Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Sorry this has probably been covered a million times but I searched for 45mins+ and couldn't find the specifics. I have an RB25DET from S2 33 with PFC and Z32 and GT3071, it has the typical reversion stalling problem. From what I've read it's to do with the AFM distance from the turbo inlet and something to do with the bends and smooth surface of the piping. What I want to confirm is, some bends are needed and it needs to be a decent distance from the turbo inlet, correct? I'm basically running some silicone hose joiners/bends and the AFM and a metal reducer. Should I be looking at trying to reduce the use of the silicone hose/joiner/bend things and going mainly metal? Would making up a bracket and attaching it to the body help or is that just stupid lol? Any tips, tricks etc?

Hope it was to long winded and confusing.

Cheers!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/452462-how-to-fixavoid-reversion-stalling/
Share on other sites

Also BOV return angle plays a big part.

Currently have an aftermarket BOV in the standard place near the TB plumbed into the intake at a 90degree like a T fitting. How should it be plumbed in?

Thanks Ben, anyone else with more insight? Because it does it when there's not much boost and load too, for example if I'm cruising doing 100km/hr and put the clutch in for a few seconds or if I'm cruising and just clutch in and brake.

Ben is on the money. Also correct me if I am wrong, but you will never fix the stalling if you are getting reversion from the turbo while using an afm. You will need a map sensor to fix it. (Or make it a blow through setup, though I have never used one or seen one that works well.)

Edited by Stagea97

More or less, yes.

The factory plumbing is a good guide. There's a decent bend and a half in the rubber to the AFM, plus it is convoluted which helps to soak up some of the reverse flow. Smooth bends will always tend to allow a bit more reversion, but they are more desirable for a number of other reasons, so we have to live with them. The angle of the factory BOV return is also pretty steeply aimed at the turbo inlet. I think (per what Ben said) that that is probably the biggest effect.

Be aware though, that the whole factory system, AFM, turbo, BOV, pipework, was designed about an engine only pulling enough air for about 180 fwKW and about 7 psi of boost. Fit bigger turbos, run much higher boost, and there ends up being a lot more air needing to be dealt with when the BOV vents. At some point it becomes inevitable that you have more than can recirculate neatly and some will have to spill back through the AFM. It's hard to know where/when you'll get to that point on any given setup though, and hence whether effort spent on "fixing" reversion will yield results. That said, whenever your BOV return is clearly not right (as yours would appear to be), then you'd be silly not to try.

Take a pic - show us how far away the AFM is from the turbo inlet.

A simple rule of thumb is have the AFM as far away from the turbo inlet as possible, then you have no issue. If you can move it even 5-10cm, that can be all the difference that is needed. Hence most people with singles and AFM is pretty much as close to the headlight/guard as it can get.

Ben is on the money. Also correct me if I am wrong, but you will never fix the stalling if you are getting reversion from the turbo while using an afm. You will need a map sensor to fix it. (Or make it a blow through setup, though I have never used one or seen one that works well.)

Totally wrong.

Damn haha. What parts are wrong? I thought having air coming back through the blades towards the afm in bursts would cause the afm to read air in bursts causing fueling in bursts also. Also a map would be placed in the plenum and wouldn't be affected?

Damn haha. What parts are wrong? I thought having air coming back through the blades towards the afm in bursts would cause the afm to read air in bursts causing fueling in bursts also. Also a map would be placed in the plenum and wouldn't be affected?

I think he's referring to you saying it can't be totally fixed is wrong.

The car is in pieces so can't take a pic, also don't have any pics from before as the bay was ugly so not worth taking pics of ;)

The stalling and AFM reversion can be two different things.

1. Stalling due to ATMO venting BOV while running AFM - this can be tuned around. ECU expects air to return, it isn't - so car stalls.

2. Reversion over the AFM - AFM can be too close to the turbo, reversion isn't just the recirc of the BOV and air directed in the wrong way but being to close to the compressor wheel where there is a lot of turbulence.

Simply moving the AFM further away will fix reversion over the AFM. Hell I've seen 500rwkw+ single setups with AFM working fine, but the AFM is as far away as possible from the intake.

Moving the AFM however will not fix the stalling issues that relate to BOVs, that comes to the tune.

Also remember factory BOVs leak at idle, hence they MUST be plumbed back. GTR BOVs do this as well, reason being is to reduce compressor surge in lower RPMs. People that have changed to aftermarket BOVs on GT-Rs and running larger twins - have at times have surging in low RPM/high load scenarios. This is partly the cause as there is no bleeding of the air (the second being the factory piping, but thats another discussion).

I understand you can easily tune around having an atmospheric bov.

So you're saying that if you're having problems with having a too tight of a bov that's causing flutter, you can move the afm further away from the turbine and it will fix the stalling?

I understand you can easily tune around having an atmospheric bov.

So you're saying that if you're having problems with having a too tight of a bov that's causing flutter, you can move the afm further away from the turbine and it will fix the stalling?

No that is not what I said at all.

Because the AFM is a hot wire it can not identify which way air is traveling, in many cases the ECU commends for more fuel when there is a current change, that includes when air is bounced at it through the turbocharger. It causes an momentarily richness, hence the idle hunt or stall.

To fix it, Trace the tables in primary fuel map of when the engine is off throttle, deduct a small VE of fuel out of those blocks, and that usually does the trick.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • My first car was a HG. I'm very familiar with them. A mild cam upgrade is a good idea. The 186 is a very flexible engine - meaning it has good torque from down low. You can give up a little torque down low for quite a lot more excitement in the mid range, and a bit more up top - but they are not exactly a rev monster. You need to upgrade valve springs at the minimum. For a bigger cam, you'd want to make sure it wasn't still running the original fibre cam gear. That would be unlikely, given that most of them shat themselves in the 70s and 80s, but still within the realms of possibility. Metal cam gear required. Carbies are a huge issue. The classic upgrade was always a Holley 350, which works, but is usually pretty bad for fuel consumption. The 186S had a 2 barrel Stromberg on it that was very similar to the one on the 253, and is a reasonable thing if you can find one, and find someone to help you get it set up (which is the same issue with setting up a 350 to work nice). The more classic upgrade was twin sidedraught CD type carbs, or triples of same, or triple Webers. The XU-1 triple Webers being the best example. You can still buy all this stuff new, I think, but it's a lot of coin to drop. And then the people able to set them up are getting fewer and further in between. There's still some, but it used to be everyone's** dad and uncle could do it. **Not everyone's! But a lot. All in all, I wouldn't get too carried away with the engine. Anything you do to it without a full rebuild for power and revs will only make it slightly faster. I am all in favour of a complete teardown rebuild, with nice rods and pistons, 10 or 10.5:1 compression, and a clean port job with at least a big enough cam to run 98 with that compression, if not bigger. And if I did that to a dirty old red motor, I'd want to inject it too, which I'd struggle to fight against the devil on my shoulder that would argue for ITBs and trumpets. But the bills would start to mount up, and it will still never make stupid power. OK, a few people still know how to build absolutely mental red motors, courtesy of the work that went into HQ racing and modern knowledge being applied. But even a 300HP red motor is no match for an RB20 with a TD06. So you have to decide what it's worth to you. I'd just put a set of 6>2>1 extractors, a 2.5" exhaust and an electronic ignition conversion/dizzy on it and just run the old girl like the fairly slow old girl that she really is.
    • Thank you so much for the comments.  This is very interesting and gives me some great ideas to think about. Keen to keep it simple and relatively classic looking. That said, i am not too worried about staying 100% period correct.  A little extra performance and relatively good (or improved) economy is just what i am looking for. Ill be keeping any parts i swap out so if i get nostalgic i can always swap it all back in.  Right now just trying to get some good ideas from people in the know (I still have a lot to learn in this space). Thank you again!  
    • Wrt the engine, you're very much limited by 'production quality' as to how much extra power you can extract from them (I'm talking i6 red-motor) -- a lot here depends on how 'authentic' or 'period correct' you want the modifications to be... ...I'm too old... <grin>...the first true performance engine Holden made, was in the HD/HR models ~ this was the 'X2' performance pack...it came with twin downdraft strombergs on an otherwise unimproved intake manifold, with a two piece exhaust manifold (reckoned to be as good as extractors)... ....these engines were built upon the '179HP' cylinder block, which included extra webbing in the casting to make it stronger and less susceptible to block distortion... The next performance i6 came out with the HK Monaro (also found it's way into the LJ GTR Torana ... the car I wish I hadn't sold)...it had pretty much the same manifold setup, but was built against the '186S' block...this block retained all the extra webbing of the 179HP block, but added a forged steel crankshaft (instead of the stock cast crankshaft), because it was possible to snap the crank... ...apart from the inherent weaknesses in the stock (cast crank) blocks, the next limiting factor is the cylinder head porting & combustion chamber design, and the actual valve sizes. Back in the day, you could buy a 'yella terra' cylinder head (from stage 1 to stage 5 gradients), and this was the way to get serious power out of them -- with the extra breathing of these heads, you could fit a triple SU or DCOE Weber setup... ...obviously, these mods were a waste of time on a stock cylinder head/camshaft grind. My housemate rebuilt the i6 in his VH dunnydore about 6 months back -- this is a 186S block with the 12port 2850 blue motor head and intake/exhaust manifolds, with a dual throat Weber off an XF Falcon mounted on an adapter plate ; it's not a bad makeup...got more torque & fuel economy just light-footing it about on the first throat, but stand on it and it makes more giddy-up than the standard 2850 blue motor that it replaced. Personal note: I'd just fit an RB30 and be done it it 馃槂  
    • Thanks for sharing. That's a great video! My buddy is doing the same thing on his build (S chassis struts and towers). He's building an S14 with billet RB30 shooting for 2000whp... a race car with a TH400 just like this video. For a road car I just couldn't go this route as the strut has to be almost vertical and the caster is not going to pivot correctly (let alone camber gain). You think the R32 frontend is bad, wait till you put a MacPherson strut on without modeling it all in Solidworks to check geometry. I'm not saying it's a bad way to do it but I'd be really curious to see how it affects the geometry.
    • Hey Christof and welcome!  Sounds like an awesome project! I'm not sure many of the regular users on here would know much about the HK but I could be wrong.  Looking forward to updates.
  • Create New...