Jump to content
SAU Community

Educated Guess At The Final Tune Results

Nismo 3.2ish
 Share

Recommended Posts

Nismo 3.2ish Grand Master

Nismo 3.2ish

Posted
  • Author
Posted

You have 2 answers thus far for you boost tapering off.

1) Turbo is to small for the 3.2L

2) You are running out of spark

Im going for 2

#2 . Paul said that before I posted these results..

Do you think the turbo is really too small if I do not care about top end, I thought it would shit it in to go 550HP ish with the cams dialed in for response.

It looks like the intake cam may be retarded , that is if I understood what was said to me :/ maybe I will find out tomorrow.

The trouble is, some blokes think I am after more KWs, I only talk about it as a reference point because most do. Since I posted the first tune , most expected more KWs ( I guess I did as well but I am a beginner :) but I did expect it to get going earlier .

Before someone tells me buy a different car! I love my R and love driving it, just want more of what I got. I probably do more Klms than most and truly get my monies worth :)

What I find funny on forums, if you are chasing HP far beyond your mods , it is OK and blokes say just keep trying. But go for response , your a dick head for wanting it and go buy a V8. well I will go for the DH of the year award and loving it, haha

  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

XKLABA
XKLABA

They lock them so no one can see their tunes, they did the same thing to my FC and Scott was able to get around it I would have expected more down low then that, you need to get someone else to tune

Nismo 3.2ish
Nismo 3.2ish

Here is the only one I have so far, boring

Nismo 3.2ish
Nismo 3.2ish

It car came up great, only trouble is I have to wear sunnies outside the car, great job but mow I have to try and keep it looking the same , pain in the arse , lol Had a quick run when the car wa

Posted Images

Hadouken Grand Master

Hadouken

Posted
Posted

Hmmm...

I bet you have great response looking at the results, but I think you mentioned a day or so ago that you wanted more response....

That is where I think you are starting to be unrealistic and you are wanting something that this car/setup cannot give you. This is why I said you should get a v8.

AngryRB Grand Master

AngryRB

Posted
Posted

I think they've done as good as they can with 98, if you ran some E85 I think you'd get what your looking for.. you'd have 40 or more killawasps more from 4000rpm and a more lively bottom end, probably 450kw's at top end and be happy... just have to buy some E85 once a month..

  • Like 1
XGTRX Veteran

XGTRX

Posted
Posted

You have 2 answers thus far for you boost tapering off.

1) Turbo is to small for the 3.2L

2) You are running out of spark

Im going for 2

My bets are on 1.

Or maybe 2 because of 1.

No one is calling you a DH Pete. You are asking questions and people are giving you answers. In a perfect world everyone would want maximum response and maximum power, in the real world the choice is always a compromise.

Nismo 3.2ish Grand Master

Nismo 3.2ish

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I am calling myself a DH too, there are too many blokes that know these cars that say that I have got as much as you can out of it and it is probably true.

Maybe I just watched too many Vids of 1/4s, hill climbs,track and never took any notice how these cars get going, revs !

It is still the best car I have owned to drive :)

jangles Veteran

jangles

Posted
Posted

Top setting was 22psi before this tune. But running on 22psi it went tits up at around 6000rpm.

Now it went to 24psi @ 4500rpm before it tapered off to 18.5 @ 7000 ( I think the 381.7 kw was around 7k , the private road I used would not let me go to 7k in 5th gear, just squeezed in 4500rpm, too short) Not sure if it is actually set at 24psi, just going off what I can see on the dyno chart before it dropped off.

There is no harm in having a guess at what is going on here and in about a month there might be some answers, could be better, or worse ??????

My boost tapers off on paper too.

My speed doesn't when I'm driving.

XGTRX Veteran

XGTRX

Posted
Posted

CRD time attack bnr34 supporting a stroker 2.7 precision 6466, is that a responsive setup?

I would say a 3.2 would spool that up a lot quicker and a power would reach for the stars.

Do you know what rear AR you have Pete? Please don't say you have a 0.6ish.

Nismo 3.2ish Grand Master

Nismo 3.2ish

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It was a 0.84 but there was talk of it being swapped for a 1.00. Never really confirmed though.

Well I did not expect you up this early, stay home ?

I think there was a .6 something and was changed to the .82 or 4 ?

Sub Boy32 Rising Star

Sub Boy32

Posted
Posted

After a big read of most of this thread I would say the turbo is too small for the 3.2lt Pete.

My car has the same problem making the max power, we had to reduce the boost in the top end.....however I also would have thought it would have made a bit more than that, my turbo is only a little bigger than yours (8374 0.92 EFR) and I managed 80kw more on 98 octane.

Have they done a back pressure test, this would tell you if you have a restriction from the small exhaust housing?

What I couldn't find is what revs it is at full boost (22psi)?

  • Like 1
Nismo 3.2ish Grand Master

Nismo 3.2ish

Posted
  • Author
Posted

After a big read of most of this thread I would say the turbo is too small for the 3.2lt Pete.

My car has the same problem making the max power, we had to reduce the boost in the top end.....however I also would have thought it would have made a bit more than that, my turbo is only a little bigger than yours (8374 0.92 EFR) and I managed 80kw more on 98 octane.

Have they done a back pressure test, this would tell you if you have a restriction from the small exhaust housing?

What I couldn't find is what revs it is at full boost (22psi)?

It has no full boost at 22psi, it drops off at 4500rpm to 18.5 psi at full boost at about 7000rpm

Lithium Grand Master

Lithium

Posted
Posted

Subboy- I suspect your car on a Dyno Dynamics would be doing well to go over 420wkw so the power difference is not quite as substantial, and the effect of a smaller turbine (yours would be more comparable to a 6266 - which btw would be far more suitable on this regardless) would be pretty substantial on a 3.2 litre.

It would be nice if there was communication from the tuner on why the drop back in boost but it seems on the fringe of plausible that it could be a contributing factor to it maybe not making quite as much as what one would think could be doable.

No matter what it's clearly a very impressive pump gas weapon and nice to think there is potentially gains to be had with further optimisation

Sub Boy32 Rising Star

Sub Boy32

Posted
Posted

Subboy- I suspect your car on a Dyno Dynamics would be doing well to go over 420wkw so the power difference is not quite as substantial, and the effect of a smaller turbine (yours would be more comparable to a 6266 - which btw would be far more suitable on this regardless) would be pretty substantial on a 3.2 litre.

It would be nice if there was communication from the tuner on why the drop back in boost but it seems on the fringe of plausible that it could be a contributing factor to it maybe not making quite as much as what one would think could be doable.

No matter what it's clearly a very impressive pump gas weapon and nice to think there is potentially gains to be had with further optimisation

Had my car on a Dyno Dynamics on another local tuners.....it made 458kw so not much different than the 467kw it made on the Hub Dyno.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • MBS206
      R33 Fuel Pump & Brakes after alarm swap

      By MBS206 · Posted

      Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • GTSBoy
      R33 Fuel Pump & Brakes after alarm swap

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • GTSBoy
      After market rear camber arm adjustment

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Jarsky
      R33 Fuel Pump & Brakes after alarm swap

      By Jarsky · Posted

      Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Duncan
      After market rear camber arm adjustment

      By Duncan · Posted

      Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
×
×
  • Create New...