Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Heu guys , im abit confused with this crank trigger ecu and loom iv perched .(microtech lt8s)

what I dont understand is it appears that it doesnt run the cas in the dizzy and has a billet cap with a seal that fits into the distributor hole in the head , with a separate loom from the main loom straight from crank trigger to the ecu , it also came with another loom from cas in dizzy to ecu witch is marked (cas if crank trigger unused)

So I did abit of research and have only come across threads saying it needs to run the cas in the dizzy and no ones seen or no of anyone removing the distributor completely to run only a crank trigger set up so I finally made my way to u guys. ????? So any input would be great

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/457767-rb30-crank-trigger-no-cas/
Share on other sites

So batch injection would mean firing 2 injectors at a time right ?what r the pros and cons of this ?would there be any power loss or gain ?with having fuel built up waiting for the valves to open?

And as it was set up with the microtech x6 would this mean it still ren sequential ignition?

Or would this not work with no cas

So batch injection would mean firing 2 injectors at a time right ?what r the pros and cons of this ?would there be any power loss or gain ?with having fuel built up waiting for the valves to open?

Im running semi sequential injection on an RB25 and it seems to have mainly an effect on low load and low rpm AFRs, throttle response and also idle quality. I wish I had full sequential control, as such I would skip batch injection.

  • Like 1

So batch injection would mean firing 2 injectors at a time right ?what r the pros and cons of this ?would there be any power loss or gain ?with having fuel built up waiting for the valves to open?

And as it was set up with the microtech x6 would this mean it still ren sequential ignition?

Or would this not work with no cas

Just reading this again...semi sequential would mean firing groups of injectors. Mine are paired 1-5, 3-6, 2-4. Instead of pairing them like wasted spark where the cylinders are in the same position, the idea with injection is to inject fuel for 1 cylinder, then the next opening cylinder. (it works alright, but still a step down from fully sequential, for the reasons I listed above) As I understand, batch fire would be firing all injectors at a certain point.

Just reading this again...semi sequential would mean firing groups of injectors. Mine are paired 1-5, 3-6, 2-4. Instead of pairing them like wasted spark where the cylinders are in the same position, the idea with injection is to inject fuel for 1 cylinder, then the next opening cylinder. (it works alright, but still a step down from fully sequential, for the reasons I listed above) As I understand, batch fire would be firing all injectors at a certain point.

im following ya .1-5 3-6 2-4 as the firing order is 153624 so the next cylinder has fuel ready to be sucked in .r the down sides all that noticeable in street driving ? Or just on dyno figures?

I think iv read that na rb30s run semi sequential and rb30turbos run full sequential ?

Both I believe rely on a reference from a cas so id be right on asuming that nether of them could of been how my set up was configured

Im using my setup on my daily run around. There doesnt seem to be any problem once the engine is over 1200rpm, plus I get decent fuel economy too.

As for dyno figures, the difference between fully sequential and semi sequential is hardly a concern, as the engine is at such high RPM and rich AFRs anyways.

Having full sequential control over the injection timing can help to run closer to stoich AFRs at idle while still remaining smooth. Getting smooth cold starts can be tricky and it helps to have more control (although that will be ECU dependant).

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

    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
×
×
  • Create New...