Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, MaximuSmurf said:

 Otherwise I'll just say f**k it and grab 2 x 38mm gates and go external setup which SHOULD get around the boost holding issue.

I posted something similar in this thread and Geoff from Full race said that it wouldn't make any difference.
Said it was more to do with the rear housing design than the internal gate.

Nice numbers by the way.

  • 3 weeks later...
4 minutes ago, sneakey pete said:

Is there an ETA or any more info on the 8474?

I haven't heard anything beyond what is already in here, I'd definitely update the thread if I have information which I'd be able to share.

The information already in here is basically; shown off at SEMA 2016, someone had one on an evo earlier this year that made ~10% more power and that's about all we know?

Hadn't really paid much attention to it but a mate may be interested if they're going to be a thing before mid year.

How are you finding it on the 2.8?   Must be pretty perky at that power level [emoji3]

Comes on much much earlier than I thought, very sketchy at this power. I usually have it on 29psi setting still a handful to drive tho.
  • Like 1

comparing the dyno charts from both Umair's youtube videos, the 9180 looks to be pretty much 900rpm later than the 8374 everywhere. same engine, both 1.05A/R housings.

8374 is at: 200kw at 4450rpm | 300kw at 4650rpm | 400kw at 5050rpm | 500kw at 6800rpm

9180 is at: 200kw at 5460rpm | 300kw at 5470rpm | 400kw at 5910rpm | 500kw at 5910rpm

it appears the 9180 is being brought on a bit more gradually, then peak torque being liimited by timing (unless wheelspin?) as well

 

great to see some proper back to back figures!

8374vs9180.png

Edited by burn4005
added picture
  • Like 1
1 hour ago, burn4005 said:

comparing the dyno charts from both Umair's youtube videos, the 9180 looks to be pretty much 900rpm later than the 8374 everywhere. same engine, both 1.05A/R housings.

8374 is at: 200kw at 4450rpm | 300kw at 4650rpm | 400kw at 5050rpm | 500kw at 6800rpm

9180 is at: 200kw at 5460rpm | 300kw at 5470rpm | 400kw at 5910rpm | 500kw at 5910rpm

it appears the 9180 is being brought on a bit more gradually, then peak torque being liimited by timing (unless wheelspin?) as well

 

great to see some proper back to back figures!

8374vs9180.png

I did change from a 5 speed to a 6 speed (with factory 33 diff) between those tunes, which would have a material impact on the dyno graphs. I.e. it's not as bad/laggier as the dyno shows it to be.

1 hour ago, usmair said:

I did change from a 5 speed to a 6 speed (with factory 33 diff) between those tunes, which would have a material impact on the dyno graphs. I.e. it's not as bad/laggier as the dyno shows it to be.

If the ramp rate is the same and the rpm is set up correctly that should have no effect

I did change from a 5 speed to a 6 speed (with factory 33 diff) between those tunes, which would have a material impact on the dyno graphs. I.e. it's not as bad/laggier as the dyno shows it to be.

How are you finding the 6 speed mate?? Was it a headache to convert?

Also just out of curiosity why is it dynoed in 3rd. I know it doesn’t matter much but just curious as every tuner wants to dyno at 1:1 ratio or close to it

the 1:1 thing is a bit of a wives tale.

Final drive ratio has an inversely proportional relationship to velocity, and a proportional relationship to Torque.. so the gear ratio completely drops out of the power equation. 

Actual torque is really high in lower gears, any torque plot is just a 'normalized' plot at 1:1 mechanical advantage... really just brake torque neglecting drivetrain losses

dyno in a high gear so the dyno doesn't have to work as hard to retard the engine (especially if you want a slow ramp on a powerful car), but also at a speed that is considered safe.

300km/h is a lot of rotating momentum.

Edited by burn4005
  • Like 2
3 hours ago, Buraz said:


How are you finding the 6 speed mate?? Was it a headache to convert?

Also just out of curiosity why is it dynoed in 3rd. I know it doesn’t matter much but just curious as every tuner wants to dyno at 1:1 ratio or close to it

pretty straight forward to convert although apparently when converting into a 33, you have to remove a part or not connect a part (or something...... my mechanic mentioned it to me once) so on idle/at traffic lights the box just rattles lol. bit annoying but you get used to it.

other than that its awesome for street use. Not so awesome for the strip or roll racing as I'm changing into 5th just before the line.

Also a bit worried if i break something then it would be a very expensive exercise to repair.

Also an FYI - if all goes to plan I'll be heading out to WSID on 11th April to see what this extra power does for ET and MPH. Stay tuned.

  • Like 1

Wouldn’t you be starting in second for roll racing anyway?

cause I was using 1st to 4th in the 5spd and now with the 6spd I’m guessing I’ll be using 2nd to 5th, so itll be the same number of gear changes 

11 minutes ago, r32-25t said:

Wouldn’t you be starting in second for roll racing anyway?

cause I was using 1st to 4th in the 5spd and now with the 6spd I’m guessing I’ll be using 2nd to 5th, so itll be the same number of gear changes 

Might try starting in 1st to get the 9180 to come quicker.  See how 50km reacts in 1st lol

37 minutes ago, usmair said:

Might try starting in 1st to get the 9180 to come quicker.  See how 50km reacts in 1st lol

With the 5spd I was at 6500-7,000 at 50kmh in first so was starting at 40 to make it useful, so with the 6spd I imagine it being even higher lol 

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

    • You won't need to do that if your happy to learn to tune it yourself. You 100% do not need to do that. It is not part of the learning process. It's not like driving on track and 'finding the limit by stepping over the limit'. You should not ever accidently blow up an engine and you should have setup the ECU's engine protection to save you from yourself while you are learning anyway. Plenty of us have tuned their own cars, myself included. We still come here for advice/guidance/new ideas etc.  What have you been doing so far to learn how to tune?
    • Put the ECU's MAP line in your mouth. Blow as hard as you can. You should be able to see about 10 kPa, maybe 15 kPa positive pressure. Suck on it. You should be able to generate a decent vacuum to about the same level also. Note that this is only ~2 psi either way. If the MAP is reading -5 psi all the time, ignition on, engine running or not, driving around or not, then it is severely f**ked. Also, you SHOULD NOT BE DRIVING IT WITHOUT A LOAD REFERENCE. You will break the engine. Badly.
    • Could be correct. Meter might be that far out. Compare against a known 5 ohm 1% resistor.
    • @Murray_Calavera  If I were an expert I wouldn't be in here looking for assistance.  I am extremely computer literate, have above average understanding on how things should be working and how they should tie together.  If I need to go to a professional tuner so be it, but I'd much rather learn and do things myself even if it means looking for some guidance along the way and blowing up a few engines. @GTSBoy  I was hoping it would be as simple as a large vacuum leak somewhere but I'm unable to find anything, all lines seem to be well capped or going where they need to be, and when removed there is vacuum felt on the tube.  It would be odd for the Haltech built in MAP to be faulty, the GTT tune I imported had it enabled from the start, I incorrectly assumed it was reading a signal from the stock MAP, but that doesn't exist.  After running a vacuum hose to the ECU the signal doesn't change more than 0.2 in either direction.   I'll probably upload a video of my settings tomorrow, as it stands I'm able to daily drive, but getting stuttering when giving it gas from idle, so pulling away from lights is a slow process of revving it up and feathering the clutch until its moving, then it will accelerate fine.  It sounds like I need to get to the bottom of the manifold pressure issue, but the ignition timing section is most intimidating to me and will probably let a pro do that part.  Tomorrow I'll try a different vacuum line to T off of, with any luck I selected one that was already bypassed during the DBW swap.  (edit: I went out and did it right now, the line I had chosen did appear to have no vacuum on it, it used to go to the front of the intake, I've now completely blocked that one off at the bracket that holds several vacuum lines by the firewall.  I T'd into the vacuum line that goes from that bracket to the vacuum pump at the front of the car, but no change in the MAP readings).  Using the new vacuum line that has obvious vacuum on the hose, im still only getting readings between -6.0 and -5.2.  I'm wondering why the ECU was detecting -5.3 when nothing was connected to the MAP nipple and ECU MAP selected as the source. @feartherb26  I do have +T in the works but wanted to wait until Spring to start with that swap since this is my good winter AWD vehicle.  When removing the butterfly, did it leave a bunch of holes in the manifold that you needed to plug?  I thought about removing it but assumed it would be a mess.   I notice no difference when capping the vacuum line to it or letting it do its thing.  This whole thing has convinced me to just get a forward facing manifold when the time comes though.
    • Update: tested my spark plugs that are supposed to be 5ohms with a 10% deviation and one gave me a 0 ohms reading and the rest were 3.9ohm<, so one bad and the others on their way out.
×
×
  • Create New...