Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have a c35 S1 rb25det manaul laurel, running an apexi fc and few small mods boost controller, fmic, cat back and air filter.

During the map time on the dyno, results where very low.  The tuner was expecting figures closer to the 290 range and instead it came around 236.  Since then compression, engine timing and many many other things have been checked and all came out correct. 

The only thing that is puzzling me is that the base timing is set to be 15 degrees.   This was done from the loop wire at the back of the car.  This shows at 15.  Then checking the white centre wire into the coil on no.1 still shows 15.  But through reading where many people have suggested the ht lead directly onto the sparkplug tactic for accuracy, there is then about a 5-7 degree difference in ignition timing???

It seems as though a lot of people get the same result either way, so people swear by each method.  but with this amount of deviation between the 2 it could be a cause of low power.  Compression is fine, standard AFM is almost maxed out, it does not lean out so fuel is there, compression is correct, 7 heat range iridium plugs, they are aftermarket coil packs from in japan...

 

Any help or information about why this occurs, or any other ideas would be brilliant as i've got a long way to go with this car but i need the base to be correct.

 

Thankyou 

If the car isn't taking timing and the base timing is correct try dropping your cat completely and running it on the dyno without it, ie dump pump to down pipe to atmosphere 

Could be a restrictive cat or cat back exhaust or both. 

Also just re reading are you running the stock dump and down pipe? 

(I'm assuming you're referring to wheel HP not kW) 

Yeah exhaust is standard except for back basically...was wondering about exhaust being an issue. 

Just unsure as to why there is such a difference between the two ignition timing readings. And if people are tuning from the direct to spark plug method then they could well be putting +5 advance on from the 'nissan approved' loop wire?. As the delay in the coil charge time must be in there calculations for ignition timing.  Has anyone else taken readings from the both methods? 

Car sounds and runs healthy with a decent amount of pull in the torque band But just missing the expected power

Yeah but why is there such a difference between the two? Though the loop wire gives a constant reading. Hear some people the loop jusr flashes all over the place or something. I'm just getting 5 degree difference after the coilpack? 

6 hours ago, Andy-p said:

Or has anyone got a picture of a spec 1 loop wire/colours or wiring diagram? Because one wire in a loop at the back of the engine is pink with a black stripe? Chrz 

Don't worry about that measure between coil and plug.

But why? I can understand if they give the same values, but if they are different then surely it needs to the correct nissan way otherwise it will be incorrectly set by a few degrees? I get that people get all sorts of pulses though the loop wire, but mine reads accurately?. The extended loop wire I'm using my even be the wrong wire which is why I'm getting very different readings. Even if someone knows ecu pin numbers or something for that loop wire so I can confirm/find it? Chrz

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

    • The ATTESSA is functionally identical to R34; there were a bunch of JDM models that continued ATTESSA including Fuga/Q70, Skyline/Q50, Cima etc as an option. All with Auto only and I think mostly for snow regions. AFAIK there were no AWD VR30DDTT sold in Australia - it is on my to do list to check regs for racing a LHD car in Targa/ATR/AASA/CAMS events because if I can get the auto to work it would be interesting to run a 4wd car The Ecuteck TCM tuning is the same model as their ECU tuning, they already have it for R35 and Dose's favourite, BMW. You buy "points" to allow your computer to be tuned, buy either a bluetooth (phone app) or bluetooth+USB+Key (phone and PC) dongle, and pay for a tune that will be locked to your tuner ( ). You can also access the tuning software yourself but 1. it is mega expensive and 2. these computers have a billion parameters that intersect, so how could you ever spend enough time on it to get a decent result.
    • Or, is it a case of what it is like owning an R series Skyline? NFI what the previous owner has done or fiddled with... Ha ha ha After reading through this thread, I went on a bit of a research about the Q50/Q60. Now I'm quite intrigued by them! Is the AWD in them more like a WRX where it's always AWD, or is it more like the ATTESSA in the GTRs? By the sound of this TCU tuning, this sounds like a case of someone has made some real software for it, and you just need the right piece of hardware, and then you license that specific vehicle/TCU. Or is this a case of the software will be really expensive so only a few tuners have it, and you still have to pay a license per vehicle?
    • By popular demand.. it was a coil. Got my hands on 1 new OEM coil, replaced with the one that made the less noise difference when I unplugged it while the car was running and started the car up. No stutter and the engine light was gone. I guess I’ll buy the other 5 they have lol
    • No, code 21 is very straightforward. It can only be the things described in that diagnostic flow. In fact it has no way of knowing that the spark plug resistance is out of spec.
    • Hi, SteveL Thank you very much for your reply, you seem to be the only person on the net who has come up with a definitive answer for which I am grateful. The "Leak" was more by way of wet bubbles when the pedal was depressed hard by a buddy while trying to gey a decent pedal when bleeding the system having fitted the rebuilt BM50 back in the car, which now makes perfect sense. A bit of a shame having just rebuilt my BM50, I did not touch the proportioning valve side of things, the BM50 was leaking from the primary piston seal and fluid was running down the the Brake booster hence the need to rebuild, I had never noticed any fluid leaking from that hole previously it only started when I refitted it to the car. The brake lines in the photo are "Kunifer" which is a Copper/Nickel alloy brake pipe, but are only the ones I use to bench bleed Master cylinders, they are perfectly legal to use on vehicles here in the UK, however the lines on the car are PVF coated steel. Thanks again for clearing this up for me, a purchase of a new BMC appears to be on the cards, I have been looking at various options in case my BM50 was not repairable and have looked at the HFM BM57 which I understand is manufactured in Australia.  
×
×
  • Create New...