Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Obviously an expensive ecu is the best option by far but the power fc still gets the job done and has a place.

I been running a power fc with my RB3025 at 350kw for years on dedicated E85, its simple and does the job for those that want a simple solution, cost me $600 and a tune.

Most tuners know a power fc and can tune it easily, i personally like the hand controller to look at knock and check sensors although i know the accuracy maybe not perfect.

Just think cost, elite 2500 is 5 times the cost and for a simple street driven 300kw do you really need bells and whistles.

12 hours ago, AngryRB said:

Obviously an expensive ecu is the best option by far but the power fc still gets the job done and has a place.

I been running a power fc with my RB3025 at 350kw for years on dedicated E85, its simple and does the job for those that want a simple solution, cost me $600 and a tune.

Most tuners know a power fc and can tune it easily, i personally like the hand controller to look at knock and check sensors although i know the accuracy maybe not perfect.

Just think cost, elite 2500 is 5 times the cost and for a simple street driven 300kw do you really need bells and whistles.

definitely valid points comparing power fc to the likes of haltech and link etc but if we try say comparing apples with apples, when it comes to price anyway I think it's pretty hard to go past a Nistune vs a Power Fc... Just my 2c anyway...

 

  • Like 1

You'll be silly to discount a Nistune when it has flex capabilities out of the box, not to mention the option of running a single R35 MAF instead of 2x MAFs, etc. as there's a check box to for you to select from.

Look, if you were given the PowerFC for free then sure why not.. but if you had to go buy something within budget, a PowerFC is silly.

  • 3 weeks later...

I ended up returning the (canceled the order on the FC) and found a couple places here in the US that offered the NIStune. I ordered that and should be here this week. 

My question is. Without having added or done anything besides installing the board onto the ECU and plugging it back into the car. Would I still be able to drive it as normal?

Theoretically, I feel I'd be able to plug it in and still drive the car, but if not I do have the software and the consult cable to be able to see my ECU. 

I dont know how to tune with the NIStune but I have been looking over the website and saw they have various PDFs with tons of info. Basically what I got from it would be just to watch knock and adjust fuel trim since I didnt change anything on my MAFs or injectors and not doing e85. 

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...