Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

I have been making some minor changes to my ignition map as my tuner had it running way to much advance so I am cutting it down a bit. I have been using the map tracer to locate the areas on the map that are used and noticed that the tracer never goes passed cell 11 on the load/boost axis. I guess this is due to the AFM maxing out (am i on the right track?).

Any way my question is this:

Has anybody out there got some sort of conversion for the load axis...

i.e. a conversion for the p1, p2, p3, p4 on the load scale etc etc...

A conversion for the rpm would be good as well, i.e. n1, n2, n3

I realise that these are linear and that you probably dont need to know what PSI level they map to but it would be nice to have the info.

Sorry about the long topic...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/51683-pfc-map-x-y-axis/
Share on other sites

hi, load on cell 11...seems low to me are you using std AFM? What about turboes? what boost are you running? Is it a GTR R33? All these can affect what cell you end up in at certian boost levels?

On my R32 GTR, std AFM's, highflowed GTR turboes, running 14psi I reach cell 15 on load by 3600rpm to give you an idea anyway. But remember that the AFM measure total airflow not boost (although thay are associated) and as I have larger comp/turb wheels my turbo may reach cell 15 at 14psi boost but yours may not if they are std GTR turboes.

That aside please answer the above questions first and maybe myself or other here will have a better chance of helping....

Mike

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/51683-pfc-map-x-y-axis/#findComment-1022295
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Old post revive.

What I do find strange is my Rb30DET with the PFC ALWAYS dips to load point 19 at WOT on 12psi at 2000rpm. It holds load point 19 all the way through the rev range.

It did this on the RB20DET afm and now also the Z32 AFM.

The Z32 AFM didn't 'appear' to change the map trace at all. ?!? :)

Strange. Has any one else had experience with the before/ after map trace with the rb20/25/z32 afm?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/51683-pfc-map-x-y-axis/#findComment-1350433
Share on other sites

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

    • Version 1 aluminium airbox is.......not acceptable No pics as I "didn't like the look.....alot" Even after all my "CAD", and measurements, the leg near the fusebox just didn't sit right as it ended up about 10mm long and made the angle of the dangle look wrong, the height was a little short as well, meh, I wasn't that confident that Version 1 was going to be an instant winner I might give Version 2 another go, there's plenty of aluminium at work, but, after having in on and off a few times, and laying in the old OEM airbox without the new pod filter and MAF, there may be an option to modify the OEM air box and still use the Autoexe front cover and filter.... maybe This >  Needs to fit in here, but using the panel, and not the pod, the MAF will need to fit in the airbox though> I'm thinking as the old OEM box and Autoexe cover that is sitting in the shed is just sitting around doing nothing, and they are relatively abundant and cheap to replace if I mess it up and need another, it may well fit with some modifications to how the Autoexe brackets mounts to the rad support, and some dremiling to move it get in there, should give me some more room for activities, as I don't want to move the MAF and affect the tune Sealing the hole it requires to stick it in the air box is simple, a tight fit and some pinch weld will seal it up tight  I am calling this a later problem though
    • and it ends up being already priced in as though you're just on 91RON without any ethanol. Car will lose a bit of economy as the short and long term fuel trims bring down the AFR back to stoich or whatever it is for cruise/idle for the engine.  
    • Oh, you are right. But, in Australia E10 is based on 91RON fuel and ends up being 94RON. Hence it being the cheaper option for economy cars. The more performance oriented cars go for the 98RON fuel that has no ethanol mixed in. The only step up we have left then at some petrol stations is E85.
    • There is a warning that "this thread is super old" but they ignore that anyway...
    • With 10% Ethanol, we're talking 2-3% fuel consumption difference. The emissions reductions and octane boost in my opinion far outweigh this almost non existent loss.    My tanks sitting at 80%. Luckily that should go down fast as I'm on vacation again for the next two weeks. 
×
×
  • Create New...