Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

yep,

Two voltages

That shouldn't change the fuel rail pressure, it only affects the flow from the pump. I thinks it is more of a noise reduction effort than anything else, so you can't hear the pump when sitting idling. :idea:

Question.

Should the pressure rise when the pump changes voltages?

BASS OUT

No not usually, even on low voltage they have enough to pump 36-38 psi, after all the engine isn't using very much at idle. :burnout:

This was something I found odd when I installed my GTR pump. The car was rich as buggery and I was running almost full static advance to make any power (Really).

I changed the filter to no avail, but it was full of crap anyway so this was a good move.

I then installed the Malpassi and drove to get the PFC installed and tuned and all was better. Strange but true. I have no explanation.

This was something I found odd when I installed my GTR pump. The car was rich as buggery and I was running almost full static advance to make any power (Really).

 

I changed the filter to no avail, but it was full of crap anyway so this was a good move.

 

I then installed the Malpassi and drove to get the PFC installed and tuned and all was better. Strange but true. I have no explanation.

See it all the time, the standard pump was stuffed and the filter blocked. So when it was tuned, the tuner compensated for the low fuel pressure. Then when you put the big pump in and a new filter, the correct amount of pressure was being applied at the rail and the engine runs rich. This is where the BS stories start about retuning being needed after larger fuel pumps are installed.

Bottom line, if it had 38 psi rail pressure (above boost) when it was tuned then it will run the same as long as it has 38 psi (above boost) rail pressure. You could put 50 pumps on it, as long as the rail pressure was 38 psi it would still run the same A/F ratios.

Hope that clarifies :D

yep,

Two voltages

Yeah, I've heard of this before in 180s as well. It appears that the engine management only applies the full voltage at higher revs by limiting the ground at lower revs. You can get a constant full voltage applied if you wire the pump directly to the chassis for a "complete" earth (i.e 0V at all revs, as opposed to 1-2V at low revs, and 0V only in the upper rev range).

you sure about the ground thing? in the mazda's the fuel pump voltage gets cut instead. so when hit boost you get 12v so you get full pressure, and then it drops to 10v for idling and cruising.

a trick was to bypass the whole thing and run a fat cable directly from the battery through a relay which would give the pump 14.4v, which would increase the pressure a bit more over stock.

i have seen stock fuel ppumps die running at 14.4v constantly (happened to my stock laser pump), dont know about aftermarket fuel pumps.

steve

See it all the time, the standard pump was stuffed and the filter blocked. So when it was tuned, the tuner compensated for the low fuel pressure. Then when you put the big pump in and a new filter, the correct amount of pressure was being applied at the rail and the engine runs rich. This is where the BS stories start about retuning being needed after larger fuel pumps are installed.

Bottom line, if it had 38 psi rail pressure (above boost) when it was tuned then it will run the same as long as it has 38 psi (above boost) rail pressure. You could put 50 pumps on it, as long as the rail pressure was 38 psi it would still run the same A/F ratios.

Hope that clarifies :)

I'd agree whole heartedly if it had ever been tuned, but on the stock computer....

The only thing you have prompted me to think of is that the stock pump was buggered, so why did it then run so rich that I had to crank in so much advance? I'm still puzzled by this one. (Queue X files music)

Put the standard pump & old filter back in and measure the fuel rail pressure. SK is on to something here.

I have an upgraded Bosche pump, standard fuel rail, standard fuel pressure regulator, 550cc injectors and 330rwkw - PLUS 300+ kms per tank.

I'm certain there would ba a logical explanation, but I changed the filter, no difference, then installed the malpassi and pfc and had the tune. Anyways it runs fine now.

So do you measure your duty cycle on the injectors? I was set to upgrade mine before the next step up.

you sure about the ground thing?  in the mazda's the fuel pump voltage gets cut instead. so when hit boost you get 12v so you get full pressure, and then it drops to 10v for idling and cruising.

a trick was to bypass the whole thing and run a fat cable directly from the battery through a relay which would give the pump 14.4v, which would increase the pressure a bit more over stock.

i have seen stock fuel ppumps die running at 14.4v constantly (happened to my stock laser pump), dont know about aftermarket fuel pumps.

steve

The pressure regulator controls the pressure...not the pump...the only way it will alter is if the reg is totally overcome by the supply and cant let off enough volume

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

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • 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
×
×
  • Create New...