Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

I installed my SAFCII last night and went through the initial setup.

I just wanted to make sure everything was normal compared to everyone else.

I have a 93 R33 gtst btw.

Sensor type:

Hotwire. Sens Calc. 4,4

Car Type

Cylinders:6,Throttle type: arrow pointing downward.

OK. Now comes the lknock settings.

I wired up the knock sensor wire to Knock sensor 1 at the ecu.

I wasn't sure if I should use sensor 1 or 2. What did other people do?

When doing the knock set my raw readings were

60 @ 1500

67 @ 3500

Is this high?

anyway, the car was probably more than just warmed up when i did the config. This morning when i checked the raw readouts again after 5 min warm up the readings were between 30-45 instead. I didn't re-configure though. Should I redo the signal correction setting again??

When I tested the car with its current setup the knock reading didn't go above 0 at all. not even at idle (some reports that this happens). I gave it a run w'/ WOT but still on 0 so hopefully it's all good and I have nothing to worry about.

Getting it tuned on thrusday so hopefully will see a nice power gain and a bit smoother delivery of the power.

:D

That all sounds good mate... Pretty much what I would expect after installing / setting up about 5 of these on 33's...

IIRC, I thought the throttle arrow went up? I could be wrong and just having brain fade though... So long as the throttle display is correct I guess...

Re the knock sensor wiring: I wired in a switch so I could swap between sensor 1 and sensor 2... But mostly I just leave it on number 1... All the others I've installed have been on sensor 1 as well... FWIW, I notice very little difference between the two...

The raw readings sound about right...

I found I get the best results by driving the car for about 1.5 hrs and then doing the knock set function again... 0 at idle is pretty normal when the car is coldish... As it heats up it can creep up to anywhere up to 40... This is normal... As you say when cruising or at WOT sits around 0 if everything is working properly...

When it knocks / pings / detonates, the signal will go over 100... More likely closer to 140....

All in all, sounds perfect to me mate...

:cheers:

I find that i get zero knock at idle on a hot day, rising to 20-30 on a hot hot day. The best you can do is try to do the knock calibration on a hot day, with the car fully warmed up. This helps control the 'false' readings.

I'm getting griffith's auto to service and tune. When i dropped in he had about 6 other imports in his yard so I guess he knows his stuff. Have heard good things about him too.

anyway, other mods are just standard stuff:

full 3" exhaust (normal cat)

FMIC

Boost controller (tune at 11-12psi)

still using panel filter

and SAFCII now.

thats bout all i can think of. Hoping for around 180-200rwkw but more realistically looking at 170-185rwkw I reckon.

A friend recently had his R33 GTS-T tuned up but with a powerfc.

He made 204rwkw on 11psi. The usual mods, FMIC & 3" Turbo back exhaust from japland that is rather quiet.

You can see a raise in tractive effort at around 5000rpm.

well I gave Dave the manual a few days before too read as he hadn't done a SAFCII before.

He didn't read it and then decided he couldn't tune it because he hadn't read the manual.

bit disappointing.

Anyway, he's going to read it over the weekend and we'll book it in next week for the dyno tune. He said he does heaps of powerfc's so I guess he knows what he's doing.

Will post results when I get them.

  • 2 weeks later...

OK, I just got off the phone from Dave griffith and to set my boost controller to 8/11psi (dual stage) and tune my SAFCII he is charging $407.

Does that sound right? sounds bloody expensive to me.

He hadn't tuned one before so I can understand it taking a bit longer than usual.

But, I shouldn't have to pay for that time should i? He was the one who said he could tune it.

how much would a tune of the SAFCII cost on the mainland.

Will post up dyno chart tonight.

OK, I just got off the phone from Dave griffith and to set my boost controller to 8/11psi (dual stage) and tune my SAFCII he is charging $407.

Does that sound right? sounds bloody expensive to me.  

He hadn't tuned one before so I can understand it taking a bit longer than usual.

But, I shouldn't have to pay for that time should i? He was the one who said he could tune it.

how much would a tune of the SAFCII cost on the mainland.

Will post up dyno chart tonight.

:wassup: Shoot :wassup:

I think I better open up a dyno shop in Tas, that's almost double what it costs in Sydney.:)

Im paid $120 for my first SAFC tune and now i do them myself. But you still have to pay for the time on the dyno. For someone who has never done it before, he is just protecting his arsse. But really they are a peice of pisss to tune.

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 know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...