Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

$150 sounds about normal for safc type tune (piggyback). try ring unigroup

NewKleer, thanks again mate. always very helpful

:P

EDIT: let me just add, the quote i got over the phone was $400 !! My response was "O....K, i'll be sure to get back to you". (wont name the tuner, not unigroup)

Edited by Munkyb0y
  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

after reading about the tremendous success SK has had with the jaycar boost controller and FC ...i know which approach I want to take...but for the life of me I can't teach myself to solder ..or to tune a car.

after reading about the tremendous success SK has had with the jaycar boost controller and FC ...i know which approach I want to take...but for the life of me I can't teach myself to solder ..or to tune a car.

i can sell you my DFA, hand controller, connecting cable, and the jaycar performance electronics book if you are interested.

they are completely assembled but i no longer have any use for them as i am going the power fc route.

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
No more so than if the wastegate actuator vacuum hose falls off, splits or leaks. In fact, based on the reliability of electrical components in the cabin compared to rubber hoses under the bonnet, I would go the other way.

:/ cheers :)

If a tee was placed inbetween the solenoid and the wastegate actuator which had an orifice equivalent to the upper limit of boost you want to run and was fed from the inlet. Would this not provide the protection from excess boost? or am I now describing a parallel system.

Is there some problem with running these solenoids for extended periods at 100%? Are they notorious for overheating or are you just being cautious.

If a tee was placed inbetween the solenoid and the wastegate actuator which had an orifice equivalent to the upper limit of boost you want to run and was fed from the inlet. Would this not provide the protection from excess boost? or am I now describing a parallel system.

You are describing a parrallel system that would slow down the boost build. The fastest possible boost build is an advantage of the IEBC.

Is there some problem with running these solenoids for extended periods at 100%?

Nope

Are they notorious for overheating or are you just being cautious.

They are what is termed a normally closed solenoid ie; they LIKE being closed, it's their natural state.

:) cheers :laugh:

They are what is termed a normally closed solenoid ie; they LIKE being closed, it's their natural state.

I understood it to open as you apply duty cycle ie. 100% = open 0% = closed

I asked because I noticed that you were aiming for approx 60% duty cycle instead of 100%. That may bring back the slight surging you felt on the freeway when you needed a little throttle uphill. It would reduce your resolution by limiting the duty cycle to 60%.

I guess what I am asking is why do you wish to limit it to 60%

PS I think you have spent more time answering questions than it took to build, install and test the unit.

They are what is termed a normally closed solenoid ie; they LIKE being closed, it's their natural state.

1. I understood it to open as you apply duty cycle ie. 100% = open 0% = closed

2. I asked because I noticed that you were aiming for approx 60% duty cycle instead of 100%. That may bring back the slight surging you felt on the freeway when you needed a little throttle uphill. It would reduce your resolution by limiting the duty cycle to 60%.

3. I guess what I am asking is why do you wish to limit it to 60%

PS I think you have spent more time answering questions than it took to build, install and test the unit.

1. You got it. Most of the time I drive around on zero boost, so the solenoid is closed.

2. The surging was due to the R&R mapping of the ECU, tuning the SAFC fixed it

3. The 60% was the suggested target by SC, the idea being it gives you room to move up or down. If you are already at say 90%, then you don't have much room to move. BTW I am still running that table I posted last year (lots of 90% in there).

;) cheers :huh:

  • 2 weeks later...

SK - I have an Apexi boost control solonoid (you know how they work!)

Instead of it being plumbed into the common port and hooking up the normally open or normally closed for internal or external wastegates respectively - Doyou think it would work allright if you plumb boost pressure to the NC port, COM to the wastegate and NO as your vent.

Effectively when the solonoid is energised the boost pressure will be allowed to go straight through to the wastegate without any bleed off via the vent and when the solonoid is de-energised the traped air between the solonoid and wastegate can ecape via the NO(vent) port.

Works exactly the same but has no bleed off on boost.

The only problem I can see with this setup is that the size of the vent hole gouverns the duty cycle required!

Your thoughts would be most appreciated!

SK - I have an Apexi boost control solonoid (you know how they work!)

Instead of it being plumbed into the common port and hooking up the normally open or normally closed for internal or external wastegates respectively - Doyou think it would work allright if you plumb boost pressure to the NC port, COM to the wastegate and NO as your vent.

Effectively when the solonoid is energised the boost pressure will be allowed to go straight through to the wastegate without any bleed off via the vent and when the solonoid is de-energised the traped air between the solonoid and wastegate can ecape via the NO(vent) port.

Works exactly the same but has no bleed off on boost.

The only problem I can see with this setup is that the size of the vent hole gouverns the duty cycle required!

Your thoughts would be most appreciated!

Sounds OK, just whetever you are driving it with will need some duty cycle adjustment, but that's hardly unusual.

:) Cheers :banana:

Edited by Sydneykid

Gary, I believe the stock R33/R34 ECU's have self learning functions where they automatically adjust themselves when the car is driven. Given this, would the DFA (and other piggyback units such as e-manage and SAFC) have problems with the adjustments made by bending the voltages? i.e. if the ECU decides to change its values do the voltage benders constantly need readjustments?

the self-learning is mainly for the cruise conditions rather than open loop/power conditions you generally tune the DFA for. so i think, so long as you arent trying to change cruise condition operation (which wants the 14.7 or whatever ecu targets), any self-learning things shouldnt be too much of a interference.

might be worth datalogging the self learn alpha/base data from consult, but im not sure what the values represent

Gary, I believe the stock R33/R34 ECU's have self learning functions where they automatically adjust themselves when the car is driven. Given this, would the DFA (and other piggyback units such as e-manage and SAFC) have problems with the adjustments made by bending the voltages? i.e. if the ECU decides to change its values do the voltage benders constantly need readjustments?

Like newkleer said, the self learning only affects cruise conditions, whereas I know the SAFC only works on anything over 50% throttle, so the piggybacks do work well.

Not sure if the DFA works similar to the SAFC or not.

Gary, I believe the stock R33/R34 ECU's have self learning functions where they automatically adjust themselves when the car is driven. Given this, would the DFA (and other piggyback units such as e-manage and SAFC) have problems with the adjustments made by bending the voltages? i.e. if the ECU decides to change its values do the voltage benders constantly need readjustments?

You are describing closed loop running for constant throttle cruise and idle, which isn't "learning". They have a lambda target, usually 15 to 1, and they rely on the standard, slow and narrow lambda sensor to give feedback to the ECU. The ECU constantly adjusts the fuel supply to target that lambda. This happens at cruise and idle, being constant throttle postions. The standard, slow and narrow lambda sensor is too slow and too narrow in its sensing capabilty to work when the throttle is being moved or the conditions (up hill etc) are changing.

The SAFC, DFA or equivalent is over ridden (by the ECU targetting lambda) at times of constant throttle cruise or idling. But at ALL other times the SAFC, DFA or equivalent corrections to the AFM signals results in the ECU using different (than standard) load points. Hence leaning out/richening the A/F ratios and advancing/retarding the igntion timing. Simply put, as soon as you touch the throttle the ECU goes out of closed loop control and the SAFC, DFA or equivalent is in control.

:mad: cheers :D

The SAFC, DFA or equivalent is over ridden (by the ECU targetting lambda) at times of constant throttle cruise or idling. But at ALL other times the SAFC, DFA or equivalent corrections to the AFM signals results in the ECU using different (than standard) load points. Hence leaning out/richening the A/F ratios and advancing/retarding the igntion timing. Simply put, as soon as you touch the throttle the ECU goes out of closed loop control and the SAFC, DFA or equivalent is in control.

:laugh: cheers :sick:

Cheers Gary, good to hear. Would installing this DFA possible sort out my R&R problem? At 70% throttle at 5000rpm I hit a very viscous jerk that flings me forward then a second later the car accelerates only to have it happen again. I'm assuming this is R&R?

At flat throttle I can feel a few flat spots as well that basically makes the car feel very slow. Nothing as viscous as the scenerio above but noticable enough to realise that you aren't making full potential power. What could this be and could the DFA possible fix this as well?

Thanks!

  • 1 month later...

Hi SK'

i was wondering if you had any suggestions to my probablem. basically i bought a already built EBC and hand controller off some guy. But when i hooked it up, i didnt get any display, i opened it up and found out that a 10 ohm resister had blown, well i replaced it, and everything was fine, then later in the day, the display went out and the EBC stopped working, opened it up again, and saw the same resistor blown.

do you have any idea's why this might be happening

thank you

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

    • You won't need to do that if your happy to learn to tune it yourself. You 100% do not need to do that. It is not part of the learning process. It's not like driving on track and 'finding the limit by stepping over the limit'. You should not ever accidently blow up an engine and you should have setup the ECU's engine protection to save you from yourself while you are learning anyway. Plenty of us have tuned their own cars, myself included. We still come here for advice/guidance/new ideas etc.  What have you been doing so far to learn how to tune?
    • Put the ECU's MAP line in your mouth. Blow as hard as you can. You should be able to see about 10 kPa, maybe 15 kPa positive pressure. Suck on it. You should be able to generate a decent vacuum to about the same level also. Note that this is only ~2 psi either way. If the MAP is reading -5 psi all the time, ignition on, engine running or not, driving around or not, then it is severely f**ked. Also, you SHOULD NOT BE DRIVING IT WITHOUT A LOAD REFERENCE. You will break the engine. Badly.
    • Could be correct. Meter might be that far out. Compare against a known 5 ohm 1% resistor.
    • @Murray_Calavera  If I were an expert I wouldn't be in here looking for assistance.  I am extremely computer literate, have above average understanding on how things should be working and how they should tie together.  If I need to go to a professional tuner so be it, but I'd much rather learn and do things myself even if it means looking for some guidance along the way and blowing up a few engines. @GTSBoy  I was hoping it would be as simple as a large vacuum leak somewhere but I'm unable to find anything, all lines seem to be well capped or going where they need to be, and when removed there is vacuum felt on the tube.  It would be odd for the Haltech built in MAP to be faulty, the GTT tune I imported had it enabled from the start, I incorrectly assumed it was reading a signal from the stock MAP, but that doesn't exist.  After running a vacuum hose to the ECU the signal doesn't change more than 0.2 in either direction.   I'll probably upload a video of my settings tomorrow, as it stands I'm able to daily drive, but getting stuttering when giving it gas from idle, so pulling away from lights is a slow process of revving it up and feathering the clutch until its moving, then it will accelerate fine.  It sounds like I need to get to the bottom of the manifold pressure issue, but the ignition timing section is most intimidating to me and will probably let a pro do that part.  Tomorrow I'll try a different vacuum line to T off of, with any luck I selected one that was already bypassed during the DBW swap.  (edit: I went out and did it right now, the line I had chosen did appear to have no vacuum on it, it used to go to the front of the intake, I've now completely blocked that one off at the bracket that holds several vacuum lines by the firewall.  I T'd into the vacuum line that goes from that bracket to the vacuum pump at the front of the car, but no change in the MAP readings).  Using the new vacuum line that has obvious vacuum on the hose, im still only getting readings between -6.0 and -5.2.  I'm wondering why the ECU was detecting -5.3 when nothing was connected to the MAP nipple and ECU MAP selected as the source. @feartherb26  I do have +T in the works but wanted to wait until Spring to start with that swap since this is my good winter AWD vehicle.  When removing the butterfly, did it leave a bunch of holes in the manifold that you needed to plug?  I thought about removing it but assumed it would be a mess.   I notice no difference when capping the vacuum line to it or letting it do its thing.  This whole thing has convinced me to just get a forward facing manifold when the time comes though.
    • Update: tested my spark plugs that are supposed to be 5ohms with a 10% deviation and one gave me a 0 ohms reading and the rest were 3.9ohm<, so one bad and the others on their way out.
×
×
  • Create New...