Jump to content
SAU Community

powerc tune - are these results safe/ok ?

paulr33

By paulr33,
in Engines & Forced Induction

 Share

Recommended Posts

Sydneykid Grand Master

Sydneykid

Posted
Posted

My 20 cents worth....

Once the boost is stable it is relatively easy to predict the fuel requirements using the throttle angle sensor and the engine rpm as reference points, even road speed and boost pressure can be referenced. This is how we tune a Skyline with a Motec (no AFM's). Note that it is a more labourious task than tuning off the AFM, and you do tend to build in a bit of conservatism.

There comes a point where the AFM's are maxed out so early that boost is not yet stable, that is when you need to reach for larger AFM's. On RB25's for example you can get to the stage where the standard AFM is showing 5.1 volts at 4,000 rpm, then its time for an upgrade to a Z32 or Q45 AFM. But there is no real reason to upgrade when you get to 5.1 volts at 6,500 rpm, the remaining rpm to rev limit are very predictable via the other inputs.

We have changed a number of RB25 AFM's as soon as they get to 5.1 volts, but they never pick up any horsepower when the 5.1 volts is reached high in the rpm range. I note that MD did a similar test recently for Z/HPI, and found exactly the same.

This is my experiences, others may have different experiences:cheers:

GunMetalR33 Mentor

GunMetalR33

Posted
Posted
You should be on TV with talent like that - you're talking out of your arse.

There is no way in hell anyone could do what you propose. It is impossible to control how much fuel is required for the air that is being ingested without accurately measuring it - if you exceed the voltage ceiling for the AFM's, the tuner has no control over anything at and past that point.

As load increase, air ingestion does, so what happens if you tune like you propose and the guy is driving up a steep hill in 5th gear? There is no way in hell the fuel system could put enough fuel (especially in this case with injectors so close to their limit).

Infact, the Power FC is usually set to dump fuel when it detects the AFM voltage ceiling; just as it does when it detects what it believes to be knock (>= 60).

Mario.

[edit:  spelling]

Mate take it easy :D

If you read what I said then you would have noticed that I mentioned that this would only work on a standard turbo setup meaning that 14 psi would be the maxium boost being run. I dont know about your car but my AFM maxes out at about 14 psi so your only guessing a couple of load points at most. I am not tring to imply that this is the best solution, only that it was a way around tuning the standard turbo setup when your AFM "occasionally" Maxes out...

  • 2 weeks later...
Lithium Grand Master

Lithium

Posted
Posted

What happens if the owner doesn't understand this and decides to change to a higher flowing air filter? A really cold day? Maybe a change in boost level? Whats the point in even having a AFM if you're going to do this kind of tuning?

GunMetalR33 Mentor

GunMetalR33

Posted
Posted

I think getting a Z32 AFM is obviously the best solution but if you cant afford one at the time then this might be a good tempory fix... Or you could just run less boost and not max out your standard AFM :D

I have my car tuned in this way becuase I run about 14psi and only have a rb25det AFM and I dont have any issues, keeping in mind that I dont change anything setup wise without a dyno run (as Lithium pointed out)...

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Duncan
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Duncan · Posted

      Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • funkymonkey
      Jacks that fit under GTR lips that can reach the subframe?

      By funkymonkey · Posted

      I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...