Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I just fitted a Apexi Power Fc and Hc to my 95 GTST manual

It is a brand new unit

When i started the car, it is or sounds like it is not running on all the 6 cylinders

Anyone have an idea what is wrong

Thanks

If you don't have the optional boost control module then make sure that option is turned off. The default setup looks for the boost controler and will not run properly if you don't have it.

I turned it off before I started it

Even tried turning it back on to make sure I had it the right way.

The would not run more than 2 seconds with it turned on.

I have refitted the factory computer and the car is running fine.

The PFC should run the car fine out of the box,yes you do need to tune them but there set up with a base map that will run the car ok.

If it is second hand maybe the program has been changed with the Excel software and that is why the re-initialise doesn't fix it.

Check to see if the AFM settup is the correct one for your car.

Did you go throught the 20min idle time with a load on the battery.

Is the case of the unit earthed out? (read in another post where this was the issue)

The unit is brand new

I have not have enough time to play around with the settings too much

Will try on the week-end

Dose the casing on the ecu need to be touching the metal body of the car (earthed out)??

I mounted the ecu using the factory bottom ecu bracket, but it is held in and isolated from the body with the velco strips that come with the PFC

I have the stock AFM at the moment with a Apexi pod, so the it should be set to the first R33.... AFM option?

I did let is run for approx 20min, it farted and carried on a bit thuo.

Turned air cond on etc.

darrin,

had the same fault when fitting my pfc, missing on one cyl, changed back to standard ecu and running on all cyl. The fault was the main connection to the pfc not being completley home and therefore causing the miss. Check the main connection to the pfc.

Good luck.

DoubleD

darrin,

had the same fault when fitting my pfc, missing on one cyl, changed back to standard ecu and running on all cyl. The fault was the main connection to the pfc not being completley home and therefore causing the miss. Check the main connection to the pfc.

Good luck.

DoubleD

Thanks DoubleD

Mine turned out to be the same problem

I found when you do up the bolt that holds the plug into the ECU, it causes the plug to curve at each end causing it not to make a good connection. This can also happen with factory ECU aswell

Solution- I used cable ties which went around the whole ECU and plug and pulled the plug in tight at each end. :P

Same thing has happened to me since I replied on this thread!

I was worried it was a coil or something.

Have put std ECU back in but have only had it idling so far.

Has the problem re-occured with you guy's or is it now fixed?

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...