Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just got my car re-tuned and dynoed and thought some people might be interested in the results, particularly the tuning of the unichip. Its a bit unfortunate that I don't have a pre-unichip dyno but I didn't own the car when it was fitted.

R34 GT-T tiptronic

Current mods are:

3.5" unknown japanese brand exhaust

3.5" unknown japanese brand dump pipe

Greddy Profec B boost controller

Blitz LM intercooler

Apexi Super Intake

Oil cooler

Unichip

The reason I got it re-tuned was because I felt the car was running too much boost and that it was running rich. The first run confirmed this with a very jumpy power curve although the AFR was ok at a very consistent 11.4. Peak power was 196rwkw. This was at 13psi.

Boost was then lowered to 10psi to see the effect which resulted in a very substantial drop in power. Down to almost 150rwkw.

A few more runs were made and then boost was set to 12psi because I feel that 12psi is safe enough for the street and am happy to risk it. This resulted in a similar power level to the first run but much smoother with a few dips here and there. The tuner then adjusted the ignition timing a few degrees here and there and got a very nice smooth curve. There is still one dip near the top of the range but couldn't seem to get rid of it. Final result using a peak of 12psi was 197rwkw and a very smooth curve.

I am more than pleased with this result and noticed the much smoother power delivery on my way home from the tuner.

dyno.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/70447-unichip-tuning-results/
Share on other sites

3.5" exhaust? loud car?

That's an impressive rwkw figure cos those are relatively minimal mods... nice job.

I heard that the stock R34 turbo's don't like being boosted over 12psi? And that 12 is kinda the max for them?

Car is very very quiet. The intake is noisier than the exhaust.

12psi is considered by most to be the absolute max and the previous tune was done before I owned the car, and 13psi was far too high imo. However the car has been running this for almost 2 years now with no turbo problems.

  • 5 months later...

That's a before and after.

The first red line was the shit tune that was done previously and was at 14psi. Far too much for the stock turbo and was causing surging resulting in the horrible curve. This was why I got it retuned in the first place.

The blue line which is much smoother is with lower boost as I mentioned in the original post. There is still a dip at ~5000rpm which we couldn't seem to get rid of.

Thanks Bob... do you think it's worth the money? Or better to stick with actual ECUs

Do you think that dips and flat spots on the graph is due to the difference between a chip and a ECU? Maybe this is a trade off between the two?

I've got a R34GTT in tiptronic as well... currently using the SAFCII (tuned on Monday). Attached are my dyno graphs (sorry about quality). Peaked at 194.6kw which is less than yours (probably due to absence of full exhaust)... Also only running 10psi of boost

Power curve is smooth, AFR curve is quite roller-coaster-ish

dyno21909052ps.th.jpg dyno11909055dh.th.jpg

Edited by satanic

Yeah I was just looking at your post.

Tempted to photoshop away the red curve to illustrate that the blue curve is much smoother but couldn't be bothered.

At the end of the day a unichip really is just a glorified SAFC that can do ignition timing. So you would expect similar results, and as dyno results read different, who knows, yours may have more power.

That's where I think your unichip will have the advantage... the timing! Unlike yours, the SAFCII is limited to AFRs but the chip can have a lot more stuff put in provided that the tuner knows what he/she is doing...

Worth a thought.

The blue line which is much smoother is with lower boost as I mentioned in the original post. There is still a dip at ~5000rpm which we couldn't seem to get rid of.

its a reasonable but that hole in the mid-top end shouldnt be there at all.

That would be quite noticeable id imagine

Hmm does anybody know how many load points or what the map setup of the Unichip is? i.e. The SAFC only has 12 points which are set via RPM, while the E-Manage has a 16x16 map of RPM vs. TPS.

None the less thats still an awesome power figure for such little mods! How come your boost isn't even though? It seems to be at around 12 or just under for abit and then drops to 10psi as you go up in RPM/Speed. What boost controller are you using?

Sorry for not reading your first post properly NJR.

Ongsta - Greddy Profec B boost controller (taken from first post also)

R31Nismoid - it's still a piggyback when it comes down to it. I think it's a good result.

NJR - does the ECU still drop the timing at gear changes at high rpm WOT? Or does it sort of slide into gear?

This thread certainly livened up!

The flat spot isn't really noticable to me, but it could be to others. We actually tried changing the timing around that load point to make it better but could not make any change to it.

As for the boost tapering off, I suspect I have a leak in my turbo-exhaust gasket which is making that worse.

I'm not sure how I'd describe the gear changes as they all feel slow to me as all my previous cars have been manual and don't really have anything to compare it to. I think though I'd lean more towards the glide into gear, the tranny had issues with the previous owner and had many parts replaced so who knows.

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 have no hard data to report, but I have to say, having driven it to work and back all week, mostly on wet roads (and therefore mostly not able to contemplate anything too outrageous anywhere)..... it is real good. I turned the boost controller on, with duty cycle set to 10% (which may not be enough to actually increase the boost), and the start boost set to 15 psi. That should keep the gate unpressurised until at least 15 psi. And rolling at 80 in 5th, which is <2k rpm, going to WOT sees the MAP go +ve even before it crosses 2k and it has >5 psi by the time it hits 90 km/h. That's still <<2.5k rpm, so I think it's actually doing really well. Because of all the not-quite-ideal things that have been in place since the turbo first went on, it felt laggy. It's actually not. The response appears to be as good as you could hope for with a highflow.
    • Or just put in a 1JZ, and sell me the NEO head 😎
    • Oh, it's been done. You just run a wire out there and back. But they have been known to do coolant temp sensors, MAP sensors, etc. They're not silly (at Regency Park) and know what's what with all the different cars.
    • Please ignore I found the right way of installing it thanks
    • There are advantages, and disadvantages to remapping the factory.   The factory runs billions of different maps, to account for sooooo many variables, especially when you bring in things like constantly variable cams etc. By remapping all those maps appropriately, you can get the car to drive so damn nicely, and very much so like it does from the factory. This means it can utilise a LOT of weird things in the maps, to alter how it drives in situations like cruise on a freeway, and how that will get your fuel economy right down.   I haven't seen an aftermarket ECU that truly has THAT MANY adjustable parameters. EG, the VAG ECUs are somewhere around 2,000 different tables for it to work out what to do at any one point in time. So for a vehicle being daily driven etc, I see this as a great advantage, but it does mean spending a bit more time, and with a tuner who really knows that ECU.   On the flip side, an aftermarket ECU, in something like a weekender, or a proper race car, torque based tuning IMO doesn't make that much sense. In those scenarios you're not out there hunting down stuff like "the best way to minimise fuel usage at minor power so that we can go from 8L/100km to 7.3L/100km. You're more worried about it being ready to make as much freaking power as possible when you step back on the loud pedal as you come out of turn 2, not waiting the extra 100ms for all the cams to adjust etc. So in this scenario, realistically you tune the motor to make power, based on the load. People will then play with things like throttle response, and drive by wire mapping to get it more "driveable".   Funnily enough, I was watching something Finnegans Garage, and he has a huge blown Hemi in a 9 second 1955 Chev that is road registered. To make it more driveable on the road recently, they started testing blocking up the intake with kids footballs, to effectively reduce air flow when they're on the road, and make the throttle less touchy and more driveable. Plus some other weird shit the yankee aftermarket ECUs do. Made me think of Kinks R34...
×
×
  • Create New...