Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi,

Ive got a manual 34 with turbo back 3" exhaust, apexi pod, hks bov, avcr (0.7 bar) and power fc. The mods were fitted in this order first exhaust > pod > avcr > pfc.

After I had the Power FC tuned I was slightly dissapointed with the 'increase' in power (it was tuned on the road, not a dyno by chapman & chapman). Since then I haven't been too worried about it as the car is running perfectly, and the tuner had ironed out a 'miss' I had on idle and some backfiring between gears caused by the atmo bov. It was only today that I realised my car is hardly any quicker than a standard manual sedan (judging purely by 'feel').

Just now i swapped back to my standard computer and it doesn't really feel hardly any slower..... I am going to run it on a dyno -

My question is how much power (at least) should I expect?

Dan666 was also in my car and agreed it should be a lot quicker......

Any ideas??

Cheers, Paul

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/76608-r34-performance-issues-with-pfc/
Share on other sites

Hmmm - cheers bass i'll see how I go.

By the way I ran 13.9 @ 101mph with 2.21 60 foot - That was a 3500 launch (obviosuly not dropping the clutch) and it was on 19" chromes with 235's. Also remember its a sedan... Bass - how did you get a 1.9 60 foot?

I was quite happy with this time - although shoudl i expect more? I think the sedan is at least 150kg heavier than the coupe?

Your missing a fmic.......

I went through the same thing in my car......I got the PFC by necessity as my afm stuffed up and I decided to get a z32 and pfc while I was at it.

I had pretty much the same mods, exhaust, pod, blitz ID3, z32 and pfc.

Have to admit the pfc DID make a little bit of difference but not as much as I expected, but once the front mount was installed and the pfc had a bit more room to do its magic it made a HUGE difference.

Admittedly the dyno is a bit of a happy dyno...but the difference the fmic should be legit as it was done on the same dyno...

I ended up going from 183rwkw before fmic to 220rwkw after fmic.

  • 2 weeks later...

I got a front mount installed a few days ago. The car is alot quicker all the way through the revs. I can't belive it actually seems to have less boost lag - theres alot more response all the way through the revs. It actually felt 'doughy' before, now it feels almost like 2 people have got out of the car. It hasn't been retuned yet, i'm not sure how much would have to be adjusted with just the addition of an intercooler... it will be done this week some time.

I've driven a fair few cars (mainly 32's and 33's) with bigger front mounts and the same mods as mine minus the computer and really have felt hardly quicker than cars with stock coolers... maybe r34's with better breathing on the intake and exhaust and tighter a/f ratios really put alot more pressure on the stock cooler??

Either way i'm happy :P I'll get a dyno readout in a while and let you know - i'd be happy with anything over 190kw...

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

    • @Haggerty you still haven't answered my question.  Many things you are saying do not make sense for someone who can tune, yet I would not expect someone who cannot tune to be playing with the things in the ECU that you are.  This process would be a lot quicker to figure out if we can remove user error from the equation. 
    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
×
×
  • Create New...