Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

af.jpg

boost.jpg

torque.jpg

I've had my car tuned by 2 other shops and i can say without a doubt that the CRD tune was by far the best... Safer tune and more power the car makes over 10psi at 3,000rpm its super responsive..

The car has built engine GT-SS turbo's but stock cams...

We didn't get enough time to play with the cam gears we are going to do that when i get a set of larger cams and some other things (oil cooler etc) so hopefully she will make some more power!!

  • Replies 95
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

mate, i highly suggest having the cam gears adjusted. mine went from 220 to 250 kw atw just from that (with the 2psi boost increaed by too). especially since you have them sitting there.

very nice mate. fat looking curve, with plent down low. cam gears could even put you over the 300kw mark.

mate, i highly suggest having the cam gears adjusted. mine went from 220 to 250 kw atw just from that (with the 2psi boost increaed by too). especially since you have them sitting there.

very nice mate. fat looking curve, with plent down low. cam gears could even put you over the 300kw mark.

Well it was a time consideration and seeing as i am planing to get new cams which will mean having to reset them it wasn't really worth the tuning time... Mind you they are set at 5,3 atm from a previous tune..

Although i am sure we could get more from it but 285kw is enough for now....

ahh if they are already set then yeah, just leave it. not much point re-inventing the wheel (so to speak!) if you are only going to replace the cams anyway.

out of interest do you have a graph of the first run it did, with the last one to compare to?

ahh if they are already set then yeah, just leave it. not much point re-inventing the wheel (so to speak!) if you are only going to replace the cams anyway.

out of interest do you have a graph of the first run it did, with the last one to compare to?

No i don't but the car was making 260 4wkw from the previous tune with a much leaner AF ratio...

Damn that looks nice

I had mine tuned there the other day, basically standard mods - exhaust, boost, power fc

Netted me a nice 227.6 awkw at 15psi on stock turbs.

Wish my dyno graphs looked like yours :P

Heres my graph

kwvstorque2.jpg

Sorry for the thread hijack :(

This really shows how good the GT-SS turbo's are!!! at 90km/h on stock turbo's you car is making 3200nm torque... At 90km/h on my car with the GT-SS its making 3800nm torque...

So not only do you get more top end you get alot more low end response to!!!

Sorry for not returning your calls on Saturday mate, I had my phone on silent from when I went to the gym the night before and only realised when I was out painting the town red Saturday night! :P

Interesting that the car lost 30awkw just from the change back to stock cams... Also interesting that the torque falls over after peaking so early. What boost was this run at? 1.6 bar/24psi right? From all accounts, that's the limit of the GT-SS efficiency curve, so perhaps the camshafts DO make a big difference?

It will be interesting to see how the bottom end is affected by the bigger cams. I distinctly remember the car pulling a little harder down low with the stock cams (which is what I was after)... I'll see if I can dig up the old dyno graph of the car with the 260/260 poncams.

I'll also dig through the garage to find those cams... I have no idea where I put them after we renovated the garage :-/

Sorry for not returning your calls on Saturday mate, I had my phone on silent from when I went to the gym the night before and only realised when I was out painting the town red Saturday night! :)

Interesting that the car lost 30awkw just from the change back to stock cams... Also interesting that the torque falls over after peaking so early. What boost was this run at? 1.6 bar/24psi right? From all accounts, that's the limit of the GT-SS efficiency curve, so perhaps the camshafts DO make a big difference?  

It will be interesting to see how the bottom end is affected by the bigger cams. I distinctly remember the car pulling a little harder down low with the stock cams (which is what I was after)... I'll see if I can dig up the old dyno graph of the car with the 260/260 poncams.

I'll also dig through the garage to find those cams... I have no idea where I put them after we renovated the garage :-/

Thats ok mate!! ended up spending like 10 hours at CRD :P That was running about 22psi but a very safe tune and no playing with the cam gears..

From what Jim has told my and what i have heard around the traps the cams make a big difference...

Oh btw did you know the powerfc pro has a 2step luanch feature :( can't wait to try that out on the bottle :D

Oh btw we got it to idle at 1000rpm and we found out why it uses soo much fuel... Dead 02 sensors!!

:P

If I had a dollar for every GTR that had dead O2 sensors........... :(

Yes, I knew that the Pro had launch control, but what it does, is cut ignition spark which causes it to dump a ton of unburnt fuel into the exhaust where it promptly ignites and tries to blow MASSIVE flames.

Don't use it unless you bolt in a straight through pipe or hollow cat-convertor, because it's the fastest way you can reduce an expensive cat-convertor into a molten lump of restrictive metal :D

Try not to hit the rev-limiter too much too, because it's an ignition cut as well, which causes the same dumping of unburnt fuel. I purposely got the PowerFC Pro because the ignition cut is much much nicer on the engine than a fuel cut which normal PowerFCs use for a rev-limiter.

Hi "kabab"You now also have 1st hand experience of just how good Jim @ CRD is with his dyno tuning - proof with your back to back comparison tuning with other GTR tuners 'so to speak...'

He is the guru!!! I back this statement up with my personal experience :P

Congrats on your results mate :(

Marko.

Could do with gearing if i am not mistaken you have a trick gear box in yours, was it dyno'd in a gear that was 1:1 ?

aha! nothing get's by the kabab. you are right, but it was done in 4th which is still a 1:1 ratio. just 1, 2, and 3 are slightly different, 4 and 5 are as per standard 32GTR.

I got them to reference the graph against rpm anyway as I find it easier for me to understand rather than trying to convert road speed. :P

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 drive the Tiguan much harder than the Skyline in all conditions, because it just grips and hooks, unlike the R33 shit box
    • The rain is the best time to push to the edge of the grip limit. Water lubrication reduces the consumption of rubber without reducing the fun. I take pleasure in driving around the outside of numpties in Audis, WRXs, BRZs, etc, because they get all worried in the wet. They warm up faster than the engine oil does.
    • When they're dead cold, and in the wet, they're not very fun. RE003 are alright, they do harden very quickly and turn into literally $50 Pace tyres.
    • Yeah, I thought that Reedy's video was quite good because he compared old and new (as in, well used and quite new) AD09s, with what is generally considered to be the fast Yokohama in this category (ie, sporty road/track tyres) and a tyre that people might be able to use to extend the comparo out into the space of more expensive European tyres, being the Cup 2. No-one would ever agree that the Cup 2 is a poor tyre - many would suggest that it is close to the very top of the category. And, for them all to come out so close to each other, and for the cheaper tyre in the test to do so well against the others, in some cases being even faster, shows that (good, non-linglong) tyres are reaching a plateau in terms of how good they can get, and they're all sitting on that same plateau. Anyway, on the AD08R, AD09, RS4 that I've had on the car in recent years, I've never had a problem in the cold and wet. SA gets down to 0-10°C in winter. Not so often, but it was only 4°C when I got in the car this morning. Once the tyres are warm (ie, after about 2km), you can start to lay into them. I've never aquaplaned or suffered serious off-corner understeer or anything like that in the wet, that I would not have expected to happen with a more normal tyre. I had some RE003s, and they were shit in the dry, shit in the wet, shit everywhere. I would rate the RS4 and AD0x as being more trustworthy in the wet, once the rubber is warm. Bridgestone should be ashamed of the RE003.
    • This is why I gave the disclaimer about how I drive in the wet which I feel is pretty important. I have heard people think RS4's are horrible in the rain, but I have this feeling they must be driving (or attempting to drive) anywhere close to the grip limit. I legitimately drive at the speed limit/below speed the limit 100% of the time in the rain. More than happy to just commute along at 50kmh behind a train of cars in 5th gear etc. I do agree with you with regards to the temp and the 'quality' of the tyre Dose. Most UHP tyres aren't even up to temperature on the road anyway, even when going mad initial D canyon carving. It would be interesting to see a not-up-to-temp UHP tyre compared against a mere... normal...HP tyre at these temperatures. I don't think you're (or me in this case) is actually picking up grip with an RS4/AD09 on the road relative to something like a RE003 because the RS4/AD09 is not up to temp and the RE003 is closer to it's optimal operating window.
×
×
  • Create New...