Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

How many of you guys with bad economy are still running the stock computers?

The stocker responds to any extra boost by immediately enriching the fuel delivery.

Try disconnecting the O2 sensor and see how the economy goes. My GTR33 is better with the sensors disconnected.

If that fails start thinking a digital fuel adjuster or aftermarket management.

  Sumo said:
A SAFC should be able to lean things out a bit.

Geoff I would have thought the ECU should have displayed a fault code if you unplug it.

I've got a fully tuned pfc and it still chews the ass end out of the fuel tank.

Fully tuned? for what, biggest power delivery or easy cruising.

Its hard to tune for both I would think. Thats where nissan engineers design a happy medium. But as geoff said, You boost it up - the computer compenstates by throwing oodles of fuel at its problem....

Cheers

Sumo

The standard ECU is most likely to give you the best fuel economy out of any ECU, aftermarket or not as long as all sensors are working correctly and the numbers you are producing are realistic. I have a stock GTR with a chip I tuned at work it puts out 234rwkw at 12 pound and returns figures close to 500km per tank on the highway. In standard trim all nissan computers are extremely rich in the top end, this is most likely to be the cause of the build up on your bumper.

Try to remeber when deciding on who tunes your car that outright power is the easiest place to tune a car. The real furness is the light throttle tranistions, idle(not for nissans) and cruise; pretty much where most cars will drive the majority of their life.

My advice to you satanic would be to just replace the 02 sensor with the generic item.

  Sumo said:
A SAFC should be able to lean things out a bit.

Geoff I would have thought the ECU should have displayed a fault code if you unplug it.

No fault code and only 260rwkw on the stock computer with them unplugged.

Used 25L in 35km with them plugged in and less than 10L on the return journey. I drive sensible as well. No fines in over 10 years.

The standard computer is a known pig if the boost is bumped up. It's been covered many times. There are pitfalls with aftermarket but it lies in the tuning and the attention to detail of the tuner.

  • 4 months later...

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

    • The values for HID colour are also defined ~ see https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2006L02732/latest/text  ~ goto section 3.9 onwards ....
    • So, if the headlights' cutoff behaviour (angles, heights, etc) are not as per 6.2.6.1.1 without automatic levelling, then you have to have to have automatic** levelling. Also, if the headlight does not have the required markings, then neither automatic nor manual adjusters are going to be acceptable. That's because the base headlight itself does not meet the minimum requirement (which is the marking). ** with the option of manual levelling, if the headlight otherwise meets the same requirements as for the automatic case AND can be set to the "base" alignment at the headlight itself. So that's an additional requirement for the manual case. So, provided that the marking is on the headlight and there is a local manual adjustment back to "base" on the headlight, then yes, you could argue that they are code compliant. But if you are missing any single one of these things, then they are not. And unlike certain other standards that I work with, there does not seem to be scope to prepare a "fitness for purpose" report. Well, I guess there actually is. You might engage an automotive engineer to write a report stating that the lights meet the performance requirements of the standard even if they are missing, for example, the markings.  
    • Vertical orientation   6.2.6.1.1. The initial downward inclination of the cut off of the dipped-beam to be set in the unladen vehicle state with one person in the driver's seat shall be specified within an accuracy of 0.1 per cent by the manufacturer and indicated in a clearly legible and indelible manner on each vehicle close to either headlamp or the manufacturer's plate by the symbol shown in Annex 7.   The value of this indicated downward inclination shall be defined in accordance with paragraph 6.2.6.1.2.   6.2.6.1.2. Depending on the mounting height in metres (h) of the lower edge of the apparent surface in the direction of the reference axis of the dipped beam headlamp, measured on the unladen vehicles, the vertical inclination of the cut off of the dipped- beam shall, under all the static conditions of Annex 5, remain between the following limits and the initial aiming shall have the following values:   h < 0.8   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   0.8 < h < 1.0   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   Or, at the discretion of the manufacturer,   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The application for the vehicle type approval shall, in this case, contain information as to which of the two alternatives is to be used.   h > 1.0   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The above limits and the initial aiming values are summarized in the diagram below.   For category N3G (off-road) vehicles where the headlamps exceed a height of 1,200 mm, the limits for the vertical inclination of the cut-off shall be between: -1.5 per cent and -3.5 per cent.   The initial aim shall be set between: -2 per cent and -2.5 per cent.
×
×
  • Create New...