Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hey guys one question.

You're using a 550hp (approx) turbo and only aiming for about 250rwkw? Won't this be running the turbo quite a bit below its' efficiency range?

If you wanted 250rwkw, wouldn't a GT-RS have been a better option due to the fact that it will be far more responsive?

A 550hp turbo should be good for towards 300rwkw.

Yeah, I am aiming for 290 to 300rwkw, shouldn't be a problem.

hey guys so happy, i started my car today, it kicked over after a small tune of Power FC, just put in a small tune to get it started and drive it to the exhaust place so that the dump can be made up, once that is done i should have my car 2 days later, the tuner will need two days, for a cold start...

im so excited i cant wait!!!!!

hey guys so happy, i started my car today, it kicked over after a small tune of Power FC, just put in a small tune to get it started and drive it to the exhaust place so that the dump can be made up, once that is done i should have my car 2 days later, the tuner will need two days, for a cold start...

im so excited i cant wait!!!!!

Keep us informed - love to see a dyno sheet!

Cheers - take it easy until you get use to it!

yeh i know everyone is telling me be careful bla bla, but hey im not stupid... i dont wanna reck wat took a lot of blood sweat and tears to build, Arup dont worry ull be seeing it soon, ill let ya drive it so u can want it, LOL...

You're letting someone else drive your car?!?!? You're crazy! :)

Just kidding...look forward to seeing those results.

On a more serious note, I know you low mounted your turbo mass_iv, but for the rest of the guys who are doing this upgrade, did you also low mount the turbo? I had originally planned on using a low mount manifold, but have also seen some nice high mount set ups and I'm curious if there's any particular benefit to doing either...

i would go for the high mount if i was going to do this again, as it would have been heaps easier. the only reason i didnt high mount it was because i was using an internally gated turbo, also the cost's of a new manifold were a little too much for me at the moment.

ECR033, did u find someone to do the work for you? if ur looking at somewhere pm me and i can give my mates at MRT a call and get a quote for you, just tell me wat work needs to be done and wat parts u have.....

Low mount is more EPA friendly and the install is cheaper.

You're letting someone else drive your car?!?!? You're crazy! :)

Just kidding...look forward to seeing those results.

On a more serious note, I know you low mounted your turbo mass_iv, but for the rest of the guys who are doing this upgrade, did you also low mount the turbo? I had originally planned on using a low mount manifold, but have also seen some nice high mount set ups and I'm curious if there's any particular benefit to doing either...

yeh i know everyone is telling me be careful bla bla, but hey im not stupid... i dont wanna reck wat took a lot of blood sweat and tears to build, Arup dont worry ull be seeing it soon, ill let ya drive it so u can want it, LOL...

lol

dammit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

u better watch out, when ur not looking your gt30 may go missing, replaced with a stock turbo :)

Hey mate I'm not sure if anyone mentioned a clutch upgrade.

My clutch was getting a little weak when I sent my car away to be "modded to the sh!thouse".

What this meant was that when I picked it up, the damn thing would just slip and I didn't get to see what the 240rwkw actually felt like. It was a big downer and 2 hours later before I even made it home it had died completely and I had to get the car towed.

A week later I got it back, although my stepdad picked it up for me cause I was at work so he got the first ride.

Funny thing was, he told my mum that he thought it felt no faster than before but not to tell me he said that (she told me anyway :)). I'm doubting he even hit full boost. Anyone should be able to differentiate between 140rwkw and 240rwkw. And I sure as hell could tell the difference.

yeh i know bout that mate, i just recently changed my clutch, ive got a heavy duty exedy clutch, although my mechanic thinks it wont last more then a month, but it should handle it for a while, ill prob go for a puk clutch or a brassy, i used to have one in there but didnt think id need it...

by the way that would suk if i wasnt the first to drive my just moded line...LOL

this has got me thinking guys, anyone know of a good clutch to handle about 250rwkw, i currently have an exedy heavy duty sports clutch, but i dunno if its trong enough, my mate has a wrx 2.5L pushing about 320awkw, and has the same clutch as me, but he rekons its only going to last him 2 weeks, as he is only using it to run his engine in...

im not sure if mine will handle 250rwkw, but i dont really wanna go for a puk or brass button clutch... any thoughts?

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

    • 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.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
×
×
  • Create New...