Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

"3 your fuel pump is not dying? it happened to me and it confuses the ecu showing a/f is good but it's actually constantly retarding timing and i only reached no more than 150rwkw till i replaced the fuel pump. "

This strikes me as possible.

i assume i attach a t piece with a pressure guage to test the fuel pump. I'm getting good economy and it doesnt miss at all when i floor it.

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

What plugs are you running?

The top end looks as if its flattening out a little, that could be due to the plugs, it could also be due to a restriction in the exhaust or as some one else mentioned wheel spin on the dyno.

If power had not have flattened out it would be up around 148rwkw.

I do agree though, that power figure is embarrasing. :)

150rwkw doesn't feel fast anyway, its only once you are up around 200rwkw it starts feeling fast.

My 176rwkw felt slow even though it was making 100 of those rwkw by ~2000rpm. This was run in 4th but only taken to ~6000rpm due to it not making any more power after 5000rpm. Torque dip in the middle is wheel spin.

Edited by Cubes
wow great result there. does the full exhaust include dump pipe?

Yeah its got a dumper, but i believe the muffler is very restrictive (its not even a straight thru). I'm running coppers that mercury gapped down to help my ailing coilpacks, which are on the way out :)

You guys believe dyno figures too much.

Example... my stock R33 GTS-T with a cat back exhaust and aftermarket fuel pump was dyno'd within a week at two places.

Unique Auto Sports = 156.1rwkw

Castle Hill Exhausts = 140.2rwkw

Nothing on the car had changed and same batch of fuel.

Goto agree with Tommo, main reason why you should always get your car dyno'd at the same place, providing they don't change their setup, you atleast will have figures relavant to previous ones that are accurate..

although - goto say <140 sounds quite low..

Guys i seem to have miraculously fixed this problem.

By the push in the back im guessing ive just gained an extra 30-40kw!

It was a leak on one of the smaller hoses going to the inlet manifold causing the disturbing whistle at high rpm, and also must have been sapping the power.

i will still get it dynoed, but the car is running smoooth as, and fast!

I'll keep youse up to date.

Great stuff mate, very good to hear it was a simple fix.

I'm suprised the guys dyno'ing it didn't notice :P

That said though, I didn't even think that was a incorrect figure, rather a slightly out dyno... but you've proved me wrong :D

Edited by TommO

Guys Guys Guys

I have read so much in the forum about Power figures I think it is quite strange that noone has done there homework on this

A stock GTS-t R33 makes 180-185kw at the flywheel which equates to a LOT less at the wheels.

A stock car will make approxx 120-130 HP at the wheels which is 88-95kw at the wheels. This I know because i have seen my car which was completly stock when i bought it and in fantasic condition and i have gone down the road of modifacation.

My car has now produced 210 HP at the wheels which equates to 154kw which is starting to become a nice street car I have a Hiflow Turbo coming and a SAFC tune on the way. I completly fail to see how the figures that you guys are talking 200rwkw with a stock dump pipe I cant help but feel that this is a crock of shit 200kw equates to 271hp

Which u JUST CANT GET with a stock dump PIPE I had to go for a aftermarket dump pipe when i hit 185-190 hp at the wheels. I think someone is telling porky's

I will probably get flamed for this.

Guys if you think i'm talking crap Google the standard power figures and make your conclusion.

http://www.digitaldutch.com/unitconverter/

Drivetrain loss is roughly 30% I thought. Ie stock R33 gts-t with 185kw at the fly will be roughly 130rwkw. R32 gts-t with 160 will be 110. Works for me. I think everyone in this thread was talking kilowatts weren't they?

A stock GTS-t R33 makes 180-185kw at the flywheel which equates to a LOT less at the wheels.

A stock car will make approxx 120-130 HP at the wheels which is 88-95kw at the wheels. This I know because i have seen my car which was completly stock when i bought it and in fantasic condition and i have gone down the road of modifacation.

So what your saying is a stock R33 GTST looses around 90kw going to the back wheels?

Once again, dyno's differ, especially different brands.

My R32 GTST making 160fwkw dead stock made 110rwkw.

Exhaust, fmic and boost it jumped to 164rwkw. I had the car on 3 different but same brand dyno's. One varied -10rwkw, it was on a 35degree day though.

85-90rwkw for 185fwkw is unrealistic. My old N/A VLmade 80rwkw on an old school dyno that had a big clock and needle looking thing that gave the power readout. :)

My car has now produced 210 HP at the wheels which equates to 154kw which is starting to become a nice street car I have a Hiflow Turbo coming and a SAFC tune on the way. I completly fail to see how the figures that you guys are talking 200rwkw with a stock dump pipe I cant help but feel that this is a crock of shit 200kw equates to 271hp

Which u JUST CANT GET with a stock dump PIPE I had to go for a aftermarket dump pipe when i hit 185-190 hp at the wheels. I think someone is telling porky's

http://www.digitaldutch.com/unitconverter/

whoever sold you the dump pipe is laughing right now... did you dyno the car with the exhaust dropped to make sure there was a restriction?

more importantly do you already have some kind of fuel management because the standard ecus tendency to richen the top end mixtures when boosted will rob you of alot more power than the stock dump pipe...

In fact with your 'highflow that is coming' you may want a ecu that lets you adjust the ignition timing not to mention that you will probably want to use a/m injectors too... unless your going to run a highflow with an SAFC and standard injectors but your not afraid of frying the rings are you!

Finally just cos your car was in great condition on the outside doesn't mean that the motor has perfect compression ...remember your talking about a 10yr old turbo car here... and don't even start me on believing the odometer reading!

so yeah the stock dump pipe isn't a huge restriction and can happily stay as long as the stock turbo, other things are more important imho

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...