Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Got any further with this SK? Ive been looking for another kit to build, as ive just finished my last :)

Looking forward to seeing how this comes out....

Yep, I installed all of the resistors on the 2A1 PCB last night, tonight I might finish the rest of the components.

;) cheers :)

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

gary im just trying to work out but am i right in assuming the inputs go to the ecu?  (not electronically minded)\

it prob says all this in the instructions anyway....

The only inputs to the TE 2A1 I am going to use (other than the F&W lambda sensor of course) is rpm and AFM voltage. Both of those are available at the pins on the ECU plug.

Did that answer your question?

:) chers ;)

just as another question, if not running an afm which input would you connect to?

Whatever the other (than rpm) axis is on the ignition and fuel maps, I would assume that's MAP sensor. What you are trying to do is to have logs that tell you what changes to make in your maps to achieve the target A/F ratios. So it makes sense to me to use the relevant maps axis in the logging. I just reckon it is easier that way.

:) cheers :)

Quick update, finished building the kit last night;

Tech_Edge_2A1_Made.jpg

As usual once I got past the tedious resistor installs, the rest was easy. Now it is just a matter of testing it, then it will be ready for use. More updates shortly.

:) cheers :)

Edited by Sydneykid

am i right in saying that you need to solder each one of those little witchety grub looking things onto the board? how long do you reckon it took to build?

looks very neat though. :)

SK - some questions on the lambda sensor:

Where would you recommend the sensor be placed for a GT-R?

Given the relatively cheap cost of the sensors, it ist advantageous to use more then one (eg. one for each "branch" on the front pipes)?

Can the meter monitor/log more than one sensor?

Does your sensor use a standard spark plug bung?

Sorry about all the questions, but I'm very interested given the relatively low cost compared to the valuable information that these can provide.

Cheers

Gav

SK - some questions on the lambda sensor:

1. Where would you recommend the sensor be placed for a GT-R?

2. Given the relatively cheap cost of the sensors, it ist advantageous to use more then one (eg. one for each "branch" on the front pipes)?

3. Can the meter monitor/log more than one sensor?

4. Does your sensor use a standard spark plug bung?

Sorry about all the questions, but I'm very interested given the relatively low cost compared to the valuable information that these can provide.

Cheers

Gav

Hi Gav, suggestion to your questions follow;

1. The closer to the turbine outlet the quicker the response to changes in A/F ratio. ie; make a change and see the result instantly. The further away from the tailpipe the less likely to get ambient air contamination, which can be a problem at low airflows with big exhaust outlets. We have the F&W lambda sensor on the race cars just after where the engine pipes join. No ambient air contamination and very fast response, as fast as the lambda sensor itself in fact.

2. Nope, waste of money I reckon. We do have 4 X lambda sensors on the engine dyno for tuning the SuperTourer engines. But 2 on 6 cylinders, I can't see much of an advantage.

3. Not that I can see

4. Standard lambda sensor bung

Hope that answered your questions

:) Cheers :)

Edited by Sydneykid
Richard, you can also buy it as a prebuilt kit about $100 more

hmmm, maybe team Rice and Team Raceworx should chip in and buy one? :P

I have been using an LM-1 for about a year on a WRX semi-race car. It has been reliable and very helpful. I log the 0-5 volts to a Race Technology DL1, when I remember to turn it on (about 50% success rate on that :D ).

Edited by clayoth
I have been using an LM-1 for about a year on a WRX semi-race car.  It has been reliable and very helpful.  I log the 0-5 volts to a Race Technology DL1, when I remember to turn it on (about 50% success rate on that :P ).

What sort of stuff have you picked up? On the race cars I keep finding little areas on the maps (load/rpm) where I can tidy up the A/F ratios. I reckon I have changed about 800 of the 1200 load points on the Motec. Most only by small increments, some by more than I would have anticipated was possible.

Next year I am going to spend a lot less time on race team stuff and more time on my own cars. Using the Datalogit, I am hoping to do similar with the knock sensor readings and the ignition timing. I reckon that there is a heap of time to be had from improving the response through the whole rpm range with fuel trim and ignition advance. Stuff that you can't do on the dyno, well I guess you could, but it would take days and cost a bomb.

:) cheers ;)

PS; no progress on the Tech Edge kit yesterday or today as I have been helping to get a number of Group Buy suspension kits out. Saturday I am out at the A1 GP, so it might be early next week before I can get back to finish it.

Slightly OT I know, but further on from talking about A/F logging to adjust tuning, are there any aftermarket ECU's that use wideband O2 sensors as a major imput ala Porsche OEM style?

Both Motec and Autronic have "self tune" using an F&W lambda sensor. You basically input a target A/F ratio and they adjust the fuel maps to it as you drive. For example 2 laps of Bathurst to tune a Mazda 2.5litre V6 starting with simple basic maps. If I remember rightly the Electromotive also does similar.

I haven't seen one that does ignition timing based on a knock sensor input, yet. Now that would complete the self tune picture and turn dynos into dynosaurs.

:( cheers ;)

  • 2 weeks 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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...