Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys, i recently installed new plugs, about a month ago, anyways, i got plugs with a .8 gap, im pretty sure they are anyways. i dont wanna pull em out to find out really :s, alot of mucking around esp if i find out they are .8

Anyways, i set my boost for 9.5psi pretty much.

anyways, when i floor it, the car seems to jolt n jerk a little bit. Then it will come onto power. Weird.

Just wondering if this is the ecu doing this, fuel pump, or plugs?

which is the most obvious reason?

am thinking about getting a remapped r32 ecu put in for the time being.

What are the costs in tuning one of these for an r33?

The car has an r34 gtt intercooler, cat back exhaust and k&n panel filter. Stock dump and stock cat

Edited by Coupe-This
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/92850-increased-boost-and-odd-problems-s/
Share on other sites

hehe okie, wont do the r32 ecu, just save up for pfc. As for fuel pump i thought about this, and i made a thread bout wot fuel pump, as i think the bosch 040 has problems with letting the tank under a qtr. prefer a pump that i can take down a lil lower than that :(

Could be coils but I think it may be the std ECU seeing too much airflow. I found this when running 9-10psi and R34 intercooler. Actually the R34 intercooler is what sort of set it off. I think at the same boost the air flow is a bit higher. Also the ramp up in airflow is what the stock ecu sees s a problem and richens up the mixture and retards the timing. I thought it was coils but it wasn't. The powerfc with even just the base map runs a lot better - no hesitation now.

It would be good if you could borrow a mates PFC to see if it helps.

If found asyou rev out sometimes it would start going really slowly from 5k rpm on - in 4th gear a couple of times up[ a hill I hit what felt more severe than a rev limit...this was at 3.5k as boost came on. Feels really severe as if you have broken something and instantly take your foot off accelerator

If your after cheap fix then get a SAFC or jaycar fuel adjuster but the PFC is much better.

Edited by benl1981

yeah it was running rich, cld smell abit of fuel when hammering it, just weird, seeing as its only on lowish boost and already getting that problem, damn it. Mite have to invest in a pfc when i get back from my holiday :s, good old c/c, lol

I had my car on about the same boost level as you last weekend on the way to avoca.. if I 3/4 throttled it so that it was about 8psi it'd gun it, as soon as I went full throttle 10psi it'd rich and retard, wouldn't accelerate till it settled down or I backed off the throttle..

It's a protection mechanism for the ECU, you could try maybe a SAFCII - not sure if this would make a difference..

thats what i was confused about, because it would act stupidly then go fine, although if i backed off from full throttle to about 3/4 like u said, it seemed like it picked up a bit of power, haha damn cars. Might have to invest in a power fc one of these days

Yes - I would find on 1/2 throttle my car would be quicker - especially running 10psi boost. Powerfc has fixed this..hoping to gain some more average power after a tune.

The stock computer is crap for anything above stock boost. Unlike other cars that are ok if you turn up the boost a bit.

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 know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...