Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

It could also be argued that that power figure looks a tad optimistic for an automatic RB25DET with the mods you have listed.

I thought my graph was optimistic until I saw this thread.

dyno.JPG

3 inch turbo back (stock cat)

FMIC

EBC

Pod

on Auto R33 GTS-T

It gave me 190+ (192 I think) but timing was all out so the setting on the EBC was put back a tad.

I'm contemplating a SAFC2 and I hope it will give me 195+.

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

This is an interesting thread

Security: Lets not mislead people into thinking that 50rwkw gains are achievable through the use of an S-AFC, especially on a car like yours that is virtually stock because they arent - end of story.

The ONLY way that you could find that much more power is if your car was running like absolute shite beforehand. The gain is not soley attritbuted to your S-AFC.

It could also be argued that that power figure looks a tad optimistic for an automatic RB25DET with the mods you have listed.

I'm thinking that his base timing was way off. Majorly retarded.

That's where the gains were had, I'm guessing.

Can someone explain how the timing or "base timing" as mentioned above can be changed? Last tune, only the SAFC was touched, nothing about timing at all - just wondering if this would help me squeeze past 200rwkw (only out by 5.4rwkw at the mo.)

Can someone explain how the timing or "base timing" as mentioned above can be changed?  Last tune, only the SAFC was touched, nothing about timing at all - just wondering if this would help me squeeze past 200rwkw (only out by 5.4rwkw at the mo.)

I think the only way to do it properly is a replacement or piggyback ECU.

Can someone explain how the timing or "base timing" as mentioned above can be changed?  Last tune, only the SAFC was touched, nothing about timing at all - just wondering if this would help me squeeze past 200rwkw (only out by 5.4rwkw at the mo.)

Base timing can be checked with a timing light.

It is adjusted by turning the CAS.

hmmmm picture's would help ay...

I have 255rwhp in an auto and you cant compare it to a manual

and 50rwkws could be gain if it was running like shit on 92 oct

and serviced air leaks fixxed 98oct and a border line good tune close to blow up

sit am wondering the psi run

turbo mabe hiflowed

james

well Nick, if you read my post properly it says he played with my timing also.

apparently my timing was off to begin with.

he advanced it half way through the tune when it reached around 168kw and it jumped to 184kw.

my point of this thread is that he actually picked this up. not only did he tune my safc, he also fixed my timing problem. its for that reason i thought i had to post this thread... he definately knows his cars.

CAS = ?

Sorry about the questions, just interested to know. Autos are very limited in what you can do to tune them, especially in the R34 where the stock ECU is quite stubborn :(

This is an interesting thread

Security: Lets not mislead people into thinking that 50rwkw gains are achievable through the use of an S-AFC, especially on a car like yours that is virtually stock because they arent - end of story.

The ONLY way that you could find that much more power is if your car was running like absolute shite beforehand. The gain is not soley attritbuted to your S-AFC.

It could also be argued that that power figure looks a tad optimistic for an automatic RB25DET with the mods you have listed.

and just as a direct reply to your post.. 50kw is 50kw.

if the dyno was reading high then it doesnt matter does it?

my base figure would've just been lower also which still doesnt change a 50kw gain.

and ive also said that he played with timing and allowed me to close the gaps on my spark plugs.

tell me another tuner that would allow you to do these things and give the same power output for the same price (it cost me $200)

well Nick, if you read my post properly it says he played with my timing also.

apparently my timing was off to begin with.

he advanced it half way through the tune when it reached around 168kw and it jumped to 184kw.

my point of this thread is that he actually picked this up. not only did he tune my safc, he also fixed my timing problem. its for that reason i thought i had to post this thread... he definately knows his cars.

Great, im really happy for you, but perhaps you didnt read my post. I was making a general statement and hoping you would post your before dyno sheet and or clarify specifics of what hitman fixed up to bring your power up (which you have now done)

Dont get me wrong, its a great gain, but for the 3rd time, i was simply saying it is always a good idea to confirm for everyone what was going wrong before so everyone understands where you made up the 50rwkw so people dont incorrectly assume that if they go and fit an S-AFC they will get these sorts of gains.

Either way, it looks good, and your car should be a different car now :(

any shop will be able to do it considering theyve got a timing light.

I havent seen a shop that doesn't have at least one timing light

Timing on rb25's should be set at 15+or-2 degrees at 650 rpm .

What was your timing set at before ? It can make a lot of difference .If retarded it wont have any power , if advanced to much it may ping ( knock ) and you may blow it up .

I dont doupt the 50 kw increase if your timing was way out , but the power your car is making is fat to optimistic in my opinion . As i said before its an auto and you have the aid of the torque converter and second gear .

A good way to find out the true power that your car is making , take it to wsid and see what your terminal speed is , thats a very good indication of your average power .

im pretty sure my timing was off.

i posted a dyno graph showing the before and after curve.

so just to clarify, i got 147 on 3" turbo back, fmic, pod and 12psi

with retarded timing (i THINK it was sitting a few degrees under stock).

if my timing was spot on then im guessing i would've made around 160kw as my base. but you cant really tell.

also another thing i'd like to add is he said that sometimes the knock sensor on the safc screws with the timing, if the knock is high then somehow it will retard timing so he advised me to disconnect it.

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...