Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hmmm.

well i just had my emanage fitted. and the tuner said that the airflow meter is maxed out at 180rwkw at 12psi??

i know my brother using the exactly the same afm on his r33 was pulling around that 200-220rwkw mark with pfc.

the tuner said that i will need z32 afm as mine is maxing out at the moment at 5volts?? he is saying that the ecu is not liking any more than that?

its got me F**ked i wonder why. I need some expert answers ;P??????????????????????????????????

could the greddy emanage be running a different current to the afm than the pfc?

Why not consider the extra map sensor plugin harness for the emanage.

It will read boost pressure off the map sensor once the afm maxes out.

Just a thought.

yeah i was looking at that on mohd parts. thankyou most helpful. i wasnt 100% sure what it did.

Why not consider the extra map sensor plugin harness for the emanage.

It will read boost pressure off the map sensor once the afm maxes out.

Just a thought.

How does that help?

The boost controller should be ensuring that the boost stays constant, especially at the sort of rpm the AFM is going to be maxing out at. So the MAP sensor shouldn't see any differences in the pressure. That means there is no variation in the load signal to cause the load mapping reference to move. So all you get is RPM mapping reference changes, which is what you would get with a maxed out AFM anyway.

The only time you really need an AFM upgrade is when unanticipateable changes in airflow occur, ie; not linear with rpm changes. At high rpm (ie; past boost build and camshaft timing effects) this shouldn't be an issue. The fuel and ignition requirements are satisfactorily driven off the rpm change.

That's why I don't change the AFM's until it is necessary because of tuning requirements, and reaching 5.1 volts at 6,000 rpm in an RB25DET is not one of those. It would seem that RacePace have a similar philosophy.

:D cheers :(

How does that help?

The boost controller should be ensuring that the boost stays constant, especially at the sort of rpm the AFM is going to be maxing out at.  So the MAP sensor shouldn't see any differences in the pressure.  That means there is no variation in the load signal to cause the load mapping reference to move.  So all you get is RPM mapping reference changes, which is what you would get with a maxed out AFM anyway.

:huh: cheers :)

Yeah your right.

But with regards to the original question, i was under the impression he wanted to run more boost then what he had, which would require someway of the ecu knowing that the extra boost is being run.

Yeah your right.

But with regards to the original question, i was under the impression he wanted to run more boost then what he had, which would require someway of the ecu knowing that the extra boost is being run.

It's not the amount of boost, but the change in boost that the ECU would need to make use of for mapping purposes. MAP sensors are usefull when boost is building or decaying. But when the pressure stays the same for periods of RPM change they are not much use at all. You still have to use the RPM axis to determin the fuel mapping.

:huh: cheers :)

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

    • Forgot to include this but this is the mid section of my steering rack that looks like it has a thread/can be turned with that notch mentioned in the post:
    • Hey everyone, Wanted to pick some brains about this issue I'm having with rebuilding my 33 rack (PN is 49001-19U05). All of the tutorials/videos I've seen online are either R34 or S Chassis racks which seem to be pretty straightforward to disassemble but this process doesnt carry over to my rack. Few of the key differences that I've noted The pinion shaft on the other racks bolt on with 3 torx bolts: Whereas my rack bolts on with 2 allen head bolts: These changes are pretty inconsequential but the main difference is how you pull the actual rack out of the housing. The other skyline/s chassis racks can be taken out by tapping the rack out of the body with a socket and it just slides right out. I'm unable to do that with my rack because there's a hard stop at the end that doesn't let the seal/shaft be tapped out. Can also see a difference in the other end of the rack where mine has a notch that looks like you're able to use a big wrench to unthread 2 halves of the rack whereas the other racks are just kinda set in with a punch. My rack: Other racks: TLDR; Wanted to know if anyone has rebuilt this specific model of steering rack for the R33 and if there were any steps to getting it done easier or if I should just give this to a professional to get done. Sorry if this post is a bit messy, first one I've done.
    • I would just put EBC back on the "I would not use their stuff" pile and move on.
    • Can I suggest you try EBC directly again and link them to as many competitor catalogues as you can to show their listing is incorrect, eg https://dba.com.au/product/front-4000-series-hd-brake-rotor-dba42304/ If you have access to an R33 GTST VIN and your VIN, you could also use a Nissan Parts lookup like Amayama to show them the part number is different between 33 GTST and 34 GTT which may get their attention
    • So i got reply from EBC and they just this site where you can clearly see those 296mm fronts on R34 GTT. I send them photos and "quotes" that 296mm are not for 34 GTT and they are too small. But it will be very hard to return them cuz nobody here knows 100% and they just copy those EBC catalogue :-D https://ebcbrakesdirect.com/automotive/nissan/skyline-r34
×
×
  • Create New...