Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hmmm dosent sound right to me, is the car running very rich for some reason???(is the rear bumper just above your muffler stained black?)

Or possibly your factory petrol level sensor is faulty or something, could also be your oxygen sensors, i would get it checked out at nissan or some other performance shop.

are you sure it wasnt constant spirited driving? i got around 200km's outa my first tank when i first got my R33 GTST. I gave it hell, everytime i put my foot down it went all the way to the floor.

next few tanks i was able to get over 400km's as i started driving it normally, so the fuel usage lies heavily on how you drive the car

firstly, how much fuel are you talking about when you say a full tank? there is no point saying 'full tank' since when some peoples gauge shows empty it has used 45L, others 55L.

convert it into L/100k's. e.g. if you get 217k's to 50L you are getting 23L/100k's. if you only used 20L/100k, and if you only used 40L thats 18L/100k's.

also, what mods does the car have? that could be the key to answering your problems. otherwise it may be either your AFM or o2 sensors.

yeah mine has now started the same problem, I don't drive mine often (maybe once a week if I'm lucky) so a tank lasts a while, but i manage about 260km out of a 40L so i get about 15~16L\100km. When i first got the car i got almost 560km out of a tank (not sure how many litres, was a damn while ago) on the highway coming home from the compliancer. Whats th best way to check if its afm or O2 besides get new ones?

I get 12.5 around town! :O ~360kms from ~45L (as much as I can fit in at the time for the last three tanks). Bloody stoked with that consumption, I expected around 14-15L around town. Worst I have gotten was 350kms out of 47L which is 13.4/100kms. Still bloody good given performance for around town driving IMO.

Before mine was tuned it was going through a tank every few days, it was really bad, but after the tune its fine, average 350-400k's per tank, or way less at trackdays etc ovbiously

Have a check of:

AFM's if your not running a MAP sensor ECU (which it doesnt sound like you are)

02 sensors

Spark plugs

An idea would be to use a MAP sensor ECU, i was advised to do this, and im very glad i did, tuning was a bit more expensive, but the AFM's arent used anymore eliminating that from ever being an issue - something worth thinking about :dry:

EDIT: Also i didnt think an ECU would be worth it for how my car was back then, it paid for itself VERY quickly, but aswel as that, the timing was all fixed up, and there was no more surging - just power where-ever and when-ever :P

For some reason mine eats O2 sensors and runs super rich with them plugged in so I run them unplugged. Might be worth giving that a try.

See how it goes after new turbos, PFC, 044 and 600cc injectors. As it is now it pulls 260rwkw on stock computer with steel wheel stock turbos.

I get 12.5 around town! :laugh: ~360kms from ~45L (as much as I can fit in at the time for the last three tanks). Bloody stoked with that consumption, I expected around 14-15L around town. Worst I have gotten was 350kms out of 47L which is 13.4/100kms. Still bloody good given performance for around town driving IMO.

That's pretty good....

I get between 16-17......

no real difference on the highway (I have got as good as14.6) as it still sucks the juice

car is basically standard

That's pretty good....

I get between 16-17......

no real difference on the highway (I have got as good as14.6) as it still sucks the juice

car is basically standard

By the sounds of it you have a gts-t? I found my last gts-t wasn;t that bad on fuel even tough i was running 270 degree cams and pushing 270rwkw, did have a map sensor ecu which as said above may make a difference. My stock gtr is worse :mellow:

By the sounds of it you have a gts-t? I found my last gts-t wasn;t that bad on fuel even tough i was running 270 degree cams and pushing 270rwkw, did have a map sensor ecu which as said above may make a difference. My stock gtr is worse :)

LOL :laugh:

yeah it's a gts-t....

pig on fuel, but you get that :ermm:

i have done a lot better with this tank. Cruise back from cooktown to cairns sitting on or around 100-120kph and then a few runs around town and the light has just come on. 445kms so far. that is a little better :)

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

    • Good afternoon Team , just a quick update on performance mods  Current Mods list (Installed) HKS - Power Editor (Came with the car) looks to be some kind of boost controller RV37 Skyline 400R (SKYLINE) | FUJITSUBO  - Cat Back  RV37 Skyline 400R (SKYLINE) | FUJITSUBO  - Front Pipe AMS  - INFINITI Q50/Q60 RED ALPHA COLD AIR INTAKE KIT AMS  - Performance Heat Exchanger Intercooler Not Yet AMS Alpha Performance Full Race Down Pipes  - to be installed in May 
    • I'd be installing 2x widebands and using the NB simulation outputs to the ECU.
    • Nah, it's different across different engines and as the years went on. R32 era RB20, and hence also RB26, the TPS SWITCH is the idle command. The variable resistor is only for the TCU, as you say. On R33 era RB25 and onwards (but probably not RB26, as they still used the same basic ECU from the R32 era), the idle command is a voltage output of close to 0.45V from the variable resistor.
    • It's actually one of the worst bits of Nissan nomenclature (also compounded by wiring diagrams when the TCU is incorporated in ECU, or, ECU has a passthru to a standalone TCU).... the gripe ~ they call it the TPS, but with an A/T it's actually a combined unit ...TPS (throttle position switch) + TPS (throttle position sensor).... ..by the looks of it (and considering car is A/T) you have this unit... https://www.amayama.com/en/part/nissan/2262002u11 The connector on the flying lead coming out of the unit, is the TPS (throttle position sensor) ...only the TCU reads this. The connector on the unit body, is the TPS (throttle position switch) ...ECU reads this. It has 3 possible values -- throttle closed (idle control contact), open (both contacts open, ECU controls engine...'run' mode), and WOT (full throttle contact closed, ECU changes mapping). When the throttle is closed (idle control contact), this activates what the patent describes as the 'anti stall system' ~ this has the ECU keep the engine at idling speed, regardless of additional load/variances (alternator load mostly, along with engine temp), and drives the IACV solenoid with PWM signal to adjust the idle air admittance to do this. This is actually a specific ECCS software mode, that only gets utilized when the idle control contact is closed. When you rotate the TPS unit as shown, you're opening the idle control contact, which puts ECCS into 'run' mode (no idle control), which obviously is a non-sequitur without the engine started/running ; if the buzzing is coming from the IACV solenoid, then likely ECCS is freaking out, and trying to raise engine rpm 'any way it can'...so it's likely pulling the valve wide open....this is prolly what's going on there. The signal from the connector on the flying lead coming out of the unit (for the TCU), should be around 0.4volts with the throttle closed (idle position) ~ although this does effect low throttle shift points if set wrong, the primary purpose here is to tell TCU engine is at idle (no throttle demand), and in response lower the A/T line pressure ... this is often described as how much 'creep' you get with shifter in D at idle. The way the TPS unit is setup (physically), ensures the idle control contact closes with a high margin on the TPSensor signal wire, so you can rotate the unit on the adjustment slots, to achieve 0.4v whilst knowing the idle control contact is definitely closed. The IACV solenoid is powered by battery voltage via a fuse, and ground switched (PWM) by the ECU. When I check them, I typically remove the harness plug, feed the solenoid battery voltage and switch it to ground via a 5watt bulb test probe ; thing should click wide open, and idle rpm should increase... ...that said though, if it starts & idles with the TPS unit disconnected, and it still stalls when it gets up to operating temperature, it won't be the IACV because it's unused, which would infer something else is winking out...  
    • In the context of cam 'upgrader' I mean generally people who upgrade headers/cams - not my specific change. I mean it makes sense that if I had a bigger cam, I may get more false lean readings. So if I went smaller, I'd get less false lean readings. To a point where perhaps stock.. I'd have no false lean readings, according to the ECU. But I'm way richer than stock. My bigger than normal cam in the past also was giving false rich leanings. It's rather odd and doesn't add up or pass the pub test. Realistically what I want is the narrowbands to effectively work as closed loop fuel control and keep my AFR around 14.7 on light sections of the map. Which is of course the purpose of narrowband CL fuel control. So if I can change the switch points so the NB's target 14.7 (as read by my WB) then this should be fine. Haven't actually tested to see what the changed switchpoints actually result in - car needs to be in a position it can idle for awhile to do that. I suspect it will be a troublesome 15 min drive home with lots of stalling and way too rich/lean transient nightmare bucking away for that first drive at 2am or whevener it ends up being. Hopefully it's all tune-able. Realistically it should be. This is a very mild cam.
×
×
  • Create New...