Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Well i have to start off by thanking Adam very much, he takes the time to do things right and im very happy with the work he done on the tune for me aswell as doing it as he isnt too keen on the wolf.

The motor that i put in the car is a R32 non vvt RB25de but i put the RB20det cams in it.

Another change to the system was putting the standard fuel reg back on and taking off the 2:1 malpassi, i also run a relay on the fuel pump so it gets full voltage.

First up Adam wanted to re route some vacume line and check timing with the light, after that was out of the way tuning began with idle and light load points, hot start then took a lot of timing out of the map so it could be increased bit at a time. Then he started to iron out the fuel map and everything was going well.

As you can see by the graph we didnt rev it very hard as it started pinging. From ignition timing at 9 degrees we were seeing a 10-12rwkw gain with every degree added. We pulled the plugs to find them all different colours, 4 looked good but 1 was a grey and black weird colour and one was pure white so thats where we stopped the tune. The plan now is to flow test the injectors and see how they go as i had them cleaned before they went in but never flow tested them, Adams theory is that it is still making good power with more timing so one cylinder may be leaning out and causing the pinging.

Anyway pulled it off the dyno to find a big oil patch under the front of the motor, seems to be comming out the front cover, guessing the cam seals and it looks like it may be chewing up the timing belt or cam seals by the black fibre gunk it spat out the back of the timing cover, my fault i guess as i did the work there.

End result im very happy and need a bit more playing with it to get it all sorted out.

post-21010-1163398961.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/143121-gt3071r-on-na-rb25/
Share on other sites

Should be good once its all sorted, looks good now. :)

What ign timing did you end up with at peak torque and peak power?

Any chance of throwing a set of adj. cam gears on it? You can then shift the power curve around so that it makes peak power slightly higher.

Should be good once its all sorted, looks good now. :yes:

What ign timing did you end up with at peak torque and peak power?

Any chance of throwing a set of adj. cam gears on it? You can then shift the power curve around so that it makes peak power slightly higher.

I think that run was at 13 degrees but started pinging. When the bugs are ironed out we will rev it a bit harder, probally to 7500rpm if its happy. Could throw some cam gears at it if i find them cheap as im happy with power level now, dont want to ring its neck too hard :P

the rear is far too small. your massive exhaust back pressure, coupled with a high compression motor is forcing you to run low timing otherwise it will ping. realistically, you could step that up two sizes (rear housing) and end up with maybe 500rpm more of spool time, but a much better motor. otherwise good luck.

Yeah, i agree. Im a big fan of the .82 for the RB25.

With my GT30, i had similar results as you did Russell, but i had the .82 not the .63

I could run lots of timing to get the thing to get up on it earlier and i was making 270rwkw on 17psi with 17psi in around 4000/4200rpm under load on the dyno.

It also looks like your gate spring needs to be higher.

To me it looks as if your getting some ext gate creep going by the way the boost ramps up and then slows down for the last 2-3psi after 3500rpm.

If you fix that it should hit 16psi a good 400rpm sooner going by what i can see on the graph.

What spring is in the gate now? 7psi is my guess :yes:

Keep the R&D going and it should be a nice package.

Its the 71mm comp wheel so the .82 really isn't needed as its never going to make much over an honest 260rwkw (450fwhp).

Thats around the GCG ball park. The .63 will be fine.

Sort out fueling issue, throw a set of adj cam gears on it and move power around to where you want it. :yes:

Yeah, i agree. Im a big fan of the .82 for the RB25.

With my GT30, i had similar results as you did Russell, but i had the .82 not the .63

I could run lots of timing to get the thing to get up on it earlier and i was making 270rwkw on 17psi with 17psi in around 4000/4200rpm under load on the dyno.

It also looks like your gate spring needs to be higher.

To me it looks as if your getting some ext gate creep going by the way the boost ramps up and then slows down for the last 2-3psi after 3500rpm.

If you fix that it should hit 16psi a good 400rpm sooner going by what i can see on the graph.

What spring is in the gate now? 7psi is my guess :laugh:

Keep the R&D going and it should be a nice package.

The gate has a 1 bar spring but its only a cheap gate :P silly me should of got a good one first time around :yes:

so the car was pinging and you now have an oil patch under the car with the crank seal poped out, blow by?

I suspect cam seals are chewed out, the catch can was dry so i dout it was blow by and i couldnt even hear the pinging, the listening guy who had his head under the bonnet picked up on it lol

The gate has a 1 bar spring but its only a cheap gate :laugh: silly me should of got a good one first time around :D

Change it then, 400-500rpm for $700 is pretty cheap return on power for a decent ext gate, if you are indeed getting some creep as i suspect

Are you using a boost controller?

Its interesting Grim32's RB25 runs a 10.5:1 static comp yet it still makes less off boost power than both Abobobs and BassJunky's that also run a higher 4.11:1 diff ratio.

Most likely just dyno differences.

I wonder if the php script alters makes adjustments for the cars final diff ratio.

I should plug in freebaggins old GT3040 .63 int gate vlt housing setup with cams etc..

But you haven't considered the cams or r34 type vct which make a fairly massive difference.

Thats some pretty good response on the turbo though. With decent boost control it'll be all in by 3500rpm and on a turbo capable of high 200rwkw thats pretty damn good. I'd expect it's all in by low 3's on the street though? As you can't run silly boost levels due to the high comp i think a step up in exhaust housing could be beneficial, but i'd look at some 264 cams to improve the breathing of the engine before that.

One thing i can assure, is that Adam knows his ECU's... he is an expert with Haltec and Power FC! He dynoed my car and was very happy with his service... Did you check out his wall of fame? lol 100 or more dyno sheets :)

Great result btw!

Regards,

Sarkis

Change it then, 400-500rpm for $700 is pretty cheap return on power for a decent ext gate, if you are indeed getting some creep as i suspect

Are you using a boost controller?

The boost controller i have is run through the computer but is turned off as i dont think i need any more boost at the moment :ninja:

At the moment im just going to fix what is wrong with it and then see what results i get. Maybe cams and exhaust housing changes may come in the future but i guess ill just have to wait and see as i dont want to push this motor too hard and im quite happy with the power its making.

My car usually spends most of its time in the garage getting worked on :yes: , now my aim is to drive it more than i work on it so i really dont want to break it again just yet :ninja:

Ok just went to have a play with the car and found a few litres of oil under it, pulled off the timing cover and found this......

post-21010-1163486658.jpgpost-21010-1163486696.jpg

Lucky this engine is still alive.

Ok the motor is a stock r32 rb25de, timing belt and cams out of my rb20det are the only mods to the inside.

My mate done the timing belt for me then i was told i should change the cams, no worries pulled it down and put it back together exactly the way it was. I turned the motor over a number of times by hand and noticed the belt moving forward and if i turned the motor the other way the belt would go back. I called my mate and he said that the big washer that goes on before the crank pulley would stop the belt from moving.

Motor started fine and drove well. Higher up in the rpm, maybe above 4000rpm it started to make a whine noise like a boost leak. I wasnt driving the car hard so i didnt worry about it, checked all the hoses and all looked fine so i thought i would wait and find it on the dyno as it didnt seem to have a vacume leak.

Some hoses were changed at the dyno then i didnt hear the noise again so i thought that was the end of that, turns out it wasnt, in the second pic you can actually see it worn a hole on the backing plate.

Now my question is, what have i done wrong.

Would it be possible to bend a crank as when i undid the crank pulley bolt it had been lock tighted in and i had to use a big hammer and that hitting bar thing that breaks bolts.

Would i not have lined up the cams properly, i just bolted them in and they spun easily.

Well i guess you learn by your mistakes.

Any thoughts are appreciated.

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

    • Nah. For something like boost control I wouldn't start my design with PID. I'd go with something that originates in the fuzzy logic world and use an emergency function or similar concept. PID can and does work, but at its fundamental level it is not suited to quick action. I'd be reasonably sure that the Profecs et al all transitioned to a fuzzy algorithm back in the 90s. Keep in mind also that where and when I have previously talked about using a Profec, I'm usually talking about only doing an open loop system anyway. All this talk of PID and other algorithms only comes into play when you're talking closed loop boost control, and in the context of what the OP needs and wants, we're probably actually in the realm of open loop anyway. Closed loop boost control has always bothered me, because if you sense the process value (ie the boost measurement that you want to control) in the plenum (after the throttle), then boost control to achieve a target is only desirable at WOT. When you are not WOT, you do not want the the boost to be as high as it can be (ie 100% of target). That's why you do not have the throttle at WO. You're attempting to not go as fast as you can. If the process variable is measured upstream of the throttle (ie in an RB26 plenum, or the cold side pipework in others) then yeah, sure, run the boost controller closed loop to hit a target boost there, and then the throttle does what it is supposed to do. Just for utter clarity.... an old Profec B Spec II (or whatever it is called, and I've got one, and I never look at it, so I can't remember!) and similar might have a MAP sensor, and it might show you the actual boost in the plenum (when the MAP sensor is connected to the plenum) but it does not use that value to decide what it is doing to control the boost, except to control the gating effect (where it stops holding the gate closed on the boost ramp). It's not closed loop at all. Once the gate is released, it's just the solenoid flailing away at whatever duty cycle was configured when it was set up. I'm sure that there are many people who do not understand the above points and wonder wtf is going on.  
    • This has clearly gone off on quite a tangent but the suggestion was "go standalone because you probably aren't going to stop at just exhaust + a mild tune and manual boost controller", not "buy a standalone purely for a boost controller". If the scope does in fact stop creeping at an EBC then sure, buy an EVC7 or Profec or whatever else people like to run and stop there. And I have yet to see any kind of aftermarket boost control that is more complicated than a PID controller with some accounting for edge cases. Control system theory is an incredibly vast field yet somehow we always end up back at some variant of a PID controller, maybe with some work done to linearize things. I have done quite a lot, but I don't care to indulge in those pissing matches, hence posting primary sources. I deal with people quite frequently that scream and shout about how their opinion matters more because they've shipped more x or y, it doesn't change the reality of the data they're trying to disagree with. Arguing that the source material is wrong is an entirely separate point and while my experience obviously doesn't matter here I've rarely seen factory service manuals be incorrect about something. It's not some random poorly documented internal software tool that is constantly being patched to barely work. It's also not that hard to just read the Japanese and double check translations either. Especially in automotive parts most of it is loanwords anyways.
    • If you are keeping the current calipers you need to keep the current disc as the spacing of the caliper determines the disc diameter. Have you trial fitted the GTS brakes fit on a GTSt hub or is this forward planning? There could be differences in caliper mount spacing, backing plate and even hub shape that could cause an issue.
    • Hi there I have a r33 gts with 4 stud small brakes, I'm going to convert to 5 stud but keep the small brakes, what size rotor would I need?
    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
×
×
  • Create New...