Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I went the tuner today as I am about to get a tune on the R33

Mods will be enough to get to around 230-240rwkw.

At the moment I am running the new GCG 450hp turbs with the old stock turbo tune.

If you ease into the throttle in say 4th gear at 3000rpm then back off slowly you get a jerk.

The tuner I spoke to today said you can't really tune it out.

He said that on the map tracer when you back off it should jump straight up the vertical axis but it jumps through a few others causing the jerk. This is a problem with AFM cars and this type of turbo. He said all skylines with HKS2530 and GCG etc (that size turbo) do this to some degree.

I mean it isn't that severe but can others try doing this on theres and see if they get the same problem.

I am going to show it to another tuner and get a 2nd opinion

cheers

Edited by benl1981

Hmm thats odd indeed with the stocker.

Is it working correctly?

I know of 3 GCG cars that have no issue... although... the OLD GCG turbo used to surge, the 500hp one.

There used to be two on the market, now there is just the one.

Your still running the stock rubber afm to turbo pipe?

I've driven other R32's and R33's *all with stock turbo's* that all do this under a specific driving condition.

Its not exactly easy to get the jerk and I can't always get it to do it easily. You must only just bring it up on boost then quickly back off but with your foot still on the throttle; the car then does a little jerk; almost like it bogs then accelerates normally again.

A larger afm to turbo pipe helps reduce this.

Adjust your driving style. :)

Yeah will I didn't notice it with the stock turbo. Maybe it's more exaggerated with the bigger turbo.

Sometimes it seems you can get it at a light constant throttle input, but mostly when backing off but not fully.

Maybe I'm being too fussy on this one.

Will show it to another tuner..

Backing off but not fully.. Sounds like exactly like the drivability issue I am thinking of. :laugh:

Try changing your driving style.. Or throw a bigger afm to turbo pipe on it as chances are it will be close to sucking shut anyway.

What your tuner is describing is reversion. On very light throttle you get some back flow (reversion pulse) off the compressor wheel. The only way to fix it is to increase the distance between the AFM and the turbo or introduce a 90deg bend. With the right software it can actually be seen as you back of the MAF voltage gets larger for a second. The majority of AFM's - RX8, any Subaru, some large yank lightening MAFs will NOT run without a bend or a large distance from throttles or turbo chargers etc etc.

I agree with cubes to a certain degree and Rob

It is reversion, the pressure differential between the front and back of the throttle isn't big enough to lift the bov off it's seat.

I only noticed it after i did the stock bov mod and blocked up the little hole. I never noticed it before that, even with an old stage 2 gcg high flow :thumbsup:

Edited by BHDave
  • 3 weeks later...

Ok - I have been checking the map tracer.

At low rpm in 4th or 5th (2000-3000rpm) and around load point 8-11 if you hold a steady throttle input you can see the little black dot jumping around up and down in the same vertical column (i.e. going up hill)...I

It doesn't look normal like what happens in 2nd or 3rd gear.

Sometimes holding this throttle input (around 0-3psi) the load point will jump from 10 to 15 accompanied by a jerk (not sure if jerk is before or after) then back to about load point 5...

I guess this could be a misfire..e.g. the car misses/halts, hence requires less air for a split second since the engine can't take it. This air builds up there and shows a higher load point reading..although this doesn't really hold true unless the car misses which allows more air to flow through..

The air build up wouldn't register a high reading on the AFM

or is the air coming back on itself and the high reading is air flowing backwards..

Anyone had experience with this?

Cheers

I have the GCG hiflow for the last 3 years and have never had this problem.Look at your boost controller,the amount of times I`ve seen people not turn the gain up to maximum is amazing.This creates little tuning problems on it`s own.If you have set gain,turn that up til it starts to spike as well.I did not have your problem exactly but I did have a little hick up on back off in 2,3 and 4th gear and proper tuning of the boost controller fixed it beautifully.Sorry,didn`t think to ask if you have a EBC.My theory is that an EBC is basically a vacume leak,so if gain is to low you may induce a constant boost leak.

hey ben, I get massive reversion on my car. After the 20th, if you like, we can try and see if we can reproduce it, then i suppose you could then say that it would be reversion.

I've also got a gtr bov spare that's going into my car. I suppose after the 20th, suppose you could try wacking that onto your car to see if the bov is the issue. in addition, maybe blockign the bov off all together, just for testing, to see if it makes it worse.

My car seems to have a small issue atm though. When I put the throttle down in neutral, then let go, my revs drop below normal idle. Only started happening around the time I put the pump in (which was 1 week after I put the turbo in). grrr, doing a few mods at once makes it hard to pinpoint issues.

Isn't it possible to 'tune out' some of the effects of reversion?

I had reversion pretty bad on my stock computer, the had the FC installed and tuned and it is mostly gone. You can still feel it slightly, but you wouldn't know if you weren't told.

i've got an r32 with a 2530 and gtr bov and a apexi stainless steel intake pipe (longer than stock by about 5cm)

i get that jerk aswell, but the funny thing is you dont get it so much when the car is cold and running rich.

it used to do the same with the stock bov.

I would like to fix the problem if its fixable

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

    • 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.
    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
    • That's awesome, well done! Love all these older Datsun / Nissans so rare now
    • As I said, there's trade offs to jamming EVERYTHING in. Timing, resources etc, being the huge ones. Calling out the factory ECU has nothing to do with it, as it doesn't do any form of fancy boost control. It's all open loop boost control. You mention the Haltech Nexus, that's effectively two separate devices jammed into one box. What you quote about it, is proof for that. So now you've lost flexibility as a product too...   A product designed to do one thing really well, will always beat other products doing multiple things. Also, I wouldn't knock COTS stuff, you'd be surprised how many things are using it, that you're probably totally in love with As for the SpaceX comment that we're working directly with them, it's about the type of stuff we're doing. We're doing design work, and breaking world firsts. If you can't understand that I have real world hands on experience, including in very modern tech, and actually understand this stuff, then to avoid useless debates where you just won't accept fact and experience, from here on, it seems you'd be be happy I (and possibly anyone with knowledge really) not reply to your questions, or input, no matter how much help you could be given to help you, or let you learn. It seems you're happy reading your data sheets, factory service manuals, and only want people to reinforce your thoughts and points of view. 
    • I don't really understand because clearly it's possible. The factory ECU is running on like a 4 MHz 16-bit processor. Modern GDI ECUs have like 200 MHz superscalar cores with floating point units too. The Haltech Nexus has two 240 MHz CPU cores. The Elite 2500 is a single 80 MHz core. Surely 20x the compute means adding some PID boost control logic isn't that complicated. I'm not saying clock speed is everything, but the requirements to add boost control to a port injection 6 cylinder ECU are really not that difficult. More I/O, more interrupt handlers, more working memory, etc isn't that crazy to figure out. SpaceX if anything shows just how far you can get arguably doing things the "wrong" way, ie x86 COTS running C++ on Linux. That is about as far away from the "correct" architecture as it gets for a real time system, but it works anyways. 
×
×
  • Create New...