Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

does anyone know what cause the car to idle to hunt after installing the HKS Twin Power.

Car is r33 gtst with the usual mods with new splitfire coil pack. With the twin power i can run 1.1mm plug gap and no miss at 23psi and seems to run smooth everywhere except when idling.

any help would be appreciated!

I have checked a few times for leaks and seemed to be ok... i will check again over the weekend. I have also plugged back the stock harness last week and it seems to be idling ok but not smooth. Was thinking the hks unit but it seems to run fine to redline with 1.1mm plug gap at 23psi. :wacko:

sorry, i meant stock coil pack harness. have checked TPS-0.45v, clean the AFM, all the hoses, the only thing i haven't clean is idle air control valve. I have also tried richen the AFR to 12.5:1 and reduce mytiming by 2 degrees and lower myidle rpm to 700rpm, which reduce the hunting by 70%, now only a little hunting which still not smooth.

Thanks for all the input guys.

have you tried to adjust the idle screw on the AAC to match the target idle on the PFC?

yes. it's already matched, but have also tried to rise/low the idle above/below the PFC and it was worst to go higher than PFC. I will clean the ACC today sometime and set the timing for lower cell to 15 from 17 (as suggested by DVS32R)and see how it go.

I have a slightly different theory.

While I havent seen the twin power CDI before, I have seen this sort of behavior with other CDI's when the ignition triggering is set incorrectly. The AEM CDI's and MSD CDI's have configurable rising or falling edge triggering. If it is set incorrectly, you idle advance will drift by the effect of the dwell angle the ecu is sending to the coils. This is most noticable at idle, and not noticable at all at higher rpms.

Im pretty sure the R34 coil packs contain a dumb ignitor module and are falling edge triggered. If you are triggering the twin power CDI from the output of the R32/R33 ignitor, then that could explain it. Re-wiring to have it trigger from the ecu directly could resolve the issue.

You wont be able to spot this ignition drift with a timing light aimed at the balancer timing marks as the flurry of sparks the CDI delivers at low RPM makes exact timing impossible to read. The AEM CDI's allow you to disable multispark to set the base timing. I have no idea if the twin power allows you to do the same. I'd figure you would just bypass the twinpower to set the base timing and then re-connect it afterwards.

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

    • Yes, it will take a fair amount of solution but the sodium citrate + citric acid + detergent is cheap stuff. Use laundry detergent instead of dish soap if you want to reduce the bubbles, also you could just buy sodium citrate and add some citric acid to the mix until you get to a weakly acidic solution if you don't feel like dealing with all the bubbling generated by adding everything together. For a fuel tank you need quite a lot of distilled water but it's probably worth the effort.
    • Actually looks like a Nitrous setup now 馃槅
    • @robbo_rb180 I already have a NEO head on the shitbox 馃槑 Just needs beehive springs so I can rev it past the 8600 rpm limiter, then again pointless too, turbo is out of puff lol. Wen da gods let me win lotto eh?
    • Everyone I know with a90 supra at time attack aren't having issues with 3-5 fast laps so far and one is decent powered one too. Saw a k24 swapped 86 with a 8hp70 and big slicks and aero which had no drama's at QR and Manton Park. I've stuck a 25 row cooler in my setup with 8hp45/50 in the hopes of keeping the oil cool as I plan on some racing next year that 20-30min sessions. I've also geared my car so won't be using 7th and 8th gear too. @Dose Pipe Sutututu just needs to get that samsonas in already and have that tassie guy fit a head and rev it too 11ty thousand rpm. 
    • My embedded systems thoughts have me sitting with GTS on this. Variation between same phone hardware, should be small. However, the internal "intensity" or "volume" amount that say Google passes to the app, will be quite different, as the underlying hardware will be passing different levels for the same volume to the Google OS. Until the app creator has had each individual phone, and set benchmarks and calibrations for each, the amount of error can be quite huge.   It can even be observed by using different phones, recording the same noise, and then playing it back, they end up soon ding different. A big reason for it, is even the different types of mics used in phones have different responses, and different frequency ranges. Then you need to get into the DSP, and the variations in those, their sample rates which then effect their frequency range, and then the quality of the DSP, and what type of hardware conversion they do to for the ADC within the DSP. Oh, and let's not forget at the low level phones are designed to cutout loud sounds. It's one of the reasons they suck in really loud environments (eg concerts). The louder you yell, the more you'll get cutout too Note DSP is Digital Signal Processor ADC is the analogue to data converter. I don't have any real data on what the variation would truly be, however, chat GPT says in general, their output is typically between +/-2dB to +/-5dB of what you're really measuring. So realistically, anything from 4 to 10dB variation is possible even with the same devices.
  • Create New...