Home Tuning Vipec And Link G4 Skyline Plug In Ecus Thread .

[Lithium]

I'm kind of not expecting a lot of turbo response with a 0.82 GT30 hot side in that 2000-2500 area but time will tell . In the past someone else here used the same 3076R 52T 0.82 combo and reckoned it spooled like a GTRS but that's a big call I reckon .

I haven't in the past paid much attention to how this V66 (44 with 88 top board) was set up in the active boost table , it uses RPM vs throttle position and I'm still trying to get my head around that approach .

The Vipec tutorials even recommend keeping it simple so if you're messing with TPS etc for your boost control mapping, you might be unnecessarily complicating things. I have seen it used successfully on a big power SR, along with gear position to make the thing driveable off corners. But that was a 600+ rwhp time attack type car, not highly relevant to a full weight 350ish hp R33.

I'm sure nobody minds sharing experiences or ideas, but could I suggest you look to knock over one issue at a time with understanding how to tune to achieve results? Dancing from topic to topic makes it difficult to follow what you're wanting.

Agreed on GT-RS versus GT3076R (even 52trim) - never going to be comparable, and tuning won't get around that - the GT30 is going to have to be laggier, especially noticeable sub 3000rpm... but it'll be all worth it overall imho.

DP - if you want to discuss anything Link/ViPEC wise then PM me, I don't really want to share stuff on the forum (sick of the BS) but I have wrestled them quite a bit... may be able to help point you in easier directions with things.

A couple of things for sure (part of it just nodding at Dale's comments):

1) Don't bother playing with timing to target AFR, AFR is a mass ratio - timing doesn't change the mass.

2) AFR as logged isn't necessarily an instant representation of what is going on in the engine, there can be a slight lag - if you see a rich AFR on lift off/funny zones it can actually be from a fraction of a second before where you are seeing or plotting it to. The Link software can only put it against where it THINKS it relates to, you could spend a lot of time chasing your tail there. Steady state tuning low speed/load areas of the map on a dyno makes it a crapload easier to see the wood for the trees. Also, as mentioned before... there is stuff you just can't expect to or don't need to be too pedantic about - by tuning you are essentially forecasting and planning potential outcomes to the best of your ability and making sure everything operates within acceptable bounds.

3) Ignore the default Link/ViPEC boost table setup imho... not sure what they were on about there but I have never used TPS as an axis and have managed pretty solid boost control with Link's setup.

[discopotato03]

I'm not really going off on tangents , I'm trying to work around mechanical things like that turbo and part of my issues are it trying to boost from low revs . I honestly can't remember what a GTRS actuator is set to but boost control I'm guessing is doing its best to jamb the gate shut more so . If it could crack - even a little - more exhaust flow in this low rev band could stop it doing reversion things .

I say reversion because , repeating here , no matter how much fuel I added in the said area the AFRs go backwards as boost rises 2000-23 2400 . Lifting the engine speed control threshold from 2000 to 2400 has made it feel better and now the AFRS tend to go richer rather than leaner as the pressure climbs in the above mentioned range . Might push that up to 2600 .

Now also understand , I didn't fit and do the initial tuning Insight did and I have nothing but good things to say about Scott K . I was reluctant to play with this computer initially but he assured me that in a lowish state of tune and on E70 I wasn't likely to do any damage . To ensure this I don't play much with the on boost settings because I don't have access to a dyno . The cold starts round town and highway stuff I'll have a go at and yes the goal is to make it "feel good" . Throttle transients and climbing into boost seem to be the challenging parts as in enough fuel but not too much/little to feel good . The timing has to be in the ball park or it doesn't get to feel good .

Just on timing I believe there is an optimum point to start the fire because this has a big say in when the initial pressure spike occurs and where the burn finishes . I reckon in a rapidly decelerating engine , throttle slammed shut , the dynamic compresson would be very low and with SFA air going in the only way to burn any residual fuel is to start the burn closer to TDC - retarded .

Now back to boost control settings . As I mentioned I was puzzled about engine speed vs throttle position because it throws in another variable I hadn't thought of . I would have thought engine speed vs manifold pressure with coolant and air temp compensations would cover it but again I'm not a professional tuner so I don't know all the tricks .

And Mr Lithium yes I understand the slight lag between the chambers and the oxygen probe and when chasing things at very low engine speeds and loads its very easy to go around in circles .

Anyway the drive nice feel good is what I'm after and not throwing money out the exhaust is part of it . I'm beginning to think that RB engines won't get good consumption on ethanol fuels because they come from the era before super lean burn designs . The 25 Neo had some updates before it ended production and I think it was a sign that RBs needed to be improved or replaced . Blame the greenies .

Anyway I'll have play with boost control ideas and see where that gets me , cheers A .

[Lithium]

Just on timing I believe there is an optimum point to start the fire because this has a big say in when the initial pressure spike occurs and where the burn finishes . I reckon in a rapidly decelerating engine , throttle slammed shut , the dynamic compresson would be very low and with SFA air going in the only way to burn any residual fuel is to start the burn closer to TDC - retarded .

I'm beginning to think that RB engines won't get good consumption on ethanol fuels because they come from the era before super lean burn designs . The 25 Neo had some updates before it ended production and I think it was a sign that RBs needed to be improved or replaced . Blame the greenies

So are you playing with timing just to get the timing dialled in nicely, or are you saying you expect it will affect the final AFR?

And did you put any more consideration into the lower ethanol /flex fuel idea?

[wolverine]

Mick_o was getting very good consumption with E85 tuned by Unigroup.

Flex fuel is what I would do if E85 was more available in my area.

[Mick_o]

Mick_o was getting very good consumption with E85 tuned by Unigroup.

Flex fuel is what I would do if E85 was more available in my area.

I could get around 450+km out of a tank of E85 on freeway driving that wasnt with 100% conservative driving either,

But driving it around "having fun" icould get around 350-380km on eflex

Best I done was a trip to shelley beach and back from Richmond around a 240km round trip and I used JUST under half a tank

[Lithium]

Mick_o was getting very good consumption with E85 tuned by Unigroup.

Yes, I was well impressed - I'd love to know how lean the cruise etc setup is...

[Piggaz]

Yes, I was well impressed - I'd love to know how lean the cruise etc setup is...

Although not micko's car but tuned by the same guy, mine according to the AFR gauge is 14.4-15.3:1 on cruise. (That's petrol AFR numbers obviously as the AFR meter doesn't know what fuel is in the tank). I can't see micks being any different.

What I have noticed was when it dips leaner than 17.5 it gets quite sluggish.. (There was just one cell which needed a touch up. Sorted now)

[scotty nm35]

My consumption has been woeful, but I realised it was mainly due to lots of short runs. The cold start enrichment you need with ethanol is horrendous so you want to keep it to a minimum.

You guys have higher comp than me at a guess also, which would help.

[ARTZ]

Mick_o was getting very good consumption with E85 tuned by Unigroup.

Flex fuel is what I would do if E85 was more available in my area.

anyone know what injectors was he running?

just pulled mine out of hibernation for a coupla days...so just for interest sake

30lts E85 got me 200km...half highway ,half suburban traffic with a few fun squirts on gate....

for a 300kw car that hasn't had a lot of road tuning, I'm pretty happy with that and Its better than I remembered it to be..

A strange hunting idle issue I had before seems to have gone away so maybe has improved my fuel economy..

still had no worries labouring up a hill in 5th at 60kms either...gotta love that Ethanol torque...

[Piggaz]

anyone know what injectors was he running?

just pulled mine out of hibernation for a coupla days...so just for interest sake

30lts E85 got me 200km...half highway ,half suburban traffic with a few fun squirts on gate....

for a 300kw car that hasn't had a lot of road tuning, I'm pretty happy with that and Its better than I remembered it to be..

A strange hunting idle issue I had before seems to have gone away so maybe has improved my fuel economy..

still had no worries labouring up a hill in 5th at 60kms either...gotta love that Ethanol torque...

ID 2000's mate.

[discopotato03]

I'll try and post the PCL though not sure if my computer skills are up to that .

A .

Edited December 3, 2013 by discopotato03

[Mick_o]

I was running PE 850's mate

anyone know what injectors was he running?

just pulled mine out of hibernation for a coupla days...so just for interest sake

30lts E85 got me 200km...half highway ,half suburban traffic with a few fun squirts on gate....

for a 300kw caat hasn't had a lot of road tuning, I'm pretty happy with that and Its better than I remembered it to be..

A strange hunting idle issue I had before seems to have gone away so maybe has improved my fuel economy..

still had no worries labouring up a hill in 5th at 60kms either...gotta love that Ethanol torque...

[discopotato03]

These give a bit of an idea what numbers I'm running . It's starting to finally give the sorts of AFRs that look good while it feels good to drive .

Note how I use retarded timing on warm up , this makes it drive much better when cool and warms up noticeably faster too .

Inlet air temp when cooler likes a bit more timing which is logical .

The ignition retard you can see at the top left of the timing map , all it does is remove the rich spike on closing throttle at lower revs . Yes probably with a slight time lag .

To be honest I haven't tried to lean out the expressway type cruise mixtures , may have to take the missus out for a spin so I can drive the lap top .

Also I'm using Nismo 740s which wouldn't be as snappy at small pulse widths as EV14s . They aren't bad but clearly not cutting edge .

Micko probably did better consumption wise with an unopened Neo 25 and obviously less exhaust restriction (GT30) . Did he really have ID2000s in his skyline ?

My lid has 256 Tomeis and OS exhaust valves plus a bit of smoothing in the ports . Nothing major but more aimed at performance than economy .

And nope my 3076R isn't fitted yet , have everything inc Scottys nice inlet pipe bar spacer plate and dump . Altered rosters at work that include single days off , nice - not .

A .

Edited December 3, 2013 by discopotato03

[Lithium]

Mick O has ID2000s and great fuel consumption in his EVO 9, not sure if his Skyline has been referred to in this thread.

[ARTZ]

yeah ,he just said was PE850s... They are sidefeeds arent they....just saw his earlier post too...I also got 450km off about 50 lts of ethanol hwy driving....So economy value is definately there considering e85 is generally 30c cheaper than pulp...I beleive its all the extra torque available, i just find I rev alot less to get the car moving.....its like driving a diesel down low...with a whole lotta fun up top....unfortunately my wideband stopped working but was running 14.7_15 on cruise...

And with the widespread availability of E85 in vic I dont even care about fitting flex..just another problem

[Lithium]

The fact that Disco's target AFRs at cruise appear to be mid/high 13:1 could go a long way to explain some of the fuel economy woes if that is representative of what the tune is doing.

[ARTZ]

The fact that Disco's target AFRs at cruise appear to be mid/high 13:1 could go a long way to explain some of the fuel economy woes if that is representative of what the tune is doing.

why?

Is it running open/closed loop?

just remembered mines running full open so possibility of even better economy when I hook it back up

[Lithium]

What do you mean, why?

Sorry its not that rich for cruise, should have used "coast" to clearer - IMHO while not enough to make 10%+ difference in economy, it's pretty rich for just rolling around type load imho. I don't really go into the 13s until load starts building.

[ARTZ]

why so rich...I'm pretty sure some of discos ramblings somewhat taught me what stoich was many moons ago.....yet I dont see a stoich value entered once on his mapping...

A quick look at my own target afrs sees pretty much everything over 3000rpm and below 100kpa set to stoich....

or am i reading it wrong?

[Lithium]

No you are reading it correctly - I was just being very polite as I don't want to get into a debate and I wasn't sure if you were questioning me (I'd have a lot more of the map closer to stoich, if not leaner at points) or questioning the AFR targets. Looking at that map I'd not be surprised if I were told it's a bit doughy and thirsty, though being DP is new to this software and practice and it's only an initial tune - it's not a the worst place for it to be, by a long shot. I've seen far far worse! We all have our own preferences and approaches, too.

The trick with the Link is the actual AFRs aren't necessarily what are in the target table, plenty of people disregard that table completely - however I set up my fuel table as much as possible like a VE table and enable "Open Loop AFR" and make sure the AFR target table is a very reliable indication of what actually happens as it makes tuning way easier

Without seeing the whole map etc it's hard to tell what to make of what DP has posted, considering I rely almost purely (or totally even) on the WG Duty table for my boost control yet that isn't attached.

PS. Another tip, I tend to put up a graphic visualisation of the map so you can spot any lurking surprises in the map easily - 4500rpm, 120kpa in the ignition map as an example