Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

couple of questions...i'm sitting here going through some logging i did the other night in my car...here is the scenario and i'm wondering what is the best option...being first time road tuning.

on wot i'm running 11.4 afr's in p15 n17 with a knock reading of 18.

my question i'm pondering is ....should i pull fuel or add a degree of timing? timing in this cell is 18degrees @6100rpm

my mods are in my signature

any advice would be great

thanks.

post-95424-0-68066300-1397136414_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/441761-map-tweaking-questions/
Share on other sites

no problem just trying to get maximum efficiency. can you not get detonation with too much fuel? conversly with too much ignition? seeing as this is at the high end of the rpm scale i tought perhap a degree more timing might help.....this is where my thinking was going on both.....might have to do what gtsboy suggests :)

Im a bit confused as to why your timing is going up in the bottom right cells. It climbs from left to right be a degree every few cells. It should be the opposite.

as rpm increases the time between spark is reduced...which is why i advance the ignition as the rpm climbs.

as rpm increases the time between spark is reduced...which is why i advance the ignition as the rpm climbs.

Isn't that what IGN Dwell vs RPM is for

I dunno, now that I can look at my old map it seems I had more timing up top anyway. It starts dropping but did start higher. I havent done any tuning for quite a while now

Isn't that what IGN Dwell vs RPM is for

I dunno, now that I can look at my old map it seems I had more timing up top anyway. It starts dropping but did start higher. I havent done any tuning for quite a while now

IGN dwell versus RPM is for charge time, to make sure the coil is charged before the spark event happens. As a real rough rule the timing will typically be at it's lowest at low rpm and equal/highest at the highest rpm - the flame has to chase the piston, funnily enough at 7500rpm the piston will pull away from the start of the flame 3x faster than at 2500rpm.... if you used the same ignition advance the flame would be left for dead and just generate heat for no useful reason.

I wouldn't trust the pfc knock reading.

Only true way to get the maximum efficiency for that cell.

Is to load it up on a dyno and hold it at the poad point and play around with timing and fuelling

i agree, its not accurate but its all i've got at the moment. i'm saving for a knocklink.

whats the optimal AFR up the end of the map? is 12-12.5 still optimal?

how much boost are you running? and I suggest you run less and less timing as load increases (incase your actuator hose comes off OR you get a massive boost spike).

12-12.5 is consider ok up top, however most prefer to keep it under 12.

I usually like peak torque (roughly after max boost) around 11.5 then it tapers up to 11.8 all the way to redline.

"Optimal" is whatever the engine is happy with. It takes a dyno and knock ears to decide what that is. Some engines might like a little more fuel to keep knock under control, some might like a little less timing. It really so very much comes down to the specific combo of engine (age, condition, components, settings), turbo (compressor efficiency range it's operating in, back pressure on the turbine side) fuel and a bajillion other things that you can't tell if it's really happy unless you can watch its reactions to different settings.

For example, with a certain "tune" at a given load point the engine might be pinging a little bit. The dyno operator can choose to either richen up a tad or reduce timing. But which one he chooses will depend on whether the torque suffers more on one change than the other, or if the exhaust temp starts to become a bit wild and so on.

base timing is set to 15 degrees. thats a lot less timing than is used to have...stock they are up around 20 at wot.

i hear what you are saying gtsboy.....the knock ears will be a great help..... i think all cars need a happy meter.

base timing is set to 15 degrees. thats a lot less timing than is used to have...stock they are up around 20 at wot.

i hear what you are saying gtsboy.....the knock ears will be a great help..... i think all cars need a happy meter.

stock is 22, however nissan never factored in 1.3bar into the motor.. the powerFC map is just to get the car going remember that

Did you set up the base timing while looking at what the power FC was doing? I can see the first 4 cells are 15 but mine used to get close to or overlap cells further then that. I used to do base timing with a second person. One person looking at the hand controller timing and the other setting it with a timing gun. I think unplugging the TPS cancels the idle map timing so it wont jump around as much

You've probably done it fine but just asking

best to pop it on a dyno, with those timing figures on a slow ramp you will find it will knock quite abit around 3600~4000rpm (assuming that's your peak torque).

I like to ramp the cars I put on dynos around 9km/k per second.. i.e. the car increase 9km/h each second... the shorter the ramp, the less stress and usually shoots up higher numbers.

I prefer to really load up the motor and let manifold glow.. think about a track, especially the straight at wakefield it's not a 400 metre straight it's quite long, thus more load on the motor

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

    • Hi again all, I’ve tried doing some searching on the topic but couldn’t find the answer I’m looking for.   I deleted my clutch booster because it had an air leak and was squealing like a hog, and now my clutch has very poor pedal feel and the friction zone is way too small, so I believe I need a bigger diameter clutch master cylinder to compensate for not using the booster. I found a Wilwood option that’s 3/4” for a good price and will fit my 3AN clutch line, but all the firewall adapters I see online such as RB factory or Chase Bays are listed as RWD only (GTST/GTS). Link below. https://rbfactory.shop/products/nissan-to-wilwood-girling-clutch-master-cylinder-adapter My question is if these adapters will also fit a GTR, and if anyone has experience using a 3/4” CMC without the booster, my clutch is a Nismo coppermix twin plate.   Thanks, always appreciate the advice!
    • Catching up on a post, I've replaced the external shark fin with a small 4g antenna (no further drilling, just a 1mm embiggening of the existing hole, and run that to where the dual battery models have the battery in the left rear guard.  No idea what the factory antenna did, but removing it had no impact on anything I use, according to the US manual the GPS antenna is in the dash and it still works fine Also ended up stealing battery power from one of the amps and ACC power from a unit nearby to add an ACC relay to power it. The mounted the booster, wifi, power socket and antenna splitter in the rear left guard out of the way, all out of site with the boot trims in
    • What drama? The only drama you're going to have is the near constant work to maintain all those sphericals. I only have sphericals in my front caster rods and front upper CAs (because both of these are near compulsory in an R32). I have had the front arms out of my car 34 times already this month, and if the new replacements arrive today, I will have them out and apart again tomorrow. Chasing clicking and clunking that comes from sphericals being a.....poor choice for a road car. Moisture and dirt are not their friends. I have been contemplating a change to my rear subframe that would require me to use sphericals in my lower CAs. And.....I don't want to have them that close to the road.
    • Did you need anything else you've already done? If you had it before... and liked the changes after, then supposedly it'd be more of the same. The idea about most suspension arms is to tune geometry that the OEM arms max out at/can't handle because they weren't designed to have the car setup in such a way that 'looks good'.
    • I have replaced everything on my r34 including suspension to Miester R, all rear subframe bushes to poly, all arms to metal adjustable and same in front.   only thing I haven't touched is the front lower control arm. Should I? what improvement can i expect ? I mean the one on the link below?   Car drives perfectly, it is just me thinking everything is either puly bush or hard bearing type so should also do lower control arm front but do I really need it ? https://www.japspeed.co.uk/product/suspension/adjustable-arms/nissan-200sx-s13-s14-s15-skyline-r32-r33-r34-adjustable-suspension-front-lower-control-arms/?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQiAo5u6BhDJARIsAAVoDWs5V_PauQPf0kx3zFCaA4tOC9Q7JSIsfJWma_jAPN2f1sJA686djOwaAidgEALw_wcB
×
×
  • Create New...