Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have a c35 S1 rb25det manaul laurel, running an apexi fc and few small mods boost controller, fmic, cat back and air filter.

During the map time on the dyno, results where very low.  The tuner was expecting figures closer to the 290 range and instead it came around 236.  Since then compression, engine timing and many many other things have been checked and all came out correct. 

The only thing that is puzzling me is that the base timing is set to be 15 degrees.   This was done from the loop wire at the back of the car.  This shows at 15.  Then checking the white centre wire into the coil on no.1 still shows 15.  But through reading where many people have suggested the ht lead directly onto the sparkplug tactic for accuracy, there is then about a 5-7 degree difference in ignition timing???

It seems as though a lot of people get the same result either way, so people swear by each method.  but with this amount of deviation between the 2 it could be a cause of low power.  Compression is fine, standard AFM is almost maxed out, it does not lean out so fuel is there, compression is correct, 7 heat range iridium plugs, they are aftermarket coil packs from in japan...

 

Any help or information about why this occurs, or any other ideas would be brilliant as i've got a long way to go with this car but i need the base to be correct.

 

Thankyou 

If the car isn't taking timing and the base timing is correct try dropping your cat completely and running it on the dyno without it, ie dump pump to down pipe to atmosphere 

Could be a restrictive cat or cat back exhaust or both. 

Also just re reading are you running the stock dump and down pipe? 

(I'm assuming you're referring to wheel HP not kW) 

Yeah exhaust is standard except for back basically...was wondering about exhaust being an issue. 

Just unsure as to why there is such a difference between the two ignition timing readings. And if people are tuning from the direct to spark plug method then they could well be putting +5 advance on from the 'nissan approved' loop wire?. As the delay in the coil charge time must be in there calculations for ignition timing.  Has anyone else taken readings from the both methods? 

Car sounds and runs healthy with a decent amount of pull in the torque band But just missing the expected power

Yeah but why is there such a difference between the two? Though the loop wire gives a constant reading. Hear some people the loop jusr flashes all over the place or something. I'm just getting 5 degree difference after the coilpack? 

6 hours ago, Andy-p said:

Or has anyone got a picture of a spec 1 loop wire/colours or wiring diagram? Because one wire in a loop at the back of the engine is pink with a black stripe? Chrz 

Don't worry about that measure between coil and plug.

But why? I can understand if they give the same values, but if they are different then surely it needs to the correct nissan way otherwise it will be incorrectly set by a few degrees? I get that people get all sorts of pulses though the loop wire, but mine reads accurately?. The extended loop wire I'm using my even be the wrong wire which is why I'm getting very different readings. Even if someone knows ecu pin numbers or something for that loop wire so I can confirm/find it? Chrz

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

    • Got the gearbox in and the front drive shafts.
    • Hi There I went through a rabbit hole of reading about Xenon headlights and the ADR regulations for having them installed. As people have been defected by running factory xenon I was researching in ways to make them compliant. Everyone always say needs to be self leveling and have washer installed, which I don't necessarily agree with. For this argument I'm using R34 as reference as I'm more aware on the construction of the headlight compared to the R33 Xenon, which may still be the exact same case.   For the self leveling clause taken from ADR 13 - Installation of Lighting and Light Signalling Devices on other than L-Group Vehicles As you can see the bold text "these manually adjustable devices from driver seats" are fine to use. As Series 1 Xenon model headlights do have a 4 level adjuster on the right near the ignition (however not series 2) then these model are consider compliant in that argument.   For the Self Cleaning aspect of this argument clause taken from ADR 13 - Installation of Lighting and Light Signalling Devices on other than L-Group Vehicles Now i can understand the argument that Xenon will need a washer as they are over 2000 lumens, but I clicked on the 12 at the end of that sentence and it takes me to the end notes which states R34 for headlight lenses are plastic, not sure if PL is mark as I don't currently have my skyline to confirm that marking is there. But could you not technically get a lenses with the PL marking on it and then get away with the argument that you need a washer. I went through a quick read of the adr and might have missed something else that may cause them to be non-complaint.    But wouldn't these technically be complaint headlights   Would love to hear other people input on this and shed some light   Edit In regard to the the washer portion I might be mistaken ADR 45 (which I believe is Regulation NO.45) states 12 cd (candela) I dont understand that portion in regarding to calculating the candela if anyone can shed some light. Otherwise I guess throw in a washer for the headlight and you definitely comply.
    • Took it to all Japan day, flogged the hell out of it and took it all, am a very very happy man  don’t know how that ended up in Greg’s thread before
    • Hey Nismo, any chance in the world you still have these seats?
    • I'd say closer to OG GTX3582R, just smaller trim - so 59mm inducer/82mm exducer as opposed to 62/82 for the first gen GTX3582R. Yeah EFRs were boss, the EFR8474 is still an absolute beast and it perplexes me that people still go to things like Turbosmart/Garrett etc when the results people are getting with those are pretty unremarkable compared to what you could get with a turbo available well before those options came out.  DriftSquid (I think) "upgraded" from an EFR9174 to a Turbosmart turbo and promised a comparison video - and kinda shuffled awkwardly and did a bit of diversion from the fact that they didn't get any improvement going to the currently massively hyped brand of turbo from a turbo that was a bit of a frankenstein that had been well superceded in it's own range before the Turbosmart unit he put on there even came out. I suspect the EFR would outperform most Xonas for what a lot of less-insane RB owners would go for, in the 400-600kw range but the Xonas are looking hard to beat up to maybe in the mid 700kw range at this stage- basically where EFRs don't really reach, and before the Precision turbos take over.  What the Xonas do well in the "EFR range" is be easier to package etc, and work very well if a divided housing doesn't suit your application.  
×
×
  • Create New...