Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

When my car came over from Japan I got it dynoed @ 1 bar as soon as it came over and it made 274rwhp. Then we backed the timing off (to prevent pinging) and turned the boost up to just under 1.2 bar and it made 297rwhp. It did this with the Japanese chipped standard computer that the car came with. The AFR's were off the chart rich as soon as it came on boost and the overall tune was not very tidy at all.

I decided to purchase a AP Engineering Power FC to get the tune spot on and went to get it tuned. On the dyno the fuel and ignition were being played with but the car did not seem to be making decent power. Timing was around 14 and the AFR's around 11.8 with the boost set around 1.2bar. The motor was struggling as soon as it came on boost. At around 4.5k it stopped making power at around 240rwhp and then fluctuated between about 230-250rwhp all the way throught to redline.

It did not seem to be missing but we changed the plugs, changed the AFM with a brand new one and everything seemed to be working fine but the car was just not making power. To check it wasnt anything mechanical I plugged the Japanese remap in and the car once again made decent power so it has to be something to do with the Power FC.

Mods done to the car so far are.

GTR front mount

GTR injectors with resistor pack

Z32 AFM

GTR Fuel Pump

Decent sized Apexi BB Turbo

Auto to Manual Conversion

I have talked to many ppl about the problem and noone seems to be able to shed too much light onto what could be wrong with the tune. Can anyone offer any suggestions on what the problem could be? The only things I can think of is the Auto loom causing some kind of problem as the computer is only meant to be used with a Manual car only.

PLEASE PLEASE HELP. This is total :bs!: and is pissing me off and stressing me out

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/67913-rb20det-ap-engineering-power-fc-tune/
Share on other sites

As the guys have already suggested, ignition timing would be where I would start. Check it with a timing light at 5,000 rpm with the chipped ecu and compare that to the Power FC at the same RPM.

user posted image

Went and got some runs printed out from the dyno today. The blue shows the power fc tune while the green is half a run with the jap retune, it would have made around about 290rwhp+ with a full run.

The power fc is tuned with afr's about 11.8:1 while the jap tune is a LOT richer than that.

Will test the timing with the light toinght and get back those results tommorrow.

Once again thanks for the help

Looking at the power graph, my first guess would be that the ignition timing is all over the place. Since the boost and A/F ratios are stable, that's the only logical alternative. It's up and down more than 20 rwhp in some places. Very interested in seeing the A/F ratios graph and what happens when you run the timing light over it.:cheers:

  • 2 weeks later...
  '[teejay said:
']try some new knock sensors

i suspect yours have failed, and are retarding the timing coming onto boost

other options : test the power fc in another car to see if thats the cause.

Id doubt it would be them, as chaning ECUs shouldnt change those problems.

It pretty much has to be narrowed down to the ECUs tune and or wiring.

Id also just double check to see if their AFR metre gauge thingy it working correctly, as if that is out, then it would be throwing out their tuning something chronic. (had it kinda happen before, AFR line was fine, just down about 2 on what it should have been ie should have been at 12, but was reading about 10)

  Sydneykid said:
As the guys have already suggested, ignition timing would be where I would start.  Check it with a timing light at 5,000 rpm with the chipped ecu and compare that to the Power FC at the same RPM.

Why do you say to try comparing the timming at 5000rpm not say idle?

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

    • Version 1 aluminium airbox is.......not acceptable No pics as I "didn't like the look.....alot" Even after all my "CAD", and measurements, the leg near the fusebox just didn't sit right as it ended up about 10mm long and made the angle of the dangle look wrong, the height was a little short as well, meh, I wasn't that confident that Version 1 was going to be an instant winner I might give Version 2 another go, there's plenty of aluminium at work, but, after having in on and off a few times, and laying in the old OEM airbox without the new pod filter and MAF, there may be an option to modify the OEM air box and still use the Autoexe front cover and filter.... maybe This >  Needs to fit in here, but using the panel, and not the pod, the MAF will need to fit in the airbox though> I'm thinking as the old OEM box and Autoexe cover that is sitting in the shed is just sitting around doing nothing, and they are relatively abundant and cheap to replace if I mess it up and need another, it may well fit with some modifications to how the Autoexe brackets mounts to the rad support, and some dremiling to move it get in there, should give me some more room for activities, as I don't want to move the MAF and affect the tune Sealing the hole it requires to stick it in the air box is simple, a tight fit and some pinch weld will seal it up tight  I am calling this a later problem though
    • and it ends up being already priced in as though you're just on 91RON without any ethanol. Car will lose a bit of economy as the short and long term fuel trims bring down the AFR back to stoich or whatever it is for cruise/idle for the engine.  
    • Oh, you are right. But, in Australia E10 is based on 91RON fuel and ends up being 94RON. Hence it being the cheaper option for economy cars. The more performance oriented cars go for the 98RON fuel that has no ethanol mixed in. The only step up we have left then at some petrol stations is E85.
    • There is a warning that "this thread is super old" but they ignore that anyway...
    • With 10% Ethanol, we're talking 2-3% fuel consumption difference. The emissions reductions and octane boost in my opinion far outweigh this almost non existent loss.    My tanks sitting at 80%. Luckily that should go down fast as I'm on vacation again for the next two weeks. 
×
×
  • Create New...