4722 replies to this topic

[JohnTurbo]

Lol. Thats just opinion. I had a setup like that in the skyline stuffed with 3x super slick defi guages. It didnt obscure vision at all and it allowed use of the gauges while still looking at the road. It was by far the most highly coverted feature on the car. I suspect it wouldnt be very neat in the vx because the A pillar is so skinny, but you could perhaps make one from tiny gauges that would be super.

[luke.]

I like where mrsimbas guages are

[MrSimba]

Just read your blog Nev all looks very good! I'd not worry about going over the 21psi as Klassen will have definatly set a 'hard limit' for the boost I would have thought or if you lost just one blanking plug out of your wastegate you'd blow the engine! When I collected mine from Chris despite it being fine for over 35 dyno runs one of the blanking plugs must have worked loose as I left his unit, the first time I went to boost it shot to 25psi @ 4000rpm (my mapped 'peek' is 22psi) and the ECU hard cut the engine to protect it as Chris had set the failsafe 'trigger' @ 25psi just in case anything like this ever happened

[Nev]

Had a 4 hours fiddle with the new instument pod this evening and got it installed and working. Write up and pic at the bottom of here.

BTW, Nippers 3" exhaust is up for sale for £900 - advert here.

Edited by Nev, 01 November 2012 - 09:26 PM.

[Nev]

This morning I re-installed a new vacuum box and its associated vacuum lines. This is the small black plastic box that hangs under the inlet manifold that the ECU uses to store a 'signal pressure' to the bypass valve. The objective of this is to smooth out the venting of boosted air from the bypass valve back into the inlet tract when I come off the throttle. I have been out for a test drive, but it's too wet and there's too much traffic to see if it works better. To be honest with my recent 4" pipework improvement and lack of driving it due to the weather, I am not familiar enough with the car to know if has made an improvement.

Edited by Nev, 03 November 2012 - 12:34 PM.

[Nev]

I must be feeling creative today as I've just come back in from the garage after making a 102 mm MAF (with longer leading throat to stabilise airflow). Once the epoxy is dry, I intend to install this (possibly in conjunction with an adjustable FPR (to increase rail pressure)) to compensate with more fueling. In theory this should keep the AFRs within tollerance (viewable in the cabin whilst I drive). The map is running seriously rich anyway (I get 20 MPG just driving 'normally') and I am fairly confident that running a bit leaner will be fine. If it looks like it is running too lean, then I just need to increase the fuel rail pressure and more petrol will squirt in with each injector cycle. We shall see.

Edited by Nev, 03 November 2012 - 02:21 PM.

[siztenboots]

can you monitor your short term fuel trims, and what does your long term fuel trim settle at ? trick is to make small adjustments and let it learn

[Nev]

How do you read your fuel trims Steve - Scangauge ? Managed to find some dry road on the last test run. Am not sure if it's my imagination, but it might possibly be coming off throttle better. I did notice 1st gear seemed more controllable and I took it upto about 4500 or perhaps 5000 RPM in 1st, which was highly dangerous previously due to mental wheelspin. I also managed some fiddling with the max boost settings. Upto about 18 PSI the car seems quite 'pleasant', once you crank it up to 21 PSI though the extra power really starts to hit home. I shudder to think what it would feel like if I let it get remapped to 30 PSI (or more!) which the turbo is quite capable of.

Edited by Nev, 03 November 2012 - 04:54 PM.

[siztenboots]

yes, sg2, plus ignition timing and amm

[Nev]

You read the voltage off your MAF on an insturment in the cabin ? Sounds like an interesting thing to do... I might connect my multi-meter up to it. However, I know that the 0 to 5 volts it sends is not linear in proportion to airflow (only an apporximation thereof), so I'm not sure how much meaning that would have TBH.

Edited by Nev, 03 November 2012 - 04:59 PM.

[siztenboots]

you can read the MAF using scanguage

[Nev]

Here is the MAF pipe drying on the radiator.

It's laughable how home-made some of my contraptions are, but they seem to work fine. I think one of the pragmatic principles of 'DIY tuning' is to fabricate from whatever materials/skill you have to hand, otherwise your project will be limited to 'off the shelf parts' and hence compromised (badly). After all, few of us have metalwork tooling, so in my case I simply use wood and epoxy instead. In the case of this mod, appearances not-withstanding this MAF will flow for around 700 BHP and cost me approx £5. If I were to buy a similar off the shelf part, god knows how much it would be, perhaps £200 or £300.

Edited by Nev, 03 November 2012 - 05:16 PM.

[Nev]

I am currently considering upgrading to a 70 mm throttle body too. There is merit in the slightly constricted TB that I have ATM, as it helps control the resolution/ganularity of low and mid range power, however on the other hand my current 62 mm TB will certainly be flattening off the dyno curve from around 7000 RPM as it is the narrowest restriction in my entire air track apart from the turbo compressor exit (which I have no control over and is configured to that size with very good reason).

Thus, the decission is whether to risk possibly loosing some fine pedal control < 4000 RPM for the sake of more power at the upper end. Basically this translates into same old ying-yang "equation" you need to consider every time you intend to make a mod. The answer to this question is based on a basic premis that the engine power delivery has always been focused on 4000 to 8000 RPM, below this is less important really as it not within the intended 'powerband'. Thus the answer is to increase TB diameter.

Edited by Nev, 03 November 2012 - 05:36 PM.

[CocoPops]

You not fancy entering the seloc sprints next year nev? Actually prove the car on track? Time attack? (Might be a bit costly for a OHW though)

[Nev]

You not fancy entering the seloc sprints next year nev? Actually prove the car on track? Time attack? (Might be a bit costly for a OHW though)

Hmmm, hard to answer that question as there are so many variables and factors. I have to say on the one hand I am not keen on paying what amounts to thousands of pounds to be restricted by artifical rules, limited dates/times, fixed venues that are miles from home, and worse noise limits than the road! However, I know what you are angling at, you are keen to see if the car is fast. However, I already know it is quick (on the right sort of tarmac/conditions) and I'm not so young that I feel I have to prove anything. Contrary to all that though, I know deep down that large/fast race tracks is where it would best belong, though I only ever spec'ed it to be a nippy road car.

However, the car isn't what I'd consider ready yet. I am still waiting for some very expensive bespoke parts I had drawn up in CAD and machined up for me. Once these are on the car they should make a radical difference. If they test out well I will be offering them to other VXers. Also I am waiting on another unrelated (so called Motorsport) part under warranttee to be machined up for me which has already failed on the car in just a couple thousand miles.

We shall see what the wind blows

Edited by Nev, 03 November 2012 - 06:11 PM.

[Nev]

Hmm, that didn't go too well. I installed the new 102mm MAF into the car, started it up and the AFR guage swung around from 16 to 21 (in closed loop) - far far far too lean. It's hardly surprising as the cross sectional area of the new MAF is +33%, so the car will be running 33% lean. I think this is too much for my adjustable FPR to compensate for. This is because the standard fuel rail pressure is 3.3 Bar. If I raise this to it's max of 5.0 Bar, that will increase fueling by 23% (ie still a 10% defecit of fueling). This is all ball park, but clearly I can't run around 10% lean, even if the dynamic fuel tabs compensated for another approx 7% Looks like I will have to swap back to the old MAF for the moment and consider a dyno run and remap at CS if I want to use it. This is not such a bad things really, if I plonk the larger throttle body on as well it makes sense to get the map adjusted correctly rather than chance it with estimated AFRs.

Edited by Nev, 03 November 2012 - 07:31 PM.

[MrSimba]

the engine power delivery has always been focused on 4000 to 8000 RPM, below this is less important really as it not within the intended 'powerband'

Maybe not but having sensitivity in the power delivery below 2000rpm is quite useful for stop/start traffic & hill starts!!!

Even more so with paddle clutches!

Edited by MrSimba, 03 November 2012 - 08:02 PM.

[Duncan VXR]

Hmm, that didn't go too well.

I installed the new 102mm MAF into the car, started it up and the AFR guage swung around from 16 to 21 (in closed loop) - far far far too lean. It's hardly surprising as the cross sectional area of the new MAF is +33%, so the car will be running 33% lean. I think this is too much for my adjustable FPR to compensate for. This is because the standard fuel rail pressure is 3.3 Bar. If I raise this to it's max of 5.0 Bar, that will increase fueling by 23% (ie still a 10% defecit of fueling). This is all ball park, but clearly I can't run around 10% lean, even if the dynamic fuel tabs compensated for another approx 7%

Looks like I will have to swap back to the old MAF for the moment and consider a dyno run and remap at CS if I want to use it. This is not such a bad things really, if I plonk the larger throttle body on as well it makes sense to get the map adjusted correctly rather than chance it with estimated AFRs.

Running true 80mm i/d over stock 80mm o/d mapped setup runs like a 3 leg donkey let alone bigger. Always going to need mapping to work on oem management sir

DG

Edited by Duncan VXR, 03 November 2012 - 09:20 PM.

[siztenboots]

oem trims will run upto 25% then it will go into limp mode

[MrSimba]

so in my case I simply use wood and epoxy instead.

Nev I'd be worried that if the epoxy cracked bits of it could get sucked straight into the turbo?

The silicone RTV you recommended for my oil leak may be a better solution? Heat resistant & flexible?