Steve Watts

Thanks for the offer, i'm after a diesel but something more 530d, 535d. Good luck with your sale.

Yes it is a pre-facelift model, few more pics attached.

2006 Reg Nissan 350Z in Kuro Black. GT Pack, Bose sound system, Alezan Leather Seats, Rays 18" Lightweight Alloys, Birdview Sat Nav, Nismo Aero Kit, Nismo Alloy kickplates and vent surrounds. 70,000 miles, good condition inside and out. Full service history, 3 keys, original receipts, 9 months warranty. Motordyne 5/15" Plenum Spacer, MRev2 Lower Plenum and Uprev Tuner Licence & Cable. Looking for £12,500. Other stuff you probably know comes with the car: Heated Seats Cruise Control Brembo brakes Electric Seats Electric Windows Xenon headlights ABS Switchable ESP Climate Control/ Air Conditioning Heated & electric mirrors Driver, Passenger & Side airbags Alarm & Immobiliser Remote Central Locking 350Z Mats

Chris, 80% opening in what gears - all of them? What were the voltage readings, you dont have to reach 5v to get full throttle.

So has anybody read data from the throttle position sensor in 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th - before and after Uprev? Other than myself that is? I found I was getting wide open throttle in all gears, both before and after. A 1500kg car doesn't get to 60mph in 6 seconds with limited throttle. Not disrespecting Uprev, it makes a good improvement to performance, I'd recommend it to anyone, but the throttle isn't limited as everyone seems to believe.

The chart shows that the throttle position sensor reads a maximum of 4.16 in 2nd, 3rd and 4th prior to UpRev. Using UpRev tuned throttle settings is also reads a maximum of 4.16. The only thing that changes is the shape of the curve.

Yeah fully stock, attached is from my first log, before I'd even received the ROM's from Uprev.

As usual I have a comment contrary to general opinion, which is that the throttle isn't limited in any gear. Uprev logs show that you get wide open throttle in all gears, well actually I can only speak for my car, but theres nothing special about mine - its a prefacelift DE. The difference in the low gears is that as standard the acelerator pedal movement is not linear with throttle opening, in first you can press the accelerator 3/4 way and only get slight throttle, making the car feel very lazy. But if you put your foot right to the floor you DO get full throttle. The Uprev throttle maps makes the car more responsive in low gears, but does NOT actually give any more throttle opening.

The mrev2 is designed for the revup (06 facelift) engined cars. Motordyne themselves reccommend only a spacer for non revup (pre 06 facelift) cars. In my experience mrev2 made no difference. Spacer made 5bhp top end same torque. Uprev worth upto 20bhp and 20lbft. Mines a pre facelift car.

Yep

Ive had the standard lower collector in and out of the car and also a genuine motordyne mrev2. The mrev2 doesnt do anything on a non revup with a spacer. Trust me your is standard, the runners are not equal heights. The mrev2 is basically yours with the tops of the front runners shaved.

For the reasons already mentioned - fitting a de collector to a revup it increases torque, shaving the front runners allows some additional flow to the front cylinders mitigating some of the loss in peak power.

We will have to agree to disagree. Having engineered and tested many components relating to fuild flow I'm pretty sure of the flow characteristics, if you google 'bellmouth intake design' you will find quite a bit of empirical data (not theory) on flow rates and pressure drops associated with different types of design. On the topic of intakes that take air from inside the engine bay - it might be interesting to compare logs from dyno runs to those on the road, I doubt the power loss would be as great on the road as it is under dyno conditions.

Tricky Im not aware of any official revisions of the de lower collectors other than the change for the revup - from your pics that is a standard de lower collector, exactly the same as mine. The mrev2 is a machined aftermarket version of that same lower collector that many people do a diy copy of. The rev up version show in the previous pics is the only other design supplied by nissan that I am aware of.

Not planning to adjust injector latency. Although is this why the stock open loop afr is so far from the target table?

There is loads of test data on bellmouths and air flow, there is even some quite detailed analysis of different profiles in the public domain that have been conducted under proper test conditions.

Not a good advert for TDI's testing then, other than for people who want to achieve high numbers (I'm not aiming that at you Matt - it just makes commercial sense for dyno ops to promote modding). The intake runners and plenum control pressure waves in to the cylinders, the airbox bellmouth would not effect this. The 06 design is better, but it could have been done by an undergraduate placement student - the cost of the change would be neglible compared with the other developments to the rev-up.

There are a few sharp edges from casting inaccuracies and identification marks on both upper and lower sections that can be smoothed out. On the lower section, if you wanted to shorten the longer runners to equalise the lengths you would probably gain a little peak power - the shortest runner is tuned around 6000 rpm, although the experience on the rev-up lower section suggests that the power loss lower down probably makes for a net loss in overall performance. Personally I would only be altering runners if I had a cam change. The standard runners/cams appear quite well matched.

Im currently getting 420 miles to a tank - about £85 worth. Unfortunately I do a 98 mile round trip to Northampton each day, so I will pay £5k a year in fuel. Even worse I might end up in Stoke - 130 miles a day - £6.5K a year.

Nice work with the Supra, turbos can be a bit different as the extent to which you can tune a forced induction engine is generally limited by safety, there will be a combination of afr and ignition timing to give best performance but generally you can make more power right up until you detonate. With na you often find best torque before encountering knock. I would expect to get with in a 1% (3hp) of optimal given enough time, realistically I might get bored before then.

Comparison with acceleration times in previous issue of EVO magazine.

So far uprev has reduced my 3rd gear 30-80 time by 8%. As force and acceleration are proportional this suggests an average of 8% increase in engine power through 2000-6500 rpm - around 20bhp By comparison plenum spacer and filter only managed 2% (around 5bhp)

I agree a constant load/rpm dyno session will find a peak torque or bhp quicker (and maybe even higher ones) than tuning on the road, especially the ignition timing. However if you have the time, interest and a methodical approach it can be done - what you give up in accuracy of power measurement you gain in tuning under actual road conditions, dynamic engine loads, real coolant and intake temps etc. My view is if I cannot measure the difference in performance on the road it is not worth tuning for it, although I understand alot of people ultimate numbers are important.

The fuel corrections are typically between 96-104, although I have seen 93-108 immediately after a new map and reset of the learned fuel.

Cam