Jump to content

itsLeon

Members
  • Posts

    82
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by itsLeon

  1. On 11/06/2021 at 13:23, Reggiez said:

    Hey all I’m after some advice on tuning my 2005 350z to possibly get it around 330bhp . I have fujitsubo exhaust and mishimoto upgraded radiator and fans and a jwt pop charge intake . Is it worth getting a map on it to get it to 330hp roughly what other mods could you do ? I’ve heard of plenum spacers ect and headers but not sure how much this would help ? I’m getting a dyno run next week to see where it’s currently at 

     


    Here are two N/A Builds you might wanna follow so that gives you an idea what is needed to get that power level

    https://www.350z-uk.com/topic/124653-ow-no-another-na-build/
    https://www.350z-uk.com/topic/110772-fast-roadtrack-350z-37ltr-hr-build/

  2. On 04/06/2021 at 11:19, msitpro said:

    Thanks for that - will analyse a bit later. 🧐 :thumbs:

     

    I assume fuel map is fuel compensation for the observed real AFR vs the AFR target?


    No it's not. It's a VE (Volumetric efficiency) map, if i leave that blank no fuel would be injected. Uprev uses a different method for delivering fuel (forgot the name) 

  3. On 29/05/2021 at 01:13, msitpro said:

    Nice nice.

     

    So what is the reason why it switches to open loop at 3k? Is that a default for the ECU? A choice you've made?

     

    I would guess this is because the closed loop mechanisms cannot react fast enough to the changes in throttle inputs and rpm?

     

    Out of interest, do you have a map/grid I can see for your optimal torque of the target AFR for fuel schedule (load) vs rpm? Would like to compare to mine/others.

     

    The equivalent table to below for your ECU -

     

    308524d1296925007-can-anyone-tell-me-what-data-byte-means-uprev-fuel.jpg.76e8cc704626f26fa5014edb96c04440.jpg

     

    AFR target: 
    LZghfAP.png

    Fuel map: 
    YZV2mY9.png

    Timing: 
    rkDF3yx.png

    Closed loop settings (o2 control):
    HZK5KAT.png

    • Like 1
  4. Im only targeting 16.7 at low rpm and load. This is because of the cams, the have a big overlap so the fuel that gets injected some part of it leaves directly into the exhaust. 
    Also 14.7 is not some holy number to focus on (its only for emmisions) and with the installed EGT sensors i can monitor if its not getting to hot. 

     

    The OEM ecu is only in closed loop when the target is 14.7 after that i goes to open loop. 

     

    Once my engine reaches higher rpm/load to numbers are accurate its just for the idle that i target leaner then normal. (when idling i can see my afr move from 15.5 to 17.4 its not steady at all until closed loops kicks in, then is more or less around the targeted afr) 

    • Like 1
  5. 12 minutes ago, msitpro said:

    I see - so you have or could have the logs if you wanted. Do they trace fairly closely with the Haltech map's closed loop AFR targets in your logging?

     

    The original bolt-ons spec from everything you've said (corrections for that dyno, temps, etc) and what I've mathematically extrapolated looks very healthy - around 275whp / 317bhp @ 6500rpm. :) ....for those interested.

     

     

    I think you're headed for 340-350whp @ 8000rpm when you're fully mapped.


    I always log when my car is running so yeah i do have the log files. But i don't understand your question about if the trace closely to the closed loop afr? 

    First there is no closed loop afr, you have set the afr targets as you want across different RPM's and engine load, for example my car is targeting an afr of 16.7 at idle because at 14.7 it was way to rich (could smell and see the fuel out of my exhaust)
    Second you set the closed loop control as you want. Mine is set to be only in closed loop below 3000 rpm and below x load. 
    I can run the car completely at open loop if i want, everything is dialed in to be around 5% of the target AFR i want.  

    • Like 1
  6. 4 minutes ago, msitpro said:

    Also, don't suppose you have the WOT AFR traces between those two runs?

    well that is optional. My car runs 2 widebands sensors connected to a haltech ECU i didn't see any reason to connect a third just for the dyno graph

    • Like 1
  7. 18 minutes ago, msitpro said:

    That's fine. Others (like myself) like to compare, with all knowledge taken into account.

     

    Out of interest, what spec is that bolt ons car, for comparison? :)


    Cosworth: 11:1
    Eagle rods: 
    Cat cams 290 duration 12mm lift (IN) 274 duration 12mm lift (EX)
    3.5inch intake
    75mm Throttlebody

  8. Guy's i really dont care how much HP its making and if the numbers are correct. The dyno is only a tool for use and not a precise measuring device. There are so many corrections/settings that will influence the numbers its showing. I only care if it is making more power then before. 

    • Like 2
  9. Well that might be true that the build motor is making less torque then the stock motor at low rpm.

     

    My engine is using 290 duration cams with 12mm lift so we had to turn off vvt (that is making power at low rpm) the manufacturer has warned me about is that these cams don't like 3000rpm and below.

     

    But I did some research about the dyno last night and most owners of these dyno's use a 15% hp correction for drive train losses we had it set on 5%

  10. No this is engine power and not wheel. We haven't use this dyno much for power sweeps so must of the settings are still on default, incorrect calibrated. So many correction settings are still on the low side and we just updated the software with many new features so still figuring out all the settings. We use this dyno for a base line run and then see how much we can HP we an add and mostly for the tuning part. 

    Will start looking at the new settings and do the run over to see if it gets different results. 

  11. So last sunday we put to car on the dyno. 
    We now make around 313hp @ 6400 RPM (havent raised the RPM limit yet) and the the torque curve is still going strong, no signs of it going down so thats a big plus. But we have found some small problems. 
    Will listing to the engine we noticed it was very loud and difficult to hear knock so i have to find a solution for that to make sure the engine is not knocking. Because we couldn't listen to knock the timing is on the low side (hence the low HP numbers, below stock timing). 
    The other problem we are having is that i need to upgrade the fuel pump because thats only good for around 350hp and i expect to reach near the end of the RPM. 

     

    Also because everyone loves dyno sheets, here we compare my car against a bolt on 350z. 
    (The dip in the torque at the end is because of a very soft RPM limit lowering the timing from 6000 to 6500 in steps to a max of -15)
    GhtBPui.jpg

    • Like 1
  12. Small update.

    While the car is up and running we have a small electrical problem. The app and tps sometimes will get incorrect voltages turning the tps off and stalling the engine.

     

    The haltech ecu didn't give any voltages back to see which one is causing the problem. 

    So far we have replaced the app sensor, checked the wiring, replaced the fuse box in the engine bay because that one had water damage yet the problem is still not solved

     

    I have updated the firmware of the haltech because this might be the one causing the problem. After the update I can finally log the voltages so that's a plus. This update was for fixing the tps problem so fingers crossed.

     

    P.s. go check if their is water under your battery, the drain will easily get clogged. Just found out multiple zeds got this problem

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...