GReddy kit: 355whp, 369wtq, stock boost
11-09-2004 | 07:52 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, Ohio
GReddy kit: 355whp, 369wtq, stock boost
Just thought I'd drop a little note that we got my own Z tuned in on the Dynapack dyno today. I am using the GReddy TT kit with Ultimate Racing full dual exhaust and cat deletes. Additionally, I have a walbro pump with a slightly modified AAM fuel system. The eManage is supplemented with the MAP sensor setup and ignition harness with diodes.
I noticed that the Z does fall into open loop above 4500 rpm in all cases and at lower rpm at a specific throttle percentage which I didn't take the time to check yet. A quite spin down the road with a scanner will reveal that item. I did note, however, that you can hit boost while in closed loop which is obviously going to be bad; especially if you are raising boost, etc. I noted that it VERY quickly will pull out 20% fuel or more to hit 14.7:1; even if at your full target boost. This is something to consider if you are using the kit without more advanced engine management, etc. I would avoid partial throttle boosting to stay out of this area.
Additionally, I noted that I did not have any noticeable det with about 4~6 degrees of retard. I pulled my plugs afterward to check and will continue to watch and see how things go. For reference, I am using stock style 1 step colder plugs gapped down to 35 thousandths. I left the air fuel ratio in the 11.5 area with a bit of fluctuation to 11.8 to 11.2.
As the title indicates, I ended up with 355 whp and 369 wtq on Shell 93 octane with about 5.3 psi manifold pressure. The hp was at peak revs that I took the car to (6400) and it was still climbing a bit. The torque was obviously down low. I did notice that the torque output was a bit wavy but that could be due to the dyno (it has the tendency to do that sometimes if the specific car is not setup the best). The SAE weather station in the dyno gave me a mere 2% power correction for ambient conditions which is very low.
I also wanted to note that since the car is true dual, I used two widebands; one was the MoTeC PLM wideband individual unit and the other was the MoTeC PLM system built into the Dynapack dyno. The A/F from one side to the other was fairly consistent at idle (within .1 A/F) but I did notice that the driver's side still ran about .2~.3 A/F leaner even with the AAM fuel rail setup. I imagine it may have something to do with the intake manifold and the fact that the air comes in right as it completes an almost 180 degree corner, etc. <shrug>
Anyways, glad to hear any comments on anything on here; especially what kind of timing everyone thought was good, etc.
I am considering installing a standalone because I know more is possible with a better engine management setup. I would recommend a reflash like TS to many ppl but some of us just change our stuff too much.
Mark
www.Quantum-Racing.com
Home of the Dynapack Dyno
I noticed that the Z does fall into open loop above 4500 rpm in all cases and at lower rpm at a specific throttle percentage which I didn't take the time to check yet. A quite spin down the road with a scanner will reveal that item. I did note, however, that you can hit boost while in closed loop which is obviously going to be bad; especially if you are raising boost, etc. I noted that it VERY quickly will pull out 20% fuel or more to hit 14.7:1; even if at your full target boost. This is something to consider if you are using the kit without more advanced engine management, etc. I would avoid partial throttle boosting to stay out of this area.
Additionally, I noted that I did not have any noticeable det with about 4~6 degrees of retard. I pulled my plugs afterward to check and will continue to watch and see how things go. For reference, I am using stock style 1 step colder plugs gapped down to 35 thousandths. I left the air fuel ratio in the 11.5 area with a bit of fluctuation to 11.8 to 11.2.
As the title indicates, I ended up with 355 whp and 369 wtq on Shell 93 octane with about 5.3 psi manifold pressure. The hp was at peak revs that I took the car to (6400) and it was still climbing a bit. The torque was obviously down low. I did notice that the torque output was a bit wavy but that could be due to the dyno (it has the tendency to do that sometimes if the specific car is not setup the best). The SAE weather station in the dyno gave me a mere 2% power correction for ambient conditions which is very low.
I also wanted to note that since the car is true dual, I used two widebands; one was the MoTeC PLM wideband individual unit and the other was the MoTeC PLM system built into the Dynapack dyno. The A/F from one side to the other was fairly consistent at idle (within .1 A/F) but I did notice that the driver's side still ran about .2~.3 A/F leaner even with the AAM fuel rail setup. I imagine it may have something to do with the intake manifold and the fact that the air comes in right as it completes an almost 180 degree corner, etc. <shrug>
Anyways, glad to hear any comments on anything on here; especially what kind of timing everyone thought was good, etc.
I am considering installing a standalone because I know more is possible with a better engine management setup. I would recommend a reflash like TS to many ppl but some of us just change our stuff too much.
Mark
www.Quantum-Racing.com
Home of the Dynapack Dyno
Last edited by QuantumZ; 11-09-2004 at 07:55 PM.
11-09-2004 | 08:04 PM
#2
lets get a standalone in there ASAP Mark - give me a shout maybe we can figure out some good options, since you're obviously taking your car farther than I am taking mine
adam
adam
11-09-2004 | 08:34 PM
#3
Those are very solid numbers at stock boost settings and the eManage. Nice work.
With that AAM fuel system and timing retard, are you planning to up the boost to the 7-9-psi range? Or do you plan on building the bottom end first.
With that AAM fuel system and timing retard, are you planning to up the boost to the 7-9-psi range? Or do you plan on building the bottom end first.
11-09-2004 | 08:44 PM
#4
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, Ohio
Originally posted by Z1 Performance
lets get a standalone in there ASAP Mark - give me a shout maybe we can figure out some good options, since you're obviously taking your car farther than I am taking mine
adam
lets get a standalone in there ASAP Mark - give me a shout maybe we can figure out some good options, since you're obviously taking your car farther than I am taking mine
adam
Mark
www.Quantum-Racing.com
Home of the Dynapack Dyno
11-09-2004 | 08:48 PM
#5
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, Ohio
Originally posted by gq_626
Those are very solid numbers at stock boost settings and the eManage. Nice work.
With that AAM fuel system and timing retard, are you planning to up the boost to the 7-9-psi range? Or do you plan on building the bottom end first.
Those are very solid numbers at stock boost settings and the eManage. Nice work.
With that AAM fuel system and timing retard, are you planning to up the boost to the 7-9-psi range? Or do you plan on building the bottom end first.
Engine management is what comes to mind as the answer (and fuel supply). I can already see at stock 5.5 psi that the factory ECU is an impedence. I tune so many standalones every day that it frustrates me to be stuck with a piggyback. I had an AEM EMS on my EVO before it was released (by retrofitting a box); I may do the same here or try a Hydra ECU which should be out in a month or so, I'd expect.Mark
www.Quantum-Racing.com
Home of the Dynapack Dyno
11-09-2004 | 10:29 PM
#7
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 449
Likes: 0
From: Silverdale, WA
Mark, thanks for the good info. I also noticed the closed loop at part throttle. I don't have my TPS hooked up to the emanage for logging yet. I feels like 60%ish when it finally rolls over to open loop. Not a good thing any way you look at it. Looking into solutions.
Gary
Gary
Trending Topics
11-10-2004 | 06:59 AM
#8
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, Ohio
Originally posted by 7 eleven
Mark, thanks for the good info. I also noticed the closed loop at part throttle. I don't have my TPS hooked up to the emanage for logging yet. I feels like 60%ish when it finally rolls over to open loop. Not a good thing any way you look at it. Looking into solutions.
Gary
Mark, thanks for the good info. I also noticed the closed loop at part throttle. I don't have my TPS hooked up to the emanage for logging yet. I feels like 60%ish when it finally rolls over to open loop. Not a good thing any way you look at it. Looking into solutions.
Gary
Mark
www.Quantum-Racing.com
Home of the Dynapack Dyno
11-10-2004 | 07:42 AM
#9
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
From: Columbus, Ohio
EDIT: Numbers are wrong, sorry. Long night last night. It's 355 wtq and 369 whp not 355 whp and 369 wtq. 
I'd edit the posts but you can only do it for 60 minutes after posting.
Mark
www.Quantum-Racing.com
Home of the Dynapack Dyno
I'd edit the posts but you can only do it for 60 minutes after posting.
Mark
www.Quantum-Racing.com
Home of the Dynapack Dyno
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post