I didn't even pay much attention at the dyno shop what I was doing ... but I went out just now to write down my S-AFC settings incase I loose them some how ... these are my after dyno settings!

Link to my Dyno charts;
https://www.rx7club.com/forum/showth...hreadid=132499

As some of you may know .. I could not boost past 9.59 PSI for some reason .. I suspect a leak somwhere. read my last 2 posts in the above link.

I think this almost proves a boost leak must exsist,

720CC primary injectors
1000CC secondary injectors

S-AFC high throttle numbers to achive the above listed A/F ratio.. with a rewired Walboro 255/LH

1000 -6
2000 -8
3000 +4
3500 +14
4000 +9
5000 +3
6000 +9
7000 on +16

I think my turbo is making boost at way lower RPM's than the dyno shows and that I am loosing it ... that is a SICK amount of fuel ..

chime in plz,

Robert.

 

that is way not right.... you should be at like -40 or something lOL... at 10 psi. I'm at -13% with stock injectors!

 

I didn't see the A/F ratios on the scanned charts

But your sure you are not running so rich you are killing boost? :-)

 

Yeah.. those numbers seem way off. We have pretty similiar mods except for the turbo, I am running stock as of these settings (1 more week 60-1 and haltech) woohoo.

Pushing 13psi on the stocker with a walbro and 4x720's after 4k all I did was remove fuel. I have a WBO2 on the car all the time, so i know what the A/F ratio is, it is in the 10's. here are my settings.

Low Throttle 20% High Throttle 60%

HI LO
1k 0 1k -5
2k +2 2K +5
3K +2 3k +5
4k +1 4k +5
5K -8 5k +2
6K -14 6k +2
7K -20 7K +2
8K -14 8K +2

 

I was thinking maybe I need a fuel pressure regulator or somthing, I'm not sure what to think. But I really think somthing is wrong

 

man thats really odd and it doesnt seem to be rich on the graph but yet still +14 and +16 with those injectors ?? strange

 

are you sure that you have all your injectors firing or some ****? that seems way the *** too rich. But, numbers dont lie

 

RPeck. maybe your airflow meter is messed up??? At maximum boost, I have seen as much as 80% on the safc's airflow value. What do you see??? My friend only sees 65%. Maybe your afm is malfunctioning???

 

I would have to take a good run and look at that... I have never paid much attention to the max Air Flow I am getting ..

But I am at a bit of a loss as to whats up now... It could be alot of things and maybe the AFM .. I am going to do some major trouble shooting this weekend .. if anyone else has Ideas of things I should chekc out ..by all means post them. I gotta cure what ails my car ...

But I somehow think the problems are one in the same .. Low max boost .... boost only way high in the RPM band ... and the S-AFC settings being so off the wall .. I think they are all related to the same issue .. whatever that issue may be is the question.

 

Rpeck.

Your O2 sensor might be the prob...most likely it is. Have you upgraded it to a 3wire (heated)?

 

This was all done with a 4 wire wide band O2 sensor from a dynapack installed.

Not I have almost constant hessitation past 4k RPM's ... its killing me, but I have been to busy to take a good long look at it lately.

 

hey saabguy, what year is yours? my 88s AFM maxes out at like 64% is this normal or maybe i need to make trip to junk yard?

 

My 87 afm has gone up to 80% at times. My safc settings are quite negative. My ECU is the N332 if that makes any difference.

I slapped my full intake and the afm shot up to 84% in first gear. I took the intake off cause that made the car hit 10psi.

My compressor is slightly upgraded so maybe that makes the readings slightly higher as well, but I am only running 6psi, not a crazy upgraded comp.

 

You really need to look for boost leaks and make sure your boost gauge is telling you the real story. I can't empasize those two points enough!

Dale

 

are you refering to me?? cause my car is running perfect.

 

Yeah, that's way too much fuel in the midrange.&nbsp Most FC's I've seen like to have fuel removed in the 4kRPM range.

How did you come to those settings?&nbsp The wide-band said so?


-Ted