Search results

I think he's coming to FCS with it

Well mine is on a similar turbo and makes 485 at 1.7 bar, the turbo will flow most at 2.2 bar....

I'll leave that one for steve. It includes a new turbo and manifold though!

It's having A LOT of work done as we speak. Will be an interesting one when it's done!

Glad you are happy but this isnt about ktec's work or mapping, it's about the messy dyno graph. If it drives ok on the road i stand by the first comment of operator error. Oh and not to dissapoint i'm VERY :eek:

That run was launched at about 1000 rpm where the graph starts so I really don't know how you expect the above to be a valid excuse? If you can't feel an issue on the road between 2 and 3 on that car I would be VERY surprised tbh Nice top end gains though

Defo not wheel spin, traction on the DD is very very good

There's no way i would be sending a customer away with that.....

How and where the car is strapped, rpm the run is launched, how long you keep load on the car before letting it go and i also see on some with decats or cams a missfire causes it to do the above so it could be in the mapping too.

Operator

You would need to make a bracket/modify it to fit.

I have one of these in stock: http://atpowershop.co.uk/catalog/renault-fuel-rail-p-171.html

I think dialing the cams in would deal with this one but maybe lose a little top end.

or do you mean manually timing the cams?

Yes but it does not need that in this instance. Whatever could be done on the standalone could be done on the stock unit. It's not like the fuelling will be going off on one, same with the spark. Of course with more time more could be done but having aftermarket does not allow you to change the...

Putting an anftermarket ECU would in no way change the dip, you can perfectly control the injection and spark with the stock unit. That dip is purely down to the VE.

It will be interesting to see how much ignition this will want with the lower compression. Personally i'd stick with stock cams unless you want 320+, shame as i've just binned about 5 sets :(

The RS2 isnt for number chasers but all the ones we have mapped have acheived the same end result of a totally flat torque curve, clean pull all the way to the limiter and a really good throttle response.

Maybe because i'm right in saying the only difference is the actual cam timing!

Surely the only difference is lift at tdc as that's not shown on the profile? No doubt they are a food cam profile but till I'm proved wrong I'll stick with the 421's :) We'll find out in jan as we are doing some testing

Best gains based on what? 421's are the same profile with different timing so providing you get the 421's to idle they WILL make more power than the 438's. At a guess the exhaut will be retarded a few degrees to make the idle but this will take power away compared to not having the r****d.

Yes! Yesterday we were supposed to be mapping a Merc ML63AMG, he had 95 octane in the tank, it made only 444hp and was knocking pretty bad. You could see the ECU pulling timing on the logs...

We back to back tested some 95 ron against vpower on a totally standard octavia VRS 1.8 20vT. Logging knock and advance with VCDS the 95 was giving massive correction figures, 6 IIRC over all 4 cylinders and 165hp. We drained the fuel while still on the dyno and filled with vpower. The same...

Thats the last cal i sent mat for the car and will be the cal on the car!

No? We can make it better that's for sure :) I know what the idle is because I looked at the cal to check

How what ? :) If you call in I will raise it, sick of people saying 421's won't idle on the stock ecu!

Your idle is set to 944 rpm

Both!

It can be mapped out still, I think I set the idle to about 1050, defo not 1300 so even that alone might fix it

You can get them to idle, either high or a slight r****d on the exhaust cam.