>Xtreme,
>
>How can you say that an SAFC isn't what we need on
>turbosystems? It's a very versatile instrument that is
>practically required to run our car's system with any
>increase in injector size, our computer alone can't do that
>well enough.

It has been proven that the SAFC WILL INCREASE timing advance. If we are running high boost, at lets say 15-18 degrees, the SAFC will automatically advance it further. Please tell me how that can be good, when we are already running on the edge of detonation?

Using a wideband O2 sensor and working on the
>dyno, guys are figuring out what A/F ratio they really need
>for maximum power for their particular car. With the
>variability in fuel and turbo systems among the 420a crew, I
>think using an SAFC is not only the smart thing to do, it's
>the safe thing to do.

Increased timing advance under boost is not good. That my friend=detonation.


The SAFC is extremely useful in this
>because it can change the fuel mixtures and work on ignition
>timing itself. Ask a lot of guys with turbocharged FACTORY
>cars and this is one of their first mods.

Yes, FACTORY turboed ecu's are much, much different than our ecu. No more explanation needed there.

My 300ZX TT
>friends say it is a must on their cars once they are using
>the huge Nismo injectors. This J&S safeguard would be very
>useful at times, but I'm not sure the increases in power
>would be worth it. The safety of it on the other hand is
>good to have, but watching EGT and A/F ratio within your car
>on the gauge pod is just as important.

I completly agree 100%

You can't change
>timing yourself while your driving, yea that's great it can
>do that, but for those of you running your turbosystems on
>the street, why not just be a little conservative and run a
>bit rich? U aren't exactly out to destroy the competition on
>your way to work.

Yes, true. But my question was how much HP *could* we gain if done with my theory. That, honestly i dont know, which is why i started this thread.

Having the safeguard at the track would be
>nice but if you are a racer, you are prepared to break stuff
>and often want to have a complete stand-alone management
>system where you can use your laptop to change timing and
>fuel curves yourself.

That would be *ideal* for a setup. At 2500+ dollars, very few can afford it. I just wanted to set out to find a more cost effective way to run higher boost, using the stock ecu. Thats all.

I think Armond's ideas make more
>sense. Also, how on earth do you figure the SAFC is useful
>for the NA boys?

I was using that as a comparison. N/A guys run rich. By leaning out the A/F ratio, and increasing timing advance somewhat, some good, reasonalbe HP could result.

I know we have a rich spot in rpm, but what
>are you going to pull by leaning that out a little bit?
>Definitely no more than 10 hp and you'd be lucky as hell to
>get even that much. The NA cars are not going to make
>disgusting power, I would love to see an NA with no N20 make
>more than 200 hp and break into the 14's.

Yeah, i would too

Personally, I
>don't think it's going to happen without insane amounts of
>money that are definitely better spent elsewhere, i.e. turbo
>or different car. The more air they are moving from the
>intakes, headers, cams, even the porting or smoothing of
>head and intake manifold isn't going to allow it to make the
>kind of power you want, I wish it could challenge an S2000
>on horsepower per liter but it's not. And with that extra
>air moving, the computer is going to compensate slightly and
>we may still run a tad rich or maybe lean depending on
>whether the computer picks it up or not. Regardless, you
>either run extra injectors, an SAFC, or a stand alone
>system.
>
>Good luck with the J&S. I doubt they even make one for the
>car I'm building right now, Ford's EEC-IV is a great
>computer and we'll be running a programmer with it that
>let's us change timing and fuel on an rpm basis. Too bad
>Chrysler didn't include that kind of ability into our ECU.

Yep, ditto on that. I am just out to find the best, most costeffective way to build High HP on our cars, without spening mad amounts of money. I think there is a different(not necc the best), alternative to do it. Timing retard, and more conservative A/F ratios is my theory. Its just that, until i prove it otherwise. I'm in no way saying this is the one, single most answer to the question of tuning. It was an idea that was sparked from my detonation experience. I always like to look at things from a different point of view. I like to contest current theories and "facts" to provoke thought, and better ideas. Where would the science and technological world be without people like that?? Future dyno sessions on my car will be taking place in the spring time for sure. I will try both known methods of tuning. I am curious to see the results. I need to prove it to myself. We will see what happens. Maybe i can work something out with J&S for testing of their product. If i blow the engine, its ok, i have the skills to rebuild it. Whats a little money anyway?

13.5 @108 MPH-2.2 60ft(stupid FWD!)
S16G @ 18 PSI/FMIC/Running on MegaSquirt II (Now with sequential
fuel injection)
My webpage: http://eclipsed4evr.home.comcast.net
-1998 Mitsubishi Eclipse RS-T- "Toy"
-1992 Plymouth Laser Turbo AWD(SOLD)
-2000 Honda CR-V(daily)