Close

Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 216
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Stockholm
    Posts
    1,527
    Rep Points
    1,175.6
    Mentioned
    61 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No

    Troubleshooting Enrita powa

    Opening this thread to gather ideas in how to troubleshoot my engine powa. Since the engine rebuild i could not get decent 100-200 kph Vbox times. I blaimed first injectors, occurring missfires, transmission, tune etc. but now the car runs very well with no codes, smooth etc but powa seems not there.
    The car revs slow, feels like something is holding it back.
    For comparison my best 100-200 kph was 7.86 sec on jb3 18 months ago with 2 persons in the car.
    Big tom does it in 8.2 sec 1 person in the car (as far as i know) on stock turbos.

    All the following runs are taken with just me in the car , full tank and around 30 kg in the boot.
    this run was a 10 sec run, stage 3 alpha cobb with jb4 adding 2 psi.
    Click here to enlargeClick here to enlargeClick here to enlarge

    Follows stage 2aggr with jb4 also adding around 2 psi on top, this run yield if i remember correnctly around 9.2 sec.
    Click here to enlargeClick here to enlarge

    Than jb4 only (using a cobb 12afr stock map and upping pressure to 90, no biasing) map 7 and map 6. One of this runs was 9.4 sec.
    Click here to enlargeClick here to enlargeClick here to enlargeClick here to enlarge

    and all vd together
    Click here to enlarge

    so whats going on?

    Possible causes:
    - Engine rebuild just putting out low power
    - Ported head messing up
    - 100 Cell cats creating too much exhaust back pressure for the boost
    - Turbos are crap
    - Cams?

    Trans is not slipping.
    No codes and well running engine
    Using 2xCM7 nozzles 70-30 mix
    I noticed yesterday checking my AEM gauge that the EGT probe 1 was showing 500 F more than bank 2 . What could cause this? This happened another time but than it got back to normal so think is missreading.
    07 335i AT - MOTIV 750 - MHD BMS E85 - BMS PI - JB4G5 - Okada Coils - NGK 5992 Plugs - Helix IC - Stett CP - Custom midpipes with 100 HJS Cats - Bastuck Quad - PSS10 - QUAIFE LSD - BMS OCC - Forge DVs - AR OC - ALCON BBK - M3 Chassi - Dinan CP - Velocity M rear Toe arms - Advan RZ-DF - LUX H8 - Level 10 AT upgrade
    Click here to enlarge

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    1,191
    Rep Points
    915.6
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I'm not an expert, but I can't imagine the cats creating a huge backpressure to induce such a huge loss. If any at all, that would cost a few hp. There are many people with upgraded turbos and some cats in place running whithout issues.

    To check how much your performance is off, do you have the possibility to get 100-200km/h vbox times from a car with similar mods, on and off Meth? Marcel's car comes to mind (although MT)? As he's also running Cobb you could try the same map, and that would be helpful to take the tune and/or the Meth system out of the equation.
    E92 335i SB / Black Leather / 6AT / Navi Prof / Sunroof / Active Steering
    Mods: Performance Seats / Performance Exhaust / RB Turbos / M3 CF Roof / Brembo GT BBK 355/345 / Rollcage / M3 Mirrors / Forge FMIC / QUAIFE LSD / Ohlins R&T / M3 Suspension Parts / Vorshlag Camberplates / Megan Toe Links / LeatherZ Gauges / Extended M3 DCT Paddles / ER Sports OC / AR OC / Aux Radiator / AR catted DP / COBB Pro-Tune
    Next: GTS Wing

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    338
    Rep Points
    442.7
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    8.3 s for my car 100-200 km/h with stock turbos and meth 70/30. Need to look more into Enritas logs before start suggesting things.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    338
    Rep Points
    442.7
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by enrita Click here to enlarge

    Possible causes:
    - Engine rebuild just putting out low power
    - Ported head messing up
    - 100 Cell cats creating too much exhaust back pressure for the boost
    - Turbos are crap
    - Cams?

    Trans is not slipping.
    No codes and well running engine
    Using 2xCM7 nozzles 70-30 mix
    I noticed yesterday checking my AEM gauge that the EGT probe 1 was showing 500 F more than bank 2 . What could cause this? This happened another time but than it got back to normal so think is missreading.
    You can start to discard all items from the suspect list that were the same in the 7.86 second run. The idea of a check list journal is good. From what I can see the only difference is the porting, perhaps also the race-cats? But i don't suspect the cats since boost is fine.

    The timing seems too low in logs.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    338
    Rep Points
    442.7
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    The tune is different too? Or have you tested with JB4 only w/o the Cobb Tune?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,089
    Rep Points
    999.1
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Maybe the turbos are crap? Nothing in your logs indicate a hardware issue.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    338
    Rep Points
    442.7
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by themyst Click here to enlarge
    Maybe the turbos are crap? Nothing in your logs indicate a hardware issue.
    They may not be in pair with RB's but they were used in the 7.86s run, which is quite good.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    1,191
    Rep Points
    915.6
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Maybe disconect the downpipes and give the turbos a visual check? IIR you said they didn't get damaged when the engine went. But possibly the damage wasn't detectable immediately?
    E92 335i SB / Black Leather / 6AT / Navi Prof / Sunroof / Active Steering
    Mods: Performance Seats / Performance Exhaust / RB Turbos / M3 CF Roof / Brembo GT BBK 355/345 / Rollcage / M3 Mirrors / Forge FMIC / QUAIFE LSD / Ohlins R&T / M3 Suspension Parts / Vorshlag Camberplates / Megan Toe Links / LeatherZ Gauges / Extended M3 DCT Paddles / ER Sports OC / AR OC / Aux Radiator / AR catted DP / COBB Pro-Tune
    Next: GTS Wing

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,676
    Rep Points
    3,291.4
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    I remember when I was injtially looking at your logs and discussing with Shiv we were both surprised at the same boost level and timing (20psi and stock timing) your trims were at zero while mine with RBs were maxing out big time as well as Shiv's on ASR turbos back then. This is indicative of a car not hungry for fuel, in turn meaning that its not making the same power. If it was it would max those trims out.

    I'd start with a compression and a leakdown test first.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,460
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    its the cobb timing, it too conservative to be fast. run some racefuel/meth, jb4 onl6, 18 psi, and see what you get

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,913
    Rep Points
    1,353.4
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Only the race cats and porting are different.
    Drop the exhaust - cats included - and see if the cats are to be blamed. If not, something has gone wrong in porting.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    338
    Rep Points
    442.7
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno Click here to enlarge
    I remember when I was injtially looking at your logs and discussing with Shiv we were both surprised at the same boost level and timing (20psi and stock timing) your trims were at zero while mine with RBs were maxing out big time as well as Shiv's on ASR turbos back then. This is indicative of a car not hungry for fuel, in turn meaning that its not making the same power. If it was it would max those trims out.

    I'd start with a compression and a leakdown test first.
    That would be a good starting point. But 20 PSI is a lot and if the air is dense the engine should ask for a lot of fuel not to run lean. Perhaps the turbos are very effective at low RPM's but not at high RPM's where real power is made.

    Strange though they supported a 7.86s run earlier if the design is bad, and this may indicate there is something else as you say and a leak down test is needed.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,913
    Rep Points
    1,353.4
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Actually, you should first see what happens if you go back to the JB3 that got you the quick 100-200 time. Then drop the exhaust still with JB3 in. that should get you to the same status you were back then, except the porting. If you still are not performing, its the porting.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    338
    Rep Points
    442.7
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 654 Click here to enlarge
    Actually, you should first see what happens if you go back to the JB3 that got you the quick 100-200 time. Then drop the exhaust still with JB3 in. that should get you to the same status you were back then, except the porting. If you still are not performing, its the porting.
    JB3 is not recommended at these levels and the status can be different by other reasons like if something has failed or the cams are offset.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,676
    Rep Points
    3,291.4
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Cams not being timed properly when they were installed back on the car could very well be the issue here...especially given enrita's had some strange misfires that were hard to explain and troubleshoot

    In any case, its not the tuning..I'm running the same map as @enrita and the car is a beast

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    251
    Rep Points
    264.3
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by enrita Click here to enlarge
    For comparison my best 100-200 kph was 7.86 sec on jb3 18 months ago with 2 persons in the car.
    Big tom does it in 8.2 sec 1 person in the car (as far as i know) on stock turbos.
    8.0 s to be precise. Click here to enlarge

    I really hope you'll find the cause for all this, because you really earn it by now...
    Don't give up!
    GT-R R35 ​coming up...

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    1,191
    Rep Points
    915.6
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 654 Click here to enlarge
    Actually, you should first see what happens if you go back to the JB3 that got you the quick 100-200 time. Then drop the exhaust still with JB3 in. that should get you to the same status you were back then, except the porting. If you still are not performing, its the porting.
    His engine blew when he was running the JB3 so that's really not an option. Still can't believe the cats are to blame, unless they're clogged for some reason? 100cell cats should create next to no backpressure.
    E92 335i SB / Black Leather / 6AT / Navi Prof / Sunroof / Active Steering
    Mods: Performance Seats / Performance Exhaust / RB Turbos / M3 CF Roof / Brembo GT BBK 355/345 / Rollcage / M3 Mirrors / Forge FMIC / QUAIFE LSD / Ohlins R&T / M3 Suspension Parts / Vorshlag Camberplates / Megan Toe Links / LeatherZ Gauges / Extended M3 DCT Paddles / ER Sports OC / AR OC / Aux Radiator / AR catted DP / COBB Pro-Tune
    Next: GTS Wing

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,057
    Rep Points
    1,149.5
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Reputation: Yes | No
    When was your last compression test?

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,089
    Rep Points
    999.1
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LostMarine Click here to enlarge
    its the cobb timing, it too conservative to be fast. run some racefuel/meth, jb4 onl6, 18 psi, and see what you get
    Thats not true at all.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,089
    Rep Points
    999.1
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by R1000K3 Click here to enlarge
    They may not be in pair with RB's but they were used in the 7.86s run, which is quite good.
    I don't know how to measure 100-200 km times in regard to good and bad, but I'd guess a .5 second difference is conclusive that the car is not making near the same power as RBs.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,460
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by themyst Click here to enlarge
    Thats not true at all.
    im betting it is

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,676
    Rep Points
    3,291.4
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    LM he's run JB4 only as well with similar results..as well as procede

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    338
    Rep Points
    442.7
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by themyst Click here to enlarge
    I don't know how to measure 100-200 km times in regard to good and bad, but I'd guess a .5 second difference is conclusive that the car is not making near the same power as RBs.
    The time difference to Enritas 7.86 run 100-200 km/h vs. dzenno's time 6.53 is far more than one second, which is huge. I agree RB's are phenomenal vs. TD's comparing these figures. The time difference can also have other roots, e.g. that dzenno's concept is much more optimized and he is using a monster IC with large core and fittings.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,089
    Rep Points
    999.1
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by R1000K3 Click here to enlarge
    The time difference to Enritas 7.86 run 100-200 km/h vs. dzenno's time 6.53 is far more than one second, which is huge. I agree RB's are phenomenal vs. TD's comparing these figures. The time difference can also have other roots, e.g. that dzenno's concept is much more optimized and he is using a monster IC with large core and fittings.
    I think it's too much speculation on something that could be so simple. The difference between LM and dzennos car and enrita is the turbos.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    338
    Rep Points
    442.7
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by themyst Click here to enlarge
    I think it's too much speculation on something that could be so simple. The difference between LM and dzennos car and enrita is the turbos.
    We don't even know if the cams are correctly set in Enritas car so it is a bit early to trash his turbos IMHO. And if he could return to well below 8 seconds as before it would save a lot of money compared to ditch the turbos. Personally I would go for a single turbo if I needed to change the concept. But the play-money is right now spent on providing the moped with a decent turbo.

Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •