car is runing very lean, need help.
#31
02-13-2007, 01:45 PM
#32
02-13-2007, 01:51 PM
Guest
Posts: n/a
Test pipes make a car run "richer" because the material the cat is made out of is used to "absorb" excess fuel. If all of this is being tested with cats still on the car, and a pipe sniffer, I don't see how you can get an accurate reading anyway. Runs could seem different depending on the heat stored in the converter. When I took my cats off the A/F gauge acted completely different, it was alittle steadier with the cat on because it would even out different gases comming out of the engine.
#33
02-13-2007, 01:55 PM
Originally Posted by G35_TX
Um obviously you didn't read the topic. He is suggesting the JWT is making his car run lean.
The G35/350Z does not act the same as OTHER VQ30/35 models. So you can not compare a Maxima vs a G35.
The G35/350Z does not act the same as OTHER VQ30/35 models. So you can not compare a Maxima vs a G35.
Did the intake cause his car to run lean? Yes. Did his other mods cause his car to run lean? Yes. Will putting the stock intake back on allow his car to gain back some fuel? Yes. Will his car be quicker? Most likely because the motor won't be running on the verge of detonation all the time.
Need I post up the link of the tuner G35/350Z comparison test where something like 6 out of the 8 cars were running OEM intakes and the cars running aftermarket intakes were some of the slowest? I'm not really trying to suggest that the aftermarket intakes made the cars slower, but it is interesting most of tuners used the stock intake even though many of the cars had headers, cams, plenums, etc
#35
02-13-2007, 03:06 PM
Originally Posted by DaveB
It's a well known fact that intakes on VQ cars make them run lean. Maximas, Altimas, Titans, G35s, 350Zs, etc, run leaner with aftermarket intakes. As for MAFs, the 03+ G/Z/Maxima use the same MAF elements (not housings) so please try again. Same goes for the short block.
Did the intake cause his car to run lean? Yes. Did his other mods cause his car to run lean? Yes. Will putting the stock intake back on allow his car to gain back some fuel? Yes. Will his car be quicker? Most likely because the motor won't be running on the verge of detonation all the time.
Need I post up the link of the tuner G35/350Z comparison test where something like 6 out of the 8 cars were running OEM intakes and the cars running aftermarket intakes were some of the slowest? I'm not really trying to suggest that the aftermarket intakes made the cars slower, but it is interesting most of tuners used the stock intake even though many of the cars had headers, cams, plenums, etc
Did the intake cause his car to run lean? Yes. Did his other mods cause his car to run lean? Yes. Will putting the stock intake back on allow his car to gain back some fuel? Yes. Will his car be quicker? Most likely because the motor won't be running on the verge of detonation all the time.
Need I post up the link of the tuner G35/350Z comparison test where something like 6 out of the 8 cars were running OEM intakes and the cars running aftermarket intakes were some of the slowest? I'm not really trying to suggest that the aftermarket intakes made the cars slower, but it is interesting most of tuners used the stock intake even though many of the cars had headers, cams, plenums, etc
#36
02-13-2007, 03:32 PM
Originally Posted by Klubbheads
so which AFR tool is the easiest install? Which one should i go with?
Then you must consider tuning costs. They should all run pretty much even.
You could always consider an safc. It will be cheaper, and easier to install than the emanage. You won't see the gains from an safc that you'll see from something like the emanage ultimate or the utec, but it's the cheapest route.
#39
02-13-2007, 04:33 PM
#40
02-13-2007, 05:14 PM
Originally Posted by Jeff92se
#42
02-13-2007, 05:58 PM
One would think, if they are modding their engines at that level, they would change the intake if it was proven to help.
At least he PROVIDES the info when it's requested. LOL
At least he PROVIDES the info when it's requested. LOL
Originally Posted by G35_TX
Yep, but doesn't prove your point they are slower because of that. lol.
I see they also have less mods except for the last car.
I see they also have less mods except for the last car.
#43
02-13-2007, 06:01 PM
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by trey.hutcheson
Easy of installation? Utec by far. The emanage ultimate is cheaper for the actual unit, but you'll pay for wiring fees. The emanage blue is even cheaper, but it's still gonna cost an arm and a leg for wiring. I can't comment on the unichip.
Then you must consider tuning costs. They should all run pretty much even.
You could always consider an safc. It will be cheaper, and easier to install than the emanage. You won't see the gains from an safc that you'll see from something like the emanage ultimate or the utec, but it's the cheapest route.
Then you must consider tuning costs. They should all run pretty much even.
You could always consider an safc. It will be cheaper, and easier to install than the emanage. You won't see the gains from an safc that you'll see from something like the emanage ultimate or the utec, but it's the cheapest route.
#44
02-13-2007, 07:20 PM
#45
02-13-2007, 07:41 PM
Originally Posted by HomieG35
Test pipes make a car run "richer" because the material the cat is made out of is used to "absorb" excess fuel. If all of this is being tested with cats still on the car, and a pipe sniffer, I don't see how you can get an accurate reading anyway. Runs could seem different depending on the heat stored in the converter. When I took my cats off the A/F gauge acted completely different, it was alittle steadier with the cat on because it would even out different gases comming out of the engine.
The removal of the cats will pull more air through the engine. That will lean out the mixture.
Regardless, look at his a/f plots. At 2000 rpms, he was registering ~15.2 versus his previous 14.5(difference of roughly 4.7% more air). At 2500, it's 15.4 versus 14.9, or 3.25% more air. At 3000, the difference is 4%. At 3500, the difference is ~2.66%. After that, the curves approach eachother, with the new configuration yielding a richer mixture beyond ~4800rpms.
Do you really think that the addition of a plenum spacer increased his air intake by 3 to 5 per cent for 2500rpms? I'm doubtful. The internal plenum volume was increased, but the diameter of the air filter, tube diameter, throttle body, and plenum mouth all remained the same.
Compare that to the graph that I exported. I added an airbox and test pipes, and my numbers leaned out less than Klubb's with a simple plenum spacer.
Klubb:
You can take off whatever you want, but I don't think it's a big deal. When you compare the red and green torque curves, I don't see how this supposed lean condition is hurting you.
Last edited by trey.hutcheson; 02-13-2007 at 07:46 PM.