Dyno Results (1 Viewer)

[bpassmore]

I'm not speaking to the MAF, this is strictly how the FPR circuit works. I don't need to test any MAF, if it's 0-5 volts, it operates the same. If you plug a 3Bar FPR and run 10psi, the rock bone stock 1FZFE fuel injectors flow 15% less fuel, it doesn't matter what the MAF is doing! The best hope is that after the software tables the new MAF, and takes the other inputs, it can adjust for that 15% less fuel. That in no way accounts for the difference in spray pattern due to the lower fuel pressure.



Scott J

94 FZJ80 Supercharged

understood, and sounds like a valid point, but it looks like you got a chip on your shoulder, right or wrong.

IMO, start a new thread with really cool graphs and FPR crap in it where you can discuss the affects(effects?) on FPR changes to the entire induction/emissions/yada yada/ flux capacitor ranges and how that is important to us.

 

[turbocruiser]

lack of a functioning rising rate FPR on a forced induction setup will completely throw off the fueling and it may end up running dangerously lean

That is totally false for 95 - 97 models. In fact a rising rate FPR often only increases our rich running conditions (the exception to this is the turbo from AVO if i remember right which would prefer a RRFPR). The stock FPR is 1:1 and this is ideal in many cases. People need to stop trying to apply all their "other assorted automobile" knowledge to "every assorted automobile" knowledge here.

 

[landtank]

Scott, I understand what you are saying and as I posted before I'm investigating a tuning sleeve that will allow the FRP to be functional.

The drawings have been sent top the machinist and I'll start testing shortly.

But at this point all tests and data have shown that this is a safe mod. Considering the number of trucks running it and the miles driven by them, I'm sure a single pull on the dyno will be fine.

 

[NKP Garage]

multiple trucks have been tested using a Wideband O2 sensor and they have all shown that it is still running on the rich side with my housing and the FPR capped. Not as much as the stock setup but still rich.

If Steve will only install this with the FPR still active I would not recommend installing it.

That is totally false for 95 - 97 models. In fact a rising rate FPR often only increases our rich running conditions (the exception to this is the turbo from AVO if i remember right which would prefer a RRFPR). The stock FPR is 1:1 and this is ideal in many cases. People need to stop trying to apply all their "other assorted automobile" knowledge to "every assorted automobile" knowledge here.

It's not "every assorted automobile" knowledge. It's common sense guys.

If the 95-97 setup runs rich on an array of particular setups on the stock ECU, that is not a problem, that is simply the behavior of the stock ECU. Disabling an FPR may be a bandaid for that particular setup, but it is not the proper way to do things. If it brings AFR's closer to what you want for that one particular setup, that's good. But it is definitely not something you should recommend for any forced induction setup people have. How rich are you guys seeing AFR's before disabling the FPR and how rich is it after? Anyone have logs/graphs of that to share to let us dumb folk see what sort of change you're talking about, and with exactly which SC/turbo.

The way it SHOULD be done is to have a rising rate FPR setup along with proper fuel control/tuning, which can be done through many different methods, all of which come with their own respective good and bad traits. MAF adjustments, piggybacks, fuel/ignition controls, FPR adjustments, etc...

turbocruiser. I understand that I'm new here, but a little more respect in towards others wouldn't kill you. I dont claim to know everything, I share what I do know with others when I think it may be of value, and I'm always open to learning new things as well.

 

[turbocruiser]

It's not "every assorted automobile" knowledge. It's common sense guys.

If the 95-97 setup runs rich on an array of particular setups on the stock ECU, that is not a problem, that is simply the behavior of the stock ECU. Disabling an FPR may be a bandaid for that particular setup, but it is not the proper way to do things. If it brings AFR's closer to what you want for that one particular setup, that's good. But it is definitely not something you should recommend for any forced induction setup people have. How rich are you guys seeing AFR's before disabling the FPR and how rich is it after? Anyone have logs/graphs of that to share to let us dumb folk see what sort of change you're talking about, and with exactly which SC/turbo.

The way it SHOULD be done is to have a rising rate FPR setup along with proper fuel control/tuning, which can be done through many different methods, all of which come with their own respective good and bad traits. MAF adjustments, piggybacks, fuel/ignition controls, FPR adjustments, etc...

turbocruiser. I understand that I'm new here, but a little more respect in towards others wouldn't kill you. I dont claim to know everything, I share what I do know with others when I think it may be of value, and I'm always open to learning new things as well.

Baktasht, first, its not your newness any at all; its when people make big blanket statements that simply don't apply whilst others are actually extremely experienced with what works on our own rigs. I sincerely don't mean any disrespect any at all I just get somewhat gritty when people put out incorrect information; I consider all these threads archives and with any archive accuracy is incredibly important. Again I sincerely don't mean any disrespect, maybe I should somehow work on wording so it doesn't seem disrespectful. Second, my FPR is connected, I don't know how many times I've taken the trouble to clarify that, but, my FPR is connected. Third as soon as you start saying you "SHOULD" have an RRFPR you are again wrong. If you don't need a RRFPR, adding one will only make things much harder to tune. Anyways please accept my apology if I sounded somewhat disrespectful I definitely didn't intend that.

 

[NKP Garage]

RR FPR's dont make things hard to tune at all. Not sure why you'd think that. There are many reasons why RR FPR's should be used on forced induction setups. It's more important on turbo setups than it is on SC setups, but it's not just with land cruisers, or just toyota's or just anything. If they weren't needed, manufacturers wouldnt use them, tuners wouldnt use them, and they'd be a thing of the past.

I see that you guys have had luck getting more reasonable AFR's by disconnecting the vacuum hose from the FPR (whatever those AFR's might be), but if getting the AFR's to be correct is the goal, there are better ways to go about it. I think Landtank's project of attempting to make the factory FPR adjustable may be a good start in the right direction. And kudos to everyone for trying different things. Nothing wrong with that, as long as you are open to the idea of new methods as well that may work better.

 

[landtank]

I'm not advocating removing the vacuum line on the stock MAF sensor. In that instance I agree that it would be a bad idea.

 

[NKP Garage]

If the modded MAF requires the vac line to be removed/capped that may work for some setups, but there are many other problems that may arise with that because the stock ECU is setup with fuel maps to be used with a vac/boost source. I understand that it is working for some folks though, so that's good. But I would be hesitant to try that out without monitoring things extremely closely. Messing with fuel pressure changes the ENTIRE fuel map. And the entire fuel map cannot be properly adjusted to compensate for the change in FP with a simple MAF swap.

This thread is for Steve's dyno testing of his truck, and I've taken it way off topic. Sorry Steve We can discuss it somewhere else.

 

[CycloSteve]

Well, I am planning on running the normal install setup, per LT's instructions. Will go over with 034 any concerns and may run with the FPR hooked up on the last run (of three). All later this month as off to Europe for the next two weeks.

 

[turbocruiser]

RR FPR's dont make things hard to tune at all. Not sure why you'd think that. There are many reasons why RR FPR's should be used on forced induction setups. It's more important on turbo setups than it is on SC setups, but it's not just with land cruisers, or just toyota's or just anything. If they weren't needed, manufacturers wouldnt use them, tuners wouldnt use them, and they'd be a thing of the past.

I see that you guys have had luck getting more reasonable AFR's by disconnecting the vacuum hose from the FPR (whatever those AFR's might be), but if getting the AFR's to be correct is the goal, there are better ways to go about it. I think Landtank's project of attempting to make the factory FPR adjustable may be a good start in the right direction. And kudos to everyone for trying different things. Nothing wrong with that, as long as you are open to the idea of new methods as well that may work better.

As respectfully as possible, what I'm saying is simply that if it isn't needed, putting it in is going to make things that much harder to tune. And, as respectfully as possible, you are still reverting to those "should statements" which are not as accurate as we would want. Safari never supplied a RRFPR for their fabulous kit on the 1FZFE ... "should" they have ... no is the answer ... has Safari supplied a RRFPR with other kits for other vehicles ... yes is the answer. So what conclusion can that produce? You can't say that all manufacturers put RRFPRs on all FI vehicles because they don't all do that. And using that type of logic is why people put things on "because its basic common sense stuff" and after all sorts of strange workarounds they then realize it really wasn't right. I'd like to learn if Mr. T put one on the SC kit? And again, again, again, I do not have my FPR disconnected! sheesh All hopefully worded with respect, and hopefully this post seems more so? Thanks.

 

[SUMOTOY]

Let's get back to basics... I could care less what Safari does, let's speak to how RRFPR's work. The math simply confirms, with a RRFPR capped, and running 10psi boost, you have reduced the output flow of your fuel injectors by 15%. It's not theory, it's how FPR's work.

Scott J
94 FZJ80 Supercharged

 

[Cattledog]

Great data on the exhaust. Thanks for the dyno charts. Looking forward to the next set of charts.

Scott stop highjacking the thread. This is the second or third thread you have gone out of your way to bash this mod and told people not to install is per the manufacture's (LT) directions.

Quit insuating that this mod in stock or forced induction applications will lean the truck out into a dangerous situation and destroy the motor. I have run my MAF for over 50K mile and still have no issue except that the truck runs much smoother and with more power...

After the past threads I still don't understand why a guy with a 94 OBDI system running forced induction has any interest in a mod only for 95-97 truck running OBDII systems.

Go out and solve your on fueling issues, the OBDI systems need far more help in controlling fuel demand than the 95-97 truck. BTW, since you understand OBDII systems so well, why on earth would you have ever bought a 94 truck and then added forced induction....

 

[turbocruiser]

Let's get back to basics... I could care less what Safari does, let's speak to how RRFPR's work. The math simply confirms, with a RRFPR capped, and running 10psi boost, you have reduced the output flow of your fuel injectors by 15%. It's not theory, it's how FPR's work.

Scott J
94 FZJ80 Supercharged

Again for those with the capacity to listen and learn, I don't have a Regular FPR capped, I don't have a Rising Rate FPR capped, I don't care what you think, and very few folks here do. You are a troll who only wants to stir stuff up and give astoundingly bad advice.

 

[NKP Garage]

As respectfully as possible, what I'm saying is simply that if it isn't needed, putting it in is going to make things that much harder to tune. And, as respectfully as possible, you are still reverting to those "should statements" which are not as accurate as we would want. Safari never supplied a RRFPR for their fabulous kit on the 1FZFE ... "should" they have ... no is the answer ... has Safari supplied a RRFPR with other kits for other vehicles ... yes is the answer. So what conclusion can that produce? You can't say that all manufacturers put RRFPRs on all FI vehicles because they don't all do that. And using that type of logic is why people put things on "because its basic common sense stuff" and after all sorts of strange workarounds they then realize it really wasn't right. I'd like to learn if Mr. T put one on the SC kit? And again, again, again, I do not have my FPR disconnected! sheesh All hopefully worded with respect, and hopefully this post seems more so? Thanks.

There's no reason for Safari to include a seperate RRFPR with their kit, there's one on the motor from the factory isn't there? No reason to replace it with something else. Just leave it there and keep it connected along with the vacuum hose that controls it. I'm not talking about your particular setup, and I have no clue how you have yours setup. I didn't say all manufacturers put RRFPR's on all FI cars. I said they are a necessary item on a properly setup forced induction motor. It's not that complicated guys. We're just going in circles here.

 

[turbocruiser]

There's no reason for Safari to include a seperate RRFPR with their kit, there's one on the motor from the factory isn't there? No reason to replace it with something else. Just leave it there and keep it connected along with the vacuum hose that controls it. I'm not talking about your particular setup, and I have no clue how you have yours setup. I didn't say all manufacturers put RRFPR's on all FI cars. I said they are a necessary item on a properly setup forced induction motor. It's not that complicated guys. We're just going in circles here.

The stock setup is 1:1.

What you stated very simply before was "If they weren't needed, manufacturers wouldnt use them, tuners wouldnt use them, and they'd be a thing of the past." which as respectfully as possible is inaccurate.

What you're stating very simply now is "they are a necessary item on a properly setup forced induction motor." which as respectfully as possible is simply inaccurate.

IF they are needed, they are needed. If not they're not. That's the point here and having a stock 80, SC'd 80 or a properly sized and setup Turboed 80 (the sweet AVO system not included) doesn't seem to "need" one.

I'm happy to share whatever you would like to look at in regards to my setup and I have tons and tons of data to support that my setup runs wonderful well, it is reliable, safe and powerrrful.

I'm not saying you are wrong with any other vehicle out there, I'm simply saying that with the 80 and several specific setups you don't need anything above 1:1 FPR.

 

[NKP Garage]

turbocruiser, does your factory FPR have a vacuum line going to it?

 

[CycloSteve]

I think we are definitely getting off topic again...let's continue the debate under the tuning thread. Entertaining as it is, the idea of this thread was to have a good set of Dyno results available which can show the real effects form a given modification, whether for better or worse. Since it is pretty easy for me to "hit the dyno" I see my truck as a test-mule of sorts. Not trying anything too exotic, just normal improvements to the equation of fuel+compression+spark = power.

 

[landtank]

Well, I am planning on running the normal install setup, per LT's instructions. Will go over with 034 any concerns and may run with the FPR hooked up on the last run (of three). All later this month as off to Europe for the next two weeks.

Thanks for at least doing a run as per my instructions.

You should know that Toyota broke up the operating range into sections and that there is not 1 but a few LTFT%s. As you depress the accelerator the LTFT% jumps to the next "zone" either up or down depending on which way you are going.

So there is a learning period and you should give it some time if adding the vacuum line after not having it.

 

[turbocruiser]

turbocruiser, does your factory FPR have a vacuum line going to it?

Of course, that's what I'm trying to tell everyone. It is referenced. It is 1:1. That is what works best in my experience; you start slapping on adjustables or other higher set rise rates and you make the thing run even richer. BTDT.

Edit: As CycloSteve stated, we need to give this otherwise terrific thread some respect and move along; this isn't the OP's intent. I'm at fault as well obviously, its just too hard to ignore some stuff sometimes. My Bad.

 

[CycloSteve]

LT, good point on the ecu learning curve...will likely then run the next dyno with the FPR capped, an save the "hooked up" test for another day (should that be needed). The good thing with the dyno is I can pull the plug if anything looks to be off or in anyway dangerous during the pulls...no guesswork involved.

Thanks for at least doing a run as per my instructions.

You should know that Toyota broke up the operating range into sections and that there is not 1 but a few LTFT%s. As you depress the accelerator the LTFT% jumps to the next "zone" either up or down depending on which way you are going.

So there is a learning period and you should give it some time if adding the vacuum line after not having it.