Dyno Discussion and Slips Discussion and a moderated "Dyno Slips" sub-forum to allow for posting of dyno slips.

Auto 3.5 Swap Dyno

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 16, 2009 | 06:03 PM
  #1  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Auto 3.5 Swap Dyno

We got the car dynoed last friday and today I finally made it back down to the shop to pickup the runfiles. The results were 210whp and 213tq. The mods are NWP blockoff plate, ebay headers and y-pipe, and PFTB. We are running a short ram intake which is just a coupler to the MAF and a Filter. One known issue is that there is an exhaust leak at the headers since we forgot to put the gaskets back in lol. But we are happy with the numbers especially since it still has the stock cat and catback on the car. Im guessing the large drop in power is because of the exhaust leak but Im not sure. SAE numbers were 203hp 206tq. Here is the graph.






Last edited by ajcool2; Oct 16, 2009 at 06:05 PM.
Old Oct 16, 2009 | 07:05 PM
  #2  
Grand_hustle17's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (22)
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,825
talk about running rich
Old Oct 16, 2009 | 08:02 PM
  #3  
Gemner's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,393
From: Hayward, CA
that afr is...interesting. this 3.0 timing equipment?
Old Oct 16, 2009 | 09:29 PM
  #4  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Originally Posted by Gemner
that afr is...interesting. this 3.0 timing equipment?
Yup. It may be due to my FP? IDK. Hopefully someone can tell me why its like that.
Old Oct 16, 2009 | 10:58 PM
  #5  
maxboy325's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (35)
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,129
From: Maryland
Forgot the gaskets
Old Oct 16, 2009 | 11:30 PM
  #6  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Originally Posted by maxboy325
Forgot the gaskets

Yeah we kinda misplaced them and when it was time to put the y-pipe on we were like forget it we'll put it the gaskets on later lol.
Old Oct 17, 2009 | 08:54 AM
  #7  
grey99max's Avatar
LandShark has Cosworth
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,327
From: Topeka, KS
Originally Posted by ajcool2
Yup. It may be due to my FP? IDK. Hopefully someone can tell me why its like that.
Tune-by-Tape.

My 3.5 did something like that on the first NA dyno, using the 3.0 timing, stock ECU and stock MAF. The MAF sees more air flow at any RPM because of the larger engine, so more fuel is sprayed thru the injectors. That's why I fixed it with a piece of tape across the back of the sensor tunnel in the MAF. It blocked just a little of what the MAF sees and leans up the engine.

Worked for me....
Old Oct 17, 2009 | 09:01 AM
  #8  
JAMAICANLOVRBOY's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 710
From: beltsville MD
ISP has seen a lotta maximas, man i need a 3.5 swap, help me....do you have a fuel converter to lean it out a bit?, at 4k that thing dumping a lotta gas, but seem like it leaned out higher in the revs. if im not mistaken shouldnt it be the other way around, leaner down low, and richer as the rpms get higher?

Last edited by JAMAICANLOVRBOY; Oct 17, 2009 at 09:07 AM.
Old Oct 17, 2009 | 12:25 PM
  #9  
nismology's Avatar
Supporting Maxima.org Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 9,099
From: Miami, FL
Originally Posted by grey99max
My 3.5 did something like that on the first NA dyno, using the 3.0 timing, stock ECU and stock MAF. The MAF sees more air flow at any RPM because of the larger engine, so more fuel is sprayed thru the injectors. That's why I fixed it with a piece of tape across the back of the sensor tunnel in the MAF. It blocked just a little of what the MAF sees and leans up the engine.
Well it's been proven that the 3.5 doesn't swallow THAT much more air than a 3.0 (especially without VTC) throughout much of the rev-range; certainly not enough to account for such a rich a/f even at lower RPM's. Most of the HP/torque increase comes from the geometry. The richness is likely due simply to larger injectors and a higher-than-stock base fuel pressure that most swappers run. If the stock injectors (somehow) and FPR were run I'd reckon the a/f wouldn't change all that much.

Last edited by nismology; Oct 17, 2009 at 12:43 PM.
Old Oct 17, 2009 | 12:26 PM
  #10  
t6378tp's Avatar
Turbo 3.5
iTrader: (69)
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 7,785
From: Philly
nice start

get the bugs worked out and get a safc/vafc or even better a jwt ecu and your good to go

I would even bother with a eb or eu since this is your girls car
Old Oct 17, 2009 | 07:17 PM
  #11  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Originally Posted by grey99max
Tune-by-Tape.

My 3.5 did something like that on the first NA dyno, using the 3.0 timing, stock ECU and stock MAF. The MAF sees more air flow at any RPM because of the larger engine, so more fuel is sprayed thru the injectors. That's why I fixed it with a piece of tape across the back of the sensor tunnel in the MAF. It blocked just a little of what the MAF sees and leans up the engine.

Worked for me....
Yeah I remember reading about that. I'll be looking for a wideband and might try this out and see how it works out.
Old Oct 17, 2009 | 07:38 PM
  #12  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Originally Posted by JAMAICANLOVRBOY
ISP has seen a lotta maximas, man i need a 3.5 swap, help me....do you have a fuel converter to lean it out a bit?, at 4k that thing dumping a lotta gas, but seem like it leaned out higher in the revs. if im not mistaken shouldnt it be the other way around, leaner down low, and richer as the rpms get higher?
No we dont have any tuning device for it yet. I'm sure it wont be long until we get one since she'll be complaining about how much gas the car is using soon. I havent looked at alot of other 3.5 dynoes so I'm not sure how a/f usually is.
Old Oct 17, 2009 | 07:39 PM
  #13  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Originally Posted by nismology
Well it's been proven that the 3.5 doesn't swallow THAT much more air than a 3.0 (especially without VTC) throughout much of the rev-range; certainly not enough to account for such a rich a/f even at lower RPM's. Most of the HP/torque increase comes from the geometry. The richness is likely due simply to larger injectors and a higher-than-stock base fuel pressure that most swappers run. If the stock injectors (somehow) and FPR were run I'd reckon the a/f wouldn't change all that much.
What FP would you recommend?
Old Oct 17, 2009 | 07:47 PM
  #14  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Originally Posted by t6378tp
nice start

get the bugs worked out and get a safc/vafc or even better a jwt ecu and your good to go

I would even bother with a eb or eu since this is your girls car
I leave all her mods up to her. I just make suggestions and make sure she knows what they are and what they do.
Old Oct 17, 2009 | 08:57 PM
  #15  
aic96max's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,369
From: Miami , FL
i would like to know what is the optimal afr to run on an na 3.5 swapped 3.0 timing car?? is it 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0??? not sure how it works in comparison to boost.??
Old Oct 18, 2009 | 09:42 AM
  #16  
grey99max's Avatar
LandShark has Cosworth
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,327
From: Topeka, KS
Originally Posted by nismology
Well it's been proven that the 3.5 doesn't swallow THAT much more air than a 3.0 (especially without VTC) throughout much of the rev-range; certainly not enough to account for such a rich a/f even at lower RPM's. Most of the HP/torque increase comes from the geometry. The richness is likely due simply to larger injectors and a higher-than-stock base fuel pressure that most swappers run. If the stock injectors (somehow) and FPR were run I'd reckon the a/f wouldn't change all that much.
My injectors and fuel pressure were stock - still are......... my A/F at WOT when NA was about 10:1. Just going by displacement, when WOT, the 3.5 pulls 16.6% more air into every cylinder at any RPM. That's approximately 583cc/cylinder for the 3.5 compared to 500cc/cylinder for the 3.0. The MAF sees the extra air flow at all RPMS. I suspect that the stock ECU map is happier with the 3.0 injectors, the injector pulse-width map is set for those injectors, and the larger 3.5 injectors may be the real problem. Still, the bit of tape worked by slightly reducing the measured air flow through the MAF sensor tunnel.

The 10:1 A/F at WOT made tuning with nitrous harder, because the NX jets were app. 12:1 A/F and as you change the jets, the WOT A/F would still vary. When I got the NA A/F set to 12:1, then changing the NX jet pairs for different HP did not change the A/F. Tune-by-Tape worked for me...

Last edited by grey99max; Oct 18, 2009 at 09:50 AM.
Old Oct 18, 2009 | 11:31 PM
  #17  
aic96max's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,369
From: Miami , FL
so its safe to say that when you have a 3.5 , if you have an sacf2 or whatever, you should be taking out fuel thoughout the whole rpm range,especially down low?
Old Oct 18, 2009 | 11:57 PM
  #18  
nismology's Avatar
Supporting Maxima.org Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 9,099
From: Miami, FL
Originally Posted by grey99max
My injectors and fuel pressure were stock - still are......... my A/F at WOT when NA was about 10:1. Just going by displacement, when WOT, the 3.5 pulls 16.6% more air into every cylinder at any RPM. That's approximately 583cc/cylinder for the 3.5 compared to 500cc/cylinder for the 3.0. The MAF sees the extra air flow at all RPMS. I suspect that the stock ECU map is happier with the 3.0 injectors, the injector pulse-width map is set for those injectors, and the larger 3.5 injectors may be the real problem. Still, the bit of tape worked by slightly reducing the measured air flow through the MAF sensor tunnel.
You ran A32 259cc injectors with your 3.5 swap? And there's quite a bit more to how much air an engine will swallow at a given RPM than its displacement. 14.6% larger displacement doesn't necessarily = 14.6% increase in mass airflow at every RPM. Intake/exhaust port flow, intake manifold design, cam specs/timing et al. all have some affect on volumetric efficiency throughout the powerband.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...sRPM060518.jpg

Keep in mind that's comparing a VQ35 with operating VTC vs. a USIM-equipped 3.0.
Old Oct 19, 2009 | 12:01 AM
  #19  
nismology's Avatar
Supporting Maxima.org Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 9,099
From: Miami, FL
Originally Posted by aic96max
so its safe to say that when you have a 3.5 , if you have an sacf2 or whatever, you should be taking out fuel thoughout the whole rpm range,especially down low?
You will have to pull some fuel, but not necessarily as much as the OP does. We don't know what his base fuel pressure is set to.
Old Oct 19, 2009 | 12:04 AM
  #20  
nismology's Avatar
Supporting Maxima.org Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 9,099
From: Miami, FL
Originally Posted by aic96max
i would like to know what is the optimal afr to run on an na 3.5 swapped 3.0 timing car?? is it 12.5 13.0 13.5 14.0??? not sure how it works in comparison to boost.??
Regardless of the ultra-lean a/f's some like to run here, the best range for consistent power is 12.7-13.2. Real n/a power is made through timing, not running lean. The best case scenario is using the fueling to keep things relatively cool and advancing the heck out of the timing. This assumes you have seperate a/f and timing control however..

Last edited by nismology; Oct 19, 2009 at 12:09 AM.
Old Oct 19, 2009 | 12:11 AM
  #21  
nismology's Avatar
Supporting Maxima.org Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 9,099
From: Miami, FL
Originally Posted by ajcool2
What FP would you recommend?
The stock A32 fuel pressure is fine to tell you the truth unless you plan on raising fuel pressure and pulling fuel with an AFC to advance the timing.
Old Oct 19, 2009 | 06:28 AM
  #22  
grey99max's Avatar
LandShark has Cosworth
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,327
From: Topeka, KS
Originally Posted by nismology
You ran A32 259cc injectors with your 3.5 swap? And there's quite a bit more to how much air an engine will swallow at a given RPM than its displacement. 14.6% larger displacement doesn't necessarily = 14.6% increase in mass airflow at every RPM. Intake/exhaust port flow, intake manifold design, cam specs/timing et al. all have some affect on volumetric efficiency throughout the powerband.
OK - OK - stock 3.5 injectors...... And yes, my engine installation was optimized for airflow - long-tube headers, 3" collector to the tailpipe, SSIM intake and a real cold-air intake under the lip of the hood, eBay S1 cams. It responds very well to spray.

On my PLX logs, the A/F was consistently around 10:1 at WOT up to fuel cut. With the tape mod, once I set it, A/F was consistently 12:1. Works for me...
Old Oct 21, 2009 | 09:32 AM
  #23  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Originally Posted by nismology
The stock A32 fuel pressure is fine to tell you the truth unless you plan on raising fuel pressure and pulling fuel with an AFC to advance the timing.
Interesting. Just found a thread about this.
Old Oct 21, 2009 | 10:43 AM
  #24  
aic96max's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,369
From: Miami , FL
yo Mike, so since I have an SAFC2, what fuel pressure do you recommend so I can take advantage of the safc timing pull while leaning out the system side effect? i belive the pressure is at 36 psi right now.

Any Idea how many degrees it pulls out at say 10%, vs 5% etc?
Old Oct 21, 2009 | 10:44 AM
  #25  
aic96max's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,369
From: Miami , FL
Originally Posted by ajcool2
Interesting. Just found a thread about this.

can you post the link to that thread?
Old Oct 21, 2009 | 11:39 AM
  #26  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Originally Posted by aic96max
can you post the link to that thread?
Here your go. http://forums.maxima.org/all-motor/3...g-advance.html
Old Oct 21, 2009 | 12:19 PM
  #27  
streetzlegend's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,097
Originally Posted by aic96max
yo Mike, so since I have an SAFC2, what fuel pressure do you recommend so I can take advantage of the safc timing pull while leaning out the system side effect? i belive the pressure is at 36 psi right now.

Any Idea how many degrees it pulls out at say 10%, vs 5% etc?
You wont be able to retard much timing to be honest. Although timing is affected by the MAF corrections, it is not as drastic as you think, it took me near 60psi of fuel pressure or more, to get 10degree advance on my NA 3.0. To pull timing, I dont think it will work, considering you will have to go so low in fuel pressure it will give you issues. email me.
Old May 11, 2010 | 01:18 AM
  #28  
aic96max's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,369
From: Miami , FL
what fuel pressure were you running during this dyno?
Old May 11, 2010 | 05:58 PM
  #29  
tedo007's Avatar
faster than you think
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,765
From: Eufaula, AL
Wow it seems you loose lots of power up top. Need for SSIM.
Old May 11, 2010 | 06:01 PM
  #30  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Originally Posted by aic96max
what fuel pressure were you running during this dyno?
45psi. I need to get a new AFPR. The one we have jumps all over the place.
Old May 11, 2010 | 06:04 PM
  #31  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Originally Posted by tedo007
Wow it seems you loose lots of power up top. Need for SSIM.
Yeah still not sure what caused the power loss. There were a good amount of thing wrong at the time of the dyno. The SSIM is our next mod.
Old May 12, 2010 | 03:59 AM
  #32  
aic96max's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,369
From: Miami , FL
would like yo see the dyno with the ssim, are you using oem rev limiter (ecu)? bc i ave been thinking about it since AP swears by it, but not sure since im sticking to stock rev limiter
Old May 12, 2010 | 08:33 AM
  #33  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Yeah were running a JWT with a 7100 rev limiter so we'll definatly benefit from it. It will also be tuned as soon as I can get her cat convertor off to hook up the wideband.
Old May 18, 2010 | 06:22 PM
  #34  
Rods03Max619's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,946
From: Diego,California
Nice swap and #'s
Old May 18, 2010 | 08:08 PM
  #35  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Thanks.
Old May 20, 2010 | 10:25 AM
  #36  
NmexMAX's Avatar
dot dot dot ...
iTrader: (22)
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 34,576
From: Santa Fe, NM
Is it 7100 or 7200
Old May 20, 2010 | 11:05 AM
  #37  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Might be 7200 but Im to scared to rev it that high and find out lol.
Old May 20, 2010 | 11:07 AM
  #38  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Originally Posted by NmexMAX
Is it 7100 or 7200
What AFR should I aim for while tuning? I know my Z is tuned at around 12.8-12.6 but I've heard 13.2 is good too.
Old May 20, 2010 | 11:09 AM
  #39  
NmexMAX's Avatar
dot dot dot ...
iTrader: (22)
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 34,576
From: Santa Fe, NM
Originally Posted by ajcool2
What AFR should I aim for while tuning? I know my Z is tuned at around 12.8-12.6 but I've heard 13.2 is good too.
JWT is notorious for running LEAN. Remember?

14.7 is best, IMO becuz itz stoyk.
Old May 20, 2010 | 11:33 AM
  #40  
ajcool2's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,550
From: Baltimore, Md
Interesting, will do. I need to find the settings for the VAFC-II that SR20DEN posted.



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:37 AM.