To spark up a thread from the old BBS... where it was said that the R34's MFD may be inaccurate...
When at Tuning Japanese their printout shows my R34 at a pretty aveage 1.15bar from 2,800 to 8,200 rpm. There were a lot of fluctuations +/- 0.1 bar from visual inspection.
The MFD pretty much agrees with this; though T6yko, oddly, got an under-reading judging from his post. My MFD's readings at the dyno day were very close to what the dyno readings gave ... I ven downloaded the session to a PC and corrolated the dyno's boost trace with the MFD's readings.
I got an average of 1.16 over the "peak boost bit" from 3,030 to 7,860 rpm. Peak was 1.25, min was 1.07 and it fluctuated quite a bit as both readings showed.
So maybe mine's better calibrated, or maybe my replacement Nismo MFD II's turbo boost probe is more accurate?
When at Tuning Japanese their printout shows my R34 at a pretty aveage 1.15bar from 2,800 to 8,200 rpm. There were a lot of fluctuations +/- 0.1 bar from visual inspection.
The MFD pretty much agrees with this; though T6yko, oddly, got an under-reading judging from his post. My MFD's readings at the dyno day were very close to what the dyno readings gave ... I ven downloaded the session to a PC and corrolated the dyno's boost trace with the MFD's readings.
I got an average of 1.16 over the "peak boost bit" from 3,030 to 7,860 rpm. Peak was 1.25, min was 1.07 and it fluctuated quite a bit as both readings showed.
So maybe mine's better calibrated, or maybe my replacement Nismo MFD II's turbo boost probe is more accurate?