Removing Rev Limiter

F

Flat_Out

Hi all, ive read a few times about "removing the rev limiter" on the k11. As to my knowledge its taping up a hole on a disk inside the distributor? Correct me if im wrong as this is just what ive gathered from reading posts. Could somebody please clear this up for me?? And are there any negatives from doing this?

Thank you

Flat_out
 
thats the jist of it flat_out :) ed recons it confuses the ecu tho, and matt say,s to join the hole with #1 cyl slot, iirc
 
Thanks frank:grinning:. So basically if i remove the distributor( hav'nt done so before) then i should see some sort of disk with holes in? Any paticular hole that should be covered?

Thank you for your quick reply

Flat_out
 
yes, an optical disc with 4 slots and 1 hole, mine seemed to run ok with black tape over the hole (you can just about get your fingers in, in situ) matts idea sounds cute (i would do it myself, but my limiter is disabled when on gas anyway :eek:)
tuned 1.0,s will still pull strongly at 8k rpm +, so its well worth doin imo :)
 
Thanks frank, i'll have a go tonight and get back to you with results(Y). Ive got the 1.3 cams etc in the 1.0 at the moment so should hopefully help a little more:p

Thanks again


Flat_out
 
The link i put in here, its my car, and it pulls strongly at 8.000rpm.

At 5.500rpm it starts to pull stronger and goes to 8.000rpm pulling the same way... :devil:

It does 10sec from 0-100kmh (0-60mph), for a 1.0 its not bad at all...
 
Rite everyone, i managed to get it done last nite, pics will be in my blog a little later. Noticed a slight increase in the rev range but not alot tbh. Could i have made a mistake? Didnt have black tape so used white and then coloured it with a black marker:p. Also on the test drive it started spluttering on me. Just like it was running on three cylinders. But after five minutes it started fine and hasnt done it since. wierd eh??

thanks for the info anyway frank:grinning:


Flat_out
 
Me & Ferrit did this to the RaT on Saturday.
Started and ran fine after.Have not noticed any changes in general running although car did cut out on first run.Restarted,all back to normal.
Gave the car some treatment,limiter is gone,car still seems to be running normally.
I'm playing with a condemned 1.0 in the RaT (which has not got a RPM counter) so I'm not too bothered what happens but think I'll need a counter if I ever do this on my new engine in case I get too excited....
 
I'm finding it hard to believe a stock profile cam is still delivering power at 8,000 RPM. Has anyone put one on a rolling road yet?
 
No ian, it won't make much past 6k with a 196deg cam and only around 5.5mm lift. Removing the limiter is pretty pointless other than for pub talk figures saying your engine can rev to 9000. Even a stock cg13 won't make much past 6400rpm on it's 222cams either.
 
Ian said:
I'm finding it hard to believe a stock profile cam is still delivering power at 8,000 RPM. Has anyone put one on a rolling road yet?
Click to expand...

yeh, its pretty pointless on a stock 1.0, and even more pointless on a stock 1.3, but bagas has fitted 1.3 cams iirc and his will still be pulling strongly at 8k :)

Low Rider said:
No ian, it won't make much past 6k with a 196deg cam and only around 5.5mm lift. Removing the limiter is pretty pointless other than for pub talk figures saying your engine can rev to 9000. Even a stock cg13 won't make much past 6400rpm on it's 222cams either.
Click to expand...

:)
 
Frank, why would there be a difference with a CG10 with 1.3 cams and a CG13 with its stock cams? I'm assuming the CG10 has a slightly higher comp ratio due to flat pistons. But still, with a cam which is only 222 duration, with low lift. I really fail to see how its benifical? Apart from saving a gear change to hit 60, which is pointless when your losing power and torque? Not trying to cause an argument here, but ii'm putting these views across, because you dont seem like a hot headed 17 year old :)
 
Ian said:
Frank, why would there be a difference with a CG10 with 1.3 cams and a CG13 with its stock cams? I'm assuming the CG10 has a slightly higher comp ratio due to flat pistons. But still, with a cam which is only 222 duration, with low lift. I really fail to see how its benifical? Apart from saving a gear change to hit 60, which is pointless when your losing power and torque? Not trying to cause an argument here, but ii'm putting these views across, because you dont seem like a hot headed 17 year old :)
Click to expand...

no they,re the same c/r Ian, i,m just going by my misses,s 1.0 with 1.3 cams, its flat as a fart till about 4k then pulls really well, then the damn limiter kicks in , then it drops out of the powerband when you change gear :doh:
matt recon,s his stock cam (1.3) engine pulls ok to 7400
http://www.micra.org.uk/showthread.php?t=30129
i,m not saying the limiter is kicking in at peak power, but the 1.0,s have got no grunt which means you have to thrash them to get any performance :eek:
 
I have to disagree that 1.0 with 1.3 cams doesnt make any power after 6.400rpm.

My Micra starts to pull stronger at 5.500rpm and keeps at that rate till 8.000rpm (never pushed more than that).
And beyond 5.500rpm its faster than a stock 1.3 (tested but didnt filmed it)

See it here:

1- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNSthJahN7A&feature=channel_page

2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7hLDDQojNU&feature=channel_page

3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nvrzry2PiIc&feature=channel_page

4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xx4QLGBhsZ4&feature=channel_page

5 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rn881n_7qwo&feature=channel_page

6 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50QB_73I6O4&feature=channel_page

7 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TfxmIZMm2E&feature=channel_page


The only problem i have, is a cutout/safe mode (fuel or ignition) at 7.200rpm in 3rd.
But it can handle with 1.6 cars with 100/110cv...
 
Not only 1.3 cams. It has:

1.3 Cams (with stock 1.0 timing)
Pod Filter behind headlight (Eagle metal filter)
Adjustable Fuel Pressure Regulator @ 3,0/3,5bar
1.6 Injectors (Sunny 1.6)
Uprated Fuel Pump (7bar max)
Metal Fuel Filter
NGK Iridium Spark Plugs (one level colder)
K1 Plug Leads (10mm)
6.900rpm cutout remove (distributor mod)
Full Janspeed Exhaust System
Distributor at 20º

I think its around 80hp. With lower gear ratios of the 1.0 gearbox and 920KG, it has a nice acceleration.
Does "real" 180kmh, 190kmh on the dash, doesnt go any further because Facelifts are limited to 180kmh...
 
hard for me to tell how fast that is now, i've not owned a micra for 3 years. And never a 1.0. Until i see a dyno print out, I cannot believe it pulls better.
 
bagas said:
1.3 Cams (with stock 1.0 timing) - Undecided
Pod Filter behind headlight (Eagle metal filter) - Not much of a difference
Adjustable Fuel Pressure Regulator @ 3,0/3,5bar - See below
1.6 Injectors (Sunny 1.6) - This will just cause you to run rich without remap
Uprated Fuel Pump (7bar max) - As above
Metal Fuel Filter - as are most
NGK Iridium Spark Plugs (one level colder) - No real difference
K1 Plug Leads (10mm) - As above
6.900rpm cutout remove (distributor mod) - Dubious
Full Janspeed Exhaust System - This may be the main difference
Distributor at 20º - That's a lot of static advance!
Click to expand...

It will be your janspeed making it slightly quicker than a CG13, not the cams, and no limiter.
 
its still comparing a tuned motor agaist a stock one. Put all them mods on a 1.3 engine, and it wouldn't stand a chance.
 
Alienfish360 said:
It will be your janspeed making it slightly quicker than a CG13, not the cams, and no limiter.
Click to expand...

With Janspeed i didnt notice nothing special, but when i installed the cams, the car become other, with much more torque.

With the limiter, when i shift up, the revs go under 5.500rpm and i have to wait till i gets to 5.500rpm to start pulling harder...
Without the limiter, i shift up at 8.000rpm and it continues to push harder because the next gear is over 5.500rpm.
Dont know the reason why the car pulls better over 5.500rpm, but it does. I will try to take it to a dyno...

Ian said:
its still comparing a tuned motor agaist a stock one. Put all them mods on a 1.3 engine, and it wouldn't stand a chance.
Click to expand...

I have a 1.3 engine laying around, i will work that engine and put it in the 1.0 chassis... And had it remaped.
 
bagas said:
With Janspeed i didnt notice nothing special, but when i installed the cams, the car become other, with much more torque.

With the limiter, when i shift up, the revs go under 5.500rpm and i have to wait till i gets to 5.500rpm to start pulling harder...
Without the limiter, i shift up at 8.000rpm and it continues to push harder because the next gear is over 5.500rpm.
Dont know the reason why the car pulls better over 5.500rpm, but it does. I will try to take it to a dyno...

.
Click to expand...
my janspeed manifold did,nt do much for my 1.0 when it was stock either fwn
and my misses,s had a high-up powerband like yours too bagas (advancing the inlet cam like in this pic helped to bring it down a lot tho :))
http://www.micra.org.uk/attachment.php?attachmentid=13127&stc=1&d=1246225039
 
Alien, my car doesnt run that rich, im getting 6,7L/100KM = 35 MPG, and driving fast (+145kmh = 90mph)

frank said:
my janspeed manifold did,nt do much for my 1.0 when it was stock either fwn
and my misses,s had a high-up powerband like yours too bagas (advancing the inlet cam like in this pic helped to bring it down a lot tho :))
http://www.micra.org.uk/attachment.php?attachmentid=13127&stc=1&d=1246225039
Click to expand...

I will not advance the inlet cam, because i will do no more on this engine, i got a 1.3 to put, maybe on january, after MOT.
And its nice to know that someone has a Micra with the same behavior as mine...
 
Alienfish360 said:
My CG10 with nothing but a Janspeed did 0-60 in 14.11 seconds, measured from the VSS, with wheels that had the correct rolling diameter.



Apart from a big turbo and a bottle of gas :)
Click to expand...

Wrong, because it still won't make as much power as a bigger motor with the same mods ;)
 
Ian, you asked for a proof, here it is:


TestePotenciaMicra10.jpg


Yellow - HP
Blue - Torque


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I238GDblp-Y


Stock:
55HP @ 6000rpm
79Nm @ 4000 rpm

Modded:
80,7HP @ 6819rpm
88.8 Nm @ 6012rpm


When i have time, i will scan and upload the printout.
 
nice result bagas (Y) you can see that little surge at 5k eh (my1.0 is the same at the mo, but at 6k tho :eek:).
it just goes to show that a 1.0 at 8k can easily be made to have the same hp as a stock 1.3 at 6k (ie, same port sizes, valves, injectors, t/b etc, but the 1.0 can make up the defecit in cc with the extra rpm
 
frank said:
nice result bagas (Y) you can see that little surge at 5k eh (my1.0 is the same at the mo, but at 6k tho :eek:).
it just goes to show that a 1.0 at 8k can easily be made to have the same hp as a stock 1.3 at 6k (ie, same port sizes, valves, injectors, t/b etc, but the 1.0 can make up the defecit in cc with the extra rpm
Click to expand...

But this 80,7hp was made with with several mods on the 1.0, not a stock one. The best thing is that it can maintain the torque till 5.000 and then it
increases till 6.000, then starts to drop, and power is always rising till 7.000. And i have a fuel cut at 7.300-7.500, i will remap it to take it off.
Another thing, i have no longer the dizzy cutout, im using NIStune on my ECU, so i can alter the revlimiter, speedlimiter, fuel maps, etc...

Stani1029 said:
so will the 1.3 be even better with this type of mod??
Click to expand...

If you have some mods on the 1.3, it will be way better, but only if you have other mods to keep it pulling at high revs...
 
Hi Guys,

does anybody ever had problems after removing the rev limiter by taping the little square hole??

I tried it and the first time i was very satisfied, it works good (what a pity that there is a hard rev limiter on higher gears)

But then i noticed that the car was bucking a bit during accleration (especially in 3. gear) and furthermore i hear something knocking in the engine bay while the car stands and the engine runs.:suspect:

I removed the tape (i took same tape from video) and then everything was alright.:glare:

Any idea?? made something wrong maybe??
regards
bjoern
 
Hmmm, so only modified cg10 has promising results?

When fully redding the cg10 stock in second gear (55) it feels like the power is dropped,

What does the stock cg10 rev to anyway? I've seen several different figures lol. (Sucks not to have a rpm gauge lol)

Awesome thread btw, awesome power from the car too (Y)
 
Hi Monchi, I had the exact same problem with mine, 1ltr 1999 facelift. Worked perfectly well after I done it, 1.3cams would keep pulling past 60mph in 2nd gear. But the next time I started it it would stall or judder, so I removed the tape and it was straight back to normal. So I left the tape off and not tried it since. I guessed it was messing with the timing and the ecu.

I never got around to asking why and if it was still possible to do, so I'll be looking for the same answer.
 
euro_micra said:
Hi Monchi, I had the exact same problem with mine, 1ltr 1999 facelift. Worked perfectly well after I done it, 1.3cams would keep pulling past 60mph in 2nd gear. But the next time I started it it would stall or judder, so I removed the tape and it was straight back to normal. So I left the tape off and not tried it since. I guessed it was messing with the timing and the ecu.

I never got around to asking why and if it was still possible to do, so I'll be looking for the same answer.
Click to expand...

...but why doesnt the problems appear directly???:suspect:

...can i damage something if i try it one more time ???

hope to get answer for this problem :wasntme:

Monchi
 
Hi all,

(I know this is an old thread, but it has already good discussion.)

I did the rev limiter removal first using brown packaging tape --> no success.

Another try with aluminum tape. Works as a rev limiter removal. But the aluminum tape fix caused some additional strange behaviour though. First it runs OK with limiter removed, but when I let revs go lower then it seems that it runs on three cylinders. If I let it to idle it stalls. If I hit ignition again, everything works OK for a while. Reving it higher and then low brings this issue again.

Any ideas? What is causing this? Some reflections on a aluminum tape to cause slot next to it misinterpreted?

Setup:
- K11 1.3
- DIY 2" exhaust from headers to end, the main catalytic still in place
- DIY 4-2-1 headers
- DIY 3" intake with Apexi cone filter
- GA16 injectors (fuel pressure regulator set to 3 bar)
- SLC DIY 2 lambda controller
- Nissan Datascan to log data through consult interface
 
A lot of people have tried this in the past with mixed success rates.....I think it depends on the age or the car and the type of ecu fitted, (Frank maybe able to shed some light on this).

I find myself though asking why you are finding it necessary to remove or raise the standard rev limiter on the CG13. Given the spec of your car you will not be making power past the standard 6900rpm rev limiter anyway. Unless of course you use the car in sprints etc and find the need to stay in a gear just that little bit longer to save the time in shifting up and down a gear before a corner?
 
Ok, I understand your question. This is just for my hobby to see how much I can get from this.

It seems that my micra has a limiter in 6700 or so. Anyway it pulls strong to limiter so I'm trying to find the limits for this. With testing with aluminum tape I saw it nicely pull at least 1k further. I had no logger connected, so I don't the real figures. (I don't have rev meter yet, which makes it even easier to hit the limiter).

I am not able to add an image, so no screen capture from Nissan Datascan. Rpm log can be used to see quite nicely how it pulls to rev limiter.
 
Low Rider said:
A lot of people have tried this in the past with mixed success rates.....I think it depends on the age or the car and the type of ecu fitted, (Frank maybe able to shed some light on this).
Click to expand...
yes my red car went a bit loopy when i did it, but the earlier blue car ran fine :)
 
It seems that I was not so lucky. I just put it back as it was. I also made 4 quarter mile test runs with and without limiter using GPS based Racechrono in a mobile phone as a measuring device. 17.6 s and 17.5 s without limiter and 18.1 s with limiter.

This was supposed to be easy 0.5 sec improvement.

I forgot to mention that the engine has been driven 320+ tkm so it might not be the best to respond in "improvements". ;-)

Edit:
After testing I found out that closing the hole was also causing some odd behavior on Nissan Datascan datalogging. Injector open time was reduced roughly to half giving maximum 8 ms and with limiter on, 15 ms. Because the airflow is giving the same information both cases the injector time must give wrong values.
 
Low Rider said:
No ian, it won't make much past 6k with a 196deg cam and only around 5.5mm lift. Removing the limiter is pretty pointless other than for pub talk figures saying your engine can rev to 9000. Even a stock cg13 won't make much past 6400rpm on it's 222cams either.
Click to expand...

agreed. mine ran peak power at 6424rpm on TDI norths dyno
 
I was trying get rid of the rev limiter and asking if anyone else is having a workaround for my issue. I was not going to argue if this modification is needed to do for my CURRENT setup. :confused: Anyone having a real input to my question?

For the previous post:
I think it's not only the peak power you need to look at...

If we compare the 2nd and 3rd gears the ratio difference is 50%. So you are getting the 50% more torque to front wheel using 2nd gear. The best rpm to shift is when the 2nd gear torque to wheels is the same what you could get from 3rd gear.

It's not a problem if power has dropped already from the peak power if you're still getting more torque to front wheels than with the next gear.
 
Here is the "proof" for the acceleration over the 7krpm. Acceleration was calculated from rpm and time and the 3rd gear acceleration was multiplied by 1.5 compared to 2nd to reflect the gearbox ratio. Data source was Nissan Datascan through consult inteface.

As you can see, even when shifting up from 7400rpm (which happened to be the hard limit for the rpm), accelereration was still better than using 3rd gear. I suppose closer to 8k would be the best shift point.

Hopefully the link works...
photostream


Comments are of course welcome!

Edit:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/41257829@N02/6938340904/sizes/l/in/photostream/
 
have you tried slotting the 5th hole to connect with cyl # 1 slot ?
and the ecu may need the 5th hole for its 720deg index/sequencing ?
 

Similar threads

Micra_Mamp
removing rev limiter??
Replies
0
Views
1K
Micra_Mamp
Micra_Mamp
Skinner_87
Rev Limiter & Launch controll
Replies
2
Views
1K
Skinner_87
Skinner_87
nathan.warren69
Rev Limiter..
Replies
15
Views
2K
AJC
AJC
C
CG13 Rev limiter removal by distributor modifications.
2
Replies
76
Views
13K
baguete
baguete
F
Car running so rough
Replies
5
Views
1K
Flat_Out
F
Back
Top