Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday July 22, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Technical > Engine Management & Tuning

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-22-2009, 07:12 AM   #51
ride5000
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 32792
Join Date: Feb 2003
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: lincoln, ri
Vehicle:
2003 GGA MBP
12.9 / 105+

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanathanq83 View Post
i will say it made more power, i was tuning my friends car, pretty much identical as mine, vf37 tgv delete, all the goodies. his whp on airboys went up 40, and torque is the same, he is now at 320 and 280, i also gained 20whp and 20wtq, it is also way smoother. base timing b is used when you ahve the but connector in
a 40whp gain from switching to SD load?

give me a ****ing break.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
ride5000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 10:10 AM   #52
JSarv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 163445
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Effingham IL (Central IL)
Vehicle:
l33t *******
12.07@115.9mph-EJ205

Default

Read my post ken det. Was checked via det cans.

Per cylinder fueling was the same per cylinder timing was removed.

Logged ipw was cleaner throughout the pull. Again I didn't say a ****ing word about power. A more consistent and clean ipw curve (logged alone for comparison sake) may/may not be the reason for the allowable changes.

40 anything is bs more timing or boost had! To have been. Run

I couldn't run more boost wgdc was set to 100% on both roms...

I'm not diasgreeing with your point but it seemed as if the ipw was "cleaner"
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 10:20 AM   #53
JSarv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 163445
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Effingham IL (Central IL)
Vehicle:
l33t *******
12.07@115.9mph-EJ205

Default

Furthermore I'm not new to sd. I've been playing with it on my honda for two years.

Load reference will not majicaly make more power - but a consistent and controlable fueling will.

Log ipw and nothing else (since our logging functions are slower than old people ****ing) with your maf - then log it via sd - there is less variation in the curve - there is a consistency that simply is not present maf based.

But then.again it could have been the 2deg of timing from the per cylinder comp ( yes this was taken into account as total timing with a comp is logged -2 of true total timing

If so good.... But thatas just speculation as well
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 10:24 AM   #54
JSarv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 163445
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Effingham IL (Central IL)
Vehicle:
l33t *******
12.07@115.9mph-EJ205

Default

And for that matter I made 0whp and 0wtq on my car and about 10 each under the curve - simply because I made a full 3" intake that put me about 1psi higher @ relative rpms during spool - ie more boost under the curve. So that's why I made a few more under the curve. Not because its sd load reference.
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 10:36 AM   #55
69subaru360
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 159682
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Maine
Vehicle:
1995 WRX
1998 2.5 RS

Default

I don't think SD will make anymore power vs MAF on my car. I have it tuned well with the MAF, I'm satisfied with how it runs. I just wanted the antilag for the dragstrip. I'm not a noob, I know how hard it is on parts. But it will only be on for a few seconds at launch and shifts, it's a risk I'll take. I had my rom about ready to flash the other night and romraider crashed, I need to remember to save my work more often.
69subaru360 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 10:41 AM   #56
JSarv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 163445
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Effingham IL (Central IL)
Vehicle:
l33t *******
12.07@115.9mph-EJ205

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 69subaru360 View Post
I don't think SD will make anymore power vs MAF on my car. I have it tuned well with the MAF, I'm satisfied with how it runs. I just wanted the antilag for the dragstrip. I'm not a noob, I know how hard it is on parts. But it will only be on for a few seconds at launch and shifts, it's a risk I'll take. I had my rom about ready to flash the other night and romraider crashed, I need to remember to save my work more often.
It really shouldn't make more power. Unless you cannot. Control your fueling via maf. It will have a smoother drive and in some cases has much more control over fueling due to sizable compensation maps for fueling
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 12:19 PM   #57
ride5000
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 32792
Join Date: Feb 2003
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: lincoln, ri
Vehicle:
2003 GGA MBP
12.9 / 105+

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSarv View Post
Furthermore I'm not new to sd. I've been playing with it on my honda for two years.

Load reference will not majicaly make more power - but a consistent and controlable fueling will.

Log ipw and nothing else (since our logging functions are slower than old people ****ing) with your maf - then log it via sd - there is less variation in the curve - there is a consistency that simply is not present maf based.

But then.again it could have been the 2deg of timing from the per cylinder comp ( yes this was taken into account as total timing with a comp is logged -2 of true total timing

If so good.... But thatas just speculation as well
by your own admission, you had afr variations of .25:1 on the maf tune.

how much knock margin do you REALLY think you gave up compared to the .1:1 variation you reportedly achieved with SD load? was it worth 1.5 degrees?

there are so many other variables that can affect how the engine runs that aren't being considered. for example, what's the dwell on the oem rom vs. the group n rom?

again, you've changed the ENTIRE ROM image on the ecu. there are a lot of places where the details haven't been revealed that can affect the outcome.

i can say this with 100% certainty though: same fuel + same air + same spark = same power.
ride5000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 12:28 PM   #58
JSarv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 163445
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Effingham IL (Central IL)
Vehicle:
l33t *******
12.07@115.9mph-EJ205

Default

I can't disagree with that one bit. I ran both up until I heard slight audible knock and dropped both off a degree with the final result.

What I left him with was 2.5 degrees at peak torque and 2 degrees up top less than knock on the maf tune for now.

Dwell could play a major role, but is it variable via hardware or software?

I fn wish we could adjust ignition dwell!
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 04:07 PM   #59
mattminer
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 90642
Join Date: Jul 2005
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Pineapple under the Sea, RI
Vehicle:
WKD Everything

Default

I just picked up a JDM ecu to start messing with this pretty soon, Im very excited Ive been tuning hondas for what seems like a billion years, speed density is the way to go!

Does anyone know or has anyone eliminated the MAF and wired in a different style IAT? I just converted an 8th Gen Civic Si to speed density, and instead of keeping the MAF, I wired in an older gen IAT and installed it in the intake manifold

M@
mattminer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 04:14 PM   #60
JSarv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 163445
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Effingham IL (Central IL)
Vehicle:
l33t *******
12.07@115.9mph-EJ205

Default

Hope you didn't pick up a jdm ecu to work with an ej205. It won't. Itl go straight to limp mode and won't do ****.
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 04:24 PM   #61
mattminer
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 90642
Join Date: Jul 2005
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Pineapple under the Sea, RI
Vehicle:
WKD Everything

Default

My thoughts were all jumbled, no im intending to use it on an ej207 swapped car, but I dont want the chance of bricking or damaging someone elses ecu, so I grabbed another ecu to do some testing on.

M@
mattminer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 05:34 PM   #62
seanathanq83
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 173241
Join Date: Feb 2008
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Houston, Tx
Vehicle:
2002 s256 twinscroll
now with one more gear

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ride5000 View Post
a 40whp gain from switching to SD load?

give me a ****ing break.
dude all i know is nothing has changed physicly with the car, or outside temp or weight or gas, or altitude or any of that. i have used the exact same number on all his airboy sheets give of take a few pounds for how much gas he has in the tank. the car is smoother and from where i was before , (1 psi more, and 1 degree less timing at peak, and 2 less at red line ) he is now making a consistant 40whp up top, basicly the hp line keeps climbing doesnt level off anymore, and the torque curve comes up and holds flat with about 10wtq drop

i dont mean that it magicly makes more power, but it allows fine tuning in places that we didnt have before such as the ability to control fueling, and other table which helps fine tune for more power

Last edited by seanathanq83; 10-22-2009 at 07:07 PM. Reason: clairifying
seanathanq83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 07:04 PM   #63
JSarv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 163445
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Effingham IL (Central IL)
Vehicle:
l33t *******
12.07@115.9mph-EJ205

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanathanq83 View Post
dude all i know is nothing has changed with the car, or outside temp or weight or gas, or altitude or any of that. i have used the exact same number on all his airboy sheets give of take a few pounds for how much gas he has in the tank. the car is smoother and from where i was before , (1 psi more, and 1 psi less at peak, and 2 less at red line ) he is now making a consistant 40whp up top, basicly the hp line keeps climbing doesnt level off anymore, and the torque curve comes up and holds flat with about 10wtq drop

maybe its the ability to control fueling, i dont know but he the charts are consistant
You were running more timing/leaner/more boost - a few whp/tq is believable - but 40 is not. So either more timing was ran. It was ran leaner. Or more boost was ran.

I'm not saying that with SD it wasn't possible to squeeze a * or two more timing out of it or a psi or two of boost - maybe leaning it out a bit (all make power) but if nothing changes its impossible to make more power.

-Jerod
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 07:09 PM   #64
seanathanq83
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 173241
Join Date: Feb 2008
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Houston, Tx
Vehicle:
2002 s256 twinscroll
now with one more gear

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSarv View Post
You were running more timing/leaner/more boost - a few whp/tq is believable - but 40 is not. So either more timing was ran. It was ran leaner. Or more boost was ran.

I'm not saying that with SD it wasn't possible to squeeze a * or two more timing out of it or a psi or two of boost - maybe leaning it out a bit (all make power) but if nothing changes its impossible to make more power.

-Jerod

sorry i went out and clarified it was 1 more psi, still help through redline, also 1 more degree at peak torque, and 2 more degree at redline, and better fueling, it was leaned out more this time about .2 across the board. so i can see where the power came from, it just seems that with SD it was easier to get these changes in
seanathanq83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 07:12 PM   #65
JSarv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 163445
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Effingham IL (Central IL)
Vehicle:
l33t *******
12.07@115.9mph-EJ205

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanathanq83 View Post
sorry i went out and clarified it was 1 more psi, still help through redline, also 1 more degree at peak torque, and 2 more degree at redline, and better fueling, it was leaned out more this time about .2 across the board. so i can see where the power came from, it just seems that with SD it was easier to get these changes in
^^ Is why. Which is quite possible.

But was the maf tune taken to a verified (not ecu) knock threshold vs the SD tune?

See - really the only comparison would be a road tune of each - using det cans - then put it on the rollers and a quick update of each tune and compare.

Most likely, there is some maf fluctuation (I've noticed in my car load/fueling is much more consistent as the maf tends to wander a bit even with our slow logger)

So having a more consistent combustion to combustion afr is going to allow a bit more boost/timing to be ran on the same fuel. This is all given the maf was a little inconsistent to begin with.

-Jerod
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 08:28 PM   #66
seanathanq83
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 173241
Join Date: Feb 2008
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Houston, Tx
Vehicle:
2002 s256 twinscroll
now with one more gear

Default

well they have both been done with road tunes, and i am going to have him run it on a mustang dyno saturday and we will run both maps and see, now i havent used det cans, just gone by the ecu. so i will get back to you on both, and i went back and looked and whp is up, but torque is pretty much identical except the torque on the SD tune hold in basicly a flat line.
seanathanq83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 11:36 PM   #67
MRF582
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 48219
Join Date: Nov 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Vehicle:
. Always drive
the race line .

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSarv View Post
See - really the only comparison would be a road tune of each - using det cans - then put it on the rollers and a quick update of each tune and compare.
I kind of disagree. If one type of ROM has internal changes that let the car make more power over another ROM then... It doesn't matter what those changes are. Maybe the stock ROM doesn't have the knock sensitivity programmed perfectly and the SD ROM does. Etc. We could sit here and brainstorm endless possibilities as such. But no one can question empirical data.

Run it at the track and see what the car traps. Or better yet, use one of these instead. Just verify the altitude change during the run... Thank goodness for GPS


Notice I said trap speed. I've come across WAY too many people in my life who, when asked what their car traps, respond with '12.xx'. 12mph? Wow, that's slow! I didn't asked for an elapsed time nor do I care!
MRF582 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 11:51 PM   #68
JSarv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 163445
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Effingham IL (Central IL)
Vehicle:
l33t *******
12.07@115.9mph-EJ205

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MRF582 View Post
I kind of disagree. If one type of ROM has internal changes that let the car make more power over another ROM then... It doesn't matter what those changes are. Maybe the stock ROM doesn't have the knock sensitivity programmed perfectly and the SD ROM does. Etc. We could sit here and brainstorm endless possibilities as such. But no one can question empirical data.

Run it at the track and see what the car traps. Or better yet, use one of these instead. Just verify the altitude change during the run... Thank goodness for GPS


Notice I said trap speed. I've come across WAY too many people in my life who, when asked what their car traps, respond with '12.xx'. 12mph? Wow, that's slow! I didn't asked for an elapsed time nor do I care!
Look - I haven't laid any claim to more power. I agree with Ken that there is a possibility of some changes that have been undefined.

How many times do I have to post DET CANS WERE USED - NOT SUBARU KNOCK CONTROL.. It was SET and monitored for reference but I wore my sweet Det Cans to confirm knock.

And as an FYI a 16bit ecu is pretty damn close to being spot on as far as catching true knock vs. something else on a mostly stock (stage 2) setup....

Yea I'm fully aware of trap speeds...

And if your telling me - setting up 2 road tuned maps - IE Maf and SD - taking the car to a dyno (same day, within an hour) and making quick runs/adjustments to both (just for reference sake) and comparing is not "comparable" you are full of ****.

Taking the car to the dyno on a different day, or noon vs midnight.. Yes there can be/is/will be variation. But running pulls with similar IAT's ECT's on nearly back to back runs is a fairly acurate to say the least, even more so than trap speeds (unless you compare on the same night, same IAT's, Same traction, ect.)

I'm not saying that Speed Density is creating this, I'm saying something in the rom is either different or our less than ok maf sensor (that VERY few people have monitored at a fast enough rate to confirm) may or may not cause some IPW fluctuation (very fine, but hey if you have an inconsitent IPW on a cylinder - power/det threshold will be lost)

SO - Again, I haven't laid claim to any power - I just stated a fact. Whether it be the rom itself or the accuracy of speed density allowing this - I don't know - all I know is the little bit more timing I was able to run and leaning it out a bit before comming to 93's knock threshold on that particular engine with NO physical changes and nearly back to back runs.

If weather changed during this "event" it would not have changed more than 1*F and humidity would not have changed more than 1-2%.

Also if you didn't read - I made jack **** for power on my car, other than being able to throw on an elephant dick for an intake (because I don't have to worry about my maf anymore) and gaining around 1-200 rpms of spool and carrying nearly 24PSI (38.6 PSIA) to redline on stock cams..

Thats it. If it were not for that i wouldn't have noticed any difference other than the response and smoothness that I was able to create with fueling - and on E85 and being cold out thats a damn good thing for me... I also had to use a 3" maf housing to keep from maxing my MAF out - I'm sure this didn't help a damn thing either...

-Jerod
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2009, 11:05 AM   #69
SVT_WRX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 164830
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: San Diego
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
G61 III OVE 58e

Default

So, from what I get from reading all this, it appears that SD based maps provide better all around drivability and better fuel control vs MAF air/fuel control. That being said, with better air/fuel control, don't you have a better chance at making more power vs MAF air/fuel control? Or perhaps you can reach your power goals easier with SD? What I'm getting at here is what is the main benefit of SD? Drivability? The possibility of making more power/tq? Or both?

I would think that if you have MORE "control" over your ECU so to speak, you would be able to squeeze out more power, would you not?

I guess the only real way to tell is to make SD tune almost completely identical to a MAF tune and take it to the track or get it on the dyno. Same day, same temps etc.
SVT_WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2009, 11:52 AM   #70
ride5000
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 32792
Join Date: Feb 2003
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: lincoln, ri
Vehicle:
2003 GGA MBP
12.9 / 105+

Default

well the question is, better fuel control compared to WHAT?

jerod's mechanical setup factors into how stable and fine-tuned his maf-load maps can be--in particular the much larger than oem maf pipe diameter, as he says.

there isn't any MORE control over the ecu. there are different controls, yes. every ROM image out there has a slightly different feature set--come include per gear boost comp, some include larger ign/fuel maps, some are smaller, etc.

never forget there is a GREAT DEAL still unknown about this ROM. we DO know that it was never meant to be street-driven.

the idea that more fine-grained control over fuel/ign maps unlocks more power is great in theory. many other aftermarket ecus offer more load cells, but this hasn't produced the results in practice.

keep in mind when you're doing a WOT run you traverse a tiny fraction of the total map surface. having 100 cells of control vs. 50 doesn't change things when you actually USE 15 of them.

having been tuning SD for the last 4+ years with the utec i can tell you a couple of things:

1) maps DO seem to be easier to tweak. they seem to have smoother surfaces and react more intuitively to changes. the bottom line is that they are easier to tune.

2) transient response seems better. i have attributed this to the faster response of the MAP sensor to changes in throttle position. in theory a true SD load doesn't require tip in enrichment, for example, because it's already accounted for. it may also mean that SD setups can contend with much longer intact tract lengths (ie fmics) which can cause transient fueling issues using oem location maf sensors.

3) they are more sensitive to accurate temperature measurement and proper compensation tables.

4) any power it "gets" you comes from either:
4.1) a better tune due to reason 1
4.2) mechanical changes you make as a result of not needing a maf sensor (ie, pulling it out of the airflow path)

5) they can be HARDER to tune idle with lumpy cams, because of the low manifold vacuum, and the scatter of that vacuum.

6) they are MUCH less forgiving wrt mods that change VE without a retune. ie, opening that exhaust cutout means you'd better retune because you're gonna run LEEEEEEEEAN.

make no mistake: subaru are no fools. maf sensors are not cheap... they're much more expensive and delicate sensors than MAP and IAT (which are already on the car). if they thought they could provide the same robustness and drive-ability with a maf-less setup then they would have. there are very real, very valid reasons they settled on maf sensor load. there are tradeoffs that cannot be avoided no matter what solution is used.

Last edited by ride5000; 10-23-2009 at 11:58 AM.
ride5000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2009, 12:47 PM   #71
SVT_WRX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 164830
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: San Diego
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
G61 III OVE 58e

Default

So by being able to remove the MAF restriction that you have in an MAF based environment, you can potentially make more power by using SD. Correct? I do understand however, that this does not necessarily mean you will have better drivability due to the MAF sensors better ability to adjust to varying outside conditions.
SVT_WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2009, 02:21 PM   #72
mattminer
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 90642
Join Date: Jul 2005
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Pineapple under the Sea, RI
Vehicle:
WKD Everything

Default

i do believe the primary reason to stick with a MAF is to easily contend with minor - mild changes in the factors dictating the cars control with ease.

On the SD cars that I tune, almost any change requires a retune, or at least a revisit. That being said, SD is definitely for me

M@
mattminer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2009, 06:50 PM   #73
JSarv
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 163445
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Effingham IL (Central IL)
Vehicle:
l33t *******
12.07@115.9mph-EJ205

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT_WRX View Post
So by being able to remove the MAF restriction that you have in an MAF based environment, you can potentially make more power by using SD. Correct? I do understand however, that this does not necessarily mean you will have better drivability due to the MAF sensors better ability to adjust to varying outside conditions.
Ken is 110% correct. A maf sensor can theoretically be tuned for 500hp on 5 different turbos given the same intake is used everytime and swapping turbos could theoretically not need a retune.

Sd does not know volume of air, that is why there is a load comp map, you tell it (essentially) the volume of air per psia. Changing to a larger turbo changes this, meaning you may stikl be running 20psi but the volume of air moved and the fuel needed have changed, a map sensor doesn't know this.

A maf sensor will pick up on this as it measures volume rather than pressure. Given its not maxed out.

So when it comes down to it, maf metering is safer per conditions and changes, however it is limited by soundwaves(turbulance), airflow,innconsistency when using an oversized housing, and some other minor things.

If our maf sensor tunability was 3d you can bet your ass I'd still be using maf, but its not and won't be.

-jerod
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2009, 07:18 PM   #74
SVT_WRX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 164830
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: San Diego
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
G61 III OVE 58e

Default

Are you both saying it doesn't matter which route you choose, you still will make the same power regardless?

Bottom line here is I want to make more power. Will I with SD or not? Or are there still too many unknowns at this point?
SVT_WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2009, 07:44 PM   #75
69subaru360
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 159682
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Maine
Vehicle:
1995 WRX
1998 2.5 RS

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT_WRX View Post
Are you both saying it doesn't matter which route you choose, you still will make the same power regardless?

Bottom line here is I want to make more power. Will I with SD or not? Or are there still too many unknowns at this point?
SD alone will not make anymore power vs. MAF. Nothing to debate there.
69subaru360 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OS Speed Density in LGT groff Open Source Reflashes 10 08-07-2008 08:27 PM
UTEC, DTEC and Speed Density SloRice UTEC 26 03-21-2007 01:26 PM
PCV on WRX with Speed Density Token-Negro Built Motor Discussion 3 07-21-2006 10:26 AM
please ASAP is the STI speed density or mass air bobturismo Off-Topic 12 04-25-2004 02:45 PM
speed-density thng Factory 2.0L Turbo Powertrain 0 07-10-2003 01:06 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.