Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Wednesday August 20, 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 General > Proven Power Bragging

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 08-27-2007, 03:36 PM   #1
IMPORTEDCARS
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 56945
Join Date: Mar 2004
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: CT
Vehicle:
08 STI Base Model
Black

Default Utec w/MBC 22+psi vs. EcuTek Tune 19 PSI

Gentlemen,

Please give us your thoughts on these 2 graphs and voice your opinions.

Thank you

-George

* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
IMPORTEDCARS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 03:45 PM   #2
AZScoobie
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 8785
Join Date: Jul 2001
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Vehicle:
02 c_turner@ix.
netcom.com

Default

The blue graph is so lean its shocking. I hope this is not pump gas. It has obvious knock correction issues around 4000 rpm. Its 14 to 1 at 2700 which is a bit lean. My opinion of this tune is that something has changed in the tune. I cant see any tuner on these boards letting a car leave with that curve and AFR. Its possible the customer changed parts on the car or a mechanical issue developed that through the tune off. Its also possible that the car had alot of negative AFR correction which pulled the Open loop fueling lean. I would have liked to see this tune after an ECU Reset.

The red graph has major issues with the Fuel map past 5500 rpm. Its hitting 10 to 1 and chugging on fuel. It also has some issue in the timing map around 3600 rpm. It looks as if the UTec sensed knock and yanked timing. That or the next load row had a drop in timing and the one after that had higher timing. It also has a timing issue around 5600 rpm. Looks like at least 1 degree of change going on there. I cant comment on the Power because There is no boost plots. Its possible the red line was running alot more boost.

Was this the same car retuned? The dates of the graph are way off. Its hard for me to comment on the increased low end of the Red graph as we may be dealing with different exhaust, headers, FMIC, intake ect ect ect... For example.

CLark
AZScoobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 03:48 PM   #3
wuuusaa
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 92894
Join Date: Aug 2005
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Running away from Polar bears
Default

besides for increasing the boost is the map slighty the similar to the ecutek?
is that on pump?
wuuusaa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 03:53 PM   #4
IMPORTEDCARS
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 56945
Join Date: Mar 2004
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: CT
Vehicle:
08 STI Base Model
Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZScoobie View Post
The blue graph is so lean its shocking. I hope this is not pump gas. It has obvious knock correction issues around 4000 rpm. Its 14 to 1 at 2700 which is a bit lean. My opinion of this tune is that something has changed in the tune. I cant see any tuner on these boards letting a car leave with that curve and AFR. Its possible the customer changed parts on the car or a mechanical issue developed that through the tune off. Its also possible that the car had alot of negative AFR correction which pulled the Open loop fueling lean. I would have liked to see this tune after an ECU Reset.

The red graph has major issues with the Fuel map past 5500 rpm. Its hitting 10 to 1 and chugging on fuel. It also has some issue in the timing map around 3600 rpm. It looks as if the UTec sensed knock and yanked timing. That or the next load row had a drop in timing and the one after that had higher timing. It also has a timing issue around 5600 rpm. Looks like at least 1 degree of change going on there. I cant comment on the Power because There is no boost plots. Its possible the red line was running alot more boost.

Was this the same car retuned? The dates of the graph are way off. Its hard for me to comment on the increased low end of the Red graph as we may be dealing with different exhaust, headers, FMIC, intake ect ect ect... For example.

CLark

Same hardware Clark, the red graph has a dip NOT b/c its knocking, we were dialing in the factory boost solenoid. Yes it shows abit rich on top, its may have been running abit warm on the IAT'S. On the road boost was set with 0 knock! the boost setting does not exceed 19 psi (1.3) bar. On the road AFR"S were 11.0-11.3 @ the very most.


-George
IMPORTEDCARS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 03:54 PM   #5
IMPORTEDCARS
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 56945
Join Date: Mar 2004
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: CT
Vehicle:
08 STI Base Model
Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ol'skoolwrx View Post
besides for increasing the boost is the map slighty the similar to the ecutek?
is that on pump?
Both on 93 Octane.

-George
IMPORTEDCARS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 03:58 PM   #6
uncle lewie wrx
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 78066
Join Date: Dec 2004
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: 2009 LGT
Default

Ooops mis-read post.

Last edited by uncle lewie wrx; 08-27-2007 at 03:58 PM. Reason: I cant read....
uncle lewie wrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 04:01 PM   #7
wcbjr
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 4001
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: I love spherical bearings!
Vehicle:
2006 Legacy GT
Obsidian black

Default

Maybe the extra fuel in the red graph cooled the cylinder temps down to where you could run more boost.

Ok, just joking. I have no idea.
wcbjr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 04:06 PM   #8
IMPORTEDCARS
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 56945
Join Date: Mar 2004
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: CT
Vehicle:
08 STI Base Model
Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wcbjr View Post
Maybe the extra fuel in the red graph cooled the cylinder temps down to where you could run more boost.

Ok, just joking. I have no idea.
The graph with more power is 19 PSI (Ecutek tuned)
The graph with less power is 22 PSI (Utec tuned MBC)

-George
IMPORTEDCARS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 04:08 PM   #9
wcbjr
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 4001
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: I love spherical bearings!
Vehicle:
2006 Legacy GT
Obsidian black

Default

What MY engine / boost control?

Care to show the boost plot?
wcbjr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 04:15 PM   #10
nmyeti
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 4980
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Albuquerque, NM USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IMPORTEDCARS View Post
The graph with more power is 19 PSI (Ecutek tuned)
The graph with less power is 22 PSI (Utec tuned MBC)

-George
Since the UTEC tune was so lean it's likely that a lot of timing was sacrificed to keep it from knocking.

How exactly do you expect to compare one poorly tuned result to another poorly tuned result when almost every single variable on the car changes? For what purpose would you solicit comments on either state of tune when both of them show that they are really poorly done?

I canít think of any other reason to post these graphs ďin comparisonĒ other than to try to either pump up your chest because you made more power with less boost, or to attempt to sell one engine management solution over another. The truth is, in the hands of someone reasonably competent (not to imply that anyone in particular is competent or not) the two solutions will provide almost identical results (to within margin of error of the measurement device).

To imply otherwise is foolish.

Since opinions were asked for, Iíll give mine. Both of those graphs are so poor Iíd be embarrassed to let a customer leave the shop with them.
nmyeti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 04:20 PM   #11
fast_lgt
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 151278
Join Date: Jun 2007
Default

You cant put something like this up without LOGS. POST UP DATA LOGS OF EACH ONE!
fast_lgt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 04:24 PM   #12
Phatron
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 36033
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Tuning Lab
Vehicle:
CEO PhatBottiTuning
2006 STi GTX3582 + Meth

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IMPORTEDCARS View Post
Same hardware Clark, the red graph has a dip NOT b/c its knocking, we were dialing in the factory boost solenoid.
This comment suggests that these plots dont represent the final "dialed in" tunes. Then why post them?
Phatron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 04:34 PM   #13
IMPORTEDCARS
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 56945
Join Date: Mar 2004
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: CT
Vehicle:
08 STI Base Model
Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nmyeti View Post
Since the UTEC tune was so lean it's likely that a lot of timing was sacrificed to keep it from knocking.

How exactly do you expect to compare one poorly tuned result to another poorly tuned result when almost every single variable on the car changes? For what purpose would you solicit comments on either state of tune when both of them show that they are really poorly done?

I canít think of any other reason to post these graphs ďin comparisonĒ other than to try to either pump up your chest because you made more power with less boost, or to attempt to sell one engine management solution over another. The truth is, in the hands of someone reasonably competent (not to imply that anyone in particular is competent or not) the two solutions will provide almost identical results (to within margin of error of the measurement device).

To imply otherwise is foolish.

Since opinions were asked for, Iíll give mine. Both of those graphs are so poor Iíd be embarrassed to let a customer leave the shop with them.
There is no reason to pump up any chests.... we were comparing 2 different graph's thats all. No harm here.

-George
IMPORTEDCARS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 04:37 PM   #14
IMPORTEDCARS
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 56945
Join Date: Mar 2004
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: CT
Vehicle:
08 STI Base Model
Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fast_lgt View Post
You cant put something like this up without LOGS. POST UP DATA LOGS OF EACH ONE!
The Utec is sold, the data logs are up to the tuner to posts.

-George
IMPORTEDCARS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 04:48 PM   #15
JMK508
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 115420
Join Date: May 2006
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Mountains
Vehicle:
Its like a STI.....
but it doesn't break

Default

So we are comparing two really bad tunes. Are you asking what one wouldnt blow the car?
JMK508 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 04:53 PM   #16
nmyeti
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 4980
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Albuquerque, NM USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IMPORTEDCARS View Post
There is no reason to pump up any chests.... we were comparing 2 different graph's thats all. No harm here.

-George

What's the usefulness of the comparison?

I see it now, doe eyed customer leaves your shop with huge warm fuzzy because you made more power on less boost with a richer AFR. While that warm fuzzy is useful for the customer at the moment to feed their speed fix, it is far more useful in making the customer feel better the extra money that has been separated from their wallet because they were sold an EMS that they really didnít need in the first place. While the results they were achieved on the new EMS are nicer, they are still rather poor and there is little point in comparing them to anything other than a work in progress. For the customerís sake, I hope youíre still in the process of tuning this one.
nmyeti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 05:12 PM   #17
IMPORTEDCARS
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 56945
Join Date: Mar 2004
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: CT
Vehicle:
08 STI Base Model
Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nmyeti View Post
What's the usefulness of the comparison?

I see it now, doe eyed customer leaves your shop with huge warm fuzzy because you made more power on less boost with a richer AFR. While that warm fuzzy is useful for the customer at the moment to feed their speed fix, it is far more useful in making the customer feel better the extra money that has been separated from their wallet because they were sold an EMS that they really didnít need in the first place. While the results they were achieved on the new EMS are nicer, they are still rather poor and there is little point in comparing them to anything other than a work in progress. For the customerís sake, I hope youíre still in the process of tuning this one.
You have it all wrong, really wrong! im done here b/c of your false assumptions and accusations. If you want get a hold of me off line to furthur discuss this, there is much more to discuss.

-George
IMPORTEDCARS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 05:13 PM   #18
akira02rex
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 82612
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Vehicle:
2015 WRX STI
Ice Silver Metallic

Default

All dyno charts that I have ever seen had the hp and tq curves cross each other at 5252rpm, why doesn't this one?

This is a strange tune lol.
akira02rex is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 05:16 PM   #19
PaulRex
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 12454
Join Date: Nov 2001
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Vermont
Vehicle:
10 Toyota Taco
K8 SV650SF

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by akira02rex View Post
All dyno charts that I have ever seen had the hp and tq curves cross each other at 5252rpm, why doesn't this one?

This is a strange tune lol.
they dont cross because of the scaling used.. hp side goes to 350 tq to 400
PaulRex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 05:18 PM   #20
HP ADDICT
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 121366
Join Date: Jul 2006
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Milwaukee
Vehicle:
06 STI
OBP

Default

Different scaling of the TQ and HP #s
HP ADDICT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 08:36 PM   #21
Junior2JZ
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 64908
Join Date: Jun 2004
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Tuning 8/9sec Subies @ P&L
Vehicle:
10.8 XT+10.0@143 GR+
9.0@170mph GTR

Default



Using this graph since this was his FINAL tune with the utec would be fair... Its run 12 in Jason's folder if you want to over lay it .. 12 pulls from baseline to tuned...

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=1332699 Same STI limited from this post

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=1238306

Im pretty sure this is Jason's car... Never ran 22psi on it... especially since it was catted and was always run on PG.. plus he AUTO-CROSSED it. I didn't want to set him up for disaster. .. The map sensor fuel cut was set to 20.5psi MAX and the table was scaled accordingly. Its weird that the car was fine for 4 months and then became so lean... If you look at both the graphs you can see how the power band was relatively smooth even with SMOOTHING SET TO 0 Its very odd that with hotter weather the car would get Leaner as well.. Also the spool or just general look of the curve is very different. Maybe since the UTEC Delta sits on the glove box the MAP was "accidently" changed... Quite a few things could have happened... All that matters is that Jason is happy with the car..

Last edited by Junior2JZ; 08-27-2007 at 08:42 PM.
Junior2JZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 08:42 PM   #22
AZScoobie
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 8785
Join Date: Jul 2001
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Vehicle:
02 c_turner@ix.
netcom.com

Default

As I said. Something changed... Thanks for posting that Graph JR. Thats more like it. Nathan. Good to hear from you man. Hope you are doing well.

Clark
AZScoobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 10:58 PM   #23
Dyno Flash
Vendor
 
Member#: 73568
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Stamford, CT
Vehicle:
'05 STI 11.1 @ 127
03 Evo 8 9.5 @ 149

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Junior2JZ;19184929Using this graph since this was his [B
FINAL[/b] tune with the utec would be fair... Its run 12 in Jason's folder if you want to over lay it .. 12 pulls from baseline to tuned...
Good idea - I will post up some graphs later

It is interesting to imagine what could have happend to make the car so lean as if the map switch was changed one would think it would revert rich to a stock map and not lean unless some other maps were on the UTEC?

Anyway - graphs to follow
Dyno Flash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 11:09 PM   #24
GhoSTI
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 86488
Join Date: May 2005
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Bronx, NY
Vehicle:
2004 STi
White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyno Flash View Post
Good idea - I will post up some graphs later

It is interesting to imagine what could have happend to make the car so lean as if the map switch was changed one would think it would revert rich to a stock map and not lean unless some other maps were on the UTEC?

Anyway - graphs to follow

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyno Flash View Post

In the past I have been guilty of also taking shots at fellow tuners.

However, I have learned that just worrying about my own work is better for business and a more classy approach.

Al
LOL...
GhoSTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2007, 11:24 PM   #25
Zumble
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 34860
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NY
Vehicle:
2005 Forester CGM

Default

*grabs popcorn*
Zumble 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
cobb vs utec vs ecutek ridexstraight AccessPort 5 11-07-2008 02:54 PM
Advantages of MBC/EBC with vf39/ecutek tune? Blown95ImpalaSS Factory 2.0L Turbo Powertrain 7 06-19-2006 06:20 PM
Ap Vs. Utec Vs. Ecutek njskatchmo Engine Management & Tuning 8 05-04-2006 09:38 AM
Vishnu XEDE vs. ECUTEK vs. UTEC stihopeful Factory 2.5L Turbo Powertrain 15 04-15-2004 04:58 PM
19 psi on stock turbo??? - Tuning Gurus what gives??? meisnerboy Factory 2.0L Turbo Powertrain 56 10-03-2003 07:21 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:37 PM.


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.