Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Tuesday September 16, 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 10-24-2009, 08:10 PM   #76
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
SD alone will not make anymore power vs. MAF. Nothing to debate there.
Nope but your car will be generally smoother all around. And there is a bit more control over fueling with this rom vs the standard maf sensored rom..

-Jerod
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2009, 08:27 PM   #77
SVT_WRX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 164830
Join Date: Nov 2007
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: San Diego
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
G61 III OVE 58e

Default

Ok...smoother feeling drivability and BETTER fuel control, but no extra horses is what you get with SD. Got it.

JSarv, did you get a chance to look at what I sent you?
SVT_WRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2009, 08:34 PM   #78
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
Ok...smoother feeling drivability and BETTER fuel control, but no extra horses is what you get with SD. Got it.

JSarv, did you get a chance to look at what I sent you?
Going through it right now.

Now... If you are running a 3" (or bigger" maf housing) and having problem having a consistent afr in boost (meaning big swings) - there is a good chance you will have a nicer curve - possibly making a BIT more power but only because the control of fueling in boost (and timing since its map based) will be a smoother curve (or can be depending on how you set it up)

this itself might be enough to squeeze a few out - but its not because of SD its because of the small amount of control you gain over things.

I've found idle and throttle response has increased as well as WOT high gear (haha) smoothness... where quite a few cells are used during the pull... I can keep my afrs on point - where as before I'd go way rich, tuning it out meant I was way lean in a lower gear/higher rpm. So it was a major trade-off...

-jerod
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2009, 12:48 AM   #79
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

after tuning a few cars with SD, expecialy mine with this SD setup i have to agree i feel its easier to tune, and i have to ability to adjust stuff that i always want to adjust with MAF based roms but cant. Now the potential for power is the same, but to me just seems easier to get to whether it be a subaru of a trans am. to me no matter what change you make you should always get a retune, which i believe helps fit SD better to my liking. with that being said i can understand why subaru and other motor companys use MAF based its more forgiving to changes, but then again i believe if you can tune or can afford a tuner this is a better route
seanathanq83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2009, 01:13 AM   #80
wrxsti.l
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 156973
Join Date: Aug 2007
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Vehicle:
2002 ADM WRX STi
STi Black/Blue

Default

I think the biggest benefit is the higher resolution of the SD table and compensation tables associated to SD compared to MAF. With MAF you compensation tables are very limited and the tune suffers as a result once IAT, ETC, AP etc change from what they were when tuned.

With SD, you have much more resolution in the SD table alone, and then have the SAD comp tables to sort out everything else.

Saying that, I'm still not convinced SD is better then MAF under CL conditions, as AF learning and corrections swing much more compared to a stable MAF tune in CL. Once in OL though, SD seems to be much smoother and more responsive then MAF in OL.

Leslie
wrxsti.l is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2009, 01:20 AM   #81
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 wrxsti.l View Post
I think the biggest benefit is the higher resolution of the SD table and compensation tables associated to SD compared to MAF. With MAF you compensation tables are very limited and the tune suffers as a result once IAT, ETC, AP etc change from what they were when tuned.

With SD, you have much more resolution in the SD table alone, and then have the SAD comp tables to sort out everything else.

Saying that, I'm still not convinced SD is better then MAF under CL conditions, as AF learning and corrections swing much more compared to a stable MAF tune in CL. Once in OL though, SD seems to be much smoother and more responsive then MAF in OL.

Leslie
A CL IAT comp table would fix this. It seems like IAT compensations are directed toward OL - but again you have to remember where this rom comes from. It was probably designed to be in CL for warmup (if the engine was lucky) and that is about it.

I don't have a reasonable answer how to fix closed loop swings, but I know on my last drive my short term trims (I have long term trims turned off currently) were no more than +/- 12% vs a guaranteed +/-25% with my big maf...

-Jerod
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2009, 09:12 AM   #82
wrxsti.l
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 156973
Join Date: Aug 2007
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Vehicle:
2002 ADM WRX STi
STi Black/Blue

Default

With my 83mm MAF, I was within +- <2%. With SD it swings +- ~15% depending on throttle use - however I still have a little more tinkering to do to the SD table to improve CL a bit more. If I can manage +- <5% I'll be happy with that.

One thing I have noticed though, is that logged RPM is around 200rpm lower then my tacho now! Strange.

Leslie
wrxsti.l is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2009, 09:30 AM   #83
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 wrxsti.l View Post
With my 83mm MAF, I was within +- <2%. With SD it swings +- ~15% depending on throttle use - however I still have a little more tinkering to do to the SD table to improve CL a bit more. If I can manage +- <5% I'll be happy with that.

One thing I have noticed though, is that logged RPM is around 200rpm lower then my tacho now! Strange.

Leslie
My rpms were always low up top - meaning I was @ 5800 but my tach read 6k.

Mine reads no differently then before...

-Jerod
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2009, 06:06 PM   #84
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

i have the same thing, and have been checking up on it, its said to be a built in safety feature that subaru puts in
seanathanq83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 08:59 AM   #85
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 wrxsti.l View Post
I think the biggest benefit is the higher resolution of the SD table and compensation tables associated to SD compared to MAF. With MAF you compensation tables are very limited and the tune suffers as a result once IAT, ETC, AP etc change from what they were when tuned.
if your tune suffers once temperature and barometric pressure changes, then your tune was ****ty to begin with.

keep in mind that subaru give us a car with a ROM so well sorted that it runs with excellent stability from <-40*f to >120*f ambient temps, 0 to 100% relative humidity, below sea level to over a mile high, with 4 fat guys and a keg in the car or just one driver that weighs 100lbs.

people have no idea how complicated and difficult it is to tune these things on the street. you CANNOT isolate the variables as FHI does when they map ecus on an engine dyno, so you have to collect MOUNDS of data and make very small iterative changes. it takes a VERY long time.
ride5000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 09:33 AM   #86
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

Resolution is benifitial you cannot deny that
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 12:37 PM   #87
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
Resolution is benifitial you cannot deny that
resolution on what?

a ve map? a timing map?

people misuse their map axes all the time. you can have a very well-running, well-tuned map with a TINY 3-d matrix.

the primary timing and fuel surfaces need not be complicated. in fact, if you presented a complicated, high frequency surface i'd tell you either a) there's something wrong with the car, or b) your map isn't finished.

you show me a 3-d map with a lot of cells and i see a bunch of unnecessary manual interpolation across regions that never get used anyway. the benefit is dubious at best.
ride5000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 01:03 PM   #88
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

Ken you make it sound like our engines are linear. What do you do when you have a jump in ve between tunable cells? Live with a lean dip?
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 01:48 PM   #89
MRF582
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 48219
Join Date: Nov 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Vehicle:
. Always drive
the race line .

Default

The ECU does interpolate you know. The only time you need another cell is if the VE increased then dropped again along the same load column... Which happens at peak torque. So you rescale your map to have more resolution in that area while you use a linear change in other areas. So for a given load your rpm axis might look like this:
1000
1500
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
3600
3800
4000
5000
6000
8000

If you can't understand this then I suggest you hang up your USB cable...
MRF582 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 03:26 PM   #90
ride5000
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 32792
Join Date: Feb 2003
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: lincoln, ri
Vehicle:
2003 GGA MBP
12.9 / 105+

Default

shek's got it. i'm not surprised at that.
ride5000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 05:47 PM   #91
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
The ECU does interpolate you know. The only time you need another cell is if the VE increased then dropped again along the same load column... Which happens at peak torque. So you rescale your map to have more resolution in that area while you use a linear change in other areas. So for a given load your rpm axis might look like this:
1000
1500
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
3600
3800
4000
5000
6000
8000

If you can't understand this then I suggest you hang up your USB cable...
Are you talking to me?
Seriously, is your engines VE linear from 6500 to 8000 rpms? DOUBT it, even at the same boost.
Have you ever tried running a small turbo @ high boost? There are too many factors to allow a linear VE track over such wide ranges. Hence more resolution. Even though YOU only see x amount of cells during the log, there are MANY more being hit as our ecu's are much faster than logging makes us believe.

I have a rich dip from 5500-5700 rpms - it follows my .25psi of boost taper for that amount of time - changing either my 5500 row or my 6000 row or either column involved in this area effects prior and after this little event. More resolution (SD vs. Maf) let me remove this rich dip.

If you think resolution is for cheaters or those who lack skills, you best go talking to stand alone manufacturers and tell them to stop adding resolution as its pointless. Go talk to worthwhile tuners who HATE the stock ecu because of its lack of resolution.

The stock tune is not great by no means, don't get me wrong you can drive up high or down low (elevation) and have a similarly performing car - but the tune itself was made for such a wide range of situations, it lacks any sort of real solidity.

It just bothers me you only need 4 cells to tune a fuel map, when motec gives you a few hundred for the same situation.. If it wasn't usefull, why do they do it?????
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 06:29 PM   #92
MRF582
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 48219
Join Date: Nov 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Vehicle:
. Always drive
the race line .

Default

Well, I wasn't talking to you but rather speaking generally to whoever might be reading this thread.

But, I guess I'll talk to you now. Uh, when did I (or whoever is on board with my school of thought) ever say you only need 4 cells to tune a fuel map on SD? Dude, I have tuned SD on UTEC before. My SD fuel map looked very linear over a couple of RPM ranges. I needed to add a bit of fuel near peak torque and remove some at near redline. This add/subtract is relative to the other linear ranges of the RPM band. The majority of my fuel map looked linear. The engine's AFR would fluctuate maybe .1 to .2 after I was done... That's good enough for me and well within the limitations of the electrical system itself...

Please understand that the RPM axis scaling I listed doesn't apply to ALL engines It was merely an example to illustrate my point.

Also, please refrain from putting words in people's mouths... Noone said resolution is for cheaters or unskilled people. I'm saying the amount of resolution we have to work with is enough. Obviously, you disagree. I guess your experiences are different than mine. I'll accept that. I just think we can get a bit creative with scaling the RPM axis to suit our needs. You seriously think you've optimized the resources you've been allocated? Play with it some more. How high are you revving anyway? What's the revlimit set to for a Group N car? Because if the resolution is good enough for a race vehicle that abuses the living daylights out of its turbo...

Anyway, it seems you've taken my comments as a bit of a personal attack. In which case, I apologize for your inability to read comprehensively

Just kidding. Good luck.
MRF582 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2009, 06:52 PM   #93
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
Well, I wasn't talking to you but rather speaking generally to whoever might be reading this thread.

But, I guess I'll talk to you now. Uh, when did I (or whoever is on board with my school of thought) ever say you only need 4 cells to tune a fuel map on SD? Dude, I have tuned SD on UTEC before. My SD fuel map looked very linear over a couple of RPM ranges. I needed to add a bit of fuel near peak torque and remove some at near redline. This add/subtract is relative to the other linear ranges of the RPM band. The majority of my fuel map looked linear. The engine's AFR would fluctuate maybe .1 to .2 after I was done... That's good enough for me and well within the limitations of the electrical system itself...

Please understand that the RPM axis scaling I listed doesn't apply to ALL engines It was merely an example to illustrate my point.

Also, please refrain from putting words in people's mouths... Noone said resolution is for cheaters or unskilled people. I'm saying the amount of resolution we have to work with is enough. Obviously, you disagree. I guess your experiences are different than mine. I'll accept that. I just think we can get a bit creative with scaling the RPM axis to suit our needs. You seriously think you've optimized the resources you've been allocated? Play with it some more. How high are you revving anyway? What's the revlimit set to for a Group N car? Because if the resolution is good enough for a race vehicle that abuses the living daylights out of its turbo...

Anyway, it seems you've taken my comments as a bit of a personal attack. In which case, I apologize for your inability to read comprehensively

Just kidding. Good luck.
I did take it kind of personally

I misread Ken's post - (I'll blame it on the Blackberry)

Anyway, if your running your turbo in a constant efficiency range - I could see a pretty linear fueling curve/timing curve needed.. I'm not, by no means, so resolution becomes necessary. I'm also a freak about my tolerances/variances in a tune. I hate having more than .2-1 afr from cold to hot/humid to not... I hate having more than .1 afr swing in boost from my desired afr.

Group-N is very limited in what can be "done" - I guarantee you wouldn't see a WRC car running less than a Motec...

I guess it just boils down to me being able to control every little aspect of things, and resolution is my out on this one.. I know its not "necessary" but its sure nice to have a car that feels the same day in and day out.. and has a smooth curve with NO chops in it (maf sensor..... in my case) I wish the stock box was capable of 1000whp I would have never removed it, but unfortunately its not and running the boost I do (especially with my nasty spool-compressor surge) caused some issues with the maf that became untunable - it was as good as I could possibly get it. My 4000+ datalogs helped a bit.

And yes I failed reading comprehension..



-Jerod
JSarv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2009, 09:32 AM   #94
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
Seriously, is your engines VE linear from 6500 to 8000 rpms? DOUBT it, even at the same boost.
yes, actually it is remarkably linear from 6500 to 8000 rpms.

perhaps we have a disagreement on definition of terms.

when i say linear, i do not mean "unchanging." i mean progressing in a proportional and predictable manner, with an unchanging slope and no inflection points to that slope.

anything in that area of the map CAN be defined by 4 corner cells, without question.

Quote:
Have you ever tried running a small turbo @ high boost? There are too many factors to allow a linear VE track over such wide ranges.
small turbo, big turbo--what's the difference, really?

you're going to see kinks in the maps at certain places:

1) when the wastegate opens
2) around the area of peak torque where NA VE is highest.
3) as the turbo runs WAY out of efficiency and compressor outlet temps and egbp go through the roof.
4) some other non-linearity pops up--ie, imperfectly regulated fuel rail pressure, sudden introduction of ADI, etc.

that's about it. all of the map surface outside these areas is going to be "uneventful." as in, able to be sufficiently mapped with VERY FEW data points.

Quote:
Hence more resolution. Even though YOU only see x amount of cells during the log, there are MANY more being hit as our ecu's are much faster than logging makes us believe.
hold on a minute here. if you're saying the ecu makes decisions much faster than the logs show, i agree.

if you're saying that areas of the map that are not referenced via their axis values are used, then obviously i disagree. do you hit peak load at 1k rpm? EVER? how many cells are really useless, and NEVER referenced? quite a few, actually.

furthermore, IF a particular cell (say high rpm, low load) is only used for a millisecond as the operating point rapidly transits the surface (ie, throttle off during shift), how do you think YOU are going to TUNE it?

the reality is, you don't tune it--you take sensical values from the cells around it, and you interpolate the middle ground.

and that is EXACTLY what the ecus do very, very well. so in actuality, you never needed to define that cell and pin it down to a hard value in the first place.

Quote:
I have a rich dip from 5500-5700 rpms - it follows my .25psi of boost taper for that amount of time - changing either my 5500 row or my 6000 row or either column involved in this area effects prior and after this little event. More resolution (SD vs. Maf) let me remove this rich dip.
as i hinted at, and shek explicitly mentioned, the same effect COULD have been achieved by rescaling your axis values, and concentrating MORE cells in the "kinky" operating points. you don't necessarily need more cells, you need more cells in a particular area.

the utec is very inferior in this respect, because it does not allow you to non-linearly scale the load axis, and the rpm axis is fixed. compared to that, the oem ecu is tremendously more flexible... and most people never realize it or take advantage of it.

Quote:
If you think resolution is for cheaters or those who lack skills, you best go talking to stand alone manufacturers and tell them to stop adding resolution as its pointless.
no, part of the "point" of resolution is to play a numbers game. people believe that more cells means more power. people in this very thread have said as much. i am trying to dispel that myth, or at least give it context. you need as many cells as you need to get the job done, and that number is smaller than most people think.

Quote:
Go talk to worthwhile tuners who HATE the stock ecu because of its lack of resolution.
like who, really? i'll bet i don't think they're worthwhile. a poor craftsman blames his tools.

Quote:
The stock tune is not great by no means, don't get me wrong you can drive up high or down low (elevation) and have a similarly performing car - but the tune itself was made for such a wide range of situations, it lacks any sort of real solidity.
what do you mean, "solidity?" if you mean repeatability, you can tune out run to run variations very quickly and easily--lock down the timing map, run in open loop 100% of the time, clamp LTFT to zero. part of the reason why the oem ecu is so flexible is because of these "automatic" compensations, but they don't HAVE to be in place. us utec users have known that for a very, very long time, since that's the one thing it does so well.

Quote:
It just bothers me you only need 4 cells to tune a fuel map, when motec gives you a few hundred for the same situation.. If it wasn't usefull, why do they do it?????
they do it for the same reason ridiculous 25 tool swiss army knives sell.

they do it for the same reason digital cameras pack more and more pixels in with every new model.

the do it for the same reason microsoft includes a bunch of features with every product that NOBODY will use.

they do it to sell ecus to people who think more is better!

Last edited by ride5000; 10-27-2009 at 09:38 AM.
ride5000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2009, 11:36 AM   #95
Clark Turner
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 178047
Join Date: Apr 2008
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: AZ
Vehicle:
02 WRX STI Spec C
Black

Default

I just converted my Car to SD using this file. Thanks J, I made another 40whp with it over MAF. Pretty smooth and nice running Rom!


Clark
Clark Turner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2009, 12:13 PM   #96
bcheck555
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 174930
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Virginia Beach VA
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark Turner View Post
I just converted my Car to SD using this file. Thanks J, I made another 40whp with it over MAF. Pretty smooth and nice running Rom!


Clark
How much power did the car make prior? Any dyno graphs? Thanks.
bcheck555 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2009, 12:18 PM   #97
Clark Turner
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 178047
Join Date: Apr 2008
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: AZ
Vehicle:
02 WRX STI Spec C
Black

Default

760 before 800 now

Clark
Clark Turner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2009, 12:51 PM   #98
ride5000
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 32792
Join Date: Feb 2003
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: lincoln, ri
Vehicle:
2003 GGA MBP
12.9 / 105+

Default

clark, to what do you attribute the increased power? were any other mods done simultaneously, or JUST a rom swap and retune?
ride5000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2009, 01:04 PM   #99
Clark Turner
NASIOC Vendor
 
Member#: 178047
Join Date: Apr 2008
Chapter/Region: SWIC
Location: AZ
Vehicle:
02 WRX STI Spec C
Black

Default

Loaded the file, Tuned it out. No changes. The file seems to run a Different amount of dwell. I would have to put my Oscope on it to find out. But I suspect this is part of the gain. The timing ended up being a different level even when making more power. It also seems I have more control over the Spray of the injectors.

All in all, Its just smoother and that results in more power as knock never showed up. This subaru MAF system is so Fast and course. Its really not smooth in action at all. The closed loop on the later Subaru roms is just horrible. Way to fast.

Sometimes a simple ecu just works better. Anyone thats spent alot of time tuning hondas, like I have has probably realized that.

Clark
Clark Turner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2009, 01:18 PM   #100
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 Clark Turner View Post
Loaded the file, Tuned it out. No changes. The file seems to run a Different amount of dwell. I would have to put my Oscope on it to find out. But I suspect this is part of the gain. The timing ended up being a different level even when making more power. It also seems I have more control over the Spray of the injectors.

All in all, Its just smoother and that results in more power as knock never showed up. This subaru MAF system is so Fast and course. Its really not smooth in action at all. The closed loop on the later Subaru roms is just horrible. Way to fast.

Sometimes a simple ecu just works better. Anyone thats spent alot of time tuning hondas, like I have has probably realized that.

Clark
If you can verify it has more dwell and post it here that would be helpful to everyone. I prefer tuning the older subaru ECU myself, it's simpler and easier.
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 02:07 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.