Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

PwrFC VS Microtech?

any experiences or opinions, plz post input

which is better , which runs better, is more cost effective versus adding more mods etc.

and for a Daily driver.. wouldnt it be better to actually keep the afm? for fuel consumption reasons, in different temperatures?.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/145451-pwrfc-or-microtech/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Not really the results im lookin for..

I know there is LOADS of info on the PFC on these boards.. Not so much about the Microtech on a skyline though..

what i really want is a comparison. I mean.. the PFC was originally designed with Skylines in mind.. wasnt it?.. could be wrong there.. but also the microtech has good self learning features so ive been told,

so i need a comparison, cause im tryin to work out which route im going..

i mean i can get the PFC, get it tuned at pits or somethin, prob cost me 1600 total.

Or i can get the Micro, from Microtech to suit my rb25det, then fully tuned buy my tuners. for 2k flat.

just wondering.. is it better to spend the extra 400$. and i mean, wat if the PFC is better for the skyline..

so can anyone Compare the 2? and point out your reasons for the results.

  silverbulletR33 said:
Not really the results im lookin for..

there is NO better advice than what MR331307 gave you.

I dont see how it isnt what your looking for.

The ECU is ONLY as good as what the tuner can do with it

Depends whether you want air flow readings or Air pressure, they both have their adv and dis but in reality it is what your tuner would prefer.

The microtech being Manifold Air Pressure sensor (MAP) is hesistant around zero pressure, this is a hard area to tune compared to a Manifold Air Flow (MAF) which can determine quite easy if it is flowing or not.

  R33S2 said:
Depends whether you want air flow readings or Air pressure, they both have their adv and dis but in reality it is what your tuner would prefer.

The microtech being Manifold Air Pressure sensor (MAP) is hesistant around zero pressure, this is a hard area to tune compared to a Manifold Air Flow (MAF) which can determine quite easy if it is flowing or not.

Good point,

Yea tuner good with em, Might go with the FC, but hmmm, hard decision. will have to find a tuner for the FC . its a daily driver, not a race car.

Thanks for your comments guys! :D

Edited by silverbulletR33

I'm using a microtech LT-8. Crappy fuel economy, crappy cold start. Not such a fantastic ECU for a daily driver. Power FC is prolly the way to go as in my opinion microtech is more of a racing ecu. So yea, PFC is probably the go for you, except i have a thing against AFM's (don't know why, i just do).

  ULOOOK said:
www.nengun.com

www.ebay.com

Still plenty around, just have a look.

nengun doesn't have any in stock.. ebay ? you actually looked for an rb25 one? ZERO. The only ones that are around, are the ones that haven't updated their stock levels properly. When you ask 'no sorry, don't have that model anymore, have the others'

"plenty around" my ass...

had a microtech on my s1 33 gtst actually was the first in adelaide to have their 'plug n play' setup. in short it was very poor as a daily driver, mostly cause it did not have enough adjustment for cold start idle up etc. but as alredy stated, fine for a race/weekend only car. oh yeah and definately agree that your tuner is EVERYTHING when dealing in aftermarket ecu. my choice PFC :)

I have tuned quite a few of both, and unless it has 1000hp and the afm is casing a restriction, the pfc has many more features than the microtec, and will return better fuel economy/cold start/drivability with far less tuning. Most dyno shops can tune a pfc, and many have datalogit, if they cant, i wouldnt let them tune my car.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...