Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

One question to all the Mines haters.

Have you actually had one in your car and has it caused issues?

I understand the theory behind what you are saying, but as soon as you modify the exhaust/boost/cooler/intake then the standard ECU is not longer tuned for your car either.

I've not used a Mines so am not speaking from personal experience but I've seen a ton of people on here poo-pooing them with what seems to be no actual evidence to support the criticism however many people who have run them or do run them are generally always speaking out in support of chipped ECUs like a Mines.

So may I ask those who are so critical of chipped ECUs to actually support their theory with some evidence?

Again, I'm not pro or against them as I've never used one, but it seems people who have on here have had generally good experiences.

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The only mods he has done is an exhaust and upped the boost. The first issue to me is the boost spiking, this to me identifies something else is wrong.

If he drops the boost I cant see why the standard ecu cant cope or even the mines for that matter. Its not like he has considerable modifications. I agree that a tune would help a lot but it doesnt appear to be the issue yet.

I was running 12psi, had an intercooler and exhaust and that was enough to get complete boost cut where the ecu kills the ignition for 2 seconds, I also got the horribly misfiring and complete lack of power over 5.5k due to it running so rich it was misfiring (below 10:1 when it got on the dyno.

The stock ecu can shit itself as soon as you start flowing much more air than standard.

One question to all the Mines haters.

Have you actually had one in your car and has it caused issues?

I understand the theory behind what you are saying, but as soon as you modify the exhaust/boost/cooler/intake then the standard ECU is not longer tuned for your car either.

I've not used a Mines so am not speaking from personal experience but I've seen a ton of people on here poo-pooing them with what seems to be no actual evidence to support the criticism however many people who have run them or do run them are generally always speaking out in support of chipped ECUs like a Mines.

So may I ask those who are so critical of chipped ECUs to actually support their theory with some evidence?

Again, I'm not pro or against them as I've never used one, but it seems people who have on here have had generally good experiences.

I am not a Mines "hater". If you live in Japan and can take your car to Mines and get them to make a chip for your car that would be fine. But buying one off ebay and sticking it in your car is like a lottery. For some people it works better than their stock ecu but for others it may either be worse or else it may be bettr but not optimal. I have had a chipped R32 ecu running my RB25DET (245awkw) but my car was tuned on a dyno and the chip tailor made for my application. People like Toshi make mail order chips for people who list their mods and these will work better than the stock ecu and he has many happy customers, but I would never buy one because i want my tune to be spot on.

Re my post above, yes I had a mines chip in my ec, it was absolute garbage, they had to wind the cas back as it had advanced the ignition so far it would ping on 98 octane fuel with octane additive as well.

Edited by Rolls
Seen many work very well first hand. Never heard of one actually running bad, they are based on a stock car with no more than breathing mods. I personally believe limitations/expectations can be taken as the same as stock, with dyno time to support.

Have although read LOTS of non-user feedback :banana:

EXACTLY, i used two, not a problem at all. Car runs better but try telling that to non-users. Good luck. i made 210kw+ on both and no my engine didnt "BLOWWW UP"

EXACTLY, i used two, not a problem at all. Car runs better but try telling that to non-users. Good luck. i made 210kw+ on both and no my engine didnt "BLOWWW UP"

Mine had the CAS wound all the way back to stop it pinging and ran so rich the wideband sensor was maxed out, I was even getting rich misfires so must have been around 9:1 AFRs.

So there is one example.

Mine had the CAS wound all the way back to stop it pinging and ran so rich the wideband sensor was maxed out, I was even getting rich misfires so must have been around 9:1 AFRs.

So there is one example.

Thats your experience. I used PFC, stock ecu, 2x Mines ECU and about to try NISTUNE.

MINES ECU was excellent, nothing bad about my personal experience with using mines ecu. ran 13.3 with shit tires, car went nice n hard, thrashed it. never missed a beat, even in 38c degree heat when i took it to heathcote.

Running an off the shelf remap is always going to be dicey, just because it works some times does not mean it is a good idea.

Everything is dicey. Tuning, modding up the car. You waking up and getting out of bed if "dicey". IT WORKED IN MY case is what im trying to say, just as well as PFC.

Or I could just pay the $300 to get it tuned and not worry about it :ph34r:

300?

First tune was 950.

My second was 1550 including some other work..

And now my 3rd is 900-1000.

point is?-its never 300, not in my case anyway.

But anyway, we could go all day. i get what your saying, it is less riskier, if you tune your car. What some people dont get is MINES ecu can work, but dont want to even hear about it. In any case, me no care, ill butt out.

As said previously, this guys setup is hardly highly modified it really only has an exhaust and some more boost. Once he drops the boost I don't see why the stock ecu or a mines ecu can't do a reasonable job.

has this seriously been going for 4 pages...

just turn down the boost... youve basically got a standard gtst there.

want more power spend more money, its pretty straight forward I would of thought...

Re my post above, yes I had a mines chip in my ec, it was absolute garbage, they had to wind the cas back as it had advanced the ignition so far it would ping on 98 octane fuel with octane additive as well.

What mods did the car have?

If you read the title of the thread you will see that the focus of the OP is to go faster. To do that he will need a tunable ecu. If he goes to EFI they will sort out his other problems. His own understanding of how things work appears to be limited.

If you read the actual thread he has a lot more basic problems to fix before he worries about modifications for more power.

has this seriously been going for 4 pages...

just turn down the boost... youve basically got a standard gtst there.

want more power spend more money, its pretty straight forward I would of thought...

You are spot on, you cant just turn up the boost and expect power, you need to modify the car, exhaust, cooler, maybe fresh coil pack before even considering turning up the boost BUT, i can assure you that OP problem is not ECU as i used this ecu previously. Its something else, the problem was there even before Mines ecu, and my suggestion is to get good flowing exhaust, good cooler, coil pack and turbo tech manual boost T. And than run 12psi. Thats how i made 208 kw, and you should too providing rest of your car is in good nic. :D
Thats your experience. I used PFC, stock ecu, 2x Mines ECU and about to try NISTUNE.

MINES ECU was excellent, nothing bad about my personal experience with using mines ecu. ran 13.3 with shit tires, car went nice n hard, thrashed it. never missed a beat, even in 38c degree heat when i took it to heathcote.

why on earth did the PFC not work? in 12 years of playing with them not once has there been an issue like yours...... in fact the PFC ignores allot of minor issues the NISTUNE wont, chances are the nistune will be worse than the PFC in your case. The PFC only cares for AFM voltage, tps and CAS the rest it ignores..... the NIstune requires just about every sensor to be in check or it will throw a code and depending on the model may not have a DTC check box to keep it ignored.

If the PFC wont run either the tuner CBF'd or they didnt tune it..... there is an underlying issue with your car that wont be sorted with any management, which can often be a biatch to find. Any good workshop should have no issues though.

If it was me id have the PFC back in it in a heartbeat.... and find the issue.

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



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...