Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys, as title suggests, I got my aftermarket ECU tuned today. WOW is all i can say, the difference in torque and power is unbelievable.

From lookin at the Graph, ive gained 20rwkws + in mid range over a number of spots, and a total of about 10rwkws in max power. This is all done using same boost level of 13psi.

On the road, the car is breaking traction in 2nd which it didnt used to do. Acceleration feels great and the seat of the pants feeling is definately more.

The car has been tuned to an excellent AFR of 12:1 and they put in about 10deg more base timing. The dyno was run in non-shootout mode, so i would assume that if it were shootout mode, the figure would be in the 200's :).

So rounding things up, the car is alot more driveable, there is power increase everywhere and the power curve is alot more smoother which is nice.

I still have to get my ebc workin so that i can hold 1bar of boost. ATM the bleeder is getting to 15psi, then droppin to 13psi. I also have an adjustable cam gear exh side gettin here soon aswell as finishin installin my CAI and partition.

Current mods are Trust front pipe, 3inch exhaust, HKS pod, GTR intercooler, unichip, and bleeder set to 13psi. Also I have heatwrapped all piping under bonnet, and daim, those temperatures are now kept down. It wasnt even hot after a huge burn thru the hills :)

So in summary, I think the Unichip is very underrated. It was perfect for my needs, and I am very happy with it. :headspin:

R31Nismoid: I bought the Unichip of ebay for $550. Tuning was $250.

Basically it was an absolute bargin. And SAFC II which would have cost more has not nearly as many functions, as Unichip can do somethin like 400 ign/fuel points.

Strutto: Im running a stock turbo, well it says nissan on the cover. By Front pipe, i mean after the stock dump, the pipe after that that connects to the cat.

Congrats Dean, nice result. Did they say why were the runs done in 2nd gear? It wont effect the peak power figure anyways, and is still good for comparison as the first run was done in the same gear. $250 for a full tune is a good price too, wish power fc was that cheap:p

Installing an Adjustable Ex Cam Gear is gonna easily crack the 200rwkw mark before you get it retuned. Im no expert but are your AFR's still all over the place alittle ? (I honestly have nfi with AFR's).

Have you got pineapples in the rear ?

Also if its the stock turbo how long do you plan on running 15psi thru it for ? :wassup:

Steve: Id definately say dyno runs wer done in 3rd. Have a closer look at speeds.

Benm: The AFRs are really good. Looks like a consistent 12:1 which is optimal for a Turbo charged engine. Im actually running 13psi atm, but wanna run 15psi. I dont gun it much anyway. I still gotta do some more investigating into it thou. Also i have Tien HAs, no pineapples, but asky bushy2k, i have no trouble launchin hard ;)

Bushy2k: Bring it on bro, I still got some more things to put on, so the car will be quicker. It does feel alot quicker. Heaps more torque.

I was always very impressed by my Unichip (when I had it) It's only when the stock ECU reaches its limitations does the Unichip become an issue. At the time (3yrs ago) no Unichip agent (including APS) could confirm for me that the Unichip/stock ECU combo could work via a Z32 AFM? At ~225rwkw the Unichip could no longer prevent massive timing reduction via the stock ECU sensing a seriously maxed out AFM voltage! It was for this reason (& a few others) that I removed my Unichip & went for a fully programmable ECU.

Dean you may find your car doesn't display the same characteristics as mine did (I also had a much larger turbo & cam gear adjustment at the time) but as airflow gets higher, via improved breathing, your AFM will reach the same point mine did. Your stock ECU will be the deciding factor. Mine pulled 15' timing out 3x in one power run. This resulted in a peak of ~225rwkw with a number of 15-30rwkw dips, & a pig of a car to drive ;) Think, 'good ol' R33 flatspot,' & then you'll know what I mean.

If someone has successfully got a Z32 AFM to work with the stock ECU (don't see why not) then you'll have no problems :D

EDIT: Just had a good look at the dyno sheet mate. Firstly, congrats on the power. Second, your before & after power curves are the same as mine were! :D I asked Turbo Tune at the time (only real option for tuning Unichip in SA - unless you head to Port Augusta) if they could do a Z32-stock ECU set-up, they weren't sure but would give it a go! I didn't bother. Ask TT why they couldn't completely get the rid of the small dips in your power curve? I'll be interested to see the answer.

Nice result.

Just a couple question though.

1. Why was the run done in 3rd and not 4th?

2. Why wasn't the run done in Shootout mode?

3. One of the dips in your power curve should be the NVCS, what is the other due to?

Cheers

Paul

Paul, when I had my car dyno'd, they told me they had to do it in 3rd or they'd hit the speed limiter. Also, isn't shootout mode really just there for comparisons? If you're just after a tuned car then why would they put it in that mode? I know I personally would like it tuned in shootout mode so I could compare, but some tuners just don't care about that, they just care about the before/after.

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

    • 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...