ECUtune Stage 2v6 ethanol, e85, flex fuel, turbo, supercharger, force induction

[NikFu S.]

LAN do you need more 2v6 test people? If so and if you need to know how it feels with a mostly stock car in sub zero weather I can pick one up from you this week.

If not, hey I was gonna spring for it within the next couple months anyways.

[shotgunslade]

There is one interesting phenomenon I have noticed. When I lift of the throttle maybe in 2nd or 3rd gear and the rpm's drop down to maybe 2000 or so, there is a sudden onset of engine braking I can massage the accelerator very slightly and make it come on and go off. As rev's drop, foot off the accelerator, a a point, it feels like I suddenly hit the brakes. Touch the accelerator pedal very slightly, seems like brakes come off, car is still slowing down, rev's dropping, but not nearly so quickly. It's a real on-off thing. Could this be an artifact of my automatic throttle bypass valve being disconnected? Guess I will know nextweek, when I reconnect it.

[longassname]

Oh thanks, I appreciate the sentiment but no I was just looking for feedback when the suggestion that I invest in dyno time was put forward. Development is done. Purchase whenever you are ready.

Thanks

Originally Posted by NikFu S.

LAN do you need more 2v6 test people? If so and if you need to know how it feels with a mostly stock car in sub zero weather I can pick one up from you this week.

If not, hey I was gonna spring for it within the next couple months anyways.

[Earthworm]

Originally Posted by shotgunslade

There is one interesting phenomenon I have noticed. When I lift of the throttle maybe in 2nd or 3rd gear and the rpm's drop down to maybe 2000 or so, there is a sudden onset of engine braking I can massage the accelerator very slightly and make it come on and go off. As rev's drop, foot off the accelerator, a a point, it feels like I suddenly hit the brakes. Touch the accelerator pedal very slightly, seems like brakes come off, car is still slowing down, rev's dropping, but not nearly so quickly. It's a real on-off thing. Could this be an artifact of my automatic throttle bypass valve being disconnected? Guess I will know nextweek, when I reconnect it.

I think that's just an SVX quirk. Mine does this (Stage 1) as well but I believe it's just the difference between "some fuel" and "0 fuel". Playing with the TPS may change how this quirk behaves.

[longassname]

the upgrade price from v5 to v6 isn't that bad. need the link to our website?

Originally Posted by SVXRide

would love to...oh, that's right, I only have the 2v5
-Bill

[SVXelerator]

Originally Posted by longassname

Did you take my post to mean that there are thousands of vanagons running 2v6 rather than very few svx's running it? I'm not exactly sure how very low volume svx sales equates into a justification for me to pour more of my time and money into rapid product development.

I believe the 2v6 software showcases what my tuning skills can produce through interative improvements resulting from months of my own road testing and the feedback provided by end users. If the ability to more acurately measure high flow air intakes up to twice the mass of stock, performance throttle enrichments, performance timing maps, performance fuel maps, improved compatability with manual transmissions, and the ability to run e85 all provided to a market that only purchases in volumes in the double digits isn't exciting I don't know what would do it. I'm always up for new ideas though. You tell me what you want and if enough people want it too to justify my investing my time and money into making it I'll do it.

Mr. Lan,
Sorry if my comments upset you. I was inferring from your earlier comment that there have been many more Vanagons with 2v6 chips than SVXs with 2v6 chips, thus significant net income in your bank account (based on the premise that your profit on 2v6 kits runs somewhere in the neighborhood of $125 to $600/kit, depending on the option purchased - valid only if one takes it as a given that your up front investment has already been covered) that you could invest in further documented improvements in your EG33-based line. By documented, I'll refer to your web site:




As the figure notes, this is a 2v4-based dyno run (not a 2v5 or 2v6), utilizing a dyno running directly off of the wheel hubs (thus eliminating the parasitic loses resulting from a roller-based dyno (DynoJet) -which the majority of SVX dyno runs have utilized - and producing nominally higher calculated crank Hp/Tq figures if one doesn't correct for the loses). What is striking is that there are no AFR curves to go with the Hp and Tq curves. As someone with your tuning skills knows, the relationship between AFR and Hp/Tq is a significant one. What would be truly exciting would be to see a series of dyno plots that demonstrated the relationship between the AFR you had "tuned" in and the resultant Hp/Tq produced (a potentially strong selling point when it comes to upgrading from your Stage 1 to Stage 2 products).

"...interative improvements resulting from months of my own road testing and the feedback provided by end users." Again, as the skilled tuner you are, you recognized the significant difference between a "street tune" and a "dyno tune" (i.e. "butt dyno" versus "quantified data"). For documented improvements, dyno runs are the gold standard and are the only way the EG33 will ever be able to fully realize its full performance potential. Turning you lose on a DynoJet for 2-3 hours with a series of incrementally different chips and posting the results would be exciting.

Thank you so much for everything you've done for the SVX performance community and I look forward to great things in the future.

[longassname]

I wasn't upset. I was confused at how you could possibly take a low volume of svx sales to equate to my having loads of money and I was trying to give you a reality check which obviously didn't sink in.

Your new post though is a little insulting and missguided. You can't equate a roller dyno to giving lower results due to parasitic losses. They give whatever results they are calibrated to give and as a general rule dynapacs give lower #'s than dynojets. While saying what an experienced tuner I am you've insinuated that the "nominally higher" results "if not corrected for the losses" (your so called parasitic dynojet roller losses) aren't impressive. Those aren't calculated #'s either by the way. They are wheel readings taken with the same car on the same dyno in the same session within minutes of each other with only the software/maf meter change in between. That's how you show real gains.

That plot was just taken from during my development of the z32 maf meter software. As for why there is no afr posted in the plot, as stated in the thread where we discussed the development of the z32 maf meter software the pipe the dyno operator has the wideband installed to wouldn't fit in the tailpipe of the test car. None the less I knew exactly what the afr was as I always do since my car has a wideband and that plot wasn't intended to prove anything to you--it was part of my tuning.

Speeking of my tuning......ie butt dyno vs real dyno...your typical wide open throttle dyno plot only captures a very small portion of the operating conditions I tune for. A dyno is a great tool but no it is not the gold standard one and only way to tune. If you leave the street tuning out then you leave out 95% of the tuning. Say it's 75 degrees the day of the dyno tuning what about when it's 100 degrees or 44 degrees? You have to spend months on the street to get that tuned. There are all kinds of things you never see on the dyno. A few hours on the dyno is great but it's no substitute for "months of itterative improvements" made on the street.

So ya I'm sitting here wondering why you would throw in all those slights about the quality of the information I've shared and the way I tune not being the way you think I should along with thanking me for what I've done and saying you look forward to what I will do--what when I start tuning on a dynojet dyno for 3 hours? Would you like to explain to me the rest of how to retune an svx ecu?

I'd love to have more dyno plots but slighting the last one and the methods used to tune since it aren't going to get you new plots any sooner.

Originally Posted by SVXelerator

Mr. Lan,
Sorry if my comments upset you.




As the figure notes, this is a 2v4-based dyno run (not a 2v5 or 2v6), utilizing a dyno running directly off of the wheel hubs (thus eliminating the parasitic loses resulting from a roller-based dyno (DynoJet) -which the majority of SVX dyno runs have utilized - and producing nominally higher calculated crank Hp/Tq figures if one doesn't correct for the loses). What is striking is that there are no AFR curves to go with the Hp and Tq curves. As someone with your tuning skills knows, the relationship between AFR and Hp/Tq is a significant one. What would be truly exciting would be to see a series of dyno plots that demonstrated the relationship between the AFR you had "tuned" in and the resultant Hp/Tq produced (a potentially strong selling point when it comes to upgrading from your Stage 1 to Stage 2 products).

"...interative improvements resulting from months of my own road testing and the feedback provided by end users." Again, as the skilled tuner you are, you recognized the significant difference between a "street tune" and a "dyno tune" (i.e. "butt dyno" versus "quantified data"). For documented improvements, dyno runs are the gold standard and are the only way the EG33 will ever be able to fully realize its full performance potential. Turning you lose on a DynoJet for 2-3 hours with a series of incrementally different chips and posting the results would be exciting.

Thank you so much for everything you've done for the SVX performance community and I look forward to great things in the future.

[TomsSVX]

Originally Posted by longassname

the upgrade price from v5 to v6 isn't that bad. need the link to our website?

Not to pry but wasn't it the deal that he did the baseline 2v5 Dyno runs for you in exchange for the 2v6? Luckily he posted his results for everyone else to see

Tom

[longassname]

No it wasn't.

Originally Posted by TomsSVX

Not to pry but wasn't it the deal that he did the baseline 2v5 Dyno runs for you in exchange for the 2v6? Luckily he posted his results for everyone else to see

Tom

[Phast SVX]

Jesus could anyone be any less appreciative.

2v6 is an incredible product and my SVX is twice the car it was without it. I have plenty of timing up where i need it in all the load levels(not just a wot) I don't understand why you all choose to bite the hand that feeds, you will end up sucking your own thumb.

phil

[SVXRide]

Originally Posted by longassname

the upgrade price from v5 to v6 isn't that bad. need the link to our website?

Yeah, but $125 will buy a lot of SS pipe and TIG supplies
-Bill (holding out for v8 )

[SVXRide]

Originally Posted by TomsSVX

Not to pry but wasn't it the deal that he did the baseline 2v5 Dyno runs for you in exchange for the 2v6? Luckily he posted his results for everyone else to see

Tom

Tom,
Mike changed his mind because he decided to go another direction with his internal R&D. Life happens I've got some other mechanical upgrades I'm working on that I'll be talking with Mike about to make sure they work perfectly with his software
-Bill

[SVXelerator]

Mr. LAN,
Sorry if my translating didn't come out write on paper, I did not mean to insult or insinuate. Let me try to clear things up below....

Originally Posted by longassname

I wasn't upset. I was confused at how you could possibly take a low volume of svx sales to equate to my having loads of money and I was trying to give you a reality check which obviously didn't sink in.

Yes, it did...I am only guilty of not communicating well

Your new post though is a little insulting and missguided. You can't equate a roller dyno to giving lower results due to parasitic losses. They give whatever results they are calibrated to give and as a general rule dynapacs give lower #'s than dynojets. While saying what an experienced tuner I am you've insinuated that the "nominally higher" results "if not corrected for the losses" (your so called parasitic dynojet roller losses) aren't impressive. Those aren't calculated #'s either by the way. They are wheel readings taken with the same car on the same dyno in the same session within minutes of each other with only the software/maf meter change in between. That's how you show real gains.

My mistake again...I was trying to compare different approaches to measurement and the loses inherent to them and then calculating crank Hp/Tq given drivetrain loses. Is it fair to say that using SAE corrected dyno figures in all cases is a good thing?

That plot was just taken from during my development of the z32 maf meter software. As for why there is no afr posted in the plot, as stated in the thread where we discussed the development of the z32 maf meter software the pipe the dyno operator has the wideband installed to wouldn't fit in the tailpipe of the test car. None the less I knew exactly what the afr was as I always do since my car has a wideband and that plot wasn't intended to prove anything to you--it was part of my tuning.

I understand. It would still be a good thing to be able to document what the AFR was across the rpm band at which you tested. I have read that the LM-1 wide band (is this what you use?) has a datalogger feature?

Speeking of my tuning......ie butt dyno vs real dyno...your typical wide open throttle dyno plot only captures a very small portion of the operating conditions I tune for. A dyno is a great tool but no it is not the gold standard one and only way to tune. If you leave the street tuning out then you leave out 95% of the tuning. Say it's 75 degrees the day of the dyno tuning what about when it's 100 degrees or 44 degrees? You have to spend months on the street to get that tuned. There are all kinds of things you never see on the dyno. A few hours on the dyno is great but it's no substitute for "months of itterative improvements" made on the street.

Agreed. Would the conclusion be here that if your car does not see a certain temperature range (less than cold day in Florida) that they might have problems? This is where the user community feedback comes into play?

So ya I'm sitting here wondering why you would throw in all those slights about the quality of the information I've shared and the way I tune not being the way you think I should along with thanking me for what I've done and saying you look forward to what I will do--what when I start tuning on a dynojet dyno for 3 hours? Would you like to explain to me the rest of how to retune an svx ecu?

Sorry again for perceived slights....not intended. I meant only to note that showing dyno results for the various "phases" of Stage 1 and Stage 2 chips would be very beneficial. Your approach has obviously yielded positive results. The results of Mr. MikeCG and Mr. TomsSVX efforts noted in their thread are much anticipated.

I'd love to have more dyno plots but slighting the last one and the methods used to tune since it aren't going to get you new plots any sooner.

Again, my apologies. I will give more thought before typing in the future.

[longassname]

fair enough

[longassname]

I'm still anxious to hear from people running 2v6 with manual transmissions.

I'd also like to hear how many people would like to run 370cc injectors.