ECUTune, for those of you that have/had it - Page 11

GreenMarine · #**151** 03-29-2008, 05:43 PM

Second Run, Stock ECU...

~ Chris

GreenMarine · #**152** 03-29-2008, 05:44 PM

Third Run... Stock ECU...

~ Chris

GreenMarine · #**153** 03-29-2008, 05:45 PM

Forth Run... Stock ECU...

~ Chris

GreenMarine · #**154** 03-29-2008, 05:46 PM

First Run... ECUTune Stage 1.v5

~ Chris

GreenMarine · #**155** 03-29-2008, 05:47 PM

Second Run... ECUTune Stage 1.v5

~ Chris

GreenMarine · #**156** 03-29-2008, 05:48 PM

Third Run... ECUTune Stage 1.v5

~ Chris

GreenMarine · #**157** 03-29-2008, 05:50 PM

Best Stock ECU vs. Best ECUTune Stage 1.v5

(These gains are minimal as they were all done within 15 minutes of swapping the ECUTune Stage 1.v5 chip into the ECU)...

I will say that the car feels more powerful than it did the day that these pulls were done...

~ Chris

GreenMarine · #**158** 03-29-2008, 05:57 PM

The video that I posted (above about 10 posts) is video from the first two Stock ECU runs...

~ Chris

SVXRide · #**159** 03-29-2008, 07:48 PM

Chris,
Well, based on the 1v5 thread, I was almost ready to say the 1v5 was good for 8 whp. Then you had to go and post up all your "stock" ECU pulls here

. From a purely statistical basis, you could make a case that the 1v5 chip did nothing (I'm not saying you should make this case, only that you could

). Guess you'll have to start looking for those "student discount" dyno runs now that the chip has had a while to "learn"

-Bill

Trevor · #**160** 03-30-2008, 01:58 AM

What is more, a logical scientific explanation as to exactly how the computer will/can "learn" given time and as a result is able adjust so as to improve performance is required, rather than hopeful speculation. Hearsay does not constitute viable evidence.

b3lha · #**161** 03-30-2008, 03:30 AM

Did you disconnect the battery at any point before the stock runs to reset the ECU, or was it using learned values for those runs?

svxistentialist · #**162** 03-30-2008, 06:52 AM

I know [well, I hope

] that Bill is only partly serious in saying a case could be made for saying the chip made no difference.

Bill was possibly expecting 8 whp, that difference did not compute on the dyno.

However, I would have to say that the chip did make a difference, and a quite significant one at that. Going by these two max charts here, the chip applied a 5 ft-lbs difference to the torque. This is not small beans, and would tally with Green Marine's seat of the pants observation that the car feels stronger. It would feel stronger, it can pull better.

Also noticeable, at least as I see it, is the fact that this increase in torque was delivered in conjunction with a richer fuel mix.

Personally, I think this is a pretty good result, only a disappointment to those whose God is horsepower.

Joe

SVXRide · #**163** 03-30-2008, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svxistentialist

I know [well, I hope

] that Bill is only partly serious in saying a case could be made for saying the chip made no difference.

Bill was possibly expecting 8 whp, that difference did not compute on the dyno.

However, I would have to say that the chip did make a difference, and a quite significant one at that. Going by these two max charts here, the chip applied a 5 ft-lbs difference to the torque. This is not small beans, and would tally with Green Marine's seat of the pants observation that the car feels stronger. It would feel stronger, it can pull better.

Also noticeable, at least as I see it, is the fact that this increase in torque was delivered in conjunction with a leaner fuel mix.

Personally, I think this is a pretty good result, only a disappointment to those whose God is horsepower.

Joe

Joe,
you're correct

I believe what Chris' plots demonstrate is that LAN has produced a conservative ECU chip that improves overall driveability, yet does not sate the appetites of those who pray to the horsepower God

-Bill

sicksubie · #**164** 03-30-2008, 11:16 AM

It is not necessarily the height of the curve, but rather the area underneath it....

Nomake Wan · #**165** 03-30-2008, 11:43 AM

The torque curve on the 1v5 graphs seems to be a lot smoother than the stock ECU runs, too... which seems to attest to the "power" that one feels after using the chip for a while.

Interesting was that I looked for the "hesitation" I used to feel around 3k RPMs and couldn't seem to find it based on the graphs there. Did your car on the stock ECU ever feel like there was a slight loss of power around 3k? Like, it would delay a little there before revving higher?

Anyway, good to see graphs finally posted. Too bad the whole "re-learn" thing would invalidate the data (different day, weather, dyno conditions, etc etc).