ECUTune, for those of you that have/had it

[JLHollowX13]

im thinking about getting the stage 1 chip. i just want to know what it does. is it worth the money? are there any fallbacks to getting it? how much does it improve everything? will it still work if your ecu is throwing a code (mines throwing one for the speedo) or will it be over ridden? what kind of results wil i get performance wise? im not sure what else there would be to know, i just want some personal input from people that have had it. im on a tight budget and i could use that money to get some other things my car needs. i know the chip lets you run 87 octane and it changes the air to fuel ratio, but how much does that actually improve it? (the change in air to fuel ratio using higher octane as i probably would still stick with the higher grade stuff) i want some changes that i can feel and ill get a good amount of performance for the money. any info people can give me or opinions would be great help, im only asking about the stage 1 because the others seem like more than i need, i just dont see how they would benefit me because im not doing any heavy mods, just want a little more performance the easiest ways. thanks!

[It's Just Eric]

honestly, for what your looking to do, mikes stage 1 chip will probably be best, though I havent had one personally to give you an idea of the proformance upgrades by feel...so I couldnt tell you if its worth the money. I wouldnt consider the stage 1 to be an instant power booster, but rather a thing to compliment other small modifications to get a little more out of them. Once again, id ask other members about what to expect

Really, the downfall to the ecutune products is when your going for big changes. Many specific high proformance buildups need specific software, and though mikes stage 2 chips may provide the fuel and whatnot to make it run, there is more to be had with a more accurate tune.

[Nomake Wan]

For a stock car, the Stage 1 really does give you more power, especially up top. It also seemed to eliminate a bit of hesitation I was getting around 3k RPMs. I actually installed the chip well after performing the Power Mode mod, and definitely noticed the difference.

Dunno if it'll help you with bragging rights on a dyno, but it sure made me feel better about my car. ;)

[huck369]

I've been waiting untill someone post a before and after dyno chart of a car with one equiped.....but it doesn't seem it's ever going to happen..:confused:

[Trevor]

I've been waiting untill someone post a before and after dyno chart of a car with one equiped.....but it doesn't seem it's ever going to happen..:confused:

Placebo is a guy with many faces and does not often come out into the open.

[RSVX]

I've been waiting untill someone post a before and after dyno chart of a car with one equiped.....but it doesn't seem it's ever going to happen..:confused:

I thought there was one on LANs site?

[TomsSVX]

I have driven cars with stage 1 and stage 2. I have owned stage 2 and the stage 3. I have had nothing but high hopes for each of these things, only to be crushed by their shortcomings. There are certain things that chip can do, but a stage one is nothing more than a sugar pill. But hey, its just an opinion right?

Tom

[JLHollowX13]

thanks for all the input! i guess ill just have to get my hands on a car that has one installed and see what i think. thats just alot of money for me to throw around when i dont know the results for myself, i could put alot of things on my car for that much.

[Nomake Wan]

I have driven cars with stage 1 and stage 2. I have owned stage 2 and the stage 3. I have had nothing but high hopes for each of these things, only to be crushed by their shortcomings. There are certain things that chip can do, but a stage one is nothing more than a sugar pill. But hey, its just an opinion right?

Tom

I would think that my dad, who is way more into cars than I am, wouldn't believe it's a sugar pill. He drove the car part of the way across country (power mode mod), and then later came back to California for a bit and I let him drive the car without telling him I'd put the Stage 1 in. He noticed the difference.

But that's not hardcore numbers, so no one's inclined to believe it. :rolleyes: Guess I'll just have to find a way to secure dyno time. Oh, and an OEM ROM, since I cut J1.

[TomsSVX]

problem is, an OE rom is probably going to give you better results than the Stage 1. Not to mention it would not be a good comparison between a stock ECU and the stage 1. To be honest, you will never see a good comparison. Because if there is no difference, it will be claimed that the "learning" feature wasn't up to par. So, I expect, like all others, that there will never be an conclusive Dyno evidence of any of the chip's abilities

Tom

[SVXRide]

I honestly hope to have definitive 2v7 dyno results within the next month or two...
-Bill

[b3lha]

Why are there so many negative comments about LAN's upgrades nowdays? Not long ago people were raving about them. LAN is the only tuner who has shown any interest in the SVX. Without his work, there would be nothing at all.

On a separate note: I predict that over the course of the next 6-12 months, other people will be producing their own stage 1 equivalent, or at least having a go at tuning their own cars. We (the SVX community) know how to read the ECU data. We know how the location of the fuel and timing maps, we know how to make the memory adapters. All this stuff is now documented. What we need is a few engine gurus to start tweaking the maps and sharing info about what works and what doesn't.

[TomsSVX]

It comes across as negativity, but lets be real. The chips have been out for years now. Revisions have been made to have 5 different versions. Each supposedly better than the next. On what basis? as no definitive dyno information has been provided for any of them. Having driven cars with every combination of "chips" be it different ECUtune products and different stock ROMS there is minimal difference that cannot be detected by a butt dyno. So my question is, why does everyone say it works wonders??

Bill, even your car... Unless you can go back to stock, then switch it back to the stage 2 ALL WHILE on the dyno, there is no comparison to made which you can gauge accurately. Thats why I said no accurate decree of performance increases can be made about these chips, due to the scapegoat of the "learning" period. You should know as well as I do that different days on the dyno will make different numbers. Especially when you are looking for increases within 10 wheel HP and 10ft. lbs of torque. Reason behind this is atmospheric conditions can change the graphs susbstantially, so if you have a high pressure system one day and a low pressure the next time you are out, your dyno charts will reflect this... Unless everything has a 'control' there is no way you can stake claims.

Tom

[AFBeefcake]

For what is worth if I had to do it all over again I would buy the stage 1 chip again.

[huck369]

Why are there so many negative comments about LAN's upgrades nowdays? Not long ago people were raving about them. LAN is the only tuner who has shown any interest in the SVX. Without his work, there would be nothing at all.

On a separate note: I predict that over the course of the next 6-12 months, other people will be producing their own stage 1 equivalent, or at least having a go at tuning their own cars. We (the SVX community) know how to read the ECU data. We know how the location of the fuel and timing maps, we know how to make the memory adapters. All this stuff is now documented. What we need is a few engine gurus to start tweaking the maps and sharing info about what works and what doesn't.


I wasn't trying to be negative, I was just saying that I have been waiting to see some proof of the HP increase, before my tight little fingers will let go of my hard earned $$$ (Huck is one of the cheapest SOB's on here):D

[Hocrest]

....will it still work if your ecu is throwing a code (mines throwing one for the speedo) ....

I'm not sure if it's you, but I seem to remember your name asking in a few threads about performance upgrades to get around a non working speed sensor???

If so, unfortunately, no. That second speed sensor is going to be very important to the performance of your car. There is really no way around it. Spending money on other modifications is foolish until you can get your SVX running properly in the first place.

[GreenMarine]

I wasn't trying to be negative, I was just saying that I have been waiting to see some proof of the HP increase, before my tight little fingers will let go of my hard earned $$$ (Huck is one of the cheapest SOB's on here):D

If my Stage 1 (that I already ordered) arrives today then I'll try to get on the Dyno at the Wilmington Dyno meet this weekend. If it doesn't come today then I might just keep it around and wait till I find a Dyno in the area... I want to do atleast one "stock" (as my car is now) pull and then one or two after I swap the Stage 1 in... I'm a big believer in hard evidence and hope to get some on here that will reflect the claims that I've heard from everyone... One way or another, I am not going to install the Stage 1 till I can secure some Dyno time and do a "before and after" run... I will post the results for all to see when I get them... If we need to add a control to that then I might wait a few weeks till there is a similar day (weather wise) and go jump on the dyno again and see if the system gained anymore power after having a few weeks to learn what it's doing...

~ Chris

[GreenMarine]

I'm not sure if it's you, but I seem to remember your name asking in a few threads about performance upgrades to get around a non working speed sensor???

If so, unfortunately, no. That second speed sensor is going to be very important to the performance of your car. There is really no way around it. Spending money on other modifications is foolish until you can get your SVX running properly in the first place.

100% agreed!!!

~ Chris

[lhopp77]

Why are there so many negative comments about LAN's upgrades nowdays? Not long ago people were raving about them. LAN is the only tuner who has shown any interest in the SVX. Without his work, there would be nothing at all.

It seems I am seeing a negativity campaign like the one that resulted in another contributing member being banned. :mad: It just hasn't escalated to the real person attack levels--yet. :rolleyes:

Lee

[GreenMarine]

It seems I am seeing a negativity campaign like the one that resulted in another contributing member being banned. :mad: It just hasn't escalated to the real person attack levels--yet. :rolleyes:

Lee

Common, you've been here as long as I have... You know that's how business is conducted around these parts ;)

~ Chris

[RSVX]

Common, you've been here as long as I have... You know that's how business is conducted around these parts ;)

~ Chris

But you disappear for months on end...:lol:

[kwren]

But you disappear for months on end...:lol:

Some people just have another life... The SVX one and a real life.:) Not for me personally, but I could see that. I have put everything in my "one life" thingie.

Keith

[GreenMarine]

But you disappear for months on end...:lol:

Haha, true true...

Back on topic though: My stage 1 came in the mail this afternoon. So I'm going to take it to Wilmington with me tomorrow and see if I can swap it out while on the dyno so I can get a run for youguys...

~ Chris

[JLHollowX13]

cant wait to see the info. thats probably going to be the best, unopinionated info we are gonna get.

[SomethingElse]

I installed v1.4 in my car. noticed a positive difference...Let my wife drive it she noticed it too, so then she got one...ill be getting v1.5 so "precious" doesnt stall out all of the time when I push the clutch in.

[svxistentialist]

But you disappear for months on end...:lol:

I think Chris is actually James Bond, but he will not be able to admit to it!

Haha, true true...

Back on topic though: My stage 1 came in the mail this afternoon. So I'm going to take it to Wilmington with me tomorrow and see if I can swap it out while on the dyno so I can get a run for youguys...

~ Chris

Thanks Chris. That would be good.

I'm not one of the sceptics, but I would like to see real comparatives. I also think the supercharger chip was never going to work without intercooling because of excessive in-cylinder temperatures. So I would like to see Sicksubie's system show some numbers.

Joe

[GreenMarine]

Alright, did my Dyno runs today... 6 total... 3 in "stock" form and 3 with the ECUTune upgrade...

The guys at the performance shop said that they'd email me the dyno slips, so I'm just waiting on those before I can post them up...

I do remember my numbers after the ECUtune switch though. Not even 5 minutes after installing the chip we did the first pull and the AFR's stayed smack in between 12.4 and 12.7 all the way up to 7,000rpm... Torque was immediate and as flat as Nebraska (ever been there, is it flat?)... The numbers were:

Wheel Torque: 191
Wheel HP: 183

Considering that a stock WRX will dyno out at about 165whp, I am quite impressed with the results. Was really hoping to get into the 200's though... I guess I'm going to have to clean out the air filter :D... I forgot to mention that I haven't cleaned it in nearly a year :rolleyes: So that might have had a negative effect... Either way, The "stock pulls were around,

~180 Wheel Torque and 175 Wheel HP... I have since driven it about 30 miles (I'm still in Wilmington) and everytime I get on it it seems to drive better. The performance is definitely noticable. It isn't a big slap in the face upgrade, but it is a nice return for your $228 spent... I'll post up more in the ECUtune Stage 1 thread when I get the emails from the performance shop...

~ Chris

[Trevor]

In practical terms, this shows a gain based on wheel measurement:
6.1% in torque and 4.57% in power.

[Suby Fan]

i went from wanting a stage 1 to reading this thread, and not wanting one and then reading the numbers and now i will be buying one...

[svxistentialist]

They look healthy. Thank you for sharing. It will still be nice to see the measured "before" figures versus the measured "after".

Just for comparison.

:D

[RSVX]

I'll post up more in the ECUtune Stage 1 thread when I get the emails from the performance shop...

~ Chris

Just go ahead and post them here to, so we dont need to go hunting...

[Nomake Wan]

Indeed. This does make me really happy, though. Good to know I wasn't hallucinating the power. :D

[GreenMarine]

i went from wanting a stage 1 to reading this thread, and not wanting one and then reading the numbers and now i will be buying one...

The posts were right, it's worth the $ :)

They look healthy. Thank you for sharing. It will still be nice to see the measured "before" figures versus the measured "after".

Just for comparison.

:D

I just got back to Raleigh and still no email from the shop... I'll be calling them on Monday and having them email the 6 pulls to me while I am on the phone. I'll post them up as soon as I get them.

Just go ahead and post them here to, so we dont need to go hunting...

Rodger that :)

Indeed. This does make me really happy, though. Good to know I wasn't hallucinating the power. :D

Nope, the power is definitely there. There isn't a massive gain but there's enough to tell that something is different. I am only speaking for the last ~12 hours that it's been on my car. Apparently it is suppose to get better as the days pass and the ECU learns how to work with it's new "buddy"... For me, the most noticable thing is the smoothness. My car used to do all kinds of hesitations at low RPM hard acceleration. Now there is absolutly nothing. The torque is available right from about 2,000 and stays super flat all the way to about 6,000rpm before it starts to fall off... My runs (after the chip was installed) only went to 7,000 rpm. I told the operator not to take it to fuel cut because I had reservations about running an engine with 133k miles on it well into the "RED" on the tach, essentially where it's never been before, and it'll never go... There is so much low and midrange power now I can short shift it all day and be totally happy...

I just thought of something... NEVER had I taken my engine to the stock fuel cut, and today I did it 3 times!!! :eek:

~ Chris

[immortal_suby]

It will be very interesting to see the stock vs. chip AFR. I'm glad to see that you got a noticeable improvement from the chip.

[JLHollowX13]

well im excited to see the results. are you going to run another test in a few weeks and see if the results are any different after the ECU has had time to "learn"? im really interested in seeing if over time there is a better gain and it would be cool to know how long it takes to peak supposing it does get better with time. although that would probably require going to the dyno more than a few times to get periodic readings. it seems i may be forking over the $ to get one of these. ill just have to wait and get the necessities done to her first. if the results seem that good then it seems like it might be worth it. ill just have to see what they look like and if you do end up doing a test after the "learn" period it would be interesting to see those too.

[GreenMarine]

well im excited to see the results. are you going to run another test in a few weeks and see if the results are any different after the ECU has had time to "learn"? im really interested in seeing if over time there is a better gain and it would be cool to know how long it takes to peak supposing it does get better with time. although that would probably require going to the dyno more than a few times to get periodic readings. it seems i may be forking over the $ to get one of these. ill just have to wait and get the necessities done to her first. if the results seem that good then it seems like it might be worth it. ill just have to see what they look like and if you do end up doing a test after the "learn" period it would be interesting to see those too.

I don't have the $125 required to go to the Dyno every weekend... From here it is just going to be a guess on how much better it gets... The main thing I wanted to learn from going to the Dyno is if there was a recordable performance increase. There was, so my work is done. Yes I am curious as to what it will peak out at... I really want to break 200 wheel TQ personally, but I'm a college student and don't have the money to keep testing...

~ Chris

[JLHollowX13]

i definitely understand that! im sure someone will come along one of these days with the info though, just a matter of time.

[GreenMarine]

i definitely understand that! im sure someone will come along one of these days with the info though, just a matter of time.

I'll get on the Dyno again sometime soon... Possibly this spring... By then the ECU should definitely be operating at it's full potential...

~ Chris

[longassname]

I'm glad to see someone has dyno'd their car and is sharing their results. Clear proof like this helps new comer's know who they should put their faith in and who they shouldn't trust. Whether claims of sugar pills and placebo are disingenuous or the result of the unfortunate combination of incompetence and arrogance I think it has proved important that the community give newcomers feedback like this which plainly exposes those who seek to missguide them.

:)

[TomsSVX]

If someone wants opinions, why not expect the good with the bad... If you are insinuating that 8whp and 11ft lbs of torque are going to be obviously noticeable, well there is nothing more to say about that.

Tom

[longassname]

:):):):):):):)



If someone wants opinions, why not expect the good with the bad... If you are insinuating that 8whp and 11ft lbs of torque are going to be obviously noticeable, well there is nothing more to say about that.

Tom

[huck369]

Did the dyno runs ever get posted....?
I didn't see them....

[GreenMarine]

Yeah, sorry bout that... I'm still trying to get the guys to email them up here... They say they've sent them a number of times already, but I haven't seen them... Worst case is that I'll be back down there the weekend of the 30th and I'll just bring a flash drive or a CD and burn them to it and bring them back with me...

~ Chris

[SomethingElse]

hehuh politics ......:lol:

[Trevor]

Yeah, sorry bout that... I'm still trying to get the guys to email them up here... They say they've sent them a number of times already, but I haven't seen them... Worst case is that I'll be back down there the weekend of the 30th and I'll just bring a flash drive or a CD and burn them to it and bring them back with me...

~ Chris

I am sorry to have to say this but, this directly illustrates the lack of reliability I have always expressed relative to "dyno" measurements. In this instance, particularly in respect of the sincerity and ability of operators. ;)

[GreenMarine]

I am sorry to have to say this but, this directly illustrates the lack of reliability I have always expressed relative to "dyno" measurements. In this instance, particularly in respect of the sincerity and ability of operators. ;)

heh... Yeah... It's a great shop, and they get TONS of business... The day I was there they put 27 cars on the dyno that day... But I hope they can get them to me soon... I want to show youguys!! :D:D

~ Chris

[immortal_suby]

Chris, can you give them a different email address to try - like a hotmail or gmail?
I'd volunteer mine if you don't have another one to use. We want those plots!

[GreenMarine]

Chris, can you give them a different email address to try - like a hotmail or gmail?
I'd volunteer mine if you don't have another one to use. We want those plots!

I WANT THEM TOO!!! I've given them my gmail and my ncsu email accounts... If both of them aren't working then they are sending them to the wrong accounts somehow... Or the plots are so big that the accounts are kicking them back... There are 7 plots at anywhere from 2 - 3mb each... If they are trying to send them all in the same email then that could be a problem... Going to email the manager and tell them to send one at a time...

~ Chris

[GreenMarine]

Alright guys, because of unknown email issues I finally lost my patience and just told them to burn the graphs to a CD and send it to me... Should be early next week, maybe this weekend :)... Again, I'm sorry to keep youguys in suspense for so long :(

~ Chris

[RSVX]

Alright guys, because of unknown email issues I finally lost my patience and just told them to burn the graphs to a CD and send it to me... Should be early next week, maybe this weekend :)... Again, I'm sorry to keep youguys in suspense for so long :(

~ Chris

You sir, are fired.

[GreenMarine]

Here's a teaser... I don't remember which run this is because the shop sent it as a "test email"... I think this is the first one right after doing the ecutune swap... not sure though...

http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z23/GreenMarineSVX/SVXChipSwap.jpg

~ Chris

[Nomake Wan]

I hope that's your first baseline run, because assuming 25% drivetrain loss, 184 WHP translates to 230 BHP...which is a stock SVX rating. :o

[huck369]

an AWD car has more like 30% loss

[NeedForSpeed]

It seems that most power estimates figure 25% loss for 5mt and 30% loss for 4EAT, if I remember correctly.

an AWD car has more like 30% loss

[GreenMarine]

I hope that's your first baseline run, because assuming 25% drivetrain loss, 184 WHP translates to 230 BHP...which is a stock SVX rating. :o

And if you read in my earlier posts... A WRX will normally dyno on one of those things at about 165whp... So what are you going to trust? An assumption of a percent loss through the driveline? Or a real life comparison? The real life comparison being that a Stock WRX is faster than a stock SVX. If (with the same tranny's mind you) the WRX cranks out 165whp and is rated from the factory at 227 crank hp, and my run shows 184whp, you do the math... All I know is that I am alot faster than a stock WRX and feels a hell of a lot better to drive now... So I guess that kinda shoots the "percent loss" theory out the window...

~ Chris

[SVXRide]

And if you read in my earlier posts... A WRX will normally dyno on one of those things at about 165whp... So what are you going to trust? An assumption of a percent loss through the driveline? Or a real life comparison? The real life comparison being that a Stock WRX is faster than a stock SVX. If (with the same tranny's mind you) the WRX cranks out 165whp and is rated from the factory at 227 crank hp, and my run shows 184whp, you do the math... All I know is that I am alot faster than a stock WRX and feels a hell of a lot better to drive now... So I guess that kinda shoots the "percent loss" theory out the window...

~ Chris

27% drivetrain loss is pretty close to 30%;) (227 - 165)

Taking this as a "given", then it looks like Chris' car has ~252 hp at the crank. Kinda makes you believe that 275-300 NA Hp at the crank isn't unrealistic:cool:

-Bill

[NeedForSpeed]

Chris, Bill, do these numbers sound reasonable?

Stock 4EAT SVX, 30% loss: 70% of 230 equals 161 stock hp
Stock 5MT SVX, 27% loss: 73% of 230 equals 168 5mt hp
Stock 5MT with stebro dyno baseline: 175 hp
S1V5 5MT with stebro dyno result: 183 hp

So, 5mt adds 7 hp to the wheels, Stebro adds 7 hp, and S1V5 programming adds another 8hp. Solid gains totalling a significant 22hp

Sound reasonable?

27% drivetrain loss is pretty close to 30%;) (227 - 165)

Taking this as a "given", then it looks like Chris' car has ~252 hp at the crank. Kinda makes you believe that 275-300 NA Hp at the crank isn't unrealistic:cool:

-Bill

[GreenMarine]

27% drivetrain loss is pretty close to 30%;) (227 - 165)

Taking this as a "given", then it looks like Chris' car has ~252 hp at the crank. Kinda makes you believe that 275-300 NA Hp at the crank isn't unrealistic:cool:

-Bill

I could believe that... I mean it feels about like 250hp. And considering I've been Autocrossing WRXs and STi's for the last 5 years, I can tell the difference... On the 300hp note, I have some VERY VERY interesting information to release... Now I'm not sure who's going to believe me but the point is that I believe the source and when you think about it, it'll start to make sense...

I went over to SOuthern States Subaru just about an hour ago to get my new Strut Top Hats. While there picking them up I ran into the Head Service Tech, a guy named Quincy. He has worked for Subaru longer than most college students have been alive (but not me cause I'm old :( ) and he actually owns an SVX. We got talking about my suspension noise (he thinks that it is my endlinks bill, waiting to hear about yours) and that eventually turned into talk about the ECUTune Stage 1 that I just did...

That's when he sprung the suprise of the century on me when he said, "You know the origional prototype SVX had 309hp right?"...

WHAT?!?!

He said that he was there when they brought the prototype over to the states for testing in the north and after testing it they decided to "detune it" because american drivers would hurt themselves and try to sue... I thought this was a little stupid, but when you think about it it kinda makes sense... Subaru didn't put a 5 MT in the SVX because they didn't have a manual that could handle the power reliably. Now the 5 MT in the WRX is essentially the same gearbox that they had back then. But it's limit of power and torque are rumored to be right around 300hp. Hmmm, that causes an eyebrow to raise alittle... Then when you think that we DON'T get the Spec. C over here. And all the other engines that are detuned, it starts to make alittle sense... Quincy said that he remembers the parts that they swapped out to take the EG33 from 309hp to 230hp... They swapped the O2 sensors, the fuel injectors and remapped the ECU... I asked him how hard would it be to get the engine up to it's original 309hp figure? He said, get some good wide band O2 sensors, get some larger injectors and have the ECU reprogramed...

So if someone is good with ECU programming, we are essentially sitting on an engine with great potential. Maybe that's one reason why the engine is just so damn bullet proof today. It's only producing about 2/3 the power that it was originally designed to produce...

Anyone else buy into this?? Like I said, I believe quincy because he's worked for Subaru forever, he owns an SVX and he was there when the prototype SVX came to the states...

Learn something new every day huh :D

Chris, Bill, do these numbers sound reasonable?

Stock 4EAT SVX, 30% loss: 70% of 230 equals 161 stock hp
Stock 5MT SVX, 27% loss: 73% of 230 equals 168 5mt hp
Stock 5MT with stebro dyno baseline: 175 hp
S1V5 5MT with stebro dyno result: 183 hp

So, 5mt adds 7 hp to the wheels, Stebro adds 7 hp, and S1V5 programming adds another 8hp. Solid gains totalling a significant 22hp

Sound reasonable?

Those numbers look pretty accurate. Good job on having the patience to sit down and plug some numbers! I got so sick of that when I was in Engineering here at NC State :(... I'd say that's about as close as we are going to get while "guessing"... But it looks like a good guess :)

~ Chris

[Dessertrunner]

I beleive he is correct, when we flow tested the heads off a SVX on a test bench they were coming up with high flow number simlar to a lot of expensives high performance cars. If they had of released it with that much power there was no Auto transmission around that could of stood the power at the time.
Tony

[Suby Fan]

27% drivetrain loss is pretty close to 30%;) (227 - 165)

Taking this as a "given", then it looks like Chris' car has ~252 hp at the crank. Kinda makes you believe that 275-300 NA Hp at the crank isn't unrealistic:cool:

-Bill

pissst... check the mod mainia fourms i believe there is some one running a 300 hp eg33 it just runs like **** at idle he is on the NASIOC fourms

[AFBeefcake]

I thought the MAF maxes out at 250 HP. So wouldn't that need to be changed aswell if the car was to have 300 HP

[GreenMarine]

I thought the MAF maxes out at 250 HP. So wouldn't that need to be changed aswell if the car was to have 300 HP

If it does max out at 250 then I would be running into some problems too wouldn't I?? I mean since I am apparently am knocking on 250's door;):D:D

But yeah, Chances are that alot of the little bolt ons were changed... Just think of how much different the car would have been if it had come out with a 309hp H-6 instead of the 230hp that we got stuck with... Man, that is something to have good dreams about :D

~ Chris

[STeeL25T]

That's pretty much all Stage whatever-v7 is, isn't it? Bigger injectors, maf, and reflash? That should be a simple enough rumor to debunk, is no one has that stage I will eventually.

[Nomake Wan]

Anyone else buy into this?? Like I said, I believe quincy because he's worked for Subaru forever, he owns an SVX and he was there when the prototype SVX came to the states...
I would believe it. Except that the Japanese SVX and UK SVXs make the same power we do and so that kinda shoots the whole "stupid american driver" bit right out the window.

But it's pretty much been proven by RallyBob that the stock motor is detuned like crazy and just needs a new ECU and injectors to nail a lot better power figures. :)

[immortal_suby]

I'd love to believe it but I am running 2v7 which is bigger injectors, a capable maf, and ecutune software that is giving the correct fuel mix along with a custom exhaust system and I am sure I am no where near 300 hp. I believe it has smoothed out the power delivery and given a decent increase in top power but there is no way it added 70hp.

[Nomake Wan]

I'd love to believe it but I am running 2v7 which is bigger injectors, a capable maf, and ecutune software that is giving the correct fuel mix along with a custom exhaust system and I am sure I am no where near 300 hp. I believe it has smoothed out the power delivery and given a decent increase in top power but there is no way it added 70hp.

Well... all I can say is, look at the 'Bolt-on' engine that RallyBob designed. All it was was intake, exhaust, injectors and ECU. And it made 275 HP. :o

[GreenMarine]

Well... all I can say is, look at the 'Bolt-on' engine that RallyBob designed. All it was was intake, exhaust, injectors and ECU. And it made 275 HP. :o

RallyBob is my new best friend :D:D

~ Chris

[SVXRide]

RallyBob is my new best friend :D:D

~ Chris

Chris,
Just be careful, it wasn't all that easy;) RallyBob's engine had WebCam custom high lift cams, gutted EG33 lifters (converted to solid with shims), and plenty of Bob's custom headwork on the I and E ports.:cool:
-Bill

[AFBeefcake]

Some one should do a before and after dyno of 2v7.
Ether way I would like to get it.

Question for people who have 1v5.
Does your car run rich?
My exhaust tips are black and when I take off with some one behind me they get a cloud of gas, but my fuel to air gauge stays in the green. I wounder if I should clean my MAF and/or get new O2 senors.

[GreenMarine]

Some one should do a before and after dyno of 2v7.
Ether way I would like to get it.

Question for people who have 1v5.
Does your car run rich?
My exhaust tips are black and when I take off with some one behind me they get a cloud of gas, but my fuel to air gauge stays in the green. I wounder if I should clean my MAF and/or get new O2 senors.

I don't have an A/F gauge, but I wouldn't doubt that I run alittle rich... Not that it bothers me terribly. Since last week when i installed it, it has been getting more and more powerful! Drove it last night and almost couldn't resist running it up to about 5500 rpm every time I accelerated :D Feels so good now compaired to stock :D

~ Chris

[SVXRide]

Hi, my name is Chris and my SVX gets 8 mpg:lol::lol:
-Bill

[AFBeefcake]

Hi, my name is Chris and my SVX gets 8 mpg:lol::lol:
-Bill

lol.
I get about 19 MPG and I drive like that too.:D

[GreenMarine]

Hi, my name is Chris and my SVX gets 8 mpg:lol::lol:
-Bill

Haha... I still haven't been through the tank that I filled up in Wilmington, so I'm not sure how bad the fuel mileage will be... I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it drops a bit though :(

~ Chirs

[Speedklix]

I've been waiting untill someone post a before and after dyno chart of a car with one equiped.....but it doesn't seem it's ever going to happen..:confused:

i'd be happy to do a dyno session after i change out my trashed 5 speed... If someone pays for it... or gives me discount on my next ECUtune purchase ;)

I WAS too busy before to go waste time at a dyno with a car I don't have the means to tune... but now that I work a 9-5 ..or whatever I want.... with weekends :D

I am curious to see what it is putting down.

[longassname]

3.316 liters = 202.4 inches³


HP * 793,000
BMEP = -------------- PSI
RPM * CID

230 * 793,000
BMEP = -------------- PSI = 161 psi
5600 * 202.4


309 * 793,000
BMEP = -------------- PSI = 216 psi <--has never been accomplished
5600 * 202.4

309 * 793,000
BMEP = -------------- PSI = 183 psi <--a reasonable #
6600 * 202.4


If the prototype made 309hp at 5600 rpms it would have made the news and been the talk of the industry. No manufacturer has ever gotten a mep of 216psi though honda did come close with a jdm s2000 at 8500 rpms where thermal efficiencies are higher. While ther is no way it made 309hp at 5600 rpms, if the prototype had different cams it could make 309 crank horse power at a higher rpm. There is a plot of volumetric efficiency in the overview of the induction control system in section 2.7 page 8 of the factory service manual which does not match the production SVX. It indicates a peak volumetric efficiency of 97% at 5200 rpms which would indicate a torque peak at 5200 rpms. If we presumed that plot of ve matches the prototype svx then we could project it having a peak power of 309 hp at 6600 rpms. This would mean the prototype had different cams. I would be inclined to believe that.

[GreenMarine]

3.316 liters = 202.4 inches³


HP * 793,000
BMEP = -------------- PSI
RPM * CID

230 * 793,000
BMEP = -------------- PSI = 161 psi
5600 * 202.4


309 * 793,000
BMEP = -------------- PSI = 216 psi <--has never been accomplished
5600 * 202.4

309 * 793,000
BMEP = -------------- PSI = 183 psi <--a reasonable #
6600 * 202.4


If the prototype made 309hp at 5600 rpms it would have made the news and been the talk of the industry. No manufacturer has ever gotten a mep of 216psi though honda did come close with a jdm s2000 at 8500 rpms where thermal efficiencies are higher. While ther is no way it made 309hp at 5600 rpms, if the prototype had different cams it could make 309 crank horse power at a higher rpm. There is a plot of volumetric efficiency in the overview of the induction control system in section 2.7 page 8 of the factory service manual which does not match the production SVX. It indicates a peak volumetric efficiency of 97% at 5200 rpms which would indicate a torque peak at 5200 rpms. If we presumed that plot of ve matches the prototype svx then we could project it having a peak power of 309 hp at 6600 rpms. This would mean the prototype had different cams. I would be inclined to believe that.

Oooo, Longass I think you missed your calling... I haven't heard talk like that since the last time I was on the Engineering side of campus... Hahaha... You're right though. I forgot to mention that the cams were different too :rolleyes:... Great explanation though! I know lots of people won't understand it, so they'll just have to trust ya, but I understand it just fine... Man, I can't wait to squeeze more power outta my engine... More power will come after it is rebuilt though... For now, the Stage 1 provides all the torque I need...

Thanks again Longass for the Stage 1... It's made driving around town, changing gears and running wide open alot more smoother, torquier, and I'll be damned if my car doesn't sound different... I know it likes to do it's rumbly "backfire" even more now :D:D That always turns heads...

~ Chris

[SVXRide]

pissst... check the mod mainia fourms i believe there is some one running a 300 hp eg33 it just runs like **** at idle he is on the NASIOC fourms

John,
You're talking about RallyBob's car, which is putting out 275 hp at the wheels (roughly 340 at the crank since he's running a 5 spd). My comment was relative to 300 at the crank (~200ish at the wheels).;)
-Bill

[SVXRide]

I could believe that... I mean it feels about like 250hp. And considering I've been Autocrossing WRXs and STi's for the last 5 years, I can tell the difference... On the 300hp note, I have some VERY VERY interesting information to release... Now I'm not sure who's going to believe me but the point is that I believe the source and when you think about it, it'll start to make sense...

I went over to SOuthern States Subaru just about an hour ago to get my new Strut Top Hats. While there picking them up I ran into the Head Service Tech, a guy named Quincy. He has worked for Subaru longer than most college students have been alive (but not me cause I'm old :( ) and he actually owns an SVX. We got talking about my suspension noise (he thinks that it is my endlinks bill, waiting to hear about yours) and that eventually turned into talk about the ECUTune Stage 1 that I just did...

That's when he sprung the suprise of the century on me when he said, "You know the origional prototype SVX had 309hp right?"...

WHAT?!?!

He said that he was there when they brought the prototype over to the states for testing in the north and after testing it they decided to "detune it" because american drivers would hurt themselves and try to sue... I thought this was a little stupid, but when you think about it it kinda makes sense... Subaru didn't put a 5 MT in the SVX because they didn't have a manual that could handle the power reliably. Now the 5 MT in the WRX is essentially the same gearbox that they had back then. But it's limit of power and torque are rumored to be right around 300hp. Hmmm, that causes an eyebrow to raise alittle... Then when you think that we DON'T get the Spec. C over here. And all the other engines that are detuned, it starts to make alittle sense... Quincy said that he remembers the parts that they swapped out to take the EG33 from 309hp to 230hp... They swapped the O2 sensors, the fuel injectors and remapped the ECU... I asked him how hard would it be to get the engine up to it's original 309hp figure? He said, get some good wide band O2 sensors, get some larger injectors and have the ECU reprogramed...

So if someone is good with ECU programming, we are essentially sitting on an engine with great potential. Maybe that's one reason why the engine is just so damn bullet proof today. It's only producing about 2/3 the power that it was originally designed to produce...

Anyone else buy into this?? Like I said, I believe quincy because he's worked for Subaru forever, he owns an SVX and he was there when the prototype SVX came to the states...

Learn something new every day huh :D



Those numbers look pretty accurate. Good job on having the patience to sit down and plug some numbers! I got so sick of that when I was in Engineering here at NC State :(... I'd say that's about as close as we are going to get while "guessing"... But it looks like a good guess :)

~ Chris

Chris,
Check my Photo Album (new version of the Lockers) for a pic of the heavy duty, adjustable front sway bar end link. Please ignore the attachment tab on the strut housing (that's what happens when you "go large" on the front bar without adding a full weld bead on the tab:eek:).
-Bill

[GreenMarine]

Where are the new lockers Bill?? Ever since the old ones disapeared I haven't been bothered to try and figure out where the new ones are...

~ Chris

[SVXRide]

Where are the new lockers Bill?? Ever since the old ones disapeared I haven't been bothered to try and figure out where the new ones are...

~ Chris

Chris,
Go up to the upper right hand corner of the network page and click on "Photo Post"
-Bill

[GreenMarine]

Bill... you've got email...

~ Chris

[Nomake Wan]

Chris,
Just be careful, it wasn't all that easy;) RallyBob's engine had WebCam custom high lift cams, gutted EG33 lifters (converted to solid with shims), and plenty of Bob's custom headwork on the I and E ports.:cool:
-Bill

That was the Phase I engine that made something like 375 BHP. I'm talking about the one that was just intake, exhaust, injectors and an ECU that made 275 HP. ;)

[SVXRide]

That was the Phase I engine that made something like 375 BHP. I'm talking about the one that was just intake, exhaust, injectors and an ECU that made 275 HP. ;)

Ah, the first version that had the standalone, custom exhaust headers, custom intake, and 6 MSD coils:cool: 212Hp at the wheels = approx 265 - 250 Hp at the crank (running a 5 spd and assuming 15-20% loss through the drivetrain...290 if we assume 27%). The latest version:

The EG33 powered RS 2.5 finally got dynoed and tuned today. I just got off the phone with the car owner Jack, and the numbers were very nice IMO. I'll try to get him to print out a dyno plot to post here, but for the moment this is what we have.

285 w/hp @ 6200-6500 rpms (flat line) (Dynapack) (up 65 whp)
248 w/torque @ 5500 rpms (up 33 wheel ft lbs)

The nice thing is the hp and torque curves below these rpms are virtually unchanged from before. In other words it did not lose 'down low' in order to gain 'up high'. Although peak power occurred between 6200-6500 rpms, there was less than a 10 hp variation from 6000-7600 rpms. It was run up to 8000 rpms during dyno pulls. Previously the power fell off after 5700 rpms (old power peak with stock cams).

So a quick recap:

*Stock EG33 shortblock with 140,000+ miles on it.
*Heads have .5 mm oversized valves, and a bit of bowl porting and blending.
*Conversion from hydraulic buckets to solid buckets.
*Web cams, stock cores welded/reground. .444" intake lift/.460" exhaust lift/
244* @ .050" duration, stock lobe separation angle.
*Heads milled 1 mm for compression.
*Custom cold air box.
*Custom headers, 1.75" primaries 31-31" long, into 2.5" collectors, both
banks merged into 3" main exhaust, one racing muffler.
*Autronic ECU

is putting out 356 - 335 Hp at the crank (again with 15-20% loss....390 with 27%):cool:
-Bill

[NeedForSpeed]

If a 5mt SVX makes 168 whp with a rating of 230, or 73%, then a whp of 212 is equivalent to an engine rating of 290. That 212 whp was at 5700, the engine was still running stock cams.


Ah, the first version that had the standalone, custom exhaust headers, custom intake, and 6 MSD coils:cool: 212Hp at the wheels = approx 265 - 250 Hp at the crank (running a 5 spd). The latest version:

The EG33 powered RS 2.5 finally got dynoed and tuned today. I just got off the phone with the car owner Jack, and the numbers were very nice IMO. I'll try to get him to print out a dyno plot to post here, but for the moment this is what we have.

285 w/hp @ 6200-6500 rpms (flat line) (Dynapack) (up 65 whp)
248 w/torque @ 5500 rpms (up 33 wheel ft lbs)

The nice thing is the hp and torque curves below these rpms are virtually unchanged from before. In other words it did not lose 'down low' in order to gain 'up high'. Although peak power occurred between 6200-6500 rpms, there was less than a 10 hp variation from 6000-7600 rpms. It was run up to 8000 rpms during dyno pulls. Previously the power fell off after 5700 rpms (old power peak with stock cams).

So a quick recap:

*Stock EG33 shortblock with 140,000+ miles on it.
*Heads have .5 mm oversized valves, and a bit of bowl porting and blending.
*Conversion from hydraulic buckets to solid buckets.
*Web cams, stock cores welded/reground. .444" intake lift/.460" exhaust lift/
244* @ .050" duration, stock lobe separation angle.
*Heads milled 1 mm for compression.
*Custom cold air box.
*Custom headers, 1.75" primaries 31-31" long, into 2.5" collectors, both
banks merged into 3" main exhaust, one racing muffler.
*Autronic ECU

is putting out 356 - 335 Hp at the crank:cool:
-Bill

[SVXRide]

If a 5mt SVX makes 168 whp with a rating of 230, or 73%, then a whp of 212 is equivalent to an engine rating of 290. That 212 whp was at 5700, the engine was still running stock cams.

Ron,
Yeah, I fell back on my old "15-20% loss for a 5spd" figure instead of 27%:o
-Bill
p.s. I went back and edited my earlier post

[b3lha]

On the 300hp note, I have some VERY VERY interesting information to release... Now I'm not sure who's going to believe me but the point is that I believe the source and when you think about it, it'll start to make sense...

I went over to SOuthern States Subaru just about an hour ago to get my new Strut Top Hats. While there picking them up I ran into the Head Service Tech, a guy named Quincy. He has worked for Subaru longer than most college students have been alive (but not me cause I'm old :( ) and he actually owns an SVX. We got talking about my suspension noise (he thinks that it is my endlinks bill, waiting to hear about yours) and that eventually turned into talk about the ECUTune Stage 1 that I just did...

That's when he sprung the suprise of the century on me when he said, "You know the origional prototype SVX had 309hp right?"...

WHAT?!?!

He said that he was there when they brought the prototype over to the states for testing in the north and after testing it they decided to "detune it" because american drivers would hurt themselves and try to sue... I thought this was a little stupid, but when you think about it it kinda makes sense... Subaru didn't put a 5 MT in the SVX because they didn't have a manual that could handle the power reliably. Now the 5 MT in the WRX is essentially the same gearbox that they had back then. But it's limit of power and torque are rumored to be right around 300hp. Hmmm, that causes an eyebrow to raise alittle... Then when you think that we DON'T get the Spec. C over here. And all the other engines that are detuned, it starts to make alittle sense... Quincy said that he remembers the parts that they swapped out to take the EG33 from 309hp to 230hp... They swapped the O2 sensors, the fuel injectors and remapped the ECU... I asked him how hard would it be to get the engine up to it's original 309hp figure? He said, get some good wide band O2 sensors, get some larger injectors and have the ECU reprogramed...

So if someone is good with ECU programming, we are essentially sitting on an engine with great potential. Maybe that's one reason why the engine is just so damn bullet proof today. It's only producing about 2/3 the power that it was originally designed to produce...

Anyone else buy into this?? Like I said, I believe quincy because he's worked for Subaru forever, he owns an SVX and he was there when the prototype SVX came to the states...

Learn something new every day huh :D


Here is a article and photo of the prototype being tested in the USA:
http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/showpost.php?p=192142&postcount=6

[SVXRide]

"butch rear spoiler":rolleyes::lol:
-Bill

[NeedForSpeed]

Thanks Phil! Do you know what paper that was found in? I wish that grill would have made production. Oops, don't want to hijack this great thread with a grill statement, but the article itself seems to give the idea that the test car was not over 300 hp.

Here is a article and photo of the prototype being tested in the USA:
http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/showpost.php?p=192142&postcount=6

[GreenMarine]

Ah, the first version that had the standalone, custom exhaust headers, custom intake, and 6 MSD coils:cool: 212Hp at the wheels = approx 265 - 250 Hp at the crank (running a 5 spd and assuming 15-20% loss through the drivetrain...290 if we assume 27%). The latest version:

The EG33 powered RS 2.5 finally got dynoed and tuned today. I just got off the phone with the car owner Jack, and the numbers were very nice IMO. I'll try to get him to print out a dyno plot to post here, but for the moment this is what we have.

285 w/hp @ 6200-6500 rpms (flat line) (Dynapack) (up 65 whp)
248 w/torque @ 5500 rpms (up 33 wheel ft lbs)

The nice thing is the hp and torque curves below these rpms are virtually unchanged from before. In other words it did not lose 'down low' in order to gain 'up high'. Although peak power occurred between 6200-6500 rpms, there was less than a 10 hp variation from 6000-7600 rpms. It was run up to 8000 rpms during dyno pulls. Previously the power fell off after 5700 rpms (old power peak with stock cams).

So a quick recap:

*Stock EG33 shortblock with 140,000+ miles on it.
*Heads have .5 mm oversized valves, and a bit of bowl porting and blending.
*Conversion from hydraulic buckets to solid buckets.
*Web cams, stock cores welded/reground. .444" intake lift/.460" exhaust lift/
244* @ .050" duration, stock lobe separation angle.
*Heads milled 1 mm for compression.
*Custom cold air box.
*Custom headers, 1.75" primaries 31-31" long, into 2.5" collectors, both
banks merged into 3" main exhaust, one racing muffler.
*Autronic ECU

is putting out 356 - 335 Hp at the crank (again with 15-20% loss....390 with 27%):cool:
-Bill

I need to find someone to build my engine like this. Or atleast source all the parts for me so I can do the build after I graduate!! That is exactly the sort of power I want... Nothing more...

8,000rpm!!! On the stock block!!! So stock rods, stock pistons?? I am rather suprised... I think when I build mine I'll definitely be building the bottom end. But it makes me feel better now, hearing that atleast the bottom end can take that kinda abuse :D


Here is a article and photo of the prototype being tested in the USA:
http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/showpost.php?p=192142&postcount=6

Oh man, Roumors confirmed... It says right there that "atleast 300bhp in European specification, performance will be startling"... I'm gonna have to go talk to quincy nest time I'm at southern states... He was actually there for the testing!! :)

~ Chris

[NeedForSpeed]

If Chris is at 183 with 5MT, Stebro and programming, and RallyBob at 212 whp with 5MT and major changes from stock, both with stock cams.

Any guess as to how much the header/race exhaust contributes to the power, coils, different intake box, standalone, etc. Where is that power coming from, still at 5700 rpms?


Chris, Bill, do these numbers sound reasonable?

Stock 4EAT SVX, 30% loss: 70% of 230 equals 161 stock hp
Stock 5MT SVX, 27% loss: 73% of 230 equals 168 5mt hp
Stock 5MT with stebro dyno baseline: 175 hp
S1V5 5MT with stebro dyno result: 183 hp

So, 5mt adds 7 hp to the wheels, Stebro adds 7 hp, and S1V5 programming adds another 8hp. Solid gains totalling a significant 22hp

Sound reasonable?

[b3lha]

Thanks Phil! Do you know what paper that was found in? I wish that grill would have made production. Oops, don't want to hijack this great thread with a grill statement, but the article itself seems to give the idea that the test car was not over 300 hp.

It's a weekly UK Motoring Magazine called "Autocar", the 21st Feb 1990 issue. Also in that issue is an interview with Masaru Katsurada, one of Subaru's chief engineers. He says "...for profitability and fulfilling market demand, we must offer some kind of high-performance SVX engine, but I still think 300bhp is too much.":mad::stupid:

You could probably build something like that grille from a 96 grille, a Subaru emblem and some fibreglass. But that's a topic for a different thread.

[SVXRide]

If Chris is at 183 with 5MT, Stebro and programming, and RallyBob at 212 whp with 5MT and major changes from stock, both with stock cams.

Any guess as to how much the header/race exhaust contributes to the power, coils, different intake box, standalone, etc. Where is that power coming from, still at 5700 rpms?

Ron,
Give me a month and we'll see what the dyno says about certain other mods:cool:
-Bill

[Nomake Wan]

Judging by Tom's comments in the ECU thread, I am assuming that the power is coming from the stock ECU pulling timing a lot more than it should be. If the engine computer actually allowed it to run normal timing all the time, it would put out a good deal more power, right? :confused: That, at least for me, explains why 'minor' mods coupled with a standalone ECU resulted in such a massive HP gain.

[NeedForSpeed]

I read it again, and the article could imply that markets other than Japan could have more than 300hp, and that test car could have more than 300hp, but why drop to 230-240 worldwide?


Oh man, Roumors confirmed... It says right there that "atleast 300bhp in European specification, performance will be startling"... I'm gonna have to go talk to quincy nest time I'm at southern states... He was actually there for the testing!! :)

~ Chris[/QUOTE]

[NeedForSpeed]

I read it again, and the article could imply that markets other than Japan could have more than 300hp, and that test car could have more than 300hp, but why drop to 230-240 worldwide?


Chris[/QUOTE]

Oh man, Roumors confirmed... It says right there that "atleast 300bhp in European specification, performance will be startling"... I'm gonna have to go talk to quincy nest time I'm at southern states... He was actually there for the testing!! :)

[NeedForSpeed]

Great, let's see what you get at the dyno, with S2V7 on gasoline?

It's Spring here, and I'm posting for the first time in many many months!

Ron,
Give me a month and we'll see what the dyno says about certain other mods:cool:
-Bill

[longassname]

Have you ever actually seen anything indicating that the factory ECU pulls out timing that it shouldn't? Those of us who genuinely have the ability to monitor ignition retard and advance have not seen this. Ask Tom Krynock. He has a select monitor and I do not believe he has seen that to be the case. In fact back when young tom was providing the unreliable information about timing Tom Krynock offered to run his select monitor on young tom's car in order to measure what was really going on and young tom turned him down despite actually being there with the car and select monitor at the same place and time.


Judging by Tom's comments in the ECU thread, I am assuming that the power is coming from the stock ECU pulling timing a lot more than it should be. If the engine computer actually allowed it to run normal timing all the time, it would put out a good deal more power, right? :confused: That, at least for me, explains why 'minor' mods coupled with a standalone ECU resulted in such a massive HP gain.

[Nomake Wan]

Have you ever actually seen anything indicating that the factory ECU pulls out timing that it shouldn't? Those of us who genuinely have the ability to monitor ignition retard and advance have not seen this. Ask Tom Krynock. He has a select monitor and I do not believe he has seen that to be the case. In fact back when young tom was providing the unreliable information about timing Tom Krynock offered to run his select monitor on young tom's car in order to measure what was really going on and young tom turned him down despite actually being there with the car and select monitor at the same place and time.

Negative. As I said in that post, I was only going by what TomsSVX posted in the ECU Dev thread. Going by that, I guessed. If I'm wrong then I apologize. But if it doesn't pull timing, we return to the original question.

Where is that 60 HP coming from?

[Trevor]

Have you ever actually seen anything indicating that the factory ECU pulls out timing that it shouldn't? Those of us who genuinely have the ability to monitor ignition retard and advance have not seen this. Ask Tom Krynock. He has a select monitor and I do not believe he has seen that to be the case. In fact back when young tom was providing the unreliable information about timing Tom Krynock offered to run his select monitor on young tom's car in order to measure what was really going on and young tom turned him down despite actually being there with the car and select monitor at the same place and time.

If confirmed information is available, i.e. "Those of us who genuinely have the ability to monitor ignition retard and advance have not seen this." presenting the figures would surely close any argument.:confused:

[svxistentialist]

I read it again, and the article could imply that markets other than Japan could have more than 300hp, and that test car could have more than 300hp, but why drop to 230-240 worldwide?


Oh man, Roumors confirmed... It says right there that "atleast 300bhp in European specification, performance will be startling"... I'm gonna have to go talk to quincy nest time I'm at southern states... He was actually there for the testing!! :)

~ Chris[/quote]

Guys, before we lose the run of it here we should consider carefully where this "300hp" suggested figure is coming from, and not presume there is a hidden and untapped 70hp sitting around waiting to be discovered. Because plainly, this is nonsense.:mad:

As Mike says, the ECU tuning maps are formulated to make the car run sweetly at atmospheric pressure, with max hp coming in around 5,500 rpm. We know from various people that the tuning and timing of the engine is relatively conservative, but that does not necessarily mean that it is easy or cheap to modify the engine for more power. The fuel map in the ECU is optimised to give good power and driveability over the normal rev range in normal atmospheric conditions with road fuel. Any improvements over standard will be made through the usual engine tuning methods, and these generally give more hp higher in the rev range at the expense of less torque lower down.

If you take into account that this article was written for Autocar during the development phase, then you must also take into account that journalists very often print the news as they would like to hear it, rather than what is being said by the developers. They have been known to exaggerate in the past, and they will in the future. :rolleyes:

Also take into account that the car may also have been tested with a turbocharger at the time, not that unexpected for Subaru, which did not make it to production. With even a Light Pressure Turbocharger and 3.3 litres displacement, 300 hp would have been easy-peasy.

Somewhere beyond this point [January 1990] the turbocharger plan was dropped, and with it, I suspect, any possibility of 300 hp in standard trim.

So I think your argument is in vain, because the magazine as the source of the information is compromised.

Joe

PS When YT is talking about timing getting pulled, I think he is referring to the engine with supercharger and no charge cooling in place. This is a different kettle of fish from a stock engine.

[TomsSVX]

Having had OT's select monitor in both of my SVXi many months back, I was able to view both of my car's timing. While my stage 3 was pulling 10* of timing whenever i got on the throttle:rolleyes: My bone stock SVX was pulling timing in high load situations. Most I ever saw was 8* of retard. So, once again, without education, I would suggest keeping a handle on that whole brain mouth thing

Tom

[svxistentialist]

Having had OT's select monitor in both of my SVXi many months back, I was able to view both of my car's timing. While my stage 3 was pulling 10* of timing whenever i got on the throttle:rolleyes: My bone stock SVX was pulling timing in high load situations. Most I ever saw was 8* of retard. So, once again, without education, I would suggest keeping a handle on that whole brain mouth thing

Tom

It's good to get actual figures rather than conjecture.

Tom, would you not consider it normal for the timing map to retard the timing in high load situations, given that it is a high compression engine pulling a heavy car at low revs?

With the auto box being programmed to prefer high gears and run the car between 1500 and 2000 rpm all the time, this I remember as being the range where my old 2.2 litre Matra used to pink badly under load in top.

As I see it the SVX is constrained by the TCU to constantly pull within a range that leaves it open to detonation, even naturally aspirated.

Joe

[RSVX]

So, once again, without education, I would suggest keeping a handle on that whole brain mouth thing

Tom


Hmm, it could be me, or not...

Either way lets keep it civil.

[TomsSVX]

Granted my old teally wasn't the best car in the world, mechanically it was very sound. So as a base for testing it was ideal. I would suggest that due to the higher compression and the depletion of fuel quality in the states that one would expect at high load ratings the ECU would pull timing. More importantly, I believe the stock ECU was made all too sensitive in regards to knock detection and revamping this aspect of the ECU would yield surprising results. No one has been able to do this with the stock ECU, which is one of many reasons I would prefer to move to a S.A. E.M.S. You can add timing all you want to the stock maps but if the ECU is too sensitive, which I believe it is, it will not help any. This may be a good reason as to why LAN's N/A pistons that he is having made would be a good idea. But ultimately if you really want to see more out of your EG33 it is my "opinion" that an ECU which is tuned for your specific application will yield a better result than what you see here. Take it for what it is worth, but that is all I have to say here

Tom

[longassname]

There aren't any figures to present except to say that when you drive around monitoring "rtrd" and "adv" you clearly see that on a healthy SVX the factory ECU doesn't retard the ignition advance. It does the opposite. It adds ignition advance. "rtrd" is just the label for a memory location in the ecu which holds the immediate value from the translation of the knock sensor signal. A value of 8 does not mean 8 degrees of retard. It means 8 degrees of advance. A value of -8 means 8 degrees of retard. The factory primary ignition map is extremely conservative under high load to say the least; the ecu uses the knock sensors to seek out knock and add in additional advance up to the threshold of theoretical maximum advantage.



If confirmed information is available, i.e. "Those of us who genuinely have the ability to monitor ignition retard and advance have not seen this." presenting the figures would surely close any argument.:confused:

[Trevor]

If confirmed information is available, i.e. "Those of us who genuinely have the ability to monitor ignition retard and advance have not seen this." presenting the figures would surely close any argument.:confused:


Having had OT's select monitor in both of my SVXi many months back, I was able to view both of my car's timing. While my stage 3 was pulling 10* of timing whenever i got on the throttle My bone stock SVX was pulling timing in high load situations. Most I ever saw was 8* of retard.



There aren't any figures to present except to say that when you drive around monitoring "rtrd" and "adv" you clearly see that on a healthy SVX the factory ECU doesn't retard the ignition advance. It does the opposite. It adds ignition advance. "rtrd" is just the label for a memory location in the ecu which holds the immediate value from the translation of the knock sensor signal. A value of 8 does not mean 8 degrees of retard. It means 8 degrees of advance. A value of -8 means 8 degrees of retard. The factory primary ignition map is extremely conservative under high load to say the least; the ecu uses the knock sensors to seek out knock and add in additional advance up to the threshold of theoretical maximum advantage.



It's good to get actual figures rather than conjecture.

Tom, would you not consider it normal for the timing map to retard the timing in high load situations, given that it is a high compression engine pulling a heavy car at low revs?

With the auto box being programmed to prefer high gears and run the car between 1500 and 2000 rpm all the time, this I remember as being the range where my old 2.2 litre Matra used to pink badly under load in top.

As I see it the SVX is constrained by the TCU to constantly pull within a range that leaves it open to detonation, even naturally aspirated.



Valid figures are void of semantics. Currently confusion is the order of the day.

The existence of a figure representing retard or advance requires a baseline figure. It is now suggested that the base line is zero in respect of the figures presented. Does this align with the piston at top dead centre. If not what is the basis of zero?

Please, can the term “Pulling” be avoided in the interests clarity and accuracy.

[Nomake Wan]

Guys, before we lose the run of it here we should consider carefully where this "300hp" suggested figure is coming from, and not presume there is a hidden and untapped 70hp sitting around waiting to be discovered. Because plainly, this is nonsense.:mad:

PS When YT is talking about timing getting pulled, I think he is referring to the engine with supercharger and no charge cooling in place. This is a different kettle of fish from a stock engine.

http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/showpost.php?p=533539&postcount=1

PS http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/showpost.php?p=533899&postcount=611

[TomsSVX]

There aren't any figures to present except to say that when you drive around monitoring "rtrd" and "adv" you clearly see that on a healthy SVX the factory ECU doesn't retard the ignition advance. It does the opposite. It adds ignition advance. "rtrd" is just the label for a memory location in the ecu which holds the immediate value from the translation of the knock sensor signal. A value of 8 does not mean 8 degrees of retard. It means 8 degrees of advance. A value of -8 means 8 degrees of retard. The factory primary ignition map is extremely conservative under high load to say the least; the ecu uses the knock sensors to seek out knock and add in additional advance up to the threshold of theoretical maximum advantage.


This statement is 100% correct. The SSM RTD function will only show anything but 0 when the knock sensors pick something up. I am saying that the problem is, even on healthy stock SVXi it is not uncommon to see that the ECU does retard timing from the advance due to knock detection. I am sure there are cars that this will never happen on, but there are indeed, very healthy EG33's that this apparent in. That being said, I agree that a healthy SVX shouldn't do this, to coincide many infact do. The problem being that the ECU will pick up what more than likely is not knock and reduce the advance accordingly.

To my limited knowledge of the inner workings of the ECU, I do not see the sensitivity being able to be adjusted w/o comprimising the RTD function of the ECU all together.

Tom

[longassname]

The existence of a figure representing retard or advance requires a baseline figure. It is now suggested that the base line is zero in respect of the figures presented. Does this align with the piston at top dead centre. If not what is the basis of zero?


No, as I was sharing that value is an input not a result. Just like the mass air sensor signal is translated into a "load" value used in the logic to control fuel and timing the knock sensor signal is translated into a "rtrd" value used in logic to control the timing. 0 corresponds to a sensor reading which will not result in a number of routines checking to see if they should modify ignition timing. A negative number indicates a sensor reading which may result in a number of routines reducing ignition advance. A positive number indicates a sensor reading which may result in a number of routines increasing ignition advance.

[NeedForSpeed]

On a NA engine, will lowering the stock compression ratio via pistons increase potential advance and make more net power than factory ratio and potential retard?

Will lower gearing decrease engine load and possibly allow more ignition advance; thus the performance advantage of low gears is twofold, one, faster through the rev range, two, more timing resulting in more whp?

No, as I was sharing that value is an input not a result. Just like the mass air sensor signal is translated into a "load" value used in the logic to control fuel and timing the knock sensor signal is translated into a "rtrd" value used in logic to control the timing. 0 corresponds to a sensor reading which will not result in a number of routines checking to see if they should modify ignition timing. A negative number indicates a sensor reading which may result in a number of routines reducing ignition advance. A positive number indicates a sensor reading which may result in a number of routines increasing ignition advance.

[Trevor]

No, as I was sharing that value is an input not a result. Just like the mass air sensor signal is translated into a "load" value used in the logic to control fuel and timing the knock sensor signal is translated into a "rtrd" value used in logic to control the timing. 0 corresponds to a sensor reading which will not result in a number of routines checking to see if they should modify ignition timing. A negative number indicates a sensor reading which may result in a number of routines reducing ignition advance. A positive number indicates a sensor reading which may result in a number of routines increasing ignition advance.

A number was originally expressed in degrees, --- "A value of 8 does not mean 8 degrees of retard. It means 8 degrees of advance."

It is now stated, --- "A negative number indicates a sensor reading which may result in a number of routines reducing ignition advance. A positive number indicates a sensor reading which may result in a number of routines increasing ignition advance."

Words are failing someone. I now must assume that no one can quote figures illustrating the actual ignition timing in respect of an SVX, as original or modified.

[Nomake Wan]

Words are failing someone. I now must assume that no one can quote figures illustrating the actual ignition timing in respect of an SVX, as original or modified.

Now, that is not very fair. I understand (or perhaps, misunderstood?) the intent of your post in correcting the wording used. To then go forward and say that "no one can quote figures illustrating the actual ignition timing" is a foolish assumption. It was one mistake, which you are now applying across the board. That's silly, don't you agree? :rolleyes:

[Dessertrunner]

Section 2 page 95 of the manual talks about how the "Select monitor" works.
Mode F07 is Ignition timing (ADVS) says the range is 12 deg to 28 deg
Mode F21 - Knock sensor signal (RTRD says range -10 to +10 deg.

Don't know if this helps but thats what the book says. I may borrow the unit here and get some numbers on my cars.
Tony

[RSVX]

Now, that is not very fair. I understand (or perhaps, misunderstood?) the intent of your post in correcting the wording used. To then go forward and say that "no one can quote figures illustrating the actual ignition timing" is a foolish assumption. It was one mistake, which you are now applying across the board. That's silly, don't you agree? :rolleyes:

But, that is his modus operandi...

[longassname]

Yes, what I said was correct. Trevor is just once again making the false assumption that the failure to understand is someone else's and not his. He's got his head stuck thinking like the ignition advance logic is 10 lines of code rather than 500. Perhaps he should be introduced to the flowchart in Subaru's patent application.


Now, that is not very fair. I understand (or perhaps, misunderstood?) the intent of your post in correcting the wording used. To then go forward and say that "no one can quote figures illustrating the actual ignition timing" is a foolish assumption. It was one mistake, which you are now applying across the board. That's silly, don't you agree? :rolleyes:

[longassname]

Trevor,

Tell me about your SVX. What kind of SVX do you have? Have you found being a member of the forums helpful in maintaining or modifying your SVX?


A number was originally expressed in degrees, --- "A value of 8 does not mean 8 degrees of retard. It means 8 degrees of advance."

It is now stated, --- "A negative number indicates a sensor reading which may result in a number of routines reducing ignition advance. A positive number indicates a sensor reading which may result in a number of routines increasing ignition advance."

Words are failing someone. I now must assume that no one can quote figures illustrating the actual ignition timing in respect of an SVX, as original or modified.

[svxistentialist]

Guys, before we lose the run of it here we should consider carefully where this "300hp" suggested figure is coming from, and not presume there is a hidden and untapped 70hp sitting around waiting to be discovered. Because plainly, this is nonsense.:mad:

We know from various people that the tuning and timing of the engine is relatively conservative, but that does not necessarily mean that it is easy or cheap to modify the engine for more power.

Joe

PS When YT is talking about timing getting pulled, I think he is referring to the engine with supercharger and no charge cooling in place. This is a different kettle of fish from a stock engine.http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/showpost.php?p=533539&postcount=1

Nomake, you left out a key line in my statement, underlined above. Rally Rob no doubt has the knowledge and the expertise to retune a lawnmower for another 5 hp if he felt the need because he knows what he is about.

If you look at his list of "Bolt-ons" you will see things like Autronic stand-alone, custom headers, individual coils [6 of ] and Sti injectors [6 of ]. Plus the ability to tune it. This add-on or bolt-on extra power is neither free nor is it cheap to achieve.



http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/showpost.php?p=533899&postcount=611

And in this case I have already said that the stock maps are tuned to give advance or retard based on load and based on knock sensor information.
The key point here is whether Tom is correct when he says that the timing map "unnecessarily" pulls or retards timing under load.

Maybe somebody will have to burn holes in a few pistons until we find out just how conservative the Fuji engineers were with the timing maps. ;) :)

Joe

[Sir. Nate]

still waiting on those graphs :domo:

[dragoontwo]

Maybe somebody will have to burn holes in a few pistons until we find out just how conservative the Fuji engineers were with the timing maps.

Or if someone had some thermocouples, you could hook up and do it without burning pistons. Alas, I don't have the means to do this...

[Trevor]

Now, that is not very fair. I understand (or perhaps, misunderstood?) the intent of your post in correcting the wording used. To then go forward and say that "no one can quote figures illustrating the actual ignition timing" is a foolish assumption. It was one mistake, which you are now applying across the board. That's silly, don't you agree? :rolleyes:

I do not agree that it is silly to ensure that statements made with reference to a technical issue, are clear and accurate rather than the reverse.

What is not fair in seeking out basic facts relative to a subject under discussion? I was not intent on correcting the wording used. I queried figures clearly indicating measurements in degrees.

However by intent I softened what could be interpreted as criticism, by suggesting that only the wording might be in error. The reply now posted has confirmed my original doubts in respect of validity.

[Trevor]

Section 2 page 95 of the manual talks about how the "Select monitor" works.
Mode F07 is Ignition timing (ADVS) says the range is 12 deg to 28 deg
Mode F21 - Knock sensor signal (RTRD says range -10 to +10 deg.

Don't know if this helps but thats what the book says. I may borrow the unit here and get some numbers on my cars.

Tony

Tony,

Special thanks for presenting applicable facts which are most certainly useful.

You have always illustrated practical skills, and confirm that you fully understood my query, which others are side stepping.

[Trevor]

But, that is his modus operandi...

I do not appreciate sarcastic snide remarks. Notably in this case from and an executive member.

My intent is always to ensure that accuracy prevails in the interests of members. Comment as you wish, but please confine yourself to facts.

This particular thread has become convoluted to the extent that it has lost all purpose. Exact information may get it on track.

[Trevor]

Yes, what I said was correct. Trevor is just once again making the false assumption that the failure to understand is someone else's and not his. He's got his head stuck thinking like the ignition advance logic is 10 lines of code rather than 500. Perhaps he should be introduced to the flowchart in Subaru's patent application.

In view of the fact that I have not received a direct reply, I now accept your statement that the figures you previously quoted are in degrees of angle.

Those reading this thread will therefore be in no doubt as to the statement posted and will be able to judge its validity.

Once again the use of sarcasm is apparent, rather than adhering to what has been presented in an absolute manner.

[Trevor]

Trevor,

Tell me about your SVX. What kind of SVX do you have? Have you found being a member of the forums helpful in maintaining or modifying your SVX?

Direct questions call for and honest objective answer. I will provide mine. When will you do likewise?

My SVX was sold in Japan during 1992. Purchased imported, 8/05/2000. Recording 82,000 Km. N.Z. Registration No. ZC 9759

E - CXW Vin. CXW 003870

Option code BXC. Trim 220. Colour code 265

Engine type EG33DDX1DE. Transmission TZ102YL1AA-KN, No. 342367

Should you HONESTLY for a true purpose, require additional information. I will be pleased to oblige.

Being a member here has certainly been beneficial in respect of maintaining my SVX.

[Dessertrunner]

Tom I was think about the idea of a different ECU and I think we need to remember that most of the ones that would suit our car simply don't have the ability to me the polluation Rules.
Tony

[TomsSVX]

Tom I was think about the idea of a different ECU and I think we need to remember that most of the ones that would suit our car simply don't have the ability to me the polluation Rules.
Tony

That is a good possibility. But since I have no hands on experience with them, any advice I have to offer is merely conjecture.

Mike, and those interested. I am by no means an expert on ECU programming and I do not know all of the ins and outs of the SVX ecu. Many thoughts I have on the are based on hands on experiences with vehicle equipped w/ various different trims and modifications. Is there room to grow? Sure. I have to be completely honest, if you are not looking to get every last HP or ft lb out of your engine possible, then the ECUtune stuff is right for you. It is a chip that can apply to a broad scope of applications. But as we know and have discussed in this thread, when applying things non-specific, sacrifices must be made. In this case, what works on Mike's test cars, may not work as well for what you have.

Either way, my point has been made. We could fight tooth and nail all day over absolute specifics and never come to a conclusion on any topic. I grow tired of restating my points just to have them picked apart. This is my opinion, and nothing more. You can take it for what it is worth, or trash it, it is up to you.

Tom

[Dessertrunner]

Tom,
I think we should think this through a bit because we get all these different guys jumping on the forum offering the world and then after a couple of months they have moved on and we are left with the original bunch. I think these guys decide that the market ECU's is so small that its not worth it. So as the old saying goes if yu want something done we are going to have to do it ourselfs.
Would you consider putting your car on a dyno with the select monitor pluged in if I pay for the dyno cost?
Tony

[Nomake Wan]

I do not agree that it is silly to ensure that statements made with reference to a technical issue, are clear and accurate rather than the reverse.

What is not fair in seeking out basic facts relative to a subject under discussion? I was not intent on correcting the wording used. I queried figures clearly indicating measurements in degrees.

However by intent I softened what could be interpreted as criticism, by suggesting that only the wording might be in error. The reply now posted has confirmed my original doubts in respect of validity.

Trevor,

I see that you may have misunderstood me. I am not sure why we must continue to misunderstand one another, as I believe that we both speak the same language. I will attempt to be as clear and precise as I can with this post, so as to prevent further misunderstanding of my intent.

In my initial response, I was merely pointing out that when one person made a mistake in wording, you then stated that no one is capable of quoting figures illustrating the actual ignition timing. Once more, I will make clear my point. A single person makes a mistake in wording, you then respond that no one (meaning all people gathered here on the board) is capable of providing such figures.

That is a fallacy, one which I absolutely do not agree with. I believe that you are being incredibly unreasonable. Correcting someone is one thing; insulting everyone else is another.

Regards,
Nomake

[TomsSVX]

Tom,
I think we should think this through a bit because we get all these different guys jumping on the forum offering the world and then after a couple of months they have moved on and we are left with the original bunch. I think these guys decide that the market ECU's is so small that its not worth it. So as the old saying goes if yu want something done we are going to have to do it ourselfs.
Would you consider putting your car on a dyno with the select monitor pluged in if I pay for the dyno cost?
Tony

Don't get me wrong, I will be taking my car to the dyno. I am still using my select monitor interface, also I have the ability to data log my AFR EGT and maybe boost, if I get a digital sensor. So, I will be working on my own, after the machine shop is done fixing my one bearing that was out of round. I would rather not accept payment for anything, as it would mean I was required to do it for someone else, which makes all of this less appealing. I have no commercial interest in this market to be honest.

Tom

[Trevor]

Trevor,

I see that you may have misunderstood me. I am not sure why we must continue to misunderstand one another, as I believe that we both speak the same language. I will attempt to be as clear and precise as I can with this post, so as to prevent further misunderstanding of my intent.

In my initial response, I was merely pointing out that when one person made a mistake in wording, you then stated that no one is capable of quoting figures illustrating the actual ignition timing. Once more, I will make clear my point. A single person makes a mistake in wording, you then respond that no one (meaning all people gathered here on the board) is capable of providing such figures.

That is a fallacy, one which I absolutely do not agree with. I believe that you are being incredibly unreasonable. Correcting someone is one thing; insulting everyone else is another.

Regards,
Nomake

Nomake,

Please believe that I am in no intent on arguing, but the facts must be confirmed.

What I said was ---”I now must assume that no one can quote figures illustrating the actual ignition timing in respect of an SVX, as original or modified.”

Your statement that my words are a fallacy and that I insulted everyone is rejected. However once again I assume misunderstanding.

In no way did I suggest that anyone was incapable of providing figures. My words surely indicated that no one could quote actual figures, (i.e. in degrees of angle because measurements in this form were not available, or had not been recorded.)

Please indicate when and where previously the actual ignition timing had been quoted, particularly within this discussion, i.e. actual figures in degrees of angle relative to TDC.

No doubt as a result of your comments and immediately following my post, useful figures covering the standard engine were posted thanks to Tony. We are now much the wiser.

Whatever, we are friends. Sincerely Trevor.;):)

[Nomake Wan]

No doubt as a result of your comments and immediately following my post, useful figures covering the standard engine were posted thanks to Tony. We are now much the wiser.

Whatever, we are friends. Sincerely Trevor.;):)

It was not the "could" in "no one could" that I disagreed with. It was the "no one" part, which Tony proved to be incorrect. ;) However, as you say, we are friends. I would not want to make an enemy of you, in the event I once more lose the illumination in my interior! :D

Regards,
Nomake

[Dessertrunner]

Tom we all have to work together to figure out what is going on, I tend to beleive that there is a lot more power to be had using the standard ECU we just need to figure out what is going on. How do we do it together is my question? What do you think would work.
Tony

[SVXRide]

If I can jump in with a suggested approach...

1. Ensure that the engine/drivetrain is in good working order (no vacuum leaks, no slipping trans, etc.)

2. Make sure that the tire/rim combination used on the SVX "test mule" isn't outside of the normal bounds of the stock tire/rim (DynoJet is an inertia-based dyno, the weight of the tires/rims on the car will make a difference in the results).

3. Do at least 2 baseline dyno runs (all runs with SAE correction!) before installing the mod in question.

4. Make sure you have the AFR measured during the dyno pulls (installing an O2 sensor in a bung upstream of the primary cat instead of just putting a probe in the tailpipe is preferred. Use the passenger's side pipe).

5. Make sure to have a SSM plugged in during the dyno pulls (anyone figured out how to data log the SSM?). Enough of us have SSMs now that there should be no reason why anyone does dyno pulls without one plugged in.

6. Make sure the engine is up to normal operating temp before starting the dyno pulls.

7. Give the car at least 15 minutes between pulls.

8. Only do one mod for each series of dyno pulls (no less than 2 pulls for each mod) as we don't want to get into a "well, how much was X worth versus X+Y?" discussion)

9. Make sure to get a print out of all dyno pulls before leaving the dyno facility (you can always scan them latter).

-Bill

[longassname]

if having done 1-7 but neglecting 8 visit Chris's dyno shop with either a 6 pack of beer or a pipe ;)

[SVXRide]

Michael,

Have you had the time to take a look at the SSM to see if there is an "easy" way to data log it? (sorry if I'm showing my ignorance regarding the inherent capabilities of the SSM:)).

-Bill

[longassname]

SSM II's log data. The original SSM's do not.


Michael,

Have you had the time to take a look at the SSM to see if there is an "easy" way to data log it? (sorry if I'm showing my ignorance regarding the inherent capabilities of the SSM:)).

-Bill

[SVXRide]

SSM II's log data. The original SSM's do not.

and what would it take to get the original SSM's to log data? Is there an output serial port?

-Bill (thinking we may be looking at "visual data logging" here:D)

[longassname]

you own one...do you see a serial port on it? ;)



and what would it take to get the original SSM's to log data? Is there an output serial port?

-Bill (thinking we may be looking at "visual data logging" here:D)

[nextse7en]

This thread has finally pushed me over the edge...

I'm putting a distributor with points and a vacuum advance on my car. Then I'll set fire to the ECU and dance around it.

-Patrick

[SVXRide]

you own one...do you see a serial port on it? ;)

OT has it:rolleyes::D
-Bill

[Trevor]

This thread has finally pushed me over the edge...

I'm putting a distributor with points and a vacuum advance on my car. Then I'll set fire to the ECU and dance around it.

-Patrick

Patrick,

It is difficult to deny that you have made a perfectly logical decision. :lol:

[TomsSVX]

Tom we all have to work together to figure out what is going on, I tend to beleive that there is a lot more power to be had using the standard ECU we just need to figure out what is going on. How do we do it together is my question? What do you think would work.
Tony

To be completely honest. An engine dyno would be the most logical way to tune the ECU just as it was done by Fuji. But the practicality of something like that for us "small timers" is not foreseeable. So we must work from what is in front of us. We are still in the developing phase of our shop here so we cannot only afford the costs of full ECU development, either standalone or stock, but we cannot afford the time it will take as of the immediate. Keep your pants on, we are not going anywhere and there will be more to come for us in the future as long as we don't settle on what we can get our hands on immediately.

Tom

[svxistentialist]

This thread has finally pushed me over the edge...

I'm putting a distributor with points and a vacuum advance on my car. Then I'll set fire to the ECU and dance around it.

-Patrick

Patrick,

It is difficult to deny that you have made a perfectly logical decision. :lol:

John in Scotland with the lovely graphite SVX [blueji], his is driven by steam, he reckons. :D

[Dessertrunner]

My daughter has a 1974 bug and I pry every day that it had a ECU, its such a pain I am putting electronic ignition so the points don't give me any more grieve.
Tony

[Trevor]

My daughter has a 1974 bug and I pry every day that it had a ECU, its such a pain I am putting electronic ignition so the points don't give me any more grieve.
Tony

Trust me Tony, I have spent years with contact ignition. Something is basically very wrong with that bugger of a bug. Possibly the condenser/capacitor. :p:)

[GreenMarine]

Alright guys, I'm sorry for the wait... I'm going down to wilmington tomorrow to cut someone's balls off (and get the Dyno results)...

In the meantime though... Maybe a video will help to make up for the lask of numbers? :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hf7M8eTpQHw

~ Chris

[GreenMarine]

Another video... More OT this time...

After the meet I was trying to explain the differences in properties of liquids and gasses (mainly how gas can be compressed and liquid can't... Basic physics 101 stuff)... So after a few beers I decided to give a practical example and then explain what actually happened... Here's the example (which every single one of them thought was impossible when I told them what I was gonna do)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VS1665Mt5Zo

~ Chris

[RSVX]

Another video... More OT this time...

After the meet I was trying to explain the differences in properties of liquids and gasses (mainly how gas can be compressed and liquid can't... Basic physics 101 stuff)... So after a few beers I decided to give a practical example and then explain what actually happened... Here's the example (which every single one of them thought was impossible when I told them what I was gonna do)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VS1665Mt5Zo

~ Chris

But... liquid DOES compress...









if only at a very small measurment.

[GreenMarine]

But... liquid DOES compress...









if only at a very small measurment.

Ok, well I was trying to aviod being super critical with my description of basic fluid dynamics. Anyhow, I managed to get my point across to "non-college types" so I considered it a success...

~ Chris


AND NOW.... The long awaited dyno plots...!!

- Please DON'T post until there are a total of 8 (EIGHT) seperate dyno plots up... THANKS!!

[GreenMarine]

First Run... Stock ECU

http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z23/GreenMarineSVX/Chip1Run1.jpg

~ Chris

[GreenMarine]

Second Run, Stock ECU...

http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z23/GreenMarineSVX/Chip1Run2.jpg

~ Chris

[GreenMarine]

Third Run... Stock ECU...

http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z23/GreenMarineSVX/Chip1Run3.jpg

~ Chris

[GreenMarine]

Forth Run... Stock ECU...

http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z23/GreenMarineSVX/Chip1Run4.jpg

~ Chris

[GreenMarine]

First Run... ECUTune Stage 1.v5

http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z23/GreenMarineSVX/Chip2Run1.jpg

~ Chris

[GreenMarine]

Second Run... ECUTune Stage 1.v5

http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z23/GreenMarineSVX/Chip2Run2.jpg

~ Chris

[GreenMarine]

Third Run... ECUTune Stage 1.v5

http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z23/GreenMarineSVX/Chip2Run3.jpg

~ Chris

[GreenMarine]

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...

http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z23/GreenMarineSVX/Comparrision.jpg

~ Chris

[GreenMarine]

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

~ Chris

[SVXRide]

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:rolleyes:. 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":D
-Bill

[Trevor]

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]

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]

I know [well, I hope :rolleyes:] 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:p

[SVXRide]

I know [well, I hope :rolleyes:] 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:p

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:lol:
-Bill

[sicksubie]

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

[Nomake Wan]

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).

[b3lha]

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.

Forgive me for being picky, but as I read it, the mix looks richer than stock below 5500 rpm. A lower AFR means less air more fuel.

[svxistentialist]

Forgive me for being picky, but as I read it, the mix looks richer than stock below 5500 rpm. A lower AFR means less air more fuel.

Can't accuse you of being picky when you are being correct, Phil.

Apologies, gaffe corrected.

Joe ;)

[nextse7en]

What we need here is 2 ecu's, one with the stage one after it has learned, and one stock. Dynoed on the same day.

-Patrick

[GreenMarine]

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:rolleyes:. 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":D
-Bill

No Dyno Puls for a few months... Summer session is coming up and that means I need to $hit about $4,000 to pay for college over the summer :(... Hopefully at the end of summer I'll have the finances in order to do another Dyno Pull...

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?

Disconnected the Battery all through the ECU swap... Reconnected the battery after the ECU was back in the car and did the first Stage 1.v5 run about 5 minutes after with the ECU still dangling (didn't have the time to crawl under the dash and put it back in there while I was on the dyno and 15 other cars were waiting to get on there...

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).

Nope, I never really had a hesitation... The performance was kinda random at times, but only barely noticeable... THe only one that could tell that something was alittle different when I'd get on it with the stock ECU was me, but that's because I've owned my baby for 7 years and know almost everything about her :)

What we need here is 2 ecu's, one with the stage one after it has learned, and one stock. Dynoed on the same day.

-Patrick

I'll volunteer to go back to the same Dyno and swap out ECU's again... I'll need a stock, functioning 1995 ECU though (and no I don't have the $$$ to buy one)... I'd only if there isn't complaining about the weather conditions... Wether conditions will NEVER again be exactly as they were that day. It is something that is just going to have to be dismissed as an uncontrollable variable... I will say however, that National Speed's Dyno is located inside an air-conditioned and ventilated workshop. So for the most part the weather conditions have a minimal impact on the runs... The day I did it however they left the shop door open so that all of the 30+ people that were there for the meet could get pictures and whatnot...

However since we can pretty much rule out weather as a factor at the moment (atleast till it's summer in Wilmington, NC), Then my stock ECU runs should be a good basic place to start... The reason we did 4 pulls is because the car kept making power, slightly more each time...

I will say that I think the chip effects fuel economy alittle (in the performance map)... I just got back from an Autocross in Wilmington a few hours ago and only managed 21 mpg down there and halfway back... That's a few less than what I would normally get... However, I don't know if that was a great test since I spent most of the time driving down to wilmington behind a Corvette Z06 and another car that were doing 90-95 the whole way down... We made record time, but I could have sworn that every time I looked down at my fuel gauge, it was slowly creeping down towards the big "E"... I am heading to Charlotte to see my grandparents next weekend and that trip will be done at a much more conservative pace (70-ish mph)... Normally with a full tank and driving at about 70mph I can get about 25mpg... Just filled up on my way back to Raleigh tonight so the only miles on this tank so far are highway miles...

If I missed anything just let me know :)

~ Chris

[svxistentialist]

I will say that I think the chip effects fuel economy alittle (in the performance map)... I just got back from an Autocross in Wilmington a few hours ago and only managed 21 mpg down there and halfway back... That's a few less than what I would normally get...

If I missed anything just let me know :)

~ Chris

We were actually saying above the new chip runs richer, i.e. uses more fuel, above 3000 rpm which is where you would have been running the engine on your trip.

You should be back to stock consumption at 2500 rpm, back to normal.

Joe

[TomsSVX]

There is a reason you should have disconnected the battery before the stock runs... this would have cleared the "learned" data and allowed you to do a stock map to modified map comparison.

Tom

[processengr]

On the "learning mode" function of the ECU, what effect does the power light "mod" (connecting a switch to ground a pin on the ecu to engage the power map) have on the "learning" process?

[TomsSVX]

None, power mode merely changes the shift patterns for the transmission, it has no effect on the ECU

Tom

[svxistentialist]

On the "learning mode" function of the ECU, what effect does the power light "mod" (connecting a switch to ground a pin on the ecu to engage the power map) have on the "learning" process?

That's a very good question Gordon and I don't know the answer or if the answer is available from any of the Subaru manuals we have. I'll hazard a guess.

The "learning" mode should probably be thought of as an automatic adjustment mode from the fuelling system. The software analyses data from the input sensors, and based on load and detonation and O2 information etc it adjusts to an optimal fuel mix based on the information it "sees".

So if you have been using low grade fuel, and the ECU has adjusted to using that, and you then fill up with high octane fuel, the ECU has to "learn" as you drive that it is now safer to load the engine more without risking detonation. Such an adjustment function will cause the timing to be changed in this instance.

These adjustments will continue to be assessed and reacted to, regardless of whether the gearbox is in normal mode or in power mode.

My guess would be that the ECU would learn to retard the ignition less while the car was running full-time power mode as the gearbox would tend to rev the engine higher in each gear, which is a lower load situation in regards to detonation.

Basically it would be doing the same job in either mode, just compensating for the different circumstances.

Joe

[b3lha]

So, we've established that GreenMarine's results, comparing a learned stock ECU with an virgin stage1, show that the stage1 offers a slight improvement.:)

Does anybody have any idea how much effect the learning could have? Are we talking 1-2hp or 10-20?

The power mode will not make a difference to the ECU learning, but the california mode might.

[SVXRide]

So, we've established that GreenMarine's results, comparing a learned stock ECU with an virgin stage1, show that the stage1 offers a slight improvement.:)

Does anybody have any idea how much effect the learning could have? Are we talking 1-2hp or 10-20?

The power mode will not make a difference to the ECU learning, but the california mode might.

Phil,
I'm going to go on record as supporting ~5 hp after "learning":cool:
-Bill

[GreenMarine]

Phil,
I'm going to go on record as supporting ~5 hp after "learning":cool:
-Bill

Yeah, that sounds like a fair estimate... I mean the power is definitely there. You can feel the difference... I'm just not sure how much more it is. Not too much, but I'd say 5 - 10whp or 5 - 10 wtq overall increase...

~ Chris

[svxistentialist]

Yeah, that sounds like a fair estimate... I mean the power is definitely there. You can feel the difference... I'm just not sure how much more it is. Not too much, but I'd say 5 - 10whp or 5 - 10 wtq overall increase...

~ Chris

Chris, I hope it does show 5 hp improvement, but like Bill, I'm going to go on record with a guess also, different from Bill's.

My estimate is you will only realise one or two hp at the most. However you will benefit from a good torque improvement of 5-8 lbs from 4k to 5k.

I'm basing this on the fact that the principal fuelling change has been to richen up 3k to 5k.

You are in fact getting the change/improvement where it is most useful on the road, punch for overtaking.

Joe :)

[GreenMarine]

Chris, I hope it does show 5 hp improvement, but like Bill, I'm going to go on record with a guess also, different from Bill's.

My estimate is you will only realise one or two hp at the most. However you will benefit from a good torque improvement of 5-8 lbs from 4k to 5k.

I'm basing this on the fact that the principal fuelling change has been to richen up 3k to 5k.

You are in fact getting the change/improvement where it is most useful on the road, punch for overtaking.

Joe :)

You know what we should do... When I can finally get back down to the Dyno and do 3 more pulls (whenever they do another Dyno day with the Wilmington Subaru guys and get a discount rate), we should start a pot for bets to see who can guess the closest gains :D... Maybe a new thread with a poll or something... Not sure when the new dyno day will be but I'll be sure to let everyone know so they can start the thread :)

~ Chris