oh...but i'd get an EL mani...350 whp on a log style mani will get you 380 or so tq and THAT's what's gonna blow your motor...

 

oh...and i haven't kept up on yoru other mods, but make sure you got the tires to hold it...mine can barely handle 300whp! ... wait ...

 

If you still want a balance of TQ and HP, then go 2.5" instead of 3". Simple as that.

 

No. Unless you rig a black box Split Second unit like we did for sometime, disconnect the primary O2 OR you run some sort of throw into open loop unit, which is probably what PTuning is doing.

 

Not this age old debate again.

 

Until people STOP spreading UTTER lies, then YES.

I have not seen any proof that it does other than what I mentioned above. So until I see so first hand or try it first hand...............

 

lol

 

**cough cough**....*tisk* *tisk*

 

Already done plenty of times. Want to disprove it for me as well? Take a car with the Ultimate and pressure sensor. Cruise at 30MPH, then tip into boost. End of demo.

Easy enough if you hammer the throttle and throw the car into open loop. Try it while staying in closed loop. ;)

 

So, you calling rozz-tC a liar? And I didn't see any disproving. All I ever hear you say is...NO, it can't.

I will be picking up an Ultimate soon, so I'll give it a shot.

 

If he does not completely understand open loop vs closed loop, drives the car most of the time with the pedal into the floor, or does not realize something is undone or not working like the primary O2 (tracking the current back to the ECU), or something along those lines then it is possible for him to be misinformed.

Let's be truthful here, about 95% of the customers in this industry DO NOT understand the premise behind OBD2, how it works, how it's effected by various sensors and how it all ties together. Having this knowledge helps profoundly with respect to troubleshooting, dealing with and spoofing OBD2.

I personally am enrolled in an advanced OBD2 electronics class through the SAE to further my knowledge of the subject area.

 

So, now your saying he is dumb founded by his own car that he drives everyday. Hmm..ok, I gotcha.

Again, disprove or explain what the pressure sensor does for those of us who are dumb founded.

 

I love how you Manipulate my words. Did I say that anywhere? No. Same Travis and times have not changed.

I will do a brief writeup for what the pressure sensor does for the unit when I get a free moment.

 

Hey, I'm just reading between the lines.... I know you didn't say that, but I wouldn't be RhythmnSmoke if I didn't sorta "Spice" things up a bit.

All's Fair in Love and War...

 

Normally, we don't like to get involved in threads that we didn't initiate, but we receive a few pms asking us to clarify some of information being posted on this thread. It's unfortunate that some of the respected members on this forum are still taking taking advantage of some of the ignorant and gullible members on this forum (ignorant meaning unlearned, not stupid).

First off let's start with this reply:

Balance of tq and hp? What does that mean? On forced induction applications, the bigger the exhaust, the better. You do not need "back pressure" in the exhaust system for a turbo-charged car, the turbo charger is the "back pressure". It's been proven time and time again that a full 3" exhaust system will make more power and torque over a 2.5" exhaust throughout the rpm ranges. The higher the hp, the more restrictive a 2.5" exhaust becomes and the more noticable the gain will be with a larger exhaust. This is like us telling our STi and Evo customers that their stock 2.5" downpipe and exhaust system will make more power than upgrading to a full 3" system. If this was the case then every evo and sti out there would be running a 2.5" system instead of a 3" system. Which also means that we should have built a 2.5" exhaust for our time attack tc instead of our 3" exhaust. This would also mean that our dyno is lying to us when it showed that a 3" exhaust was making more power than a 2.5" exhaust. Dynos don't lie! Simple as that.

As far as part throttle is concerned, let me give you an insight into the tC. The tC like most of the newer cars on the market, e.g. 350z, RSX, etc. utilizes a front Wideband O2 sensor from the factory. Unlike the early cars which uses a narrow-band O2 sensor--which can only tell the ecu if the car is running rich or lean, with stoich at 14.7:1. The wideband O2's response time is fast enough and has a broader band for measuring AFR, that it can tell the ecu not just if the car is running rich or lean but also how much richer or how much leaner.

When you're driving a stock NA tc, the factory ecu is constantly getting feedback from the front O2 sensor when you're at idle or part throttle (ie. not WOT). Based on that reading it gets from the O2 sensor, it will adjust the fueling (e.g. short term and long term fuel trim) to get the AFR to what it wants to see. Now this is great and dandy for the stock NA setup, however throw on a turbo and it's not so great. Even at part throttle or what the stock ecu consider cruising, it's trying to get the AFR down to the high teens, which is perfectly fine for an NA setup, but part throttle on a turbo setup might be making a few pounds of boost and when you're in boost, you don't want the factory ecu trying to lean out the AFR.

So what's the way around this without taking the easy road and ditching the factory ecu for a full standalone. Although a full standalone would be ideal, since the tuner has full control of the fueling and ignition without having to constantly "fight" the factory parameters. The downside to a standalone is that the tuner will have to spend a great deal of time (and money) tuning a lot of different parameters to get the car to run smooth, not only at WOT, but part throttle, just like the factory. This includes the idle map, A/C on/off, acceleration enrichment, decelaration enleanment, part throttle response, fuel map, ignition map, VVTi, and so on. It's easy to to tune for power at WOT, but it takes a lot of time and knowledge to tune for part throttle, acceleration and good throttle response. This type of tuning must be done on a loading dyno and afterwards some final adjustments on the road. Tuning a car merely with a street tune is like trying to assemble your motor with a monkey wrench--it can be done, but it's not the right way to do it. Street tuning with a butt dyno is like using your eyes to measure a piston ring gap. So a full standalone is an option, but the other downside is that unless you live in a state where there's no emission via the OBDII scanning, you're not going to pass emissions.

The other alternative is to disconnect the front O2 sensor, which will forced the ecu to run off the existing fuel trim that it has already learned. This means that if you adjust the part throttle fueling, the factory ecu will not try to alter the fueling since it no longer has a working front O2 sensor to measure and make adjustments with. The downside to this this is that you will get a CEL light, which again means that you will not be able to pass ODBII scanned emissions testing.

The final option is to have a device/ecu that can spoof/trick/condition the factory ecu into thinking that the reading it gets from the factory O2 sensor is what it wants to see, instead of what it really is. Split Second offers a few "black box" that can do just that--but it still requires a tuner that know how to make it work against the factory fuel trim. The FIC also has this capability built-in. But just like anything else, you need to calibrate it on a loading dyno along with a good scanner that can measure short term and long term fuel trim. From the information you obtain on the dyno and the scanner, you can intercept the signnal from the factory O2 sensor, condition it to what you want the factory ecu to see, so that it does not try to alter the fuel trim. Now with the FIC, this is possible, but the problem is that the revised version of the FIC has firmware issues that was introduce after the original firmware version. This change to the FIC makes it impossible for us to provide the customer with a good tune. When I say good tune, i'm talking about a smooth acceleratin car throughout the rpm ranges, not just at WOT. We've had so many issues with not being able to give the customers a tune on the FIC, without the car stumbling at certain rpm ranges that we opted to no longer tune the FIC on a tC--at least until we have confirmation that the problem has been resolved. This stumbling issue might be still be considered a good tune for some tuners and customers but to us, it's unacceptable. AEM is aware of this issue and hopefully it will be address sooner than later.

As for the E-manage ultimate, we feel that it's the closest thing to a full standalone ecu without losing your ODBII. This means that with the proper setup and tune, you will be able to have control over the engine's fueling and ignition parameters while still being able to pass emission. Without getting into too much details, the e-manage ultimate has the capability to control the factory ecu's part throttle fuel trim
without running an auxiliary "black box" or disconnecting the primary O2 sensor--it's not advertise as a feature but it has the capability of implementing it. With the proper setup and a custom pnp harness, our tuner was able to defeat the factory fuel trim without throwing a single CEL. This setup is still being tested on our time attack tc- making over 400whp DD (450whp DJ). So far, the AFR is where it should be--the factory ecu is happy with what it see, yet we're able to run the AFR we want for forced induction and no CEL or factory fuel trim so far. On top of that the e-manage is also controlling our boost solenoid--ie. it's also being used as a boost controller. In addition, we're running 900cc injectors.

Again, what we've done with the "fuel trim defender" on our time attack tc is still under preliminary testing, but once we've confirmed what we've done with the e-manage ultimate to "defend" the fuel trim by the factory ecu is functioning without any issues, we will include this setup with our turbo kit.

So the moral of the story is:
- There's too many experts driving keyboards on the internet
- Don't believe everything you read -- take everything with a grain of salt.
- Snake oil can be packaged in many different ways.
- If it's too good to be true it's too good to be true.
- You get what you paid for.
- There's no such thing as a cheap turbo setup -- at least not a running one without problems.
- Form should follow function, not the other way around.
- If we continue to buy and support the cheap ebay and overseas knockoff, in a few years all the true pioneers that have actually done the R&D work for the worthwhile products in the market today will seize to exist and all will be left with is a knock off of a knock off--basically junk.

MrC

 

I do agree with much of what was posted MrC and I do commend you for taking the time out to go ahead and attempt to clarify to the masses as to what is going on. I have been attempting to spoon feed this data to several people for years now and most have turned a blind eye and deaf ear.

So apparently through some extensive R&D, you have found out much of what we have about the various piggybacks in the market for the tC and how they adversely or lack there of effect LT & ST fuel trims. We have been playing with several pieces of this for some years now and it is nice to see someone else trying to pave their own way as well.

I do not 100% agree with the "bigger is better" phenom in the exhaust world even for a turbocharged app for a few reasons, which we can go into with a whole other thread sometime in the near future considering we damn near killed this thread in off-topic behavior.

In conclusion, I do feel that you're last statement is the absolutely most true piece of info that was posted on your entire post. Too many people do not support the real companies who do the TRUE R&D and really work to make a better way of doing things.

 

so any one want to buy my 3 inch exhaust im going to 1.75 i need the tq lol i kid backpressure is a turbos worst friend open dump out your fender

 

MrC....as always, VERY informative, thank you for sharing your knowledge.

 

For the record, AEM has acknowledged the stumbling issue and has come out with 2 solutions to rectify the problem depending on which avenue of problem is arising.

 

Dezod, I commend you on your very mature and professional response. There's room for eveyone aboard this large community. We just need to help the community weed out the the facts from the fiction. No one has a monopoly on knowledge, we are learning new things everyday, not just from the vendors we deal with or the experts we talk to, but lots of time from the members of this community. An educated consumer makes a better customer in the end.

The one thing that I feel we need to stress to the community is the influx of products from overseas marketed under various brands under U.S. based companies. I don't want to get into naming names, but let's just say, we don't carry any of these company's products. The only thing I can say about them is that their product is cheap and I use that term loosely. So next time you go and buy a product because it's cheap think about what you're doing. You're saving a few bucks but these cheap knock-off products you're buying are basically reversed engineer knock-offs that have never been tested to work , fit properly or safe to use. We've seen broken springs on cars that could have easiy kill someone.

There's a reason why these products are cheap and that's because no time or money has been spent on R&D. If we, as performance car enthusiast continue to fuel the growth of these companies that make these knock-off products, in a few years, all the bright minds and new ideas in this industry will disappear. We're already seeing this happen to some of the biggest pioneer in this industry. So next time you go to buy a performance parts, think about what you're buying, who you're supporting, and if it's worh buying an inferior product just to save a few bucks.

MrC