Linewalker
Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2007
What systems do you speak of that are “WAY WAY superior to the XFI...”? Not knocking your statement, just asking out of curiosity.
Another 9 second Turbo Buick
- Thread starter neat
- Start date
What systems do you speak of that are “WAY WAY superior to the XFI...”? Not knocking your statement, just asking out of curiosity.
ttypewhite
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2001
There are a lot of people that have the money to buy 9 second capable parts to run in the 9's. Problem is the lack of knowledge on how to verify that the chip they have is right. Just because you gave all your information on your car, doesn't mean that you automatically are golden. How many stories have I heard about guys putting boost on the car before verifying that the tune is safe and burn the car down. Too many people are comfortable with being uncomfortable about actually knowing what each platform does. What works for one doesn't always work for all. Too many people don't realize that they can sway someone into that belief that doesn't have a clue. I question everything where my car is concerned. I'm open to learn, but you have to drop hard data if you are going to convince me of anything. That's why I'm reluctant to post in most cases because technical info imo is lost.
A good seller will try and sell you the most expensive thing.Ask your vendor
And he’ll make it sound good to
Lol
What do the aftermarket ECU's do that the stock one doesn't? It's fuel, timing, and boost; right? I'm curious, not doubting that a stand alone is superior, just wondering. I saw where someone mentioned individual cylinder tuning, but I don't think most people are going to run 6 wideband sensors or 6 EGT sensors and really take advantage of that. You can pull plugs, but unless you're cutting them open there's no real way to super tune each cylinder to it's max potential. Even if you were cutting them open, I'm not sure you could make quantifiable gains tuning individual cylinders one at a time at the race track. Maybe on an engine dyno, or less likely a chassis dyno, but it would extremely difficult to do on a drag strip IMO. Other than individual cylinder tuning, what features does the new stuff have that the stocker doesn't?
I would think high end boost control; boost per gear, or per RPM, or maybe even a boost ramp based on MPH. I had a car with a stand alone that would build a progressive nitrous ramp based on front wheel speed. It was awesome. A quality stand alone will do all that, right? I don't think the stock ECM will do any of that.
I don't think the stock ECM will do a timing cut / bump to build boost on a trans brake / foot brake. I would think an aftermarket stand alone would do that.
I would also think the fueling corrections based on AFR could be done much more quickly with the newer stuff. Is that right?
I saw somewhere that the XFI would shut the engine down or something if your second fuel pump didn't come on. That could be a big deal.
If the engine goes into knock, I would guess an aftermarket ECM would be able to pull timing AND reduce boost. I think the stock computer will just do timing. There is the little boost vent solenoid deal on the stock set up, but I don't think many people are running that / using that.
In terms of power production, I can see the MAF sensor going away as a potential power gain. I'm curious about how a stand alone ECM would make power beyond deleting the MAF sensor though. I've seen "data acquistion" mentioned a couple times, but I don't really know what that means. I've been through the power logger pretty thoroughly, and the only thing I really find irritating is the sample rate for MPH. It's tough to tell when the car actually leaves the line. That's a limitation of the factory VSS though, so unless the stand alone is putting a reluctor ring on the drive shaft, watching an ABS sensor, or using some other method to get a speed signal; I don't see how the stand alone solves the MPH reporting deal. That's a pretty small complaint though.
I guess I'm asking those that have a stand alone, what does it do that you like? What does it do that the chip stuff didn't do?
I ran a Pro-M EFI stand alone on my 89 Mustang and loved it. It was vastly superior to the stock ECM. The main difference was in how the computer "thought" about air and fuel. The Pro-M operates on a Lambda based fueling system, and knowing bore, stroke, and number of cylinders. The system used a MAF sensor to measure incoming air, compare it to maximum engine volume, and then calculate load / fuel needs. My Mustang was a 302, so if the MAF sensor detected 302 cubic inches of air, that was a fuel multiplier of 1. If it was half that (151 cubic inches of air) the fuel multiplier was .5. More than 302 cubic inches of air via turbo or blower, and the multiplier just went beyond one, 1.2, 1.35, etc... That was something that a KPA based table simply could not do, and it was freaking awesome because you could change stuff on the car and not have to dink with the tune. Different cam? No problem, and no laptop required. Change intake? Add a super charger? Different heads? No problem, and still no laptop required. The only changes that required re-tune were CID changes or injector changes.
That being said, the Pro-M system is the only one I've seen that uses a MAF meter. The others I've messed with have all been speed density, and operated off a KPA table, watched the wideband, and made fueling changes after the fact in an attempt to achieve a target AFR. Those systems can work awesome, but in my relatively limited experience, they are pretty limited when it comes to how the engine reacts to changes. Maybe the stuff the buick crowd is using isn't like that, I honestly don't know. For example, with a SD system, on a Buick I would be worried about adding a more efficient intercooler and having the boost go down because the intake charge is cooler, or the boost stays the same because I'm using a spring loaded waste gate but I'm moving more air now because it's cooler / denser. The MAP sensor will report the same KPA because the boost stayed the same, so I'm going to get the same fuel, which is not correct anymore because I went to a better intercooler. The wideband should pick up the lean condition, and the computer should correct for it, but I'd feel much better if the system had a way of measuring the incoming air and fueling for that, as opposed to making changes post engine via wideband.
Maybe that's nothing I should be worried about, I honestly don't know, but those are some of the concerns I'd have going to a stand alone on a Buick.
Anyone who is pretty knowledgeable on that stuff, I'd love a chance to really discuss it in detail.
I would think high end boost control; boost per gear, or per RPM, or maybe even a boost ramp based on MPH. I had a car with a stand alone that would build a progressive nitrous ramp based on front wheel speed. It was awesome. A quality stand alone will do all that, right? I don't think the stock ECM will do any of that.
I don't think the stock ECM will do a timing cut / bump to build boost on a trans brake / foot brake. I would think an aftermarket stand alone would do that.
I would also think the fueling corrections based on AFR could be done much more quickly with the newer stuff. Is that right?
I saw somewhere that the XFI would shut the engine down or something if your second fuel pump didn't come on. That could be a big deal.
If the engine goes into knock, I would guess an aftermarket ECM would be able to pull timing AND reduce boost. I think the stock computer will just do timing. There is the little boost vent solenoid deal on the stock set up, but I don't think many people are running that / using that.
In terms of power production, I can see the MAF sensor going away as a potential power gain. I'm curious about how a stand alone ECM would make power beyond deleting the MAF sensor though. I've seen "data acquistion" mentioned a couple times, but I don't really know what that means. I've been through the power logger pretty thoroughly, and the only thing I really find irritating is the sample rate for MPH. It's tough to tell when the car actually leaves the line. That's a limitation of the factory VSS though, so unless the stand alone is putting a reluctor ring on the drive shaft, watching an ABS sensor, or using some other method to get a speed signal; I don't see how the stand alone solves the MPH reporting deal. That's a pretty small complaint though.
I guess I'm asking those that have a stand alone, what does it do that you like? What does it do that the chip stuff didn't do?
I ran a Pro-M EFI stand alone on my 89 Mustang and loved it. It was vastly superior to the stock ECM. The main difference was in how the computer "thought" about air and fuel. The Pro-M operates on a Lambda based fueling system, and knowing bore, stroke, and number of cylinders. The system used a MAF sensor to measure incoming air, compare it to maximum engine volume, and then calculate load / fuel needs. My Mustang was a 302, so if the MAF sensor detected 302 cubic inches of air, that was a fuel multiplier of 1. If it was half that (151 cubic inches of air) the fuel multiplier was .5. More than 302 cubic inches of air via turbo or blower, and the multiplier just went beyond one, 1.2, 1.35, etc... That was something that a KPA based table simply could not do, and it was freaking awesome because you could change stuff on the car and not have to dink with the tune. Different cam? No problem, and no laptop required. Change intake? Add a super charger? Different heads? No problem, and still no laptop required. The only changes that required re-tune were CID changes or injector changes.
That being said, the Pro-M system is the only one I've seen that uses a MAF meter. The others I've messed with have all been speed density, and operated off a KPA table, watched the wideband, and made fueling changes after the fact in an attempt to achieve a target AFR. Those systems can work awesome, but in my relatively limited experience, they are pretty limited when it comes to how the engine reacts to changes. Maybe the stuff the buick crowd is using isn't like that, I honestly don't know. For example, with a SD system, on a Buick I would be worried about adding a more efficient intercooler and having the boost go down because the intake charge is cooler, or the boost stays the same because I'm using a spring loaded waste gate but I'm moving more air now because it's cooler / denser. The MAP sensor will report the same KPA because the boost stayed the same, so I'm going to get the same fuel, which is not correct anymore because I went to a better intercooler. The wideband should pick up the lean condition, and the computer should correct for it, but I'd feel much better if the system had a way of measuring the incoming air and fueling for that, as opposed to making changes post engine via wideband.
Maybe that's nothing I should be worried about, I honestly don't know, but those are some of the concerns I'd have going to a stand alone on a Buick.
Anyone who is pretty knowledgeable on that stuff, I'd love a chance to really discuss it in detail.
dank GN
BlackArts Automotive (661)993-8277
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2009
I haven't been to the track yet to get a time set in stone but have been to the dyno and have tuned my car to a respectable 750rwhp @ 17lbs of boost . my car is running a stock ECM on e85 this is a stage motor btw .. I have full control over a full VE table, Spark tables, A/F table.
and I do have individual cylinder fuel control . also have 6 EGT probes in the headers .
with the SD2 chip you have a lot more control over the standard chip. I can even email ppl tunes and help others tune there cars by looking at there PL files
and I do have individual cylinder fuel control . also have 6 EGT probes in the headers .
with the SD2 chip you have a lot more control over the standard chip. I can even email ppl tunes and help others tune there cars by looking at there PL files
dank GN
BlackArts Automotive (661)993-8277
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2009
I have a 2 step hooked up that cuts timing . trans brake and bump box with a stock ecm. also the temp sensor is in the manifold so a more efficient IC will not effect a sd chip setup
Street Lethal
Tech Anarchist
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2006
Can those systems handle ION Sense tuning, serious question?
More resolution and more overall control. Nelson showed something very interesting online in that even with laser cut precision parts that have identical flow rate per cylinder, not to mention injectors having identical flow rates when tested beforehand, when the engine was put on the dyno with boost and then measured, the afr was still greatly all over the place in terms of the individual cylinders themselves, essentially underlining for him the benefit of individual cylinder control. Great run by the way, that thing took off like a bat out of hell...
ttypewhite
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2001
Thanks for stepping up brother. Do you have the ability to overlay a datalog over your current maps? ie: basefuel and timing? The one area I wish standalones didn't eliminate was the MAF. That for drivability and actually reading what air is being brought in is a valuable asset imo, especailly for better gas mileage. WOT is the easiest part of tuning. Setting the proper parameters for all around driving, start up, tip in, fuel enrichment etc is what separates the boys from the men.
Jerryl
Tall Unvaccinated Chinese Guy
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2004
Agreed.
This is my understanding regarding stock ECM and aftermarket;
-If WOT is ALL that’s needed, a carburetor will work just as well.
-There is NO ONE better today with chips than TurboTweak, period. Some cars never run right on a chip which doesn’t mean the chip/code is bad, it means the variables were not communicated, or they changed.
-XFI is not for everyone, and not everyone knows how to tune XFI, on a specific platform. It doesn’t mean the XFI is bad, it means it wasn’t installed or set-up correctly.
Do aftermarket have faster processors? I surely hope so. Is it an advantage? Not necessarily as the stock ECM is well capable of the RPM range requirements. So, the faster processing speed of any aftermarket is correct, but “faster than required” doesn’t add value. The benefits IMO are in granularity and associated control. For 98% of our cars, it’s not always about max HP.
People underestimate the tuning knowledge required for cars running 9’s on stock ECM. These guys know EXACTLY what they are doing. What no one will tell you is how may engines were blown up along the way and the simple fact that it “can be done”, doesn’t imply “immediately by everyone”. The thought of "everyone should be able to do this" only takes away the accomplishments of those who do.
If I wanted to run 8’s on a stock ECM, I would find someone who did that and pay them whatever they ask to help me do that. We either pay for experience, or pay to gain experience. Just because someone posted it on the internet/this site, doesn't mean it's the norm, or even true.
I guess Ken Duttweiler, Cal Hartline and all the tuners should just go back to stock ECM and burn chips. Anyone who is serious about making big power with their set up all run after market ECM. I am not telling anyone to buy one however if you want the best out of your set up that is the way to go.
Street Lethal
Tech Anarchist
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2006
Agreed, but I don't think the XFI guys are arguing "big power" being an issue with stock ECM based systems, I think they lean more towards the XFI for it's overall control of that big power, not that it cannot be made. I mean lets be frank, would anyone really trust their 1000 plus horsepower, which costs a lot of money, to a system with limited control? Idle, tip in, part throttle and wide open throttle, those targets are the least of a persons worries. Correction range and processing speed is where it's at when making that much power...
Street Lethal, that is what i am talking about most stage2 and high power 109 are using stand alone systems. Processing quicker can save your engine from blowing up also you can have a range of plus or minus fuel up to 25% in case something goes wrong. New technology is your friend if you know how to use it.
X2 Mike... I am a chip guy > I am old . Don't like change. Ya know a Grumpy old man. Russ went to a Fast system on Melissa's car a few years ago. Both Melissa and I were dragging our feet to stop him.
Ok let me get the crow sandwich I am now eating. INFO INFO INFO !!! Its the name of the game as ya go faster /quicker. Hell Melissa knows more than I do on it ! I guess ya call it progress Don't tell anyone I told you this Once the car is in tune which can be done on a stock ecm or aftermarket ecu,the main issues are not correction factors/processor speeds but the real things that are mechanical that can go wrong.fuel pumps going south,wiring issues,wires going bad,coil pack, plug not firing,welds coming apart ,voltage drops, etc.ive seen 15$ items take out 15000$ motors.see technology can fail and happens all the time.there is no system that can save everything otherwise things would never break,high horsepower cars always break regardless of the system.there is no saftey net when pushing things hard the trick is to get ahead of the small things that can lead to big things.the faster they get the more We will Be wrenching on them period.
Hey my pump is 12 years old BUT it only has 258 miles on it.. Plug wires are good !! Look at em. What are those wires hangin there ?? Oh I forgot to tape them up. ummm what did they do ?? Ohh I think it was an alarm and a stereo
Street Lethal
Tech Anarchist
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2006
I disagree with the processing speed not being a fail safe. It's not that it is guaranteed to save every possible occurrence, but the added safety benefit is there. Processing speed with individual cylinder control makes one hell of a difference when you consider how fast combustion both occurs, and deviates in terms of air/fuel from one cylinder to another. Like you said though, mechanical issues arise, alky pumps die in the middle of a run, etc, and most would like their O2 correction to have a much wider spectrum to correct with because it takes a fraction of a second to go lean, and then you're done. I think Grumpy nailed it in that some people just don't want change. I mean hell, I'll bust out the old classic Nintendo every now and then and have features such as left, right and jump and have a grand ole time. But then I'll bust out the newest Nintendo and have Mario, Luigi and the Princess have a freaking three-way lol. Technology is that good today, so use it...
Last edited:
