Brettus

iTrader: (2)

wow - this thread delivers LOL .
So you are parting out your car 05rex8 ? That is two in the last week that fitted a turbo only to part out shortly thereafter . It's a very common story on here .

05rex8

iTrader: (7)

heck no
my turbo feels great on the street as is. 259 tq at the wheels isn't that bad
I just need to modify the w/g actuator arm like you advised yet. Then I will go back to the dyno.

Brettus

iTrader: (2)

/\ I thought Fluid was refering to you .
Good to hear you are still going forward . Let me know if you need any help with getting your boost control sorted - I've tried lots of different stuff to get a decent result with that actuator.

05rex8

iTrader: (7)

no sir, must have been a local to him

I shall try your suggestion with the actuator arm and go from there. Keep your pm box open.

thewird

Is it normal for a battle and spinoffs to ensue when someone is trying to get technical info (preferably unbiased) lol.

I understand a blow-through MAF is possible, the same can be said about a blow-through carburetor in front of a turbo. Now which is the more correct way to go about it. With a MAP, you know what timing and fuel happens at a given PSi level vs RPM. In my opinion it is the more ideal setup for high horsepower applications but I won't mind hearing other side of the table.

Food for thought. A GM 3bar map sensor costs $60 on ebay new and all you need to do to hook it up is a vacuum line and plug it into the ECU. How much would a comparable MAF cost to buy and then install. Also, with a MAF, BOV air must be re-routed back into the intake after the MAF. See where I'm going with this?

thewird

Brettus

iTrader: (2)

12psi at 20deg. C is not the same as 12psi at 50 deg.C . See where i'm going with that ?

thewird

That's what air correction tables are for?

thewird

Charles R. Hill

iTrader: (7)

Many of we vendors are pretty passionate about what we do so these dust-ups happen from time to time. We try not to take them personally and when meet up with each other you'd never know that we had previous arguments going on.

As for "unbiased" opinions; there is a theory that lack of bias is impossible but I suppose the closest one can come to that is making sure that the advice-giver can articulate for you why they prefer their particular approach. There are plenty of people who have enough experience with many different methods of tuning, be they EMS's, reflash tools, or what have you, but getting them to explain their reasoning isn't often easy.

A carb installed in "in front" of a turbo is a "draw-through" set up while a turbo installed before the carb is a "blow-through" design. Further, the bowl vents on a carburetor serve a very important function in a blow-though set up that make it a bit easier than dealing with blow-through MAF set ups.

Because of all this, there is no "correct" way to go about it. Just like I said previously, it is often a matter of personal preference.

I suppose the first two questions that need to be asked are; 1) What is your ultimate power goal, realistically? 2) With which method are you more comfortable?

If your power goals are modest, that can heavily influence the idea of keeping things simple.

thewird

1) I want whatever 12 PSi will give on that turbo so the car can be delivered to the owner as he has been without his car for 2 or 3 months, due to parts delays etc. I'm aiming for a reliable car as opposed to one thats on the edge like mine so my interest in horsepower stops at giving the owner a dyno sheet.

2) I feel more comfortable with a MAP based setup as that is what I have always tuned with and enjoy making cars run as close to stock as is possible with a given setup. Even if I have to spend days on a car to get it right.

I feel at somepoint the owner will want more as he didn't seem to like the 12 PSi idea to begin with as Esmeril advertises 414 rwhp @ 16 PSi with their coils (what do coils have to do with horsepower but alas lol. yes I know the RX-8 coils are weak and it is a good upgrade but they advertise it as if the coils is what makes the power). But he agreed to start with this for now and then get back to that point once he has had the car for a bit.

thewird

Charles R. Hill

iTrader: (7)

12 PSI, manifold, is becoming more and more common with the RX-8 and they are often doing it with a factory MAF sensor set up. This is where reflashing is a strong tool. When you look at how often the real-world driver is in boost it is a mere percentage of drive time. Especially as it concerns idle quality and throttle transitions (what we at BHR call "driveability"). The MAF sensor will certainly measure that amount of airflow. BTW, you may want to consider embracing the idea of thinking of all this in terms of mass-airflow rather than manifold boost. It makes many things far easier to compare and consider.

Since the RX-8 is a MAF system, switching to a MAP system can be complicated without any equal payoff.

In the next paragraph what I see is a conflict between your views on realistic power and what your customer's views on realistic power might be. When getting near 400 h.p. there are all SORTS of things that need to be uppgraded in the name of reliability/durability.

I am glad you customer at least agrees to start at lower power levels and then to pursue higher levels later.

As for what coils have to do with it; that is a whole other talk show but they do make a difference, even in N/A applications, and especially when we get to 8 psi or MAF values near 300 gms./sec.

Brettus

iTrader: (2)

The inter-x is known to have very poor temperature correction . Early users were constantly changing tunes depending on atmospheric conditions .

Charles R. Hill

iTrader: (7)

That drove Jeff NUTS when trying to tune Phil's S/C with the Int-X. Plus, the idle had to be set quite rich, IIRC. He did manage to get T-Diddy's engine with the PTP turbo kit to run pretty darned nice with the Int-X but Tommy has less climatic/altitude changes to tune around.

thewird

I have never had an issue making a car run like stock on a MAP sensor. When my car was tuned many moons ago by a "professional" tuner from from the states I hated the way it drived. It bucked in random places, wouldn't respond instantly, ran rich, and overall was just a poor drive. Because of this I started tuning my car and found its actually very easy to make it drive smooth and respond instantly on throttle. Maybe you had a similar experience and is influencing your decision. Anyway, I really didn't want to turn this into a MAF vs MAP debate lol.

I understand the need to upgrade other things when you demand more horses out of a car quite well. I have gone through that process with my car and still is going on an ongoing basis.

My point about the coils was that it wasn't the coils themselves that made the power. As long as you have a properly functioning ignition setup that is smooth all the way to redline on the dyno for example, going to stronger coils, isn't going to make more power. Like I said, yes its a good upgrade as the the oem rx8 coils are weak but it was just the way they advertised it that bothered me. They should have advertised it as keeping your rx8 from misfiring (can't remember if this is the correct term, its when your HP is jumping on the dyno instead of being smooth)

thewird

thewird

Don't think its a problem with the Microtech specifically. The ECU only does what you tell it too. If you tell it to do the wrong thing, its not going to do the right thing on its own. I find that AIT temp correction tables are more or less close between cars and don't really need much tweaking once its set correctly.

Also, a MAF based FI system doesn't eliminate the need for AIT correction table.

thewird

thewird

On another note, I've been thinking about making a PowerFC harness for the RX-8 as that is a MUCH cheaper option and comes with a commander to view live data. The PowerFC has a lot more drivability features then the Microtech. I just find the Microtech too simple in some regards and the fact that you cant save a map or copy and paste data is retarded.

thewird

Brettus

iTrader: (2)

If so you have done better than anyone else has with the X (that i've heard about) . I remember having a conversation with Scott from Mazsport about this . He said at the time that the scale for AIT correction was too course and offered to fix it so perhaps it can be overcome if you know what parts to replace .

Yes there is a correction table in the stock software for AIT - seems to work well .

thewird

The car runs very smooth so far and is pretty consistent both hot during the day and late at night when its cold (I've taken the car home with me a few times). This is with the stock values in the Microtech. I haven't really looked into it much as I was spending most of my time with staging the injectors. When I get closer to a complete tune, I will start looking into those correction tables.

So what was your point of adding the temperature debate? If the stock AIT values didn't work well with stock components I would be worried for all RX-8's.

thewird

thewird

Hmm, now that I think about it, the stock Microtech AIT table was a flat line. Might explain why a few people had issues as you would need to make your own table from scratch.

thewird

mysql101

When I had the int-x, it was setup with the base tune that Scott had developed over dozens of RX-8's. It still had variations in AFR values going from winter to summer. Some people use two maps to help with the transition.

There is no way the microtech can come close to the accessport if you want OEM like drivability.

thewird

I have to disagree with that statement. Drivability has nothing to do with the ECU used but rather with the tuners familiarity with the ECU and desire to make a car he does not own run smooth. This is actually the reason I started tuning other peoples cars in the first place. I was literally disgusted with the drivability this tuner from the States left peoples cars with. My main priority when tuning is making the car run smooth and near stock. Making power is easy, making a are drivable is the real hard part.

I'm not sure who Scott is but if its the base map thats on the Microtech, the air temp correction table is a flat line.

thewird

MazdaManiac

iTrader: (3)

Nope.

The analog world in which we live has a continuous gradient for pressure, temperature, mass and volume.
The most appropriate tool will have the greatest resolution for determining where on that gradient the motor lies at any given moment.
The Microtech has very, very, very low resolution. Therefore, to get get maximum drivability, you make the maximum compromise with the device with the minimum resolution.
Human beings - while quite variable - are very sensitive to changes in the gradient. If you make these kinds of compromises, the driver will notice. Some much more than others.
If you just want to go thump, the Microtech will work. Anything finer than that and you must use a better tool.
There is NO tool with finer resolution than the factory ECU. It exceeds the granularity of ALL aftermarket stand-alone devices. (That is not to say that its utility is greater than a Haltech, for instance. Just that it measures that gradient with greater resolution.)

Me thinks "pusillanimous" went completely over someone's head.

Easy_E1

iTrader: (2)

Here Brice,,,, YOU DUMB ****!

dictionary.reference.com/browse/pusillanimous

05rex8

iTrader: (7)

I'm sure 99% of the people on this forum didn't know what that word meant. Myself included.

thanks for the link tho, lmao.

Easy_E1

iTrader: (2)

I figured as much. Hence the link. I like to use it in special cases.

MazdaManiac

iTrader: (3)

Wow. OK.
I won't bother. Hopefully, no one is taking you too seriously, then.