+1 on this, I am excited to see some results

 

I'm really excited myself .... bascially all disappointments so far when it comes to tuning the series 2. Will be a great option for all of us if this works out. One of the best parts is once you get the initial tune, there's no fee for future adjustments when you add mods .... with the exception of adding a turbo, as that would take quite a bit of adjustment.

 

It's hard not to become overly optimistic.

The results from the only dynotronics tune in the "ecu" thread were kinda (totally) discouraging. I know it was an automatic, and it's really the first to be publicized on this board, but... uuhhh...

At any rate, it's nice to finally see some folks actually going for it. I keep checking the S2 tuning threads throughout the day looking for updates. Keep them coming!

 

I don't understand why people do non-standard axes on a dyno graph.

Is it so hard to do power on the y-axis and rpm on the x-axis?

 

Actually, it is on some dynos because, in absence of an ignition signal to derive RPM (which is a common problem with the RX-8 because of the ignition scheme), the dyno only knows drum speed, which also makes it impossible to determine torque.

This is yet another reason why I prefer the Dynopack.

 

Oh....damn.....at least the dyno still shows the necessary information.

 

Actually, the before only runs show RPM on the X-xis and have torque.

So all I can say to Roen is, "I know, right?"

They haven't gotten the other one back to me. Grrrr, Arrrrgghh.

 

I wish dynotronics would chip in here, about the disappointing power increases.

Do you have numbers before and after? Or did I miss that somewhere in this thread?

 

The before and after numbers are on the graph he posted a few posts up. It looks like a loss of about 5hp.
I was very much looking forward to this and honestly thought we would see a few hp. Hopefully we still will somewhere down the road.
On the plus side, at least we know Dynotronics can change the tune in the ECU.

 

Not to be too harsh, but technically no - you do not know that.

The shape of the two plots is essentially identical and you don't have AFR to compare. The difference between the two plots - plus or minus - are within the margin of error for an identical calibration.

I wouldn't want to suggest that nothing was changed in the PCM, but this plot does not actually indicate any significant changes to anything.

 

Well, he bumped the redline and removed the electronic speed limiter.

Does that count?

I have verified this, but did not feel comparing me new redline was exactly apples to apples in the dyno.

And dynotronics is having an "away" weekend, so they might be a tad busy right now.

 

We will know for sure soon .... I put my car on the dyno , and did get an AFR on mine ... sent my ecu into dynotronics last week so once i get it back going to dyno it again and see what changes. We'll be able to compare AFR then.

B

 

Yeah i caught that .... hard to say what happened there though since he didn't have AFR on his dyno. Mine does , so when i post both we'll be able to see torque, HP, and the AFR difference . Don't know if the whole automatic thing makes a difference or not, but we'll see.

 

I'm wondering if there even was a tune placed onto the vehicle, since the results were in spec for dyno error. I'm hoping dynotronics will come on and address this speculation.

 

Soon is not soon enough!

 

I think his point was that as the years go on and the prices fall, sales would possibly increase

Surely this couldn't be influenced by all of the S2 threads where you made a stand that you are the only guy that does AP tuning for the 8, and how there is no desire to fund the research for the S2. Most of us read that and thus do not ask.

I am just asking for the sake of understanding the development process, not to be a dick, but what exactly is factored into your profit margin? The hardware is already there, the experience with the hardware is there (Assuming you would be the one working on the S2 maps), and there is some research from the S1 that, although cannot be used on the S2, may help provide some information on what parameters helped tunes and what hurt.

I can understand if you were developing a new product from the ground up ... but it doesn't seem like it is the case here.

 

My points were echoed in the above post. I would hope that as S2's become cheaper, and sold to 2nd and 3rd owners (out of warranty), more people will be willing to modify the cars than when they were new/warrantied.

I too would like to know more about how expensive (and why) the process is considering the hardware/experience already present.

 

I don't think you are understanding the concepts of "economies of scale".

Specific R&D numbers aside, lets say that it would take the sale of 200 AccessPORT units to break even on the R&D effort.
With 170,000+ Series I RX-8s out there, it took Cobb almost a year to break even based o that round assumption. The total number of units out there is just over a thousand.
With only 15,000 Series II RX-8s out there, it wouldn't be unreasonable to suggest that it would take 10x as long to generate the same sales volume, even if Series II owners were essentially the same demographic as Series I owners (which they are not).

Were a talented automotive hacker to figure out an effective way to supply flash tuning to the market at a similar price point and physical simplicity as the AccessPORT, it might be worth his time as an individual to sell 30 or 40 hand-made systems and support them and their purchasers through tuning, warranty support and PCM failure claims since his gross profit would be around $30k.

I think you can understand how $30k is not even worth the effort.

 

We should really consolidate all of the ECU threads.

 

I kind of agree--and I like the title of this thread b/c a push is what is needs to happen to get the right tuners/vendors moving in this direction.

 

MazdaManiac Cobb doesn't want to do it. Simple as that. He has iterated over and over how he does not feel it is worth it (and for him, it may well not be). I doubt a forum debate will change his mind. Besides, at this point, developing one would be pretty much admitting he was wrong about not doing it in the first place, and everyone knows how much fun that is.

Hopefully, someone else withe the required skills will feel differently. If not, we make do with what we have.

 

No, I didn't say that.

I was explaining why Cobb wont do it.

I'd love to sell you a solution.
I'm just telling you that there isn't one forthcoming.

 

Fair enough, above post corrected

 

Ok, just got my car back with the ecu back in the car after the dynotronics tune. I obviously haven't gotten on the dyno yet, probably will next weekend, but I can tell you from my self and my tech driving it there's def a noticeable difference in performance. Running MUCH better , seems to be more power and torque , but how much more I really can't judge. We both noticed a significant difference though. Very pleased with the tune , however, the after the 2nd dyno next weekend i'll post before and after.



B

 

The author of MMCFlash has said that support for S2s is "forthcoming", I think he needs a good pic of the ecu pcb as well. If anyone knows Russian, that would also probably help.
This would provide only dumping/flashing using the OpenPort 2.0 cable from Tactrix, someone would still need to make a definition file for each rom.
http://mmcflash.ru/forum/index.php?showtopic=52?