Series II ECU Tuning
#302
Registered
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.
#303
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!
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!
Last edited by Docj78; 08-18-2011 at 06:26 AM.
#305
Banned
iTrader: (3)
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.
This is yet another reason why I prefer the Dynopack.
#309
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.
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.
#310
Banned
iTrader: (3)
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.
#311
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.
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.
#312
Registered
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.
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.
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
#313
Registered
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!
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!
#316
Registered
iTrader: (15)
I get fewer than 3 or 4 requests a year from SII owners about the AccessPORT.
It is a totally dead-end market with practically zero possibility of even breaking even in the investment, let alone making a profit.
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.
#317
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 too would like to know more about how expensive (and why) the process is considering the hardware/experience already present.
#318
Banned
iTrader: (3)
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.
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.
#321
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.
Hopefully, someone else withe the required skills will feel differently. If not, we make do with what we have.
Last edited by v3rlon; 08-24-2011 at 12:34 AM. Reason: correcting for the maker of AP
#323
#324
Registered
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
B
#325
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?
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?