which is better for sc eco - Tuning Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
which is better for sc eco
Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:47 AM
Ok guys I am going to be getting Matt Gorman's sc for my car. Which would be the best way to tune for it.
1) 1 bar map and tune with hpt
2) find 2.5 bar tmap and fake it
3) swap to ld9ecm and wire harness. And do that reflash.

If I do number 3 what map sensor do I need. Thanks guys....






Re: which is better for sc eco
Thursday, September 15, 2011 1:17 PM
1.) is what I like to do and works great.
2.) is also good.
3.) would also work, but 1&2 will get the job done just fine.



FU Tuning



Re: which is better for sc eco
Thursday, September 15, 2011 1:34 PM
Nice thanks man. How difficult is it to.do the one bar? I already have tuned na before I have the le5 mani and 36# injectors



Re: which is better for sc eco
Thursday, September 15, 2011 1:50 PM
SLO CAV (autocrossing dude) wrote:

Nice thanks man. How difficult is it to.do the one bar? I already have tuned na before I have the le5 mani and 36# injectors


It really is not different. Just change your target AFR's, take timing out.

I like to use the IPW table to add fuel in boost, and keep VE offset stock/low anf fine tune the VE.



FU Tuning



Re: which is better for sc eco
Thursday, September 15, 2011 7:24 PM
Interesting on the ipw... Thanks man.... If I need help can I contact you some how?



Re: which is better for sc eco
Thursday, September 15, 2011 7:34 PM
3 is much better. With that I would still use the 2.5 bar tmap and just remember that all the map values in the 2 bar tune are actually 25% higher. Following that I would run a fake 2.5 bar. The reason to run the 2.5 bar tmap is so that you actually get an iat reading that isnt useless. You need to get that iat after the blower or you're really just driving a ticking time bomb.


1994 Saturn SL2 Home Coming Edition: backup car
2002 Chevy Cavalier LS Sport Coupe: In a Junk Yard
1995 Mazda Miata R-package Class=STR
Sponsored by: Kronos Performance

WPI Class of '12 Mechanical Engineering
WPI SAE Risk and Sustainability Management Officer
Re: which is better for sc eco
Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:20 PM
Is the spot for the screw in iat after the blower?

Also John with the ipw do you adjust it in closed loop? I haven't tried tuning closed yet.


Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:22 PM


Re: which is better for sc eco
Friday, September 16, 2011 5:33 AM
Let me add some info to my previous post.

I recently helped a friend built a M62 for his cavy. We stayed with a 1 bar map. This did not affect IAT, because we put the IAT in the same spot it would be if you were using the TMap. We put the map in the lower part of the intake manifold (tap the manifold in the smooth section where the bracket bolts to the manfold from underneath).


That setup made 236whp, and just drove to Utah from Fl with no issues and good MPG's.

If you use the IPW to add fuel in boost you have to change the 0KPA column, NOT the 95kpa.The higher the number the more fuel. Max you can do is a 2.0. You can do this in closed loop or Open loop.

You can contact me no problem. Depending on what injectors your going to run etc.. I might have a decent starter tune.



FU Tuning



Re: which is better for sc eco
Friday, September 16, 2011 6:40 AM
option 3 is gonna be the best for tune-abilty in boost. Option 2 gives you the ability to command different timing at tifferent boost levels, nothing more. A drawback to the 2.5bar fake is that how the actual timing correlates to the commanded timing is somewhat of a mystery, and the IAT modifier is somewhat screwy using it. You don't need to run the 2.5bar to have a meaningful IAT reading, you can just wire in the IAT from the tmap, or use the hole on the manifold for a theraded IAT sensor. It's been done plenty of times and works great.

Option 1 is the easiest, and very effective as John's menioned. The IPW vs vac table is great for course tuning bigger injectors, and addition add'l fuel in boost also as John's mentioned. Plus, with all the 1-bar tunes I've done (~6 now including my own), timing actually makes sense. Command 18* before modifiers, and that's what you get (with no KR). Subtract one degree in the IAT modifer, and you get 17*. To me that is much more valuable than timign resolution in boost on a roots s/c app. We NEED that IAT protection to work properly...



Re: which is better for sc eco
Friday, September 16, 2011 6:44 AM
Another issue with the 2.5 bar timing is that it gives you the bare minimum timing you need out of boost for the car to even run correctly. I could get better low load drivability and maybe another mpg with more resolution down there. But I would be sacrificing some mid range WOT power if I went with the 1 bar setup.


1994 Saturn SL2 Home Coming Edition: backup car
2002 Chevy Cavalier LS Sport Coupe: In a Junk Yard
1995 Mazda Miata R-package Class=STR
Sponsored by: Kronos Performance

WPI Class of '12 Mechanical Engineering
WPI SAE Risk and Sustainability Management Officer
Re: which is better for sc eco
Friday, September 16, 2011 6:51 AM
Leafy (Club Jeffie FEA man) wrote:

Another issue with the 2.5 bar timing is that it gives you the bare minimum timing you need out of boost for the car to even run correctly. I could get better low load drivability and maybe another mpg with more resolution down there. But I would be sacrificing some mid range WOT power if I went with the 1 bar setup.
I tend to disagree with this part. The 105kPa column is your WOT timing on 1 bar, so whatever kPa column you use on the 2.5bar, just paste it in the 105kpa in the one bar tune and you have the exact same power. Speaking of mid range, especially on your car with a 2.8" pulley, you really have to try hard to modulate the throttle enough to really hit the "in between boost" columns of the 2.5bar spark table. To me that's a very minimal sacrifice.

But i totally agree with the rest, espcially on a more mild set up such as a stock pulley where you are really only using two or three columns of te PE advance tables anyways.




Re: which is better for sc eco
Friday, September 16, 2011 10:52 AM
In a 3rd great pull I normal hit multiple columns in a single rpm row.


1994 Saturn SL2 Home Coming Edition: backup car
2002 Chevy Cavalier LS Sport Coupe: In a Junk Yard
1995 Mazda Miata R-package Class=STR
Sponsored by: Kronos Performance

WPI Class of '12 Mechanical Engineering
WPI SAE Risk and Sustainability Management Officer
Re: which is better for sc eco
Friday, September 16, 2011 10:56 AM
Thanks for the advice guys.... This will be a mild one I guess. The head is stock and Matt is including the 3.0, 3.1, 2.8 and factory pulleys. right now the car has the 36# Saab green top injectors and I have a set of precision 550's too.

John that would be fantastic to get a base tune. Or even one that's almost complete. That would help out tremendously. My email is importfightercavalier@gmail.com

Thanks a ton fellas



Re: which is better for sc eco
Friday, September 16, 2011 10:58 AM
Ah, I see. Then you 'd just have to move each cell individually to the 105kPa column of a one bar tune. It would/should still work just fine. It's not like you hit drastically different boost pressure in different gears, unless you have one of those fancy variable diameter pulleys



Re: which is better for sc eco
Friday, September 16, 2011 2:50 PM
Yeah I would only lose a degree or two of timing for just a second.


1994 Saturn SL2 Home Coming Edition: backup car
2002 Chevy Cavalier LS Sport Coupe: In a Junk Yard
1995 Mazda Miata R-package Class=STR
Sponsored by: Kronos Performance

WPI Class of '12 Mechanical Engineering
WPI SAE Risk and Sustainability Management Officer
Re: which is better for sc eco
Monday, September 19, 2011 12:19 PM
So john, you have a base tune for 36# inj and 1 bar map? I may try the stock pulley for a while and will swap to a smaller one later on. the rest of my mods are in my profile. I'll even buy you a beer just,for your time...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Monday, September 19, 2011 12:21 PM


Re: which is better for sc eco
Monday, September 19, 2011 1:32 PM
SLO CAV (autocrossing dude) wrote:

So john, you have a base tune for 36# inj and 1 bar map? I may try the stock pulley for a while and will swap to a smaller one later on. the rest of my mods are in my profile. I'll even buy you a beer just,for your time...


I do not have one already done for 36er's.

I have one for 650's. I could send ti to you. Adjust the constant. Do some VE tuning, and then probably add some timing.



FU Tuning



Re: which is better for sc eco
Monday, September 19, 2011 2:01 PM
Awesome. Send it on.... did.the ve offset change much?



Re: which is better for sc eco
Monday, September 19, 2011 4:05 PM
SLO CAV (autocrossing dude) wrote:

Awesome. Send it on.... did.the ve offset change much?


It will be later tonight or tomorrow. The wife has my laptop.

VE offset is stock.



FU Tuning



Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search