PLM Long Tube Header

[KoolBRZ]

Here are the best AVCS Intake and Exhaust tables I've developed so far for the PLM Header. I'm trying 4 more tunes tomorrow, so I'll let you know. 1.7 is simply the PLM tune steve99 posted with changes in the intake and exhaust tables at the low end. I've tried a dozen others and I keep coming back to the tune with these tables as the best tune so far. I simply can't improve on the top end of either intake or exhaust tables without creating a worse flat spot at 3500 RPM, so I'm concentrating on improving the low end torque instead. Copy these if you will and you won't be too far from as good as you can get. The tables steve99 posted are a great place to start. The top end can't be beat. I know because I've tried.

[Shady195]

I'll have to give these a try.

I used steve's tables and the butt dyno does not feel to much of a difference except for a bit of fall off in the 3-4krpm range.

.

[Lithium]

Originally Posted by shu5892001

Is the baseline with header and no tune? Or no header and no tune.

Thanks

the baseline was a stock brz on the same dyno. that brz has the highest numbers out of all the stock twins to be on that dyno.

[KoolBRZ]

I loaded 5 tunes, including the 1.7 version posted earlier last night, and today I drove around to customer's trying out the other 4 tunes and comparing them to the 1.7 version. Version 2.1, the last version, is finally better than version 1.7. I evaluated best flat-foot shift of an automatic tune in manual mode, best acceleration from 3000 on up, best mileage, and best drive-ability in automatic mode with the A/C on. This tune passed all those tests with flying colors. Here is a pic of just the exhaust table, The intake table remained the same as version 1.7 above. It's time for someone else to try this out with their car and tell me what they think. Remember, you won't get the same results if you don't have the PLM or Nameless header. I circled the area where the changes are made from the 1.7 tune on the 2nd pic.
P.S. @Kodename47, I trimmed out with 5's and 10's across the board, following your advice a bit further than you intended, but it works good. You should try it.

P.P.S. @steve99, can you update your tune tweaks with these 2.1 tables? They are far superior to the 1.4 version you have posted, and will most likely be the last version of this tune I post.

[KoolBRZ]

I want to share my best tune ever. I think it will work for any header, but I haven't tried it on others yet. Everybody uses too much overlap over 1.0 Load and I've been reducing overlap. Here are screenshots of the AVCS Intake and Exhaust tables I've changed. I've also used almost all of wayno's changes and additions. Check out these tables compared to my previous tables, and compare these tables to each other. I purposely made them almost a mirror image of each other.

[burdickjp]

Do you have datalogs comparing something like acceleration to go by for these changes?

Sent from my XT1045 using Tapatalk

[KoolBRZ]

Originally Posted by bur****jp

Do you have datalogs comparing something like acceleration to go by for these changes?

Sent from my XT1045 using Tapatalk

No. But, before you scoff, try comparing how different tunes affect the drive. It seems our cars are designed to get power over 3500 rpms, and economy under 3500 rpms. Too much overlap under 3500 rpms loses power AND economy. I've just been trying to understand through trial and error the effects of changes to the AVCS, both intake and exhaust. I've finally gotten enough power that I can accelerate up a gradual incline in 6th gear, at 1800 rpm, and about .95 load. That's my scientific version of a datalog. I've also gotten so I can hear AVCS changes, and have concluded that quieter is better below .7 load, and if it doesn't get louder by .9 load, it needs more overlap. I don't have any restrictions in my exhaust except the muffler, so I hear everything. I want other people to try it not out of some altruism, but so I can better understand how the AVCS can be used to compensate for intake and exhaust restrictions and make the most power possible, at any rpm.

[Starkiller]

Here is a video of mine with a PLM header on a dynojet 5,000lb dyno.
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A306zUVPiBg"]FR-S Dyno - YouTube[/ame]

[burdickjp]

Originally Posted by KoolBRZ

No.

Load the OEM tables. make a datalog going up that hill logging JUST load and RPM. Do it as repeatable as you can for at least 6 runs.
Load your current tables. Do the same thing. Again, be as repeatable as you can.
Post the logs up and I will show you how to analyze them in a manner which can, without bias, demonstrate changes.
I will be using Python, so get anaconda set up: http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showt...ghlight=python

[witz]

how are these doing right now?

[Shady195]

Originally Posted by Starkiller

Here is a video of mine with a PLM header on a dynojet 5,000lb dyno.

93 or e85?

and a better pic of the dyno graph would be great

[Starkiller]

Regular ole Florida 93. LOL. We think that once we get to clean up the tune a little bit that we may make 200hp without E85.

[Shady195]

Looks pretty decent! Wish it was closer to the real "nameless" dyno I've seen with that massive hump in the torque department but it looks pretty good once you get up around 4 grand.. Which my butt dyno concurs with.

[illmatic]

oops


Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk