Nameless Performance Equal Length Stepped Header

[Hawaiian]

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

They moved to a MoTeC unit, so I I question what's going on with the stock ECU and the gains...they had already said they were facing regression issues on the stock unit.

Why was no one else having regression issues?

Bill, mike, and bob seem to be doing just fine.

[OrbitalEllipses]

Originally Posted by Hawaiian

Why was no one else having regression issues?

Bill, mike, and bob seem to be doing just fine.

You should be asking "why didn't anyone else report regression issues?"

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

You should be asking "why didn't anyone else report regression issues?"

What regression issue... Please fill me in. As in the ECU is slowly going back to an older state? or what?

[FrsDuke]

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

They moved to a MoTeC unit, so I I question what's going on with the stock ECU and the gains...they had already said they were facing regression issues on the stock unit.

They are doing both, more than doubling their tuning development time. They didn't abandon using ecutek with the stock ecu. They aren't just doing a glory tune they are producing a tune (for each) that is for distribution. So just getting numbers is not the point. It has to be safe and repeatable performance.

We aren't just waiting on the testing of a header. We are waiting on the development of a header as well as two tuning solutions for multiple exhaust configurations. All while the third party doing it is splitting time on a dyno while fulfilling other obligations for his tuning business.

It's just going to take time. Will I be disappointed if I get my header before I see numbers? Sure, but I will be far more excited to have it regardless.

I know they have already verified it makes great gains without a tune at all. I wish at least that info was being shared, but I'm not gonna wish in one hand and shit in the other just to see which fills up first.

They wouldn't have started selling if they had any doubt about the results. They've spent too much time developing and watching interest grow to do anything less than deliver results.

[Hawaiian]

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

You should be asking "why didn't anyone else report regression issues?"

I'm not looking to start another war here, but maybe because no one else was having them?

@jamesm @mad_sb. I'm not trying to drag you in to anything, but have either of you had issues with runes "regressing" back to stock after only a few dyno pulls? I know the other guys can't post here due to their vendor status and the whole "stay out of other vendors threads.

[Hawaiian]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

What regression issue... Please fill me in. As in the ECU is slowly going back to an older state? or what?

Yes. Let me try to find his post.

[FrsDuke]

Originally Posted by Hawaiian

I'm not looking to start another war here, but maybe because no one else was having them?

@jamesm @mad_sb. I'm not trying to drag you in to anything, but have either of you had issues with runes "regressing" back to stock after only a few dyno pulls? I know the other guys can't post here due to their vendor status and the whole "stay out of other vendors threads.

Were the regression issues with ecutek or motec? I seem to remember them only tinkering with motec at that time, but I'm not certain. Perhaps that is one delay with the dyno figures. Wouldn't be good for them to say here is the performance on ecutek and not show motec if they want to sell any motec stuff.

[raven1231]

Originally Posted by FrsDuke

They are doing both, more than doubling their tuning development time. They didn't abandon using ecutek with the stock ecu. They aren't just doing a glory tune they are producing a tune (for each) that is for distribution. So just getting numbers is not the point. It has to be safe and repeatable performance.

We aren't just waiting on the testing of a header. We are waiting on the development of a header as well as two tuning solutions for multiple exhaust configurations. All while the third party doing it is splitting time on a dyno while fulfilling other obligations for his tuning business.

It's just going to take time. Will I be disappointed if I get my header before I see numbers? Sure, but I will be far more excited to have it regardless.

I know they have already verified it makes great gains without a tune at all. I wish at least that info was being shared, but I'm not gonna wish in one hand and shit in the other just to see which fills up first.

They wouldn't have started selling if they had any doubt about the results. They've spent too much time developing and watching interest grow to do anything less than deliver results.

Your last sentence is what worries me most...

[mad_sb]

Originally Posted by Hawaiian

I'm not looking to start another war here, but maybe because no one else was having them?

@jamesm @mad_sb. I'm not trying to drag you in to anything, but have either of you had issues with runes "regressing" back to stock after only a few dyno pulls? I know the other guys can't post here due to their vendor status and the whole "stay out of other vendors threads.

I have not, other than long term trims stacking up for fuel, iam, etc.

Originally Posted by FrsDuke

Were the regression issues with ecutek or motec? I seem to remember them only tinkering with motec at that time, but I'm not certain. Perhaps that is one delay with the dyno figures. Wouldn't be good for them to say here is the performance on ecutek and not show motec if they want to sell any motec stuff.

Stock Ecu EcuTek Tune by @johnbradley


IIRC the issue was with the first pull after a flash, the torque dip would be gone. The next pull on the same tune and every pull after the dip would be back to some extent in a small area. I suspect that, at the time, @johnbradley did not have much time under his belt with one of the twins. I would imagine he has more time with them now. Regardless, i think the plots they posted were with the "regression".

Im curious to see the difference betwen stock ecu tune results and stand alone tune results....

[Hawaiian]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

What regression issue... Please fill me in. As in the ECU is slowly going back to an older state? or what?

Found it.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...postcount=1215

Read from page 54-56 if you want the full story

Originally Posted by FrsDuke

Were the regression issues with ecutek or motec? I seem to remember them only tinkering with motec at that time, but I'm not certain. Perhaps that is one delay with the dyno figures. Wouldn't be good for them to say here is the performance on ecutek and not show motec if they want to sell any motec stuff.

It was with Ecutek at the time. They were starting to contemplate motec because of issues they were having with the Ecutek.

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by Hawaiian

I'm not looking to start another war here, but maybe because no one else was having them?

@jamesm @mad_sb. I'm not trying to drag you in to anything, but have either of you had issues with runes "regressing" back to stock after only a few dyno pulls? I know the other guys can't post here due to their vendor status and the whole "stay out of other vendors threads.

I had street tuned someones car and he drove on it for 2-3 days before goign to the dyno. After that he put down mid 190's WHP. After a few quick flashes just smoothing the fueling out the power was nearly the same, so if regression from a few pulls is what someone is talking about I don't know what they are talking about since I would have seen a power "gain" from flashing the rom with almost no changes. There are a lot of tables in this ecu so it is possible something was forgotten if they were getting regression.

[OrbitalEllipses]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

I had street tuned someones car and he drove on it for 2-3 days before goign to the dyno. After that he put down mid 190's WHP. After a few quick flashes just smoothing the fueling out the power was nearly the same, so if regression from a few pulls is what someone is talking about I don't know what they are talking about since I would have seen a power "gain" from flashing the rom with almost no changes. There are a lot of tables in this ecu so it is possible something was forgotten if they were getting regression.

It was odd, but I recall other tuners at the time saying something about it as well. They didn't outright say they were having regression issues, but that after a few pulls power wasn't as strong. Not outright gone, just not as much as the first few pulls. IIRC it wasn't attributed to heat either which is what I would expect on a dyno.

[Hawaiian]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

I had street tuned someones car and he drove on it for 2-3 days before goign to the dyno. After that he put down mid 190's WHP. After a few quick flashes just smoothing the fueling out the power was nearly the same, so if regression from a few pulls is what someone is talking about I don't know what they are talking about since I would have seen a power "gain" from flashing the rom with almost no changes. There are a lot of tables in this ecu so it is possible something was forgotten if they were getting regression.

I know an issue @JuniorAWD found early on was a radio check box for debug mode. It would look like he was adjusting timing and everything was going in fine, but the only setting that would change on the car was the fuel mapping.

Once he figured that out it was smooth tuning from there. Maybe that was the same issue? It was the first twin he was working on after all.

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

It was odd, but I recall other tuners at the time saying something about it as well. They didn't outright say they were having regression issues, but that after a few pulls power wasn't as strong. Not outright gone, just not as much as the first few pulls. IIRC it wasn't attributed to heat either which is what I would expect on a dyno.

I remember an article of a specific tuner that said somethign like this a while ago. Also the ecu isnt in full ready state the moment it starts. I don't know specifically what triggers the cam tables but there seems to be a timer or ready check somewhere beyond the triggered IAM table. So if you do a pull fairly shortly after flashing (1-2 minutes) it will use the high det table, and a few pulls later it will activate the low det table and your cam timing changes. There are other tables with similar situations. And if you are on the dyno with fuel trims enabled this could be causing similar issues.