FR-S Dyno testing at DD Performance Research inc. 2ZZ comparison

[Boosted2.0]

Originally Posted by huma

Like I said before, your settings are STD, not SAE corrected (more accurate). Once you change the settings, your whp is going to be more like 172 whp or less.

We change the settings all the time. The data is not recorded or stored in a corrected fashion - it is indexed as speed of the roller over time with the current engine RPM, boost, A/F etc. stored at each data point. You can view it easily in any correction factor or none at all. In this case we posted std but we have of course looked at in in SAE and uncorrected as well. The difference is only a couple (2) HP to SAE - not 6. It was 175.74 WHP and 144.38 WTQ.

SAE and STD tend to be quite close on lower powered NA cars.

[Illusive]

Spent the day learning the EcuTek software and setting up our basemap. Spent the afternoon on mapping the ideal cam angles.

Should have the ideal cam angles button'd up tomorrow and I can then work on a final vvt and ign blend for our 93 oct map.

We found some interesting data with resetting the ECU on the FRS rom before and after reflashing with the EcuTek BRZ rom. Will post those results up later.

[Zaneman]

Interested in what mods you will be bringing out for the twins. Will you mostly be posting on your sites forum or here?

[Illusive]

We will be cross posting the results including here of course.

For now it's just going to be bone stock tuning results.

[Illusive]

Final 93 oct tuning results are in after a marathon tuning day (10AM - 1AM)

Ecutek base runfile 46 is with a fresh ecutek flash with the Ignition Advance Multiplier (IAM) set to 1.0 (default is 0.7) for maximum timing on the base / stock flash.

With the IAM set to 0.7 the peak hp was in the 173 range.

We felt it was more apples to apples comparison if we set the IAM to 1.0 for the before and after.

[Boosted2.0]

Also of note - we found that the FRS stock ecu does NOT use a 0.7 IAM as has been reported. The basemap and ignition response that ECU TEK is sending out is different than the stock ignition software. It works fine, but the stock FRS definitely gives you maximum timing immediately after an ecu reset, whereas the ECU TEK flash with a 0.7 IAM does not. With the IAM set to 1.0 the behavior of the ECU TEK base flash was similar to the stock behavior however.

Oh an Jason's tune (Illusive's) was on our still bone stock FR-S BTW. That tune is the only modification to the car at this time.

[Zaneman]

Great to see you guys figuring out the FR-S. Having a dyno & flow bench should equal some real world results and proof as opposed to a lot of other companies and products.

[Boosted2.0]

Originally Posted by Zaneman

Great to see you guys figuring out the FR-S. Having a dyno & flow bench should equal some real world results and proof as opposed to a lot of other companies and products.

Thanks Zane! We were very happy that the HP had finally stabilized so we could start the tuning and parts development process. Don't get me wrong - we were happy it kept going up, but we were also starting to get antsy.

[FreshFRS]

is that 190whp i see from just a tune? thats freaking sweet! intake and exhaust >210-220whp? seems fairly possible.

[Boosted2.0]

Yep. Our pump gas tune seems to be about the best power curve for a pump gas stock engine tune I have seen so far, and actually compares favorably to the E85 tunes. We're going to do some street driving on it and then re-dyno and see if the power number is stable. I look forward to testing with some mods on it as well.

[OrbitalEllipses]

Originally Posted by FreshFRS

is that 190whp i see from just a tune? thats freaking sweet! intake and exhaust >210-220whp? seems fairly possible.

A) Dynojet.
B) Always compare percent delta HP rather than raw delta HP; it is a more accurate manner of ascertaining power change.

[Illusive]

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

A) Dynojet.
B) Always compare percent delta HP rather than raw delta HP; it is a more accurate manner of ascertaining power change.

Not true.

We have several dyno plots of our FR-S that show it making 165 whp bone stock with low miles and no engine break-in.

We could just as easily posted up those as the "before" and then made it look like we were tuning gods by making 25-30 whp with just a tune.

Heck we could have also posted the 173 whp dyno plots with the IAM set to 0.7 which is the default setting and shown that as the "before" showing gains of 17-20 whp from just "tune"

Point being using the before then after delta is not always accurate if the before figures are being fudged to sell the product.

[Boosted2.0]

Also our dyno is in no way "happy" - the base numbers we get on pretty much everything are right in line with every other dynojet. I have seen plenty of Dynapacks and dyno dynamics that read a good deal higher as well.

Please note this is not some 25 year old dyno either - this is a not yet 1 year old in ground 424xLC2 with the Linx system - the most advanced dyno currently available.

[FreshFRS]

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

A) Dynojet.
B) Always compare percent delta HP rather than raw delta HP; it is a more accurate manner of ascertaining power change.

as long as all dynos were done on the same dyno it doesn't matter, what kind of dyno it is. what matters is the improvement from the baseline.