View Single Post
Old 05-25-2014, 07:58 PM   #5666
Shiv@Openflash
Senior Member
 
Shiv@Openflash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Drives: 2013 FRS
Location: SF, CA
Posts: 2,629
Thanks: 1,055
Thanked 5,470 Times in 1,494 Posts
Mentioned: 605 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jac View Post
the TQ300 was nice but, as fenton said, it was very current hungry. It taxed the controller in a bit way and required dual dumps (4 batteries) and an aux charger to drive. The dyno showed that it didn't have as good of low end torque (below 4500rpm) as the TQ250. But it did start to make more power above 5000rpm or so. By 6500rpm, it made a good ~10whp more. But on the road, it didn't seem as responsive or quick to spool. Given a choice, I think the TQ250 is a better performer at this stage. Even ignoring the currently hungry aspects of the TQ300.

Looks like I'll have my 1.5 dump pack upgrade there next week! And I'll re-do the OTS maps accordingly. Both for gasoline and E85. I know lot of people are waiting so I'll try to do it as soon as possible.

Cheers,
shiv
Shiv@Openflash is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 17 Users Say Thank You to Shiv@Openflash For This Useful Post:
alexand3r (05-25-2014), clintavo (05-26-2014), DAEMANO (05-25-2014), DC2R (05-25-2014), enwave (05-26-2014), fenton (05-25-2014), Gums (05-25-2014), Jac (05-25-2014), keen as (05-25-2014), nlowell (05-25-2014), raven1231 (05-25-2014), robwbright (05-25-2014), Sojhinn (05-25-2014), Target70 (05-25-2014), VR46 (05-27-2014), WNDSRFR (05-26-2014), WRB5titch (05-25-2014)