[diodelphi]

Originally Posted by GrimmSpeed

ALL parameters in the map were equal between pulls.

Changing the MAF scale was not even necessary because we worked hard to make the intake behave as close to stock as possible. In fact in the MAF scale for the intake I believe the HIGHEST correction percentage anywhere was only 4%.

The ignition advance multiplier was forced to 1.0 for two reasons:

1) Consistency. We could perform pulls from stock IAM (i can't remember if it's .7 or .8) until the IAM gets to 1.0. But this is a waste of time, and is a way that some companies can post false dyno numbers (pull 1 being at a lower ignition advance compared to pull 5, thus showing "gains," but actually showing gains from increased ignition timing).

2) Looking for knock. If we do three pulls and the IAM drops, we know we have a problem.

For these reasons and more EVERY SINGLE DYNO YOU SEE should be performed at IAM = 1.0. This is what we did, this is what we do, it is most accurate, and the ONLY thing that we changed in the ECU map from stock.

So no, we didn't change cam or ignition timing, other than forcing the ignition to its "best condition."

Again, all comparison dynos were performed in the same temperature, conditions, dyno, operator, and on the same day.

Let me know if this makes sense to you or if you have any other questions,
Chase
Engineering

I read your links carefully , Thanks so for step by step dyno test graph .
very thanks because you are careful about customers .
I ordered one
be happy