OFT vs. Ecutek

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by jamesm

That maf tube is a major fail on their part. Smaller than stock, right?

The shop that installed it told me it was 30% larger... I never actually looked at it to be honest. I scaled it up a few % from stock with a 3,000RPM redline and accelerated for 100 feet, then scaled from that point and ended up oddly near stock... I question if it was in fact smaller than stock. When the owner gets back in town I can take the calipers to it and find out!

I added some enrichment to 5.0v as it didn't seem to differ much from 4.727 but the 5.0v landed at 279.47 vs 279.227(stock ROM OEM MAF calibration).

Though I tried to keep pulls under 4.9v when possible. I actually setup a custom rom that I continually adjusted to whatever 4.8-4.9v g/s was and flickered the CEL to warn me that I was nearing maf capacity during tuning. I wanted to see how far the MAF was actually going to be usable. And the owner needed a short notice, short time frame tune so I didn't have time to setup a clean SD map. Although I am happy it happened that way because I was really quite curious how much that MAF could support.

[jamesm]

The scaling doesn't matter in terms of when it's maxed. 5v is 5v regardless of how much air the ecu thinks that correlates to. If you were hitting 4.8v at those boost/power levels, it has to be stock or smaller or maybe that particular car's sensor was an oddball. I ran 14psi and moved a lot more air before I saw that voltage.

The fact that targets were hit with the scaling near stock would suggest its around the same size as stock, but that's assuming the other fueling related calibrations are dead on true.

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by jamesm

The scaling doesn't matter in terms of when it's maxed. 5v is 5v regardless of how much air the ecu thinks that correlates to. If you were hitting 4.8v at those boost/power levels, it has to be stock or smaller or maybe that particular car's sensor was an oddball. I ran 14psi and moved a lot more air before I saw that voltage.

The fact that targets were hit with the scaling near stock would suggest its around the same size as stock, but that's assuming the other fueling related calibrations are dead on true.

This was on a stock fuel system and I tested E85 and 91. AFR targets were pretty spot on. No matter what it is further than I am comfortable with. Unless you are bone stock I would recommend as SD tune on that setup.

[jamesm]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

This was on a stock fuel system and I tested E85 and 91. AFR targets were pretty spot on. No matter what it is further than I am comfortable with. Unless you are bone stock I would recommend as SD tune on that setup.

what, you mean i'm not supposed to just disable the code and run it to 4.99v? damn..

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by jamesm

what, you mean i'm not supposed to just disable the code and run it to 4.99v? damn..

LOL

[DeliciousTuning]

Originally Posted by CajunFRS

This is good info for me because if I ever do pull the trigger I'm going for a smooth operation not big numbers.

I would like for my internals to see 100k inside of my motor.



Evo uses a hybrid SD/MAF so what about other cars.... GTR, STI, and GTI? I honestly think tuners should use whatever works for them. Long as the user experience is good and everything is running right.

Mercedes and BMW uses Manifold Air Pressure (MAP) on most all of their turbo engines, not MAF. And we all know how BMW and Mercedes drive, nice and smooth in all conditions. If an OEM can do it, than I am sure with EcuTeK and RaceROM custom mapping we can do it.

Speed Density works very well once tuned in, but yes it needs to be tuned in and that does take time. Once you have nailed it, there is never a need to rescale the MAF sensor for different size pipes, just drop in the tune and and go. Makes tuning a little easier at the end of the day if you put the leg work in up front.

So on systems that come with blow-through MAF systems, I prefer to run a 100% Speed Density setup, as it will make for a much more consistent tune versus running a blow-through MAF. The idle will be rock steady, open/closed loop conditions will be consistent and cruising can be dialed in nearly perfect and then reused on many applications.

At the end of the day us tuners all have our own opinion, so choose your tuner and go with what they recommend to make sure you get the type of tune you are looking for. Personally I would only recommend Speed Density on vehicles running forced induction setups that do not offer a draw-through MAF system. In these applications Speed Density will be ideal for a much smoother and more desirable tune in my opinion.

Cheers,
William Knose

[Shiv@Openflash]

Originally Posted by DeliciousTuning

Mercedes and BMW uses Manifold Air Pressure (MAP) on most all of their turbo engines, not MAF. And we all know how BMW and Mercedes drive, nice and smooth in all conditions. If an OEM can do it, than I am sure with EcuTeK and RaceROM custom mapping we can do it.

Speed Density works very well once tuned in, but yes it needs to be tuned in and that does take time. Once you have nailed it, there is never a need to rescale the MAF sensor for different size pipes, just drop in the tune and and go. Makes tuning a little easier at the end of the day if you put the leg work in up front.

So on systems that come with blow-through MAF systems, I prefer to run a 100% Speed Density setup, as it will make for a much more consistent tune versus running a blow-through MAF. The idle will be rock steady, open/closed loop conditions will be consistent and cruising can be dialed in nearly perfect and then reused on many applications.

At the end of the day us tuners all have our own opinion, so choose your tuner and go with what they recommend to make sure you get the type of tune you are looking for. Personally I would only recommend Speed Density on vehicles running forced induction setups that do not offer a draw-through MAF system. In these applications Speed Density will be ideal for a much smoother and more desirable tune in my opinion.

Cheers,
William Knose

BMW uses speed density on it older turbo engines because it operates closed loop fuel control 100% of the time. So there is no risk of missing fueling targets under any load conditions. I'm not certain, but I think the same applies to Mercedes as well. So I don't see how that is relaven to our platform which transitions to open loop fuel control under load. And that is an NA application. Errors are multiples when boosting on top of that.

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

BMW uses speed density on it older turbo engines because it operates closed loop fuel control 100% of the time. So there is no risk of missing fueling targets under any load conditions. I'm not certain, but I think the same applies to Mercedes as well. So I don't see how that is relaven to our platform which transitions to open loop fuel control under load. And that is an NA application. Errors are multiples when boosting on top of that.

I think his point was more about the fact that SD can operate smoothly in which he chose some "luxurious" cars that should drive smoothly.

[Shiv@Openflash]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

I think his point was more about the fact that SD can operate smoothly in which he chose some "luxurious" cars that should drive smoothly.

And my point was that these luxurious cars operating in closed loop fuel control 100% of the time, unlike the fa20. So their effective fuel control strategies are vastly different. Running continual closed loop fuel control compensates for the fueling errors induced by running speed density. This is evident by the fact that their fuel trims under boost are variable depending on conditions and fuel composition. We have several hundred BMW N54 OFT users so I have enough logs to share if anyone wants to see

[nelsmar]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

And my point was that these luxurious cars operating in closed loop fuel control 100% of the time, unlike the fa20. So their effective fuel control strategies are vastly different. Running continual closed loop fuel control compensates for the fueling errors induced by running speed density. This is evident by the fact that their fuel trims under boost are variable depending on conditions and fuel composition. We have several hundred BMW N54 OFT users so I have enough logs to share if anyone wants to see

And the point still stands that SD is still drivable and can be smooth. You seem to light to debate anything that OFT doesn't currently support...

[FrsDuke]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

We have several hundred BMW N54 OFT users so I have enough logs to share if anyone wants to see

Probably getting another user soon. My father just got a 2011 335i "for mom"
Sorry, back on topic. The debate will never die because some tuners think it is mandatory and some don't. Preference is what it comes down to. I've yet to hear someone say "I hate SD but I have to do it because of x, y, or z". The ones that use it are comfortable with it or prefer it for whatever reasons.

[Shiv@Openflash]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

And the point still stands that SD is still drivable and can be smooth. You seem to light to debate anything that OFT doesn't currently support...

It may sound like that who doesn't understand the point I am making.

[DeliciousTuning]

Originally Posted by nelsmar

And the point still stands that SD is still drivable and can be smooth. You seem to light to debate anything that OFT doesn't currently support...

Agreed.

And thanks bringing up another valid point about closed/open loop tuning. Why could you not run closed loop fuel control 100% of the time with Speed Density. I am sure with EcuTeK RaceROM you could.

With EcuTeK RaceROM a tuner can even use stock injectors to horsepower levels I am sure other systems will not be able to obtain due to fact they do not have EcuTeK RaceROM. So now one can save a little money for other performance minded parts.

On top of that a lot of EcuTeK tuners use the RaceROM custom mapping features heavily especially on forced induction vehicles. Most of our customers (75%) running FI usually request at least one of the features: FlexFuel, Traction Control, Boost Control, Switchable Maps...

Of course there are naturally aspirated vehicles which can run with other tuning systems, but I believe EcuTeK is making more on a naturally aspirated vehicle than anything else out there. And they have the option of switching between maps on the fly if they like.

There is just more cool features and abilities to come with EcuTeK. Where other systems just imitate, EcuTeK innovates.

Cheers,
William Knose

[Shiv@Openflash]

This debate condensed into an analogy:

Statement 1: it's ok to drive with no air pressure in your tire. BMWs and Mercedes can do it.

Counterpoint: that's not a valid comparison because those cars have run-flat tires. The FRS/BRZ does not. So attempting to do so is not ideal.

Statement 2: it seems that you are saying anything that you don't recommend isn't ideal. The point that luxurious cars can drive around with no air pressure still stands.

Counterpoint 2: [speechless]