2017 Toyota 86 Baseline Dyno vs OFT Stage 1

[JermMX5]

Originally Posted by Tor

My guess is it switched from closed loop to open loop fuelling.

There are some misconceptions about learning:
- It only helps if the tune is "off" when freshly flashed.
- Learning can also be detrimential if a tune that initially produces good values has some errors that causes the ECU to learn wrong fuel trims over time.

If the tune is perfect when freshly flashed no learning is required at all. The time the ECU spends in closed loop, learning doesn't matter at all.

Why would it have switched at 7200rpm?

[steve99]

Originally Posted by JermMX5

Why would it have switched at 7200rpm?

It possible the ECU has switched between the OL fuel table A or B or the Power AFR WOT table you don't have defined. Im not sure on the switching logic.
The 2017 fueling and timing logic is different to previous

[JermMX5]

Originally Posted by steve99

It possible the ECU has switched between the OL fuel table A or B or the Power AFR WOT table you don't have defined. Im not sure on the switching logic.
The 2017 fueling and timing logic is different to previous

So with the Power AFR WOT table not being defined, is it just defaulting to what the default behavior is for the stock tune or does Shiv have it defined on a custom definition? I thought with the Open Flash Tablet we were supposed to have access to everything?

[Tor]

Originally Posted by JermMX5

Why would it have switched at 7200rpm?

Purely guesswork, but judging from the tables available in the definition I have. I would rather say that it was in "Power AFR" and then dropped to OL (AFR Command curve doesn't match OL or CL fuel tables).

[steve99]

Originally Posted by JermMX5

So with the Power AFR WOT table not being defined, is it just defaulting to what the default behavior is for the stock tune or does Shiv have it defined on a custom definition? I thought with the Open Flash Tablet we were supposed to have access to everything?

All the roms will contain all the tables, just without the correct definitions you cannot see or alter them.


Id imagine shiv has updated definitions

[Qc86]

So the numbers you got are HP and not WHP?

[chazmuska]

Originally Posted by Qc86

So the numbers you got are HP and not WHP?

Those are WHP numbers. The already has 205HP at the crank. What I'm curious is to know how much WHP one will get with just a carbon fiber driveshaft. I've heard a lot of good things about it.

[Qc86]

Id be curious to get my car on the same dyno. I got the ecutek tune along with all the bolt ons and do 166whp. I seen people do runs on the same dyno ive been (MAHA) and then on a dynojet and there was around 15whp difference.

[JermMX5]

Originally Posted by Qc86

Id be curious to get my car on the same dyno. I got the ecutek tune along with all the bolt ons and do 166whp. I seen people do runs on the same dyno ive been (MAHA) and then on a dynojet and there was around 15whp difference.

These cars make 205 crank... And based on what I've seen with the ace headers, making 30 whp with ace+ecutek is easy. So I would not be surprised if that 211 was the actual power you were putting down.

Because 166whp on a bone stock 2017 would mean 20% drive train loss, which is almost feasible. I would say it's closer to 15%.

But if you put down 166whp with say even 20 more hp on the crank (Which you should have more), then that would mean an over 30% drivetrain loss which would be crazy.

[JermMX5]

Originally Posted by Qc86

Id be curious to get my car on the same dyno. I got the ecutek tune along with all the bolt ons and do 166whp. I seen people do runs on the same dyno ive been (MAHA) and then on a dynojet and there was around 15whp difference.

And oh my god that TQ is flat. The Stage 2+ OFT tune doesn't even fill in the curve like that.

[Jasonb]

Originally Posted by JermMX5

And oh my god that TQ is flat. The Stage 2+ OFT tune doesn't even fill in the curve like that.

Also looks like a lot of smoothing on the graph. It looks too good to not have a ton of smoothing applied.

[nunonuna]

Originally Posted by JermMX5

And oh my god that TQ is flat. The Stage 2+ OFT tune doesn't even fill in the curve like that.

I assume he has a header..
Header is the key to fill in the dip. Even OTS stg 1 with catted UEL header makes flat tq curves.

[JermMX5]

Originally Posted by nunonuna

I assume he has a header..
Header is the key to fill in the dip. Even OTS stg 1 with catted UEL header makes flat tq curves.

Not on the 2017s... Go take a look at the OTS 3.0 thread and the 2017s with the Stage 2+ and header and OP still have quite a dip. Where as his 2017 is flat

[steve99]

Originally Posted by JermMX5

Not on the 2017s... Go take a look at the OTS 3.0 thread and the 2017s with the Stage 2+ and header and OP still have quite a dip. Where as his 2017 is flat

Scaling on dyno sheets can make curves look flatter