Programmable ECU on 20V

[fandango]

Speed, your explanation is very clear...tq!

William, wish I could attend the TTT tonite...aiya, shud not hv agreed to fetch wife to work today...

I suppose the real skill of the tuner then is not so much to extract power, but to extract it while keeping consumption and reliability within acceptable limits...hmmm...

 

[Useless]

speed,
thanks for highlighting my error in stating variables vs constants. i should really stop typing faster than i am thinking *Useless slaps own forehead*

Peeps,
the thing here is that ignition timing does play a significant role in engine performance improvement. We may set the ign timing very close to ping limit, but what would be the final lambda output? There will be a region of unburnt HC in the af mixture. Oxidation will be incomplete even past the afterknock phase. However, remember that knock occurance is dependant on combustion chamber shape, operation range and fuel octane level. As of engine combustion chamber shapes, some engines have direct relationship of knock vs rpm, but some have an inverse relationship. but on a more sensitive note, how many of us are really concerned of our emmissions? with longer cam durations, bigger valves, larger injectors, upgraded fuel pump, etc, alot of unburnt fumes will already be exhausted into the atmosphere.

personally for me, reliability is having only to change engine oil at at least 10,000 km, power output at more than 100hp per 1 liter engine displacement under normal aspirated operations, with a good torque curve and compliant to minimum of euro4 emission regulations.

i think that the 4age 16v engine can put out 140~150 hp atw with some mods and still give good reliabilty and fuel consumption figures. This of course having the stock ecu replaced.

an interesting area which is still unchartered in our local RnD is injector and injection characteristics. On the whole, happy tuning and modding!

 

[fandango]

160 Atw

The last time my car was dynoed it yielded 134 ATW, with stock cams and ECU and bolt ons (including one very nice 4-1 extractor). That works out to about 157 at the crank (15% loss factor for manual gb). So, it's only 8HP off the stock blacktop quotes. But the 4-1 is gone now...

I thinking of aiming for about 160atw, with some cams and aftermkt ECU. This would mean about 188 - 190 at the crank. Most important it cannot sacrifice too much low end or else it wont be streetable. Can this be done if cams do not exceed 272 and 8.5" lift? Ideally a very fat and juicy torque curve from 3-6k rpm...:shocked:

 

[yolk]

Alo bro fandango
Manyak mau ahhhh lu !!! hahahahah .. actually when I first got my 20v and day dreaming everyday I wanted a 180hp ATW engine !!! Then as I learned more about the engine and what it can do and can't do I reduced the expectation to 170hp ATW .. and then starting looking at how to make that figure and then compared with money at hand and decided to drop it to 160hp ATW ... hahahaha :X-:

One thing for sure if you're talking about 272 cams you definately need to go standalone or at least a piggyback to get the maximum out of it and also to get a good daily driver. The stock ecu just can't do it. With 272 cams and a standalone I believe 160-170hp is no problem ... only problem is the tuner and he can maximise the power band to what you want .. coz you are talking bout HIGHER DEGREE/LIFT cams here ... btw the gold color corolla with 272/9mm cams did get about 160hp ATW without a standalone and just a piggyback :_:

But GO AHEAD YOU CAN DO IT !!!!! I decided not too in the end .. hahahahah:embaressed_smile:

 

[Useless]

Fandango,

About drivetrain losses, it still makes me wonder about the theory of 15% losses which translates to ATW is 85% of total crank output? if we built an engine to push out 1000hp at the crank, that would mean a whopping 150 losses through the drivetrain? correct me if i am wrong, but shouldnt it be 8-12hp losses via a "good" drivetrain, and up to 15hp losses via a "bad" drivetrain.

choosing cams on the toyota would be rather fun as one can opt to go for higher lift or longer durations cam openings without much worry of valve hit as compared to other makes.

I suspect newer gen piggybacks can trick the older motronic derived toyota ecu through lambda monitoring and controlled output.

 

[fandango]

I am not complaining if the loss is only 8-12bhp! I suppose the gearbox is still in pretty good shape, more so with RP fluids...so far so good. Damn, I miss those adjustables. For a given duration, I wonder how lift affects torque spread (if at all). I suppose higher lift will require stiffer springs, which in turn may reduce 'revability'??

oops...we seem to be drifting off topic now...

Use, I reckon you've dabbled in quite a bit of standalones yourself. Wanna share if there is any major differences in the tek-teks available? I downloaded the HalwinX v1.0...very interesting...but there are loads of stuff i know zilch about still...

 

[GT20v]

Fandango,

About drivetrain losses, it still makes me wonder about the theory of 15% losses which translates to ATW is 85% of total crank output? if we built an engine to push out 1000hp at the crank, that would mean a whopping 150 losses through the drivetrain? correct me if i am wrong, but shouldnt it be 8-12hp losses via a "good" drivetrain, and up to 15hp losses via a "bad" drivetrain.

choosing cams on the toyota would be rather fun as one can opt to go for higher lift or longer durations cam openings without much worry of valve hit as compared to other makes.

I suspect newer gen piggybacks can trick the older motronic derived toyota ecu through lambda monitoring and controlled output.

Bro,
i farking agree with you..n my argument is exactly the same like urs......i always count bhp at wheel minus 15bhp for FF......nvr ever with percentage.......wah really glad found 1 supporter already hahahhaha:X-:

 

[fandango]

got my head screwed on wrong

Aso, my head was screwed on wrong...:retarded:...so if whp is 134, then at crank is only abt 145 only. Hehe...So aiming for 160 whp means only abt 170-175 at crank. So, if programmable ecu costs approx 5000 + cams 3000 + pulleys 1000 = 9000.

So extra 26 whp will cost 9000; that means 1hp = 346.15. Hmmm....cheaper than buying a real horse I guess.:regular_smile:

 

[yolk]

I don't really believe this is the case definately RWD and 4WD will sap more power from the crank and i agree that using a percentage to calculate the loss is not really accurate but fixing it to 8-15hp loss due to drivetrain is just as bad i think.

Fandango,

About drivetrain losses, it still makes me wonder about the theory of 15% losses which translates to ATW is 85% of total crank output? if we built an engine to push out 1000hp at the crank, that would mean a whopping 150 losses through the drivetrain? correct me if i am wrong, but shouldnt it be 8-12hp losses via a "good" drivetrain, and up to 15hp losses via a "bad" drivetrain.

choosing cams on the toyota would be rather fun as one can opt to go for higher lift or longer durations cam openings without much worry of valve hit as compared to other makes.

I suspect newer gen piggybacks can trick the older motronic derived toyota ecu through lambda monitoring and controlled output.

 

[GT20v]

yolk,
losess i stated is for FF.for FR,AWD or MR would be diff i guess.im not sure what the best value...............30??? me not rear driven car user..hehehehhe

 

[Useless]

haha. sorry guys, seem like we are drifting off topic bit by bit here.

fandango,
i have not dabbled in any standalones on a deep level. i am trying very hard to dissociate myself from the world of tuning or whatever there is to do with mods. just that i have past experiences working with various ecus, and am currently doing vehicle diagnostics as a day-to-day job. to me, all the available standalones are pretty decent, just the amount of depth and time spent by the tuners would make a difference in the output.


yolk and gt20v,
i actually have met u guys ler. i doubt u remember me la. gt20v, i was the guy struggling with your vacuum problem while using the ipoh mali ecu. a friend of chin.

i agree that rwd has a slightly greater average drivetrain loss as compared to ff. but 30 hp is way to large. i am talking in perspective of a run-in/well maintained drivetrain as comparison baseline. i believe atw rating is also subjective to the friction between flywheel and also clutch.

lets direct back to topic a lil so that moderator wont ban topic. hehe.

20v silvertop should run 4 throttles with standalone ecu with map sensor. somehow adapting the 20v silvertop to have a larger plenum is a problem. the jetronic type flap airflow sensing is somewhat a crude method of measuring airflow. map is not that accurate but cheap,reliable, and last long. still think that NA application should stick to karmann vortex or hot film but tuning it will be a difficult for standalone.

cheers!

 

[GT20v]

oh.....its you :_:......appreciate your effort on my car dude.....

TPS is not bad......add MAP for barometric......heheh we got a very advanced carb already hehehe

 

[QiW]

eehh ?? i tot your office ada firewall cannot masok zth one ??? hehehehe

 

[Useless]

gt20v,

so u went for a microtech?

rgds

 

[rollaGT]

mind those sifu to explain more on "standalone"???
and i only know that the degree max is 15. what is the total 45 degree????

 

[GT20v]

useless,

nope.hehehe

 

[fandango]

I'm not sure to what extend are standalones flexible enough to adapt to "hardware" changes without having to be tuned all over again, say if I change an extractor, exhaust, or if change another pair of cams, advance the intake cam, etc.

And what about "uncontrolled" changes, such as higher coolant temp due to rust, higher ambient temp due to weather, sensor failure, etc. How will the programmable ECU react to these, or a combination of these? :retarded:

If human intervention is frequently required, then it may prove to be a bit of a hassle...

 

[cuscostrutbrace]

As for my experience,if i unplugged my water temp sensor on my S.A,revving become difficult,but idle a not really affected.I dont know how the std ecu react to this but i think should be no problem with std ecu since it is very refined

 

[Useless]

Gee, i thought this thread died a long time ago just as it was getting interesting. keep it up peeps!

fandango,
standalones are stupid. Its how well the user understand and works with the unit. Adaptability is a pretty big word to use for standalones as there is so many varying factors that influence total input. hmm, maybe a simple illustration would be:

condition 1:
a + b = y

condition 2:
a + b + c + ... zz = X

condition 1 would most probably be a derivative used by part time tuners. whereby condition 2 is used by OEM. so if the programmable ecu has already been catered for these extra varying conditions, hence we can say that the unit respond to varying input. else nothing. in the real world, human intervention is always required. the funny thing is that the more complex the ecu is being programmed, admittedly the response time is shorter and the output is more accurate; BUT these units are the ones which will always produce error codes due to one of the many perimeters that fall out of limits.

just my poor 2 cents. i am not a tuner or standalone expert. cheers ppl!
useless

 

[fandango]

ok, so the OEM has done all the hard work in terms of working out all the interelationships between variables, and also some failsafe measures for reliability and eco-friendliness.

Since it's gonna be really tough to reproduce these complex rules in a standalone, maybe it's better then to tinkle with just the AFR and Ignition timing, and let the OEM ecu figure out the other compensatory factors? Is that a better solution that going full standalone, since it may be less "flexible"?

Ah but then again, the OEM will have some limitations in terms of accepting a modified signal from and AFR or ignition timing unit. Damn, it's really not about having your cake and eating it too....

Maybe I should just get a Ignition Timing Controller...only prob is, anyone know what kind of intervals are available? going by the number of knobs, i think it's only about 1,000rpm intervals...aihhh....500 would be the ideal i suppose...and what about the deg of adv timing possible with an ITC??

Earlier posts suggested timing at 42 deg BTDC for optimum power....aiihhh....still longing for that...