computer upgrade
05-23-04, 10:48 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
computer upgrade
There are many types of piggyback, and stand alone computers. I want to know whats the best BANG for your BUCK. My upgrades are FULL Exhaust, RAM AIR MOD W/AIR Filter, Pullys, Ignition Computer. I know that not much ,but if I want to go any further I have to get a computer. by the way my car runs REALLY RICH, so Rich it shoot 3 foot flames out of both pipes. First Thought Cool, Second thought ooooh Crap. I got to get this fix before I blow up my motor.
Trending Topics
05-24-04, 02:36 AM
#8
Rotorhead
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
Posts: 9,136
Likes: 0
Received 39 Likes
on
33 Posts
Re: computer upgrade
Originally posted by gsracer
A safc tuned with your own wideband, or on a dyno with their wideband will net you between 10 and 15 rwhp. By far the best bang for the buck ecu for a bolt on N/A fc.
A safc tuned with your own wideband, or on a dyno with their wideband will net you between 10 and 15 rwhp. By far the best bang for the buck ecu for a bolt on N/A fc.
The downsides to an EMS are that it is more expensive and more complicated than a simple fuel computer, usually requiring professional tuning which adds about $500 to the price of the upgrade. Therefore, your point of a fuel computer being the best bang for the buck does have merit for those whose bang is limited by their bucks.
I totally disagree with the necessity of wideband tuning, and I don't think that novices should attempt unsupervised tuning regardless of which gadgets they use, but I won't get into that any further in this thread.
Originally posted by torean
no point in getting a 1500 ems if ur not gonna use all the functions...
no point in getting a 1500 ems if ur not gonna use all the functions...
2) Hardly anybody uses ALL of the functions of an EMS, regardless of engine type.
3) Many EMS products do not have boost control, so in their case, it is quite possible for an NA to use all of the EMS functions.
4) The large majority of RX-7 race winners throughout history had NA engines.
05-24-04, 03:11 AM
#9
EIT
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,790
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: computer upgrade
I can see your point, but I'm going to disagree somewhat because a full-function EMS is far superior to any piggyback that still uses the crummy stock ECU and AFM setup. While a well-tuned piggyback fuel computer will produce nearly the same peak horsepower as an EMS, the EMS has a huge advantage in revving and overall drivability because it ditches the 80's technology computer for a modern computer.
The downsides to an EMS are that it is more expensive and more complicated than a simple fuel computer, usually requiring professional tuning which adds about $500 to the price of the upgrade. Therefore, your point of a fuel computer being the best bang for the buck does have merit for those whose bang is limited by their bucks.
I totally disagree with the necessity of wideband tuning, and I don't think that novices should attempt unsupervised tuning regardless of which gadgets they use, but I won't get into that any further in this thread.
The downsides to an EMS are that it is more expensive and more complicated than a simple fuel computer, usually requiring professional tuning which adds about $500 to the price of the upgrade. Therefore, your point of a fuel computer being the best bang for the buck does have merit for those whose bang is limited by their bucks.
I totally disagree with the necessity of wideband tuning, and I don't think that novices should attempt unsupervised tuning regardless of which gadgets they use, but I won't get into that any further in this thread.
We all know the limitations of the outdated FC engine management, it's nothing new. However, I'm sure many many people will find it hard to spend 50-75 percent of the initial car cost on an ecu to gain an extra 10-15 hp.
Look at any n/a dynograph tuned with an safc. You'll notice gains all over the powerband. Not only peak power, but especially in the midrange.
Thirty years ago nearly all cars were run by carbs. Without 3 dimensional fuel and ignition tuning, they still managed to haul some serious ***. Yes, gas mileage was worse, and part throttle power was probably much lower than it's potential. However, it definitely got the jobe done. I like seeing other FC owners use current ems technology on their cars, however I simply feel it's not feasibly for the vast majority.
As far as novices tuning an safc, I'd definitely agree. However what classifies someone as a novice? At one point or another we were all ignorant newbies, as no one is born with any of this knowledge. Equipped with a EGT guage and a wideband, I feel confident most people with a basic understanding of basic efi concepts can tune their n/a FC with a safc.
05-24-04, 07:44 AM
#10
Rotorhead
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
Posts: 9,136
Likes: 0
Received 39 Likes
on
33 Posts
Re: Re: Re: computer upgrade
Originally posted by gsracer
Jesus, this guy has bolt on's on a n/a. It's not a 60-1 equipped turbo. Simply judging by his need to even ask the question I highly doubt he wants to dwell in the complexities a stand alone EMS will present.
Jesus, this guy has bolt on's on a n/a. It's not a 60-1 equipped turbo. Simply judging by his need to even ask the question I highly doubt he wants to dwell in the complexities a stand alone EMS will present.
Originally posted by gsracer
I like seeing other FC owners use current ems technology on their cars, however I simply feel it's not feasibly for the vast majority.
I like seeing other FC owners use current ems technology on their cars, however I simply feel it's not feasibly for the vast majority.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
HalifaxFD
Canadian Forum
126
05-09-16 07:06 PM