billt

iTrader: (1)

I have a '95 FD and live in Connecticut. I'm thinking about replacing my stock ECU with either a Pettit or M2 with the following setup: 93 octane, stock seq twins, stock fuel system, downpipe, intake, hi-flow cat, rb duel tip cb, smic (I'm currently running only the dp on a 50k mile engine). Three questions: Any difference between reprogrammed '95 ECUs vs reprogrammed 93-94ECUs? Will a reprogrammed 93-94 cause EGR codes in my 95 or is this just a cal/non-cal issue? Is there a difference in Pettit/M2 California vs non-cali ECUs? Thanks.

KMAR

I have tried two reprogrammed ecus that came from 93-94s on my 95 RX-7 and have had no problems with them running, the code did come up on one of them but, now I'm using a Knight Sports re-tune ecu and no engine light shines. I'm up in Canada and there is no difference between yours and mine so it should work. Not sure but, I think Cal or not, all are the same?
Merry Christmas!

billt

iTrader: (1)

Thanks KMAR. Merry Christmas!

jeff p

get a non cali federal ecu and send it to pettit for a chip. the cali ecu looks for the electronic egr sensor and will trip a code if not located. I think the 93 and 94 units have this. in 95 I think they got away from the egr thing. but research to make sure.
Jeff

billt

iTrader: (1)

Thanks Jeff. I might buy a used M2 or Pettit ECU from a 93-94 FD but I'm not sure if it's 100% plug-n-play in a 95 FD. Anybody have experience using a non-cali reprogrammed 93-94 M2 or Pettit ECU in a 95? Thanks.

CantGoStraight

Stay away from the 94 federal as it is basically the same as any year Cali. ECU and looks for an electrical signal from the EGR. The 93 was vacuum controled and the 95 didn't come with one at all.

KMAR

Ya, I'm an R-Tard for not saying that already, CantGoStraight is right. No EGR on my car.

billt

iTrader: (1)

Thanks KMAR & CantGoStraight..

White94RX

Apexi Power FC

KMAR

A Re-tune is safe if you follow what it is made to compensate for. I'm assuming this may be the reason why some decide to go this route? I went Re-tune because of the initial cost. This summer a PFC is coming. Billt - I'm assuming this is why your going to be using a re-tune - cost, simplicity, safe? I've also had a chance in the last 2 years to play around with a PFS computer, it was great, I just didn't have the equipment to tune properly. In the end it was easier to use the Knight Sports but, I have the absolute worst fuel economy now. Seems like they are tuned so safe that you don't get the efficiency. Now that I have the money to do a PFC I hope to be making the right amount of power for my set-up and fuel economy. I've used my 95 as a daily driver for 5 years, so a PFC only makes so much sense now. I know some guys locally that use the PFC that idle better, run smoother, get better fuel efficiency, and make more power than I do with similar set-ups. After all this goofing around with different computers I could have just done the PFC once and be done with it. So when someone like White94RX says, "Apexi Power FC" I'm listening now. Billt, maybe you should just use the Power FC?

CantGoStraight

I have no complaints with fuel milage. While 26 isn't uncoomon on the highway at 75-80mph more typical is 21-23. This drasticly changes with around town stop light to stop light runs. I've had as low as 9mpg and with our open track auto=x test and tunes have gone through 1/2 a tank in 4 hours of running.

billt

iTrader: (1)

I was thinking about the M2 or Pettit primarily for safety, not cost. Since 100s of FDs have used either M2 or Pettit ECUs I figured either would provide a very conservative map if I limit boost to 12psi, keep the cat or hi-flow cat and use 93 octane in the tank. Since the price of PFCs has come down it probably makes more sense to go that route. The price of a used programmable boost controller (assuming I didn't go manual) together with a used reprogrammed ECU would end up costing almost as much as the PFC anyway. Thanks again.