Time Slips and Dyno Section is for posting 1/4 mile time slips and dyno graphs

fastest 1/4 time on stock ECU/IC?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 30, 2007 | 02:25 PM
  #1  
jacobcartmill's Avatar
Thread Starter
just dont care.
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,387
Likes: 4
From: Nashville, TN
fastest 1/4 time on stock ECU/IC?

Hey guys, i was wondering who has run the fastest 1/4 mile time on the stock ECU (no piggybacks or reflashes or anything) and stock IC.
i went back to the track again and squeezed out a 12.51@110mph, which from what i'm gathering is pretty fast for the stock ECU and IC at 10psi. this was also on regular street tires.

my mods are:
apex'i intakes
custom downpipe, hiflow cat, RB catback
TB mod, non-seq, removed emissions
MBC set at the stock 10psi

so what's the fastest time someone has run in an FD with the stock ECU and IC?
Reply
Old May 1, 2007 | 07:26 PM
  #2  
jacobcartmill's Avatar
Thread Starter
just dont care.
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,387
Likes: 4
From: Nashville, TN
anyone?
Reply
Old May 1, 2007 | 07:41 PM
  #3  
bryant's Avatar
bryant
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,509
Likes: 0
From: montgomery
that sounds pretty good.
Reply
Old May 1, 2007 | 08:40 PM
  #4  
bajaman's Avatar
Constant threat
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,968
Likes: 39
From: near Wichita, Kansas
Well, that is faster than any magazine ever tested one, for sure.
Great run!
Reply
Old May 1, 2007 | 08:54 PM
  #5  
TpCpLaYa's Avatar
T3DoW
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,755
Likes: 5
From: Chicago - NW Burbs
wow! thats realllly good for stock ic and boost, especially that trap....damn!
Reply
Old May 1, 2007 | 08:56 PM
  #6  
scotty305's Avatar
~17 MPG
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 323
From: Bend, OR
That does sound like a fast time, but it sounds like you might be approaching the safe limits of what you should do with a stock IC & ECU. Unless you've got data to prove otherwise (for instance a dyno sheet demonstrating safe wideband A/F ratios vs. RPM), I'd recommend an ECU and an IC ASAP.

-s-
Reply
Old May 1, 2007 | 09:46 PM
  #7  
jacobcartmill's Avatar
Thread Starter
just dont care.
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,387
Likes: 4
From: Nashville, TN
i dyno'd in february and the AFR was mid 11's on the exact same setup. that was about 3 months ago though, but i havent done anything to the car. mid 11's should be plenty safe.
i suppose i should dyno again to see if the power went up somehow (though i dont see how it could), but as far as it being at the limits -yeah, its definitely at the limits of boost and the crappy IC, but it's obviously still at 10psi with good AFR's. if it was running more than 10psi it would be fuel cutting.
when the boost comes in it spikes to 11psi for a split second and holds 10psi all the way to redline. (crappy MBC)
110.7mph seemed a little high to me too, but i'm not sure.

i was just curious who has run on the stock ECU because its usually the #1 thing to upgrade after intake/exhaust with FD's, and i never hear about people making quick passes on the stock ECU and IC. they just upgrade to a PFC/basemap immediately. as far as i can see, the stock ECU does better than everybody gives it credit for, as long as you decide to keep the boost at 10psi.

Last edited by jacobcartmill; May 1, 2007 at 09:59 PM.
Reply
Old May 1, 2007 | 10:05 PM
  #8  
slo's Avatar
slo
registered user
Tenured Member 15 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,469
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
are you sure its a 100% stock ecu, there are many companies over the years that have reprogramed them

Last edited by slo; May 1, 2007 at 10:28 PM.
Reply
Old May 1, 2007 | 10:26 PM
  #9  
Sr20fd3st's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
From: Stow, Ohio
that must just be some ridiculous reaction time and an awesome launch. good job
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 01:16 AM
  #10  
jacobcartmill's Avatar
Thread Starter
just dont care.
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,387
Likes: 4
From: Nashville, TN
Originally Posted by slo
are you sure its a 100% stock ecu, there are many companies over the years that have reprogramed them

i'm pretty sure its 100% stock... i've overboosted before and its hit fuel cut.

Originally Posted by Sr20fd3st
that must just be some ridiculous reaction time and an awesome launch. good job
the time doesnt start til you cross the starting line (unless its bracket racing).
you can sit on the start line for 30 seconds and run a 13.5
so the r/t doesnt really matter
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 01:27 AM
  #11  
zbrown's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 644
Likes: 1
From: scranton nd
Originally Posted by Sr20fd3st
that must just be some ridiculous reaction time and an awesome launch. good job
id have to disagree


sounds about right... i was at the track for the first time on the new setup this sunday and ran a 12.4 at 109mph on 10psi untuned (high 9's afr's) on a gt42 with soft launchs slipping the clutch... managing a 1.9x 60ft

just for ***** and giggles and for some good logs



quick car for stock equipment though .... good work
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 01:56 AM
  #12  
scotty305's Avatar
~17 MPG
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 323
From: Bend, OR
Originally Posted by jacobcartmill
I dyno'd in february and the AFR was mid 11's on the exact same setup. that was about 3 months ago though, but i havent done anything to the car. mid 11's should be plenty safe.
Good man. I didn't mean to doubt you; just wanted to hear the rest of the story. You've obviously done things the right way: change something, and verify that it's working well (safely and reliably) before pushing it to the limit. It seems like many of the people on these boards have yet to learn this.



As far as i can see, the stock ECU does better than everybody gives it credit for, as long as you decide to keep the boost at 10psi.
I agree, but it's only because the original settings are so rich to begin with. Our ancient ECUs work pretty well, within their limitations. Just for reference, the original Intel Pentium CPU was introduced in 1993; clock speed was a whopping 66MHz.

-s-
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 08:02 AM
  #13  
Sr20fd3st's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
From: Stow, Ohio
i've always wondered if the newer jdm cpu was a direct swap in? i know it's faster (32bit instead of 16 bit or something) and it's obd2 (which would make reading any codes so much more convenient.) would also alow tuning thru diagnosis port since it's obd2 by some of the common simple plug n play tuners
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 08:21 AM
  #14  
matty's Avatar
Lives on the Forum
Tenured Member: 25 Years
Liked
Loved
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,012
Likes: 40
From: CT
as i said in other thread i doubt u are making only 265 to trap almost 111mph. noone is doing that. people are trapping 110mph with 300 rwhp for the past 10 yrs. is your boost gauge faulty?
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 08:26 AM
  #15  
Rxmfn7's Avatar
Do a barrel roll!
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 7,529
Likes: 2
From: Lower Burrell, PA
I had trapped 106 MPH on 10PSI/stock ECU with really shitty kumho 712s spinning mostly through 1st and 2nd, but almost 111MPH seems really high for 10psi. Not doubting you, just saying.. When I was running my Pettit ECU and 14psi I was only trapping 113-114.
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 08:27 AM
  #16  
Rxmfn7's Avatar
Do a barrel roll!
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 7,529
Likes: 2
From: Lower Burrell, PA
No ,they are not interchangable..


Originally Posted by Sr20fd3st
i've always wondered if the newer jdm cpu was a direct swap in? i know it's faster (32bit instead of 16 bit or something) and it's obd2 (which would make reading any codes so much more convenient.) would also alow tuning thru diagnosis port since it's obd2 by some of the common simple plug n play tuners
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 08:32 AM
  #17  
Sr20fd3st's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
From: Stow, Ohio
Originally Posted by jacobcartmill
the time doesnt start til you cross the starting line (unless its bracket racing).
you can sit on the start line for 30 seconds and run a 13.5
so the r/t doesnt really matter
i was thinking more along the lines of shifting r/t and throttle control.

and boo to the jdm ecu not being interchangable
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 08:55 AM
  #18  
driFDer's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member: 20 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
From: socal
Sounds like a great time and a healthy motor! Either your boost gauge is messed up or you can launch reallly good.
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 10:40 AM
  #19  
BobfisH's Avatar
RX7 lover
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,160
Likes: 3
From: UK
I got 13.2 at 109 with a 1.9 60ft.

Mods were a racing beat back box, apexi filters - thats it.
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 11:48 AM
  #20  
onelife2stories's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
From: denver
i didnt notice anyone say anything about weight? maybe jacobcartmill is a smaller guy. take passenger seat out. run on fumes in the tank, lighter wheels and tires, simple things. isnt the rule of thumb .1 seconds for every hundred pounds? (i realize this changes with hp and many other settings, im just repeating what someone told me before)
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 12:46 PM
  #21  
salva's Avatar
Rotary Restorer
Tenured Member 15 Years
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
From: Central FL
I'm sure you are making more than 256rwhp. I made 295rwhp with similar mods at 10psi awhile back. It may have been a very hot day when you dynoed, but on the average if your motor is healthy you should have no problem making close to 300rwhp with all the bolt ons,IC and the stock computer. The problem with the stock computer is that you are running the risk of blowing up since there is a possibility of overboosting with those mods and the ECU will not help you since its only mapped to about 12psi (I believe) and the fact that the fuel cut comes in pretty suddenly is also another factor in damaging engines.
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 01:18 PM
  #22  
jacobcartmill's Avatar
Thread Starter
just dont care.
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,387
Likes: 4
From: Nashville, TN
salva, i understand what you're saying, but it doesnt overboost as the setup is non-sequential and the boost is reliable, it doesn't boost creep (probably due to my hi-flow cat) and it doesnt hit fuel cut. this is why i keep it at 10psi

1life2stories, i weigh 135lbs and ran with a little under 1/2 tank of gas. i weighed the car with ZERO gas several months ago and it was 2680lbs. i had about 8-9 gallons in the tank and gasoline weighs ~6lbs/gallon, so thats ~51lbs of gasoline.
2680 + 135 + 51 = ~2866lbs race weight (fuel and driver)

for the people that are saying my boost gauge is reading incorrectly (low):
if you hold more than 10.5psi for a second or two the ECU will fuel cut. what i'm alluding to is the fact that my boost gauge CAN'T be wrong, because if i were holding more than 10psi it would be hitting fuel cut.
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 01:37 PM
  #23  
matty's Avatar
Lives on the Forum
Tenured Member: 25 Years
Liked
Loved
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,012
Likes: 40
From: CT
Originally Posted by BobfisH
I got 13.2 at 109 with a 1.9 60ft.

Mods were a racing beat back box, apexi filters - thats it.
wow..nice f'ing trap
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 01:39 PM
  #24  
matty's Avatar
Lives on the Forum
Tenured Member: 25 Years
Liked
Loved
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,012
Likes: 40
From: CT
Originally Posted by jacobcartmill
salva, i understand what you're saying, but it doesnt overboost as the setup is non-sequential and the boost is reliable, it doesn't boost creep (probably due to my hi-flow cat) and it doesnt hit fuel cut. this is why i keep it at 10psi

1life2stories, i weigh 135lbs and ran with a little under 1/2 tank of gas. i weighed the car with ZERO gas several months ago and it was 2680lbs. i had about 8-9 gallons in the tank and gasoline weighs ~6lbs/gallon, so thats ~51lbs of gasoline.
2680 + 135 + 51 = ~2866lbs race weight (fuel and driver)

for the people that are saying my boost gauge is reading incorrectly (low):
if you hold more than 10.5psi for a second or two the ECU will fuel cut. what i'm alluding to is the fact that my boost gauge CAN'T be wrong, because if i were holding more than 10psi it would be hitting fuel cut.
i dont think fuel cut happens that quick..
Reply
Old May 2, 2007 | 01:44 PM
  #25  
jacobcartmill's Avatar
Thread Starter
just dont care.
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,387
Likes: 4
From: Nashville, TN
are you sure? 2 seconds is a long time when you're hammering at full boost. in fact, i think its more like under 1/2 second
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:38 AM.