Jaskas

Well well, the weather cleared... or became warmer and we took a drive to the dyno.

Would you guys be happy with this kind of result:

mcipseric

Is that rear wheel HP?

Jaskas

Engine HP

mcipseric

Please excuse my ignorance and educate me if I am missing something.
isn't 275 BHP what non varioram engines get stock?
and varioram engines get 282 BHP?

Now, 275 RWHP would be very impressive.

thanks,

Eric

evoderby

Good to see you have it running! How much HP did the dyno show when running Motronic? What sort of ignition map is presently mapped, Standard, RS, dyno optimised???

Cheers,

H

daltvater

Can't quite see the chart that well. 30hp increase? If so nice work!!!

Juha G

Sorry I couldn't make it to the dyno session today (we were at the skiexpo in Helsinki).

I'd be interested to see the difference between the motronic+chip and Ari's mapping on the MSQ.

And guys, you need to realize that an aftermarket ECU does not add any power, it is just another means to control the engine. The point in having an aftermarket ECU is that it is (usually), easier to work on than the stock ECU.
On 95's and 97-98's you can install chips but on the 96's you can't do ****.
With this kind of ECU you can very easily tune the maps on the fly with a PC.
Just like what they did today on the dyno with Jaskas car.
How much power you get is not dependant on the ECU, it is the engine itself that sets the limits. By adjusting the mapping you can find those limits.

i.e. swapping and aftermarket ECU on a 100% stock car does not make much sense to me. But doing it on a little bit modified (exhaust, intake etc.) engine makes much more sense.

As a reference point, my varioram 3.6 made 279hp and 339Nm with the stock motronic (and 200cell cats). With aftermarket ECU, we were able to take advantage of the better flowing exhaust and saw 309hp and 390Nm.

matt777

If this car was base lined with a stock ECU at 10% or 15% less (on this particular dyno) then it would be very impressive.

Lorenfb

For a stock engine, it's all about the timing as presented here:
https://rennlist.com/forums/911-foru...-the-myth.html

Jaskas

The pic of the dyno monitor above was just to mess your heads. We did infact get better numbers than that. But as Juha said. The whole idea of this ECU is to be able to control and manage the engine more easily.
The ECU:


Here is the whole report of the road trip - dyno session day:

The day started early: wakeup at 0530: Weather check, +5 Celcius, raining, dark as hell:


Driving thourgh the wet high way with the ( superior ) H4´s of a 1987 Carrera is not a pleasure:



After driving for 3 hours we arrived to the dyno and hooked the car up on the dyno and took the reference run of the Motronic with Stewe Wong chip:



This proved pretty much that the engine was working as it should. The figures were a bit above the stock ( 286hp/340Nm)

Next step was to hook up Juusos MS ECU and run all the maps in to it. I took about 3 hours on the dyno to run and test all the different loads and rpm areas. Get the idle working etc...

Temporary fitment:


Laptop hooked to the ecu:


Guys adjusting the ECU:


In the end we got a slip out of the dyno:


Even though I would have like to seen figures closer to Juhas figures, Im still really happy with these ones as well. When we got these figures out the car was really warm ( 3 hours on the dyno).

At this point the day was not over for us, The drive back home ->

Halfway house, visiting my brother:


Almost home:


At home:



To summarize the whole project:
+ My engine gave out figures as it should
+ The MS ECU was really easy plug and play
+ 30Nm 1000 rpm earlier than before
+ Cant wait to see what the MS software can really offer me.

- Even though the after 3 hours on the dyno, the maps are not perfect yet. Idle; partial throttle needs still adjusting
- We had some problems above 6000 rpm ( You can see it in the dynoslip)
- I think this is a start of new era of mods on my engine -> $$$

Here is a comparizon of the stock ecu and MS Ecu:


A video clip of the dyno sessions:

Juha G

Something is not right at the upper rpm range!?

There shouldn't be such a dramatic difference between the wong chip and Ari's mapping. Was the engine running too hot? I don't see any fans in the video!?
Also, did you have the resonance flap control right? If not, that would definately make a big difference.
In any case, it looks like there is hp still on the table with this setup.

Edit: i called my friend Juuso and he is quite sure he knows what is cuing the problems at the higher rpm range; Filtering of the crankshaft position sensor input is too hard. It seems that what works with BMW engines does not necessarily give the best results with Porsche engines. The good thing is that this can be fixed by just changing a single component on the board.
Looking at the graphs, i think there is at least 10-15hp to be had...

Christian J

That is a long day. Well done!

Lorenfb

"There shouldn't be such a dramatic difference between the wong chip and Ari's mapping. "

Really? And how can a statement like that be made not knowing the actual
values of the fuel and especially the ignition maps of each ECM. Most likely
the USA 'chip' has 'pushed' the timing, i.e. as usual, more in the Bosch
DME ECM than in the replacement ECM. Furthermore, since the replacement
ECM lacks knock control, a more conservative ignition advance is necessitated
to avoid detonation.

"Filtering of the crankshaft position sensor input is too hard."

And any difference between the Bosch DME ECM determination of the crank timing
and the replacement ECM's timing sensing can have significant timing effects, which
in turn affects torque.

Bottom line: Until both set of maps are presented on Rennlist, the results
are a big guessing game with all sorts of conjectures, which is always the case
with any type of 'tuning' mod.

Juha G

I don't buy it... What you are implying is that the wong chip made more torque in high rpm range because the stock ecu has knock control. If the chip mapping was "pushing" it, the knock control would have pulled back the ignition and the torque would drop as a result.
In any case the difference would not be that dramatic.

Loren, you don't need to guess anything here. There is no point in comparing maps (I don't even know how we could access the wong maps??). This topic is not about who makes the best maps. It is about an AFTERMARKET 100% PLUG n PLAY ECU.

Lorenfb

"What you are implying is that the wong chip made more torque in high rpm range because the stock ecu has knock control."

No! What I said was; "Furthermore, since the replacement ECM lacks knock control, a more conservative ignition advance is necessitated to avoid detonation.".

Which does not explicitly imply that was why the different results, but only that
a more conservative ignition advance is necessitated in the final iteration of
the timing maps.

"If the chip mapping was "pushing" it, the knock control would have pulled back the ignition and the torque would drop as a result."

Not necessarily, especially given the cold weather, and other factors such as
what the fuel octane being used was affects whether knock control takes effect.

"There is no point in comparing maps (I don't even know how we could access the wong maps??). "

The Bosch DME ECM maps are easily determined no matter who the so-called
'tuner' is. That's a five minute effort.

"This topic is not about who makes the best maps. It is about an AFTERMARKET 100% PLUG n PLAY ECU."

Yes, but if ones uses engine output as a comparative factor, then the engine
timing variable needs to be removed from the analysis. Since posts like this arise;

"If this car was base lined with a stock ECU at 10% or 15% less (on this particular dyno) then it would be very impressive."