Rochester

iTrader: (9)

Tune #3 is available. A few more tweaks as he dials things in each cycle, but apparently changes are more fine-tuning, so... maybe we're over the hump on this process. There may be only a few more cycles here before we call it.

Part of this tune is a small change to the throttle sensitivity. The plan is to leave the first 20% of the curve alone, then front-load the signal a little after that initial dip. This I actually understood, having played with a Sprint Booster like 12 years ago. It's not throttle "response" per se, it's throttle "sensitivity". And while those are two different things, the net result is a perception of quicker response. In other words, it's all in your head, and that's fine.

Also, we briefly touched on e85, and it was his recommendation, based on talking with me about how I drive and what I do with the car, to stick with 93. I'm not looking to wrestle every ounce out of my car, that's not my thing. If it were, I'd get 3" long tubes for the tune. My hopes were to make the car more enjoyable, smooth and consistent... which is the direction these tunes are going. I mean, I suppose I could have an e85 map and a 93 map, but let's be honest, I'm not going to be changing maps. And I drive the car so rarely that running the tank down to empty so I can fill up with the *other* gas, that's just too much to bother with.

Unless I go summer with e85, and winter with 93? No, stop it. LOL

Anyway, once again I'll apply the map this evening, drive around, then do another hour of logging tomorrow.

backman_66

Get the dyno!! I plan on doing mine this summer!! I've never done a dyno in my life and always wanted to. It's time. Looking forward to seeing your numbers as well as Rochester's!

backman_66

Eugene actually told me not too long ago that he believes 3" intakes don't do anything because when viewing engine load / airmass coming into the engine, it doesn't really change anything. This is also what I believe, even before I spoke with Eugene. Look at how much power people can make with the standard 2.5" intakes such as Gen 3's. Some people have hit 330whp, right? If you add another 0.5" of tubing diameter on each side of the intake, your engine isn't going to magically be able to pull in that much more air. This is why I went with a happy medium of 2.75" for my application.

Rochester

iTrader: (9)

Agreed, and same. It's on my schedule for late summer, Aug to Sep time frame. No commitment, but it's on the list.

We'll sit around with a drink and watch the numbers come in.

SonicVQ

Keep in mind if you want to run E85, you need larger fuel injectors, higher capacity fuel pump and will need to change your oil more often.

Rochester

iTrader: (9)

Yeah, that's not me, Sonic. It's too much stuff to deal with. I'm already stretching my boundaries with this tune, although glad I did.

Anyway, just loaded up Tune #3a (which is his 3rd tune, but tweaked again for the throttle blip.) I'll take it for a drive after dinner. Feels like I just said that yesterday, LOL.


[edit]

Man, it rows through the gears, both up and down, so-o-o smoothly. I hate saying that over and over, but that's the biggest take-away. The car simply runs better.

Anyway, the change in throttle sensitivity is very subtle. There's nothing different when stabbing the pedal, but when you initially dig deeper it feels like the car is responding faster. Like I said, it is not actually responding faster, but it feels like it is, and that's the point. And after 5 minutes of driving, it became the new normal.

Rochester

iTrader: (9)

Lots of driving for this latest log. This is my fourth log file, one each after the base tune and 3 custom tunes.

This sure would have been easier to do with a bluetooth dongle and a cell phone. (sigh)

2 hours
76 miles
3 WOT pulls
36 mb

backman_66

I figured it out now. I'm sure the file sizes are different because you're recording using a cable and not BT.

How does the car feel so far?

EDIT: I didn't notice your edit above. lol

Rochester

iTrader: (9)

I suppose that's possible, and really the only good thing you can say about using the laptop instead of the other approach. I've got all kinds of cables all over the freaking place in my car while doing this. There's the laptop, plugged into the power inverter which is plugged into my cigarette lighter. There's the OBC flat cable extension duct taped to the top of my steering rack, plugged into my EcuTek cable which is plugged into the computer. And there's a USB extension cable plugged into the EcuTek USB key and plugged into the computer as well... so I don't snap the key. It's really kind of ridiculous. I should take a picture, LOL.

You know what else sucks about using the laptop? The laptop software doesn't "stick" the sampling checkboxes from one session to the next. I have to do that each and every time that I data log.

In the future, if it ever comes up by way of recommendation, I will strongly urge people to get the bluetooth dongle.


Really good. I suspect we're close to the end here, and I'm feeling very positive about this experience overall. When I'm officially "done" done, (which means ripping off the duct tape, LOL), I'll take the time to write down all my thoughts on the project.

jpowersjr2

iTrader: (1)

I just commented on a 1 year old post on Eugene's Instagram page. He replied back in like 30 seconds lol. Going to see what all is involved in putting in a newer ECU so that I can run EcuTek.

Rochester

iTrader: (9)

He reviewed my latest, two hour log, made some tweaks, generated a new ROM file. I applied it, took the car for a shake down... an-n-n-d we're done. At least, done for now. I'm thinking Spring 2022 of ripping a bunch of log files for a review of things a year later, and he's cool with that. Also, he's urging me to upgrade to bluetooth, and offering to make that license transfer if I send him my dongle. That's probably a good idea.

All told, 1 base file, four custom ROM files resulting in a 93 octane map and a 93 economy map (which I've still not tried yet). Start to finish, about a week, with daily activity on both ends, and a number of phone calls.

No regrets at all. I need to collect my thoughts on this project and wrap it up.

backman_66

Within that two hour log, did you vary your engine load and rpm / gear frequently? I really feel like Eugene wanted me to get WAA-AAYY more data than you submitted. Also multiple cold-start data logs until it reached something like 70C operating temps. (Apparently there are different fuel tables for hot / cold)

Rochester

iTrader: (9)

Oh absolutely. I didn't just cruise the highway in 6th. I was all over the place, with all kinds of heavy load. And all my logs started cold, after sitting overnight.

And you're right, as much data as you think you can give him, he wants more. Quite frankly, the only way that's going to happen is if I get the bluetooth adapter and log every single time I use the car. That kind of thing simply isn't going to happen with the laptop approach. Also, I rarely drive the car as is, so... awkward.

Rochester

iTrader: (9)

I’m done with this Remote Tune project for now. All the hardware and cables have been packed up, all the files and documents have been archived, and everything is back to normal again.

It’s been a hectic week, working with Eugene, data logging, updating ROM files to the ECU, doing WOT pulls every day, yikes! But really, it was hectic in the sense that this whole project kind of pushed the boundaries of my comfort level modifying the car. All in a good way, though. I learned enough to get to this point, and have some sense of pride in getting here. Gearheads who are a lot more technical than I am will probably LOL at that, and that’s OK... I laugh at myself a lot too. That’s how you keep sane and get through projects. Anyway, I’ve circled back through this thread, adding edits with the benefit of hindsight.


Was it worth it?

That’s the simple question, isn’t it? Simple answer is... Yes. Absolutely. All told, I spent $956 on hardware and services. Unfortunately, what I don’t have is any tangible proof that validates the opinion. Proof like a before/after dyno. My only evidence is what I’ve written down here, and that’s just talk. Take it for what it’s worth to you.


Expectations

Coming into this, I tried really hard to temper expectations that the car might run better, and I might have more power available in the mid-range. Subconsciously, I was excited to come away with a car that was a monster, snarling and snapping with the throttle. Well, there’s no monster here... just a car that runs better, with more power in the mid-range. LOL

I suspect there are a lot of tuners out there who pump & dump with advance timing, aggressively peel back knock thresholds, and front-load the throttle with heavy sensitivity. In that situation, I could see how drivers would plotz over the changes. But that’s not what Eugene did. His entire philosophy is to chase down inefficiencies and just make the car run better. He’d rather remove timing ahead of problem situations, so that the car loses less power overall, with the net result being a sense that you actually have more power than you would otherwise. Essentially, fighting a forest fire by judiciously setting smaller fires in front of it. It is a very interesting approach, something you might expect given his background in large-data analysis.


Results

The car starts and idles no different than it ever had.

The tonal quality of the engine/exhaust is mostly the same, however when under load the sound has changed somewhat. Hard for me to say exactly, because I have really poor hearing; (I’m deaf in one ear.) It’s like... instead of growling, it’s howling. Dumb words, but it’s all I got.

Throttle sensitivity was tweaked just a little bit, so that it remains normal when stabbing the pedal, but front loads a little extra in the middle. It’s a subtle change, I like it, and it’s totally the new normal... meaning I’m hard-pressed to recognize the difference now. That’s fine.

1st gear is a hard thing to judge in my car, because of the 4.083 rear gears. So I’m not even going to comment. However, when you dig into the throttle for 2-3-4 (and honestly 5th too), the car responds with a deeper reservoir of power. I’m not talking WOT, I’m just talking about heavy throttle. And there’s just more there there to play with as you like. If there were a dyno curve to look at, I’m 100% confident you’d see more HP in the mid-range. Sure feels like it.

Upshifts are cleaner, so are rev-matching downshifts. Discovering this really surprised me. For years now, heavy throttle upshifts were always kind of violent, and subject to miss-shifting. Same for trying to rev-match downshifts. But now it’s smooth as butter. (OK, that’s hyperbole, but honestly, it is much, much better.) With this new, smooth running behavior, matched with the RJM clutch pedal and my TWM Short Shifter... it’s an absolute joy to row up and down the gears. I adore driving this car.

Cruising behavior is noticeably smoother, which is kind of a surprise. I suppose because when you’re cruising with the throttle (not cruise control), you’re constantly making small adjustments with your foot, and the feedback from those adjustments is a smoother operation now. So yeah, just cruising around in the car now is a better experience. Go figure.

Shudder is gone. There’s this behavior with my car, when you come off throttle, particularly heavy throttle, there was a shudder, and this shudder would interfere with gear shifts. I suspect this is something only exasperated (or exposed) because I have poly motor mounts, and poly transmission mount, and poly differential mounts, and all kind of frame braces. Whatever the cause or contribution to recognition, that shudder is gone. The car is super smooth, all the time.

Behaving as it does now, this also means that I can be in a higher gear at slower speeds and lower RPM, and still have a smooth driving experience. That introduces opportunity to drive the car totally stealth and chill in a way I couldn’t before. So there’s that.


Plans

I may someday upgrade to a long-tube intake, or I might not. If I do, I may upgrade to a 3” mid-pipe, or I might not. No commitment. Either way, I’m hoping to circle back with Eugene in Spring 2022, and give him a whole lot of log data for a year-after review.

That’s about it. After 10 years with this car, I’m feeling like there aren’t any more modification plans. But never say never.

I hope you enjoyed reading this thread. And for those actively participating here with comments and advice, thank you. And particularly for those who've brought Eugene Turkov to my attention as someone to hire for a remote tune, thank you for that as well.

~john

RobC7

Glad you are satisfied. As long as the road matters are great, I don't think you need to worry about the dyno numbers. Without a baseline, it's hard to say what you've gained. Not to mention the gears are not favorable for putting down expected numbers.

I understand going to a 3" long tube intake however I am confused why you would get a 3" midpipe. Outside of the intake, I think going with 2.5" FI RHFCs would not be a bad choice. At the end of the day, I think you've done all the things that give you the most power, adding anything else may have diminishing returns.