Jump to content
SAU Community

ECU  

135 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

i just got a quote for a haltec E11v2 for the car from in tune performance. anybody got any guff on these. quoted around 2700 fitted and tuned. removes air flow meter and o2 sensor. was told this is the best plug in ecu

  • Replies 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Due to a lack of research on my behalf i am running a microtech on my rb26. the car seems to drive smoothly enough but fuel consumption is rediculous. i get max 280 km out of a tank and even if a i really baby it it doesnt seem to make any difference.

rotomotion tuned it to 320rwhp with the only mods being the usual exhaust, pods, FMIC, walbro pump. 12 psi.

At this stage i would not recommend the microtech to anyone because everyone seem to get better fuel consumption than me with similar or more power. I am hoping another tuning attempt wil fix the problem. The rear bar collects a fair bit of blackness. Weather that is due to not having a cat or running too rich i dont know.

If anyone is running microtech and can get more than 300km out of a tank i would like to know about it.

theres no closed loop function on the microtech so fuel economy is crap

its a very well known issue

Ok so basically its live with crap fuel economy or change ecu. I guess that takes the microtech out of the race then because i dont know of any advantages it has over other models to compensate for its fuel economy?

Ok so basically its live with crap fuel economy or change ecu. I guess that takes the microtech out of the race then because i dont know of any advantages it has over other models to compensate for its fuel economy?

there were some threads about turning off closed loop on the power fc and editing the cells around the cruising points directly to improve economy even over closed loop operation but i didnt read in much detail

have a search in the forced induction section

For my money on my RB26DETT PFC all the way.

I do not want to pay for a whole heap of Wank features I (& about 80% of other ECU buyers!) am never going to need or use.

I dont care who has ran what ET on what ECU.

I have ran about 5 tuneable ECUs over the past 13years, the PFC is cheap, popular and flexible and is the only one I find it hard / impossible to tell I actually have an aftermarket ECU Fitted, which is what its all about really :D

The Wolf is getting me 500 to a tank - stock 20, 25 turbo, turbo back exhaust. Got 600 cruising to Busselton and back. If you put your foot into it tho it drinks a bit but regular driving if I come in much under 500 I would be scratching my head.

The Wolf is getting me 500 to a tank - stock 20, 25 turbo, turbo back exhaust. Got 600 cruising to Busselton and back. If you put your foot into it tho it drinks a bit but regular driving if I come in much under 500 I would be scratching my head.

Bayley,

The reason your getting such good fuel economy is cause your car is running too lean. Your AFR's are dangerously lean for a turbo car, and can lead to pinging. I'd suggest you get a retune soon, cause while you may save of fuel you'll be up for a new engine.

Cheers

Paul

I got 450+km with my old R32 GTR , power FC (airflow meters) group A turbos, Tomei 260 cams (lumpy idle too) making the better part of 300rwkw and a half dead engine.

BUT. Who gives a fig! If you have a performance car you are going to use lots of fuel or you simply aren't enjoying it!

Want ecconomy? Buy a mo-ped.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Lucky man, who owns it in the family? Any pics? 
    • The engine stuff is Greg Autism to the Max. I contacted Tony Mamo previously from AFR who went off to make his own company to further refine AFR heads. He is a wizard in US LS world. Pretty much the best person on earth who will sell you things he's done weird wizard magic to. The cam spec is not too different. I have a 232/234 .600/603 lift, 114LSA cam currently. The new one is 227/233 .638 .634. The 1.8 ratio roller rockers will effectively push this cam into the ~.670 range. These also get Mamo'ified to be drilled out and tapped to use a 10mm bolt over an 8mm for better stability. This is what lead to the cam being specced. The plan is to run it to 6800. (6600 currently). The Johnson lifters are to maintain proper lift at heavy use which is something the LS7's supposedly fail at and lose a bit of pressure, robbing you of lift at higher RPM. Hollow stem valves for better, well everything, Valve train control. I dunno. Hollow is better. The valves are also not on a standard valve angle. Compression ratio is going from 10.6 to 11.3. The cam is smaller, but also not really... The cam was specced when I generated a chart where I counted the frames of a lap video I had and noted how much of the time in % I spent at what RPM while on track at Sandown. The current cam/heads are a bit mismatched, the standard LS1 heads are the restriction to power, which is why everyone CNC's them to get a pretty solid improvement. Most of the difference between LS1->LS2->LS3 is really just better stock heads. The current cam is falling over about 600rpm earlier than it 'should' given the rest of my current setup. CNC'ing heads closes the gap with regards to heads. Aftermarket heads eliminate the gap and go further. The MMS heads go even further than that, and the heads I have in the box could quite easily be bolted to a 7.0 427ci or 454 and not be any restriction at all. Tony Mamo previously worked with AFR, designed new heads from scratch then eventually founded his own business. There he takes the AFR items and performs further wizardry, CNC'ing them and then manually porting the result. He also ports the FAST102 composite manifold: Before and after There's also an improved racing crank scraper and windage tray. Helps to keep oil in the pan. Supposedly gains 2% power. Tony also ports Melling oil pumps, so you get more oil pressure down low at idle, and the same as what you want up top thanks to a suitable relief spring. There's also the timing chain kit with a Torrington bearing to make sure the cam doesn't have any thrust. Yes I'll post a before and after when it all eventually goes together. It'll probably make 2kw more than a setup that would be $15,000 cheaper :p
    • Because the cars wheels are on blocks, you slide under the car.   Pretty much all the bolts you touched should have been put in, but not fully torque up.   Back them off a turn or two, and then tighten them up from under the car with the wheels sitting on the blocks holding car up in the air.
    • Yes. Imagine you have the car on the ground, and you mine away all the ground under and around it, except for the area directly under each individual wheel. That's exactly how it'd look, except the ground will be what ever you make the bit under each wheel from
    • Yes, if you set the "height" right so that it's basically where it would be when sitting on the wheel. It's actually exactly how I tighten bolts that need to be done that way. However....urethane bushes do NOT need to be done that way. The bush slides on both the inner and outer. It's only rubber bushes that are bonded to the outer that need to be clamped to the crush tube in the "home" position. And my car is so full of sphericals now that I have very few that I need to do properly and I sometimes forget and have to go back and fix it afterwards!
×
×
  • Create New...