Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Spooks

Yes thats true for most standard ecu - wrx is no different.

Just with the link even when tuned well - it will still run alittle rich - its like a built in insurance policy with the link.

you'll see if you gt a link ;0>

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ok, if your going to make a bold statement like that, you need to suggest/list some factual information here.

ok. A few important things for me are

1) A good tuner... which leads into 2...

2) A good tuner that wont charge you an arm and a leg

and for one thing, in Vic that is very hard to find when compared to a PFC or a Wolf.

I dare say that applies to most other states in this fine country

i NEVER had this issue with my LINK when it was tuned properly.

One thing that rings true though is that my car chews through fuel, and runs extremely rich.

You've even said it runs hell rich.

i wouldnt call that a good tune. A good tune wont ever run lean BTW

also.. Does the link use the knock sensor input???

I am currently running a Link Plus in my car and i am very happy with it. I have also had a Power FC and if i had to choose between the two i would choose the Link Plus anyday of the week. I previously had too many problems with AFM's etc and decided to change to Link and haven't looked back the only ECU i would replace it with would be an Autronic or Motec but obviously they are much more expensive.

Anyone who has doubts - please look at the link a pasted on page 1 and look at the lack of load points, lack of fuctionality, etc the link has compared to a better ecu.

Yes the fact that the link doesnt use the AFM is great - and as i said my Link was OK - but just look at the simple facts and you'll see that its lacking badly.

Dan

Does the Link (and all the other ECU's that suffer poor fuel economy) have Closed loop running?

It was my understanding that ECU's that dont do this arnt legal as they dont comply with the ADR's. On the back of the Microtech LT1200(?) it says in small print "For racing use only" because of this.

OH dear, another "XXXX ecu versus Power FC" thread......

This is how I see it.....

a lot of the NZ guys use LINK ecus

That's because they are made in NZ

I previously had too many problems with AFM's etc and decided to change to Link
So you had problems with a standard Nissan part and it was the Power FC's fault. More likely yours for not servicing your AFM's properly.

At least you could easily get a replacement, wait until a MAP sensor fails and you get

AVO have no more map sensors, and they dont know when they will be getting anymore... so this is stressing me out big time.
i guess the wrx link plugin is similar to the gtslink
Ahh no, the WRX is a 4 cylinder and the GTST is a 6 cylinder.
for about 800/900 bucks seand hand its OK....
So they depreciate (loose their value) pretty quickly, I wonder why? At $1100 new, Power FC's seem to hold their value pretty well, I wonder why?
i cant expect a car with 300+rwhp to be decent on fuel.
How about 9.4 litres per hundred kilometres from Sydney to Wakfield Park and back (400 k's). And it has a lot more than 300 rwhp. That will save you the $200 price difference pretty quickly.
the car would smoothly decellaratedown in revs and speed with suck utter smoothness
You don't have to tune that with a Power FC, it comes standard in the base maps. That will save you more than the $200 difference in price in extra tuning costs.
good luck with PowerFC and it working from just being plugged in
Must be the way I plug them in, I'm up to ~15 Power FC's and not one car has failed to start first turn of the key and then be driven without issue to the dyno shop for a tune. Cars with the usual mods (exhaust, filter, boost up) drive better than standard most times. I must just be lucky, huh?
link is better then a few of the other choices on the market
I have compared a Link side by side with a Microtec, Haltec and Wolf and I can't see any demonstrable superiorities. As for Power FC, Motec, Electromotive and Autronic .....well not even close.

The bottom line, if you want your car to drive as "nice" as it did when standard and not cost an arm and leg to buy install, and tune, then there is only one choice in my opinion. The Power FC is unmatched in all those areas, it's the best all round ECU for a Skyline.

:rofl:

OH dear, another "XXXX ecu versus Power FC" thread......

it wasnt supposed to be

ive been told that powerfc wont work on my setup, so im investigating alternatives

was just suprised at how little information there was on links on this forum

thanks for you input anyway sydney kid

imacul8, the link plus has all the features you claim it doesn't including temp correction.. does the power fc? runs the std knock sensor also. The ecu comparison link you posted up fails to list most of the links features...

you also fail to mention how many countless hours the holinger equipped car you mention spent on the dyno at west racing?

I agree its far from the best ecu on the market but it does a good job in mine and countless other cars and for the dollars you can't complain.

Nismoid your initial comment on the subject is laughable, shit if everyone on the forum isnt using it, it must be crap.. ? Well done

How about 9.4 litres per hundred kilometres from Sydney to Wakfield Park and back (400 k's).  And it has a lot more than 300 rwhp.   That will save you the $200 price difference pretty quickly.

haha Douche,

Fcuk highway kilometres. I was talking CITY driving, because thats where it fcuks you the hardest.

Highway my fuel consumption is no problems.

DCIEVE

I also fogot to mention that a certain holiger equiped car spent hours being retuned at another perth wokshop.

Agreed tuning is the key.

But more load points (both ignition and fuel) allows for a smoother finer tune.

haha Douche,

Fcuk highway kilometres.  I was talking CITY driving, because thats where it fcuks you the hardest.

Highway my fuel consumption is no problems.

Obviously you don't live in Sydney, there is an hour of traffic to get to the highway.:)

imacul8, the link plus has all the features you claim it doesn't including temp correction.. does the power fc?  

The Power FC has tables for;

Water temp injection correction

Air temp injection correction

Air temp boost correction (if you have the Boost Control Kit)

Ignition water temp correction

Ignition air temp correction

Ignition boost correction

Battery voltage injection correction

Battery voltage ignition correction

And it flashes the standard dash warning light when;

Injector duration exceeds your selected value

Knock exceeds your selected value

Airflow exceeds your selected value

I agree its far from the best ecu on the market but it does a good job in mine and countless other cars and for the dollars you can't complain.  

I'm sorry but I CAN COMPLAIN, if I add it all up the Link actually costs more. It takes longer to install, it's not really plug and play, it doesn't have the quality support maps loaded and correction tables preset, the tuning is far more difficult....Someone has to pay for this additional labour, and that means you.

ive been told that powerfc wont work on my setup, so im investigating alternatives
If the Power FC "won't work" (whatever that means), then the Link sure as hell won't.

I have seen Power FC's running cars with 1100+ bhp, so obviously power isn't the problem. The only issue I can think of is auto transmission, and I can assure you that the Link won't run the auto much worse than the Power FC won't.

So post up what it is that you have been told the Power FC won't do. I am sure someone on here will be able to tell you how to do it.

:)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I think you're really missing the point. The spec is just the minimum spec that the fuel has to meet. The additive packages can, and do, go above that minimum if the fuel brand feels they need/want to. And so you get BP Ultimate or Shell Ultra (or whatever they call it) making promises to clean your engine better than the standard stuff....simply because they do actually put better additive packages in there. They do not waste special sauce on the plebian fuel if they can avoid it. I didn't say "energy density". I just said "density". That's right, the specific gravity (if you want to use a really shit old imperial description for mass per unit volume). The density being higher indicates a number of things, from reduces oxygen content, to increased numbers of double bonds or cyclic components. That then just happens to flow on to the calorific value on a volume basis being correspondingly higher. The calorific value on a mass basis barely changes, because almost all hydrocarbon materials have a very similar CV per kg. But whatever - the end result is that you do get a bit more energy per litre, which helps to offset some of the sting of the massive price bump over 91. I can go you one better than "I used to work at a fuel station". I had uni lecturers who worked at the Pt Stanvac refinery (at the time they were lecturing, as industry specialist lecturers) who were quite candid about the business. And granted, that was 30+ years ago, and you might note that I have stated above that I think the industry has since collected together near the bottom (quite like ISPs, when you think about it). Oh, did I mention that I am quite literally a combustion engineer? I'm designing (well, actually, trying to avoid designing and trying to make the junior engineer do it) a heavy fuel oil firing system for a cement plant in fricking Iraq, this week. Last week it was natural gas fired this-that. The week before it was LPG fired anode furnaces for a copper smelter (well, the burners for them, not the actual furnaces, which are just big dumb steel). I'm kinda all over fuels.
    • Well my freshly rebuilt RB25DET Neo went bang 1000kms in, completely fried big end bearing in cylinder 1 so bad my engine seized. No knocking or oil pressure issue prior to this happening, all happened within less than a second. Had Nitto oil pump, 8L baffled sump, head drain, oil restrictors, the lot put in to prevent me spinning a bearing like i did to need the rebuild. Mechanic that looked after the works has no idea what caused it. Reckoned it may have been bearing clearance wrong in cylinder 1 we have no idea. Machinist who did the work reckoned it was something on the mechanic. Anyway thats between them, i had no part in it, just paid the money Curiosity question, does the oil system on RB’s go sump > oil pump > filter > around engine? If so, if you had a leak on an oil filter relocation plate, say sump > oil pump > filter > LEAK > around engine would this cause a low oil pressure reading if the sensors was before the filter?   TIA
    • But I think you missed mine.. there is also nothing about the 98 spec that supports your claim..  according to the fuel standards, it can be identical to 95, just very slightly higher octane number. But the ulp vs pulp fuel regulations go show 95 (or 98), is not just 91 with some additives. any claim of ‘refined by the better refineries’ or ‘higher quality fuel’ is just hearsay.  I have never seen anything to back up such claims other than ‘my mate used to work for a fuel station’, or ‘drove a fuel delivery truck’, or ‘my mechanic says’.. the actual energy densities do slightly vary between the 3 grades of fuel, but the difference is very minor. That said, I am very happy to be proven wrong if anyone has some hard evidence..
    • You're making my point for me. 95 is not "premium". It is a "slightly higher octane" version of the basic 91 product. The premium product that they want people to buy (for all the venal corporate reasons of making more profit, and all the possibly specious reasons of it being a "better" fuel with nicer additive packages) is the 98 octane stuff. 95 is the classic middle child. No-one wants it. No-one cares about it. It is just there, occupying a space in the product hierarchy.
    • 98 and 95 have to meet the same national fuel standards beside the actual RON.  91 has lower standards (which are quite poor really), so 95 is certainly not 91 with some octane booster. It would be an easier argument to claim 98 is just 95 with some octane boosters. Also RON doesn't specify 'quality' in any sense, only the octane number.  Anything different retailers decide or not decide to add to their 95 or 98 is arbitrary and not defined by the RON figure.
×
×
  • Create New...