Unitronic Stage 2+(K04) Impressions

[FLtrooper]

I would love to see the results though. Would be awesome to do that with all 3 tuners, same exact car and hardware. It would cut through all the bs

I will supply the car and pay for dyno time if the big names want to step up!

GIAC/UNI/APR/REVO/EURODYNE/C2

Who ain't skeered??

:fighting0030:

 

[tdream1]

Do you think there would be an issue with the 2nd tune you run? Sometimes it takes a day for everything to calibrate after the flash. I would love to see the results though. Would be awesome to do that with all 3 tuners, same exact car and hardware. It would cut through all the bs

I think it would take some time for the ECU to adapt to the new tune. I always noticed that my car gets progressively faster after getting reflashed or even just switching maps when I was APR tuned (just 8 short hours ago).

I can probably dig up my old Mustang dyno sheets on my APR K04 93 octane tune, but my clutch was slipping back then. I don't think it'd be a fair comparision. I'll be going back to the dyno in the next few weeks to see how the UNI tune does.

 

[mdhollis]

^Yeah I have the same feeling. After a couple hours of driving the car progressively feels better and more responsive

 

[tdream1]

^Yeah I have the same feeling. After a couple hours of driving the car progressively feels better and more responsive

Totally!

 

[ns01gti]

I will supply the car and pay for dyno time if the big names want to step up!

GIAC/UNI/APR/REVO/EURODYNE/C2

Who ain't skeered??

:fighting0030:

I'd love to see it!

 

[John@Unitronic]

I also switched to Uni over the weekend. My cold start misfires. surging and cranking issues all magically disappeared. I knew I made a good decision when I saw a call coming from Quebec while my car was being flashed 600 miles away. Thanks again for the support, John!

My pleasure!

When did you get the UNI tune? John checked yesterday for me and said they have the most updated file in their database. Maybe it was literally, just updated or maybe just a different ECU ID.

Ken had an ECU ID that unfortunately had not seen an update to the latest revision Stage 2+ file at that time. The file should be ready for that ECU ID by the end of the week!

One other thing I have issues with, is I've heard/seen mixed feedback on Uni. EVERYONE on these forums has had great luck with them, but I've seen my friend have NOTHING but bad luck and awful service. He has a BT 1.8t and everytime he tried to get a tune it's not ready, they are working on it, they don't have time to upload it, BS BS BS. He left his car at a shop last week, went on a work trip and through the weekend and went to pick it up yesterday and it still wasn't ready. And it wasn't like it was a huge task either, it was getting the car tuned for an R32 throttle body. Being that the 1.8t has been around since 1998 and there are probably hundreds (if not thousands) of people running bigger throttle bodies on those motors, I don't get what the issue is. BTW this is the second or third time he has tried to get a tune for this and it still hasn't happened. I was even with him and waterfest 2 years ago and we talked directly to the Uni booth, they took his information, and it's still not done. THIS is one of two (if it actually makes more power) I haven't switched yet.

FWIW I asked and he did say his tuner was talking with John, which really confused me since everyone here has such great luck with him :iono:

Although we've certainly done that kind of stuff plenty times in the past, special requests done via remote re-tuning sessions are not just a standard off-the-shelf type thing. Not trying to get off topic, but your buddy's situations was unique and our software calibrator was running a bit behind at the time. In addition, a few last minute requests were thrown in the mix(2-step/no lift shift). We've worked with him to limit the inconvenience and to show our apologies for situation.

 

[mdhollis]

.........

I will get the y-axis fixed

 

[mattley crue1]

Before these are interpreted the wrong way, I'll add something to it.

The axis for these logs are VASTLY different. The APR boost logs has a max Y value of 3000 mbar, the comparison graph has a max of 2500. The APR graph is boosting higher throughout the pull.

The timing pull logs, is graphed with a scale of 0 to -2.5. The EMS can pull timing up to -12. Timing pull anywhere from 0 to -3 is optimal, it means the car is pushing as much timing as possible with very little reliance on the knock sensors. The competing graph, will show "0" knock because it is graphed with timing correction being positive, timing correction is negative. So if the other graph is pulling timing, it would not show according to that graph.

The lambda graph has a Max Y of 0.88 and a Min Y of 0.74. This makes it appear to be choppy in comparison to a graph that has a Y axis that ranges from 0 to 1.2.

The BTDC graph is set such that it ranges from 0 to 12, the other graph is set much differently. The BTDC graph isn't very useful without CF information.

thanks for pointing that out! i probably wouldnt have noticed just glancing over it.

 

[mdhollis]

Ok guys lets just hold off till we can have a good discussion with all the parties involved satisfied with the data

 

[U-20T]

Ok guys lets just hold off till we can have a good discussion with all the parties involved satisfied with the data

No prob we will see when they are corrected

 

[allset]

Bold :yikes: :thumbdown:


Overboosting, and Pull on less timing and Shaky Woozy MAF. Having timing pull is optimal addle:

soooooooo..... advancing timing say 12 degrees is bad then?:lol:

 

[allset]

deleted posts?

 

[Bronson@APR]

Bold :yikes: :thumbdown:


Overboosting, and Pull on less timing and Shaky Woozy MAF. Having timing pull is optimal addle:

If you're pulling zero CF, this means the car is not interpreting it is anywhere near knock. This means there is more timing left on the table, hence more power. When you see CF, this does not mean you are having pre-ignition.

The OEM uses knock sensors to calibrate their tunes, if you graph an OEM tune you'll see there will be 0 to -3 pull on a few cylinders for a single pull.

The MAF readings show that the APR tune is boosting more, the oscillation is due to turbulent airflow because the APR tune is boosting more and spooling a few hundred RPM earlier. After the surge zone, the MAF is showing that the APR tune is pulling in more air, which is generally a sign that the engine is making more power assuming the hardware has stayed the same.

Clearly, you know more about this stuff though.

 

[allset]

axis do need to be equal for posting.

 

[Bronson@APR]

So surging is good, and more boost to aid in surging. Overboosting is good. Got it.

2-3 more hp down low is hardly something to speak about.

He pulled timing will on DPI meth with that log. God knows what he was pulling if he didnt have knock protection

It isn't surging, if it was surging, boost would get clipped which it isn't.

It's a lot more torque and it's a much quicker delivery, it is not 2-3 horsepower. I do not see a car that is overboosting either, it is staying within the map limit of 2550 mbar. An overboost condition would show up with the N75, which it isn't. It is steady throughout the pull. Even if it exceeds the map, that is still not overboosting, tunes exceed the map limit all of the time there are ways of calibrating around it.

It's showing faster spool, more boost, more peak air and only -2.25 timing correction. I do not know the particulars of the meth kit, I'm not going to pretend to. I do know however you spin it, the APR tune is showing more power via the MAF. MAF values can be compared if it is in a comparison to the same car, it is evident in the logs why it is pulling more peak air mass too.

Everything you've stated incorrectly so far, are things that are common knowledge for calibrating this platform.