Hey guys...
the dyno appointment went down today at like 4pm, an hour later than what was scheduled due to this POS VW GTI that couldn't even start his car! ahha. he had volks tho.... so. :P

Well, the results were moderate, considering that the ground was wet, and my tires were slipping, and that this program that was uploaded to the ECU is considered "beta" and that the fine tuning hasn't been done.

97 Maxima:
<a href="http://www.seas.ucla.edu/%7Efarhana/BaseandUPRD1.jpg">97 ECU stock, 96 ECU stock, 96 ECU UPRD</a>
<a href="http://www.seas.ucla.edu/%7Efarhana/BaseandUPRD2.jpg">96 ECU stock, 96 ECU UPRD</a>

Here are the results: Torque increased 12.1 ft/lb, while Max Power
was increased 5 hp, (seeing nearly a 15.3 hp gain in the midrange at
4500 RPMs.) Mind you that these results are based on an ECU that wasn't
meant to be used on a 97, so the gains were quite significant.


The results are in the the 96SE ECU in the 97 GXE. Mind you that
the gains were for my car only. We ran out of time today, so Nabil's
ecu dyno will be rescheduled until after SEMA, uprd staff is leaving tomorrow for Vegas, so no maxima stuff until after Nov 3rd.

until the other final dynos are in, this is what we have. Damn. i wish we coulda saw nabil's gains today.

Robert said that we'd most likely redo the dynos at another dynojet next time, so the results for Nabil's ecu might be compeltely different.

i just want to goback to the clayton and see the end results. what i got today totally shocked me. it's as if my Ypipe, CAI, did nothing. something strange here..... well... whatever. i have nothing to hide, so i posted it all... comment all you want, just to let you know this isn't the final say on the matter. i started getting the 0707 Error code a few days ago, seems like the rear bank 02 sensor on the 97 is a completely differnt model number than that for a 96 Maxima, so.. i'll be swapping o2 sensors to try to get the ecu compliant....

thanks for your continued interests, and more updates will be posted in a week.
Cheston



[Edited by Chebosto on 10-26-2000 at 11:27 PM]

 

It's quiet in here

 

Yeah it is. i was shocked too.

huh... well. back to the clayton then... no need to bust any more heads open with flames.
just hope you knwo that this was a beta test and that the real deal isn't here yet..

 

Thanks Cheston for getting us what you could today

Any guesses how the traction and tuning might alter the results?

Also, can anybody explain why the 1st Clayton runs show continued improvements after 4500-5000rpm while these Dynojet's look like they fizzled at that same point

Don't think we can blame the CAI for this one.

 

no i wasn't trying to flame. i just though no matter positive or negative some people would have replied cuz they were waiting on you all day today.
to me, it's great gain for a chip, that's about what i expect, and i think it's worth the money.

 

Yo Cheston. Good job. I guess some guys were waiting for the miracle pill for $400. For two normal guys, you did great. On par w/ anything that anyone else has done. Congrats and hope you guys can keep it rollin'

 

*sigh*
yea, be being one of them believign in a miracle chip. heh. but we'll go back and fine tune it later, possibly bump up the "effect" range from 3k to like 2.5k and try to lean it more on the top end to get more power.

you can see the torque just takes off at 4500, maybe we can get it to sustain more than drop off so quickly like it did...

well. like i said. this is still a baby. we need to get used to it and pamper the thing on the clayton to get it tuned well....

UPRD isn't gonna just chuck out their plans cuz of the lousy dyno, i have Robert's word that they'll work something out...

15 isn't too bad, but ~23 is much better. (which i think we'll see on Nabil's car..)

 

I'll wait for the pre 97 dyno test
^_^
hey..that is a conservative gain which is good.
especially for a chip that is not designed specifically for the car....
2 thumbs up!
=]

 

Thanks for doing the dyno run. The gains look very worthwhile even though they are coming nowhere close to the Clayton numbers which was to be expected. Hopping on the dyno will hurt numbers a little. It is surprising that Jeff Ks 95 SE was putting down over 16 more hp and 15 ft/lbs more torque than your car with similiar mods. Couple questions.

Why did you make your runs in 3rd? Almost all dyno shops use 4th gear on a 5 speed. Using 3rd will show a little more power and were probably making your wheels more likely to hop.

Did you run those bigass rims on the dyno? If you did, those suckers will take away some hp. I wouldn't be surprised if you'd loose 7-8hp right there.

Like I said, the initial dyno results look really good for $400-450. Hopefully Nabil's Max will make a good showing. I think this is going to be the next big mod. I don't think there's a NA mod out there that gains that much torque and hp on Max. I'll take more mid range punch anyday. IT WILL IMPROVE 1/4 mile and highway acceleration. I can also see where you say the new "surge" in power in right at 4000. Look at that torque and hp boost in the mid range. Yummy......


Dave

 

" It is surprising that Jeff Ks 95 SE was putting down over 16 more hp and 15 ft/lbs more torque than your car with similiar mods. "

yeah. weird. huh? this dyno basically said that my car is basically stock and that the ypipe and cai didn't help to much.

"Why did you make your runs in 3rd? Almost all dyno shops use 4th gear on a 5 speed. Using 3rd will show a little more power and were probably making your wheels more likely to hop. "

that's what they tested at. what pissed me off was the dyno guy opened it up from the beginning instead of revin'g to 2500 slowly then punching it. he punched it at the beginning. becuase it's weird. when driving, if you punch it at the beginning, the computer goes thru a closed loop program of somesort and the fuel is just not used correctly. when i'm at 2500 then punch it, i instantly see power gains on the road.. just didn't show up on the dyno..

" Did you run those bigass rims on the dyno? If you did, those suckers will take away some hp. I wouldn't be surprised if you'd loose 7-8hp right there. "

big *** rims: well. 17x8s yes. but i dont think they would matter much, since this dyno wheel has no load, unlike the clayton.

" Like I said, the initial dyno results look really good for $400-450. Hopefully Nabil's Max will make a
good showing. I think this is going to be the next big mod. I don't think there's a NA mod out there that gains that much torque and hp on Max. I'll take more mid range punch anyday. IT WILL IMPROVE 1/4 mile and highway acceleration. I can also see where you say the new "surge" in power in right at 4000. Look at that torque and hp boost in the mid range. Yummy...... "

yeah. amazing isn't it. totally worth it even right now, i think.. Nabil's readings should be interesting. too bad we couldnt do it today. blast.

 

Those are good gains. I'd buy, but dont tell UPRD that, tell them we want more, hehehe. Thanks Cheston & Nabil, you guys get my vote for Maxima enthusiast's of the year!

 

Hey good work on the dyno.

But about your car... it is cali spec right? Aren't cali spec cars supposed to put down less power anyways?? Just wondering.

-Shing

 

As far I've I know, running big rims on a dynojet will affect hp numbers. I've always been told to put your 15s back on when you make a dyno run. The wheels might not be that much heavier than stock, but they have a lot more weight towards the outside of the rim which makes it harder for the motor to spin them.

I think the rims and your car's Cali-spec motor is pulling out 10-12fwhp.

Is Nabil's Max a Cali-spec version?

I'll be dynoing in a few weeks when I get my Kosei K-1s and fix my exhaust leak. My current mods are a y-pipe, HKS intake, B-pipe, and RT cat. I've got a standard issue 6 Max SE 5 speed. I'm hoping I'll be pretty close to Jeff's numbers because I'm running trap speeds as good as he was in Mega Max.

Dave

 

Good job in general but a few questions/comments.

first, i have/had a similar setup to yours and was putting 180+ hp to the wheels when i dynoed last (stock rims though) and it was dry, so that does throw a wrench into his numbers, but remember, we're comparing between runs on his car, where it was the same wheels, same loss of traction in all runs, so comparisons are valid

BUT: how were the runs done, was that 1 run per ecu??? statistically, you can't do that...you need a minimum of 2 per condition and preferably 3 per treatment. Also, what was the order the ecus were run in? How long was allowed to cool between runs?

These are the important questions that may allow us to really see the real gains.

FINALLY (MOST IMPORTANT) remember my 95 JWT ecu in my 97 max....NO HP/Tq gains at all!!! While my below 4500 rpm gains were ~7 hp and ~10 tq if i remember correctly.

So my conclusion: it's a better performer than the JWT ecu, costs 150$+ less. So Depending on the questions i raised above, i think it's a success. Especially considering the alternatives.

But: he just mentioned mil problems....in fact, the 95 ecu in my 97 eliminated all my mil problems (interesting huh?) so that needs to be examined.

All in all, i think it's a good result, but needs some additional analysis.

Robert

 

we had 2 runs for each ECU, they were basicaly on top of each other, so i took one of each and posted it. The order was 97gxe ecu. wait 5 minutes. 96 stock ecu. wait 5 minutes. 96 UPRD ecu, wait 5 minutes. the dyno roller was a bit messed up, i started seeing a slight film on the tires after the second run.. second of all, i kept on the rims due to the fact that we dynoed on the clayton with my rims so i wanted to keep things consistant.. but the funny thing is. the clayton puts a load on the car while the dyno jet does not. . ... interesting there....

i have a cali-spec GXE, not the greatest nor the fastest thing... so i was disappointed termendously to seeing such a low base run.. odd..

the MIL problems we'll be working on.. the 95 got rid of the mil on the 97, prolly cuz OBD1 didn't really need a rear o2 bank sensor, while the 96 does, and the 97 needed stricter emissions... we're looking into that...

 

Well, looks much more like I expected.

Looks good though! However, you said to wait for more results.... I can do that. I'll also shoot an e-mail to Jeff S. (MadMax) who was the original TRG PROgram guy and get him to repost his dyno so we can compare it as well.

175hp is pretty average for a CAI/y-pipe/muffler Maxima-- and considering as how the high-end gain is pretty minimal it looks good enough to me.

 

that i was trying to make was that you need to do the first ecu again at the end:

for example
if 97 is the 97 ecu (stock); 96 is 96 stock ecu and 96+ is UPRD 96 ecu then the run order should be

97, 97, 96, 96, 96+, 96+, 97, 97

that way any changes in the machine/car from the first to 6th run will be verified on the last runs (7 and 8)

Jim Wolf keyed me to this they're called back-back-back dynos.

For example, maybe your car runs better when hot and the last runs you car was a little hotter and thus dynoed better....OR...maybe the dyno dried off and thus appeared to produce higher dyno number....

by re-running the 97 again...you'd verify that nothing changed from the first to last runs.

That way you can't have any questions about the reliability of the dyno runs.

Robert

 

oh.. ok. i c.
i'll make note of this.

this is just one of many dyno sessions ...

hey. i need input . since you were the only other one using a JWT ecu in the 97, what did you think the car needed?

we'll be using the AFC to tune fuel mapping later....
but any other input would be great....

 

His car peaked at around 5000-5100rpm! Then if falls from from there. I would say that it could use alittle more tuning in the toppend because his power peak should be around 5500-5800rpm and not 5000rpm. Too bad no one wants to try a cam regrind with a tuned ECU. I know that it would be able pick up at least 5hp average from 5000-6600. I figure an increase in duration of about 10 degree's, slightly more lift would yeild nice results. Now it won't make more than say the 5th gen intake manifold but it would be damn close .

 

you saw changes up to about 5k? mine (JWT) only went to about 4500.

we (whomever) really needs to try and increase hp/tq gains above 5k.

that's why i ditched my JWT b/c when i race/autox, i rarely get below 5k...hence those low gains are only really used in drag racing IMHO.

just my 0.02

Robert

 

LOL . [whisper to self] "if I only knew then what I know now" [/whisper to self].

 

the mad archiver strikes again.. you bored Ari?

 

Yes I'm pretty bored. However there hasn't been much follow up on the ECU since last year. I'm pretty surprised that people would spend like $500 for a catback, when for $50 extra you could get way more midrange-lowend torque without any noise. Its been over a year since we wondered how a 4th gen would do with a 5th gen intake manifold has it happened, hell no. But then again we didnt have altezza's last year either

 

Cheston says he is coming out with an SC ECU.. however.. i have seen lots of URPD ECU's up for sale in the FS Forum .. however.. i would say a $500 NOS kit is better than a catback or ECU.. however.. i shall be doing the catback thing.. because i want looks and sound not looking on the performance end.. although the catback does make the car pull harder at top speeds... i can't use an ECU because they advance the timing and fuel curve.. and that would cause me to detonate while using Nitrous unless i got the JWT NOS kit

 

That is why you get a G-force ECU with a n2o program. Then you can spray and keep the torque gain off the bottle .

 

they don't have one

 

wtf? of course they do.


sprint. man. you need to seriously get your facts right.

 

With the G-Force NOS ECU, is there something that CHANGES when you have nitrous activated so that you don't detonate the hell out of your engine while you are on the bottle, and yet acts like the N/A ECU while you are OFF the bottle. Or do you have to choose, either N/A program or NOS program. I'm getting nitrous in the spring, and would like to not blow up my engine because of this ECU, but I'm prepared to spend $500 on this ECU rather than an exhaust or something similar because the gains are so much better. Cheston, I'm searching through the threads about the ECU, but I'm sure I'll have more questions before I buy. By the way this will be for a 96 5 speed.

 

this the main reason why i want to leave this forum. its because of ppl like sprintmax and your stupid little antiquated remarks.

fine. you go out and try your best to bring aftermarket parts for a 4 door import than no one wants to support.

thats fine with me. I'm getting out of this anyway. i have an is300 waiting for me at a dealership.


i hate this stupid bull crap drama on this forums. what is this. the SprintMax comedy hour? everything you've ever said on this forum has been unproductive.

stick your synical and smartazz remarks to yourself.

 

Damn straight.

I agree that there is a little too much drama (and not to mention, BS)on the forums now. We're here to help each other out, right? Since I first became a member over a year ago, I've noticed that the forums have started to turn into some kind of pointless chat room.

Look what's happening now. Cheston is leaving.

Hey Cheston, if you are leaving...just know you've been the greatest help to all of us, providing us with updates on new mods and maintaining a great website.

 

maybe you need to visit the 4th Gen Forum.. come to think of it.. apart from offering "mind blowing" deals.. i don't think i have EVER seen you answer a question in the 4th gen forum..

 

Maybe because he's answering the questions and not asking them. Sounds like he's the guy with the answers, not the questions.

Stereodude

 

 

Cheston and Sprint:

Both of you are out of line.


Cheston, you said:

"sprint. man. you need to seriously get your facts right.
"

which was fine.

But then you said:

"this the main reason why i want to leave this forum. its because of ppl like sprintmax and your stupid little antiquated remarks. "

This was in response to Sprint saying:

"they don't have one"


Obviously, Cheston, you are making more out of this particular comment than meets my eye. I'm sure it's a deeper problem and of a personal nature with Sprintmax, but take that to e-mail or something. I'm not interested in seeing two contributing members go at it here.