|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 22
New CEG\'er
|
New CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 22 |
How much is a chip? i know the afc2 is 300 or so. Why not just save teh money and go full stand alone? It would be a much better option if you want to learn everything there is to know about tuning. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,970
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,970 |
Originally posted by turbodude:
How much is a chip? i know the afc2 is 300 or so. Why not just save teh money and go full stand alone? It would be a much better option if you want to learn everything there is to know about tuning.
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by Thinkmoto:
has anyone ran a TEC2/3 or a motec setup on a contour? yeah I know they are expensive but then you would have all the tuning capabilities in your hands...Kinda curious if anyone has 
Believe it or not it does not have near the overall tuning capability of the stock PCM. Ford's EEC-V really is a marvelous setup. Very advanced and indepth!
Now if you were building a race only setup that had no reason to have any sort of "true" driveability, mileage, emissions, etc, etc then a stand alone is fine to use.
However when considering you can fully tune any setup with the stock PCM and still retain full daily driveability why would you not use what you already have.
More money in your pocket, no loss of driveability, and still the same final performance...
It's the price of the reburns I don't want to pay and I would like the ability to get the most from the mods I will do along the way.
But in all reality, my whole setup will be basicly where I'd like it to be and the only mods I'll be doing once it's actually up and running will be more towards making it street friendly......so maybe a wideband o2 setup, a good base line tune and my AFCII is all I really do need.
Any opinions?
2005 Ford F150 SuperCab FX4
1964 Chevrolet Impala SS
1998 CSVT: 354HP/328TQ @ 10 psi, now gone 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 22
New CEG\'er
|
|
New CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 22 |
what kind of table does teh stock PCM uses, i highly doubt it is a configurable 32 x 32... And speed density IMHO is much better than the MAF setup. But to each his own.
Timing is my biggest concern. But you should be fine with your setup. As long as your injectors are not too big.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,970
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,970 |
IIRC, Keyser or DemonSVT would know about the tables the PCM works off of. I have a return style fuel rail, and am considering 42's or one step down. I still need to do some more research so I know what I need to use 
2005 Ford F150 SuperCab FX4
1964 Chevrolet Impala SS
1998 CSVT: 354HP/328TQ @ 10 psi, now gone
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Originally posted by turbodude:
what kind of table does teh stock PCM uses, i highly doubt it is a configurable 32 x 32... And speed density IMHO is much better than the MAF setup. But to each his own.
Timing is my biggest concern. But you should be fine with your setup. As long as your injectors are not too big.
Sorry, I have to disagree with your assumptions.
The MAF setup is far superior to the speed density. I can attest to that since I used to work on many GM's with speed density. The MAF system can easily accommodate any increases in boost pressure without having to change the sensor as long as the airflow is within the range of the MAF and the fuel requirements are within what the injectors can provide.
Basically, my injection system on my car is fine right now with no boost, 7 psi, or any psi I choose. I tested the A/F curve with 3 different boost levels as well as NA, and the PCM automatically adjusts the fuel based upon volume of air. No matter what boost level I picked, the stock PCM kept the AF extremely close to the same on each run without any additional tuning once it was dialed in. I'm very pleased with it, just not with the cost of reburning the chip.
I am going to consider purchasing the ECM from the 2000 SVT and converting to returnless so that I can buy the tweecer and get full tuning capability. With that much power at my fingertips there wouldn't even be a contest, I would win hands down! 
Just messing with you guys, but you know I would extract the most power out of my setups instead of this conservative guesses I have to work with. It would be worth it for me to pick up the PCM, wiring harness, fuel rail and fuel pump just to be able to spend the $500 on the tweecer and have full tunability.
Of course, if the guys at tweecer would ever take the time to crack the return-style codes then they would have a much greater market from the contour/cougar/mystique/mondeo crowd! Seems almost foolish that they haven't done it by now since the vast majority of those cars were return style and since they are finally entering their own in the modifications market.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 22
New CEG\'er
|
|
New CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 22 |
i guess thats where we differ. I will always choose speed density or teh maf for ease of tuning. I like to Have MAP vs RPM tables. Easier to tune driveability in my book. But to each his own
Have you deal with any stand alone ems's as of yet? I would assume you would like it. Since you are a hand on kind of guy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
I played around with a Motec at the speedshop when they tune their racecar, but it costs as much as my car is worth! That is the only one I have played with. I considered the AEM but it too is more limited than the EEC V system. A tweecer is the way to go as far as I am concerned.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 3,223
"Absolut Rara."
|
|
"Absolut Rara."
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 3,223 |
Originally posted by turbodude:
what kind of table does teh stock PCM uses, i highly doubt it is a configurable 32 x 32... And speed density IMHO is much better than the MAF setup. But to each his own.
Timing is my biggest concern. But you should be fine with your setup. As long as your injectors are not too big.
I'm going to have to disagree with you as well. The stock Ford PCM is a very capable system; the EEC 4 was even used in some Formula one cars with the same hardware (different box of course) as many of the late 80's early 90's Ford vehicles.
As far as Speed Density vs. MAF, they both have thier place, with SD being easier/quicker to tune, but w/ a proper load-based MAF setup being far more adaptable to changing conditions and providing far better overall driveability. There is a reason Ford uses the more expensive MAF system, especially when you consider what tightwads the vehicle chiefs and finance people are.
|
|
|
|
|
