could anyone tell me the best chip to be using on the NA for good performance gains?i dont want to hear any laughter from the TT chimps about this post as well...
Dont let them get to you.... ...the TT guys are only stirring and will only hassle people spending big money on NA engines(plus some owners feel threatened if an NA might have more power than their bog standard tt}D )
I have a Hitec chip..... as WYKKED said, most if not all the NA owners using aftermarket chips are running a Hitec chip. The chip is great and so is the service. Bob (the guy that does the programming) is always willing to help and answer questions. You will never get the same gains a TT would because we dont have turbo's where we can up the boost, but its fair to say that all healthy NA's with the Hitec chip have over 130rwkw. Thats with just exhaust, airfilter and ECU modifications. Stock is around the 100rwkw mark apparantly. Also, the gains you receive is very much dependant on the health of your engine. Speak to simon from TTZ if you want more specific info regarding the Hitec upgrade.Cheers
chips and NA's NA doesn't really need a chip. And not before you've done intake exhaust headers and perhaps UD pulley. Just advance your timing 5 degrees or maybe more even, and do the other mods first. Not like a TT that needs more fuel for higher boost... gains from a chip are pretty small really on an NA... less you've done heads and cams and valves and all that old school shit as more fuel aint what it needs!
Apexi SAFC II is a much better option Just advance the timing as egg said on a dyno and while you're there program the Apexi for a nice beautiful flat Air/Fuel ratio curve of 13.0 The quickest NAs and NAs that are raced on the track on this forum don't run Hitecs. Plus you have full visual knock control monitor(with warning) which is essential when racing or drag racing Catcha
But 4 the money I've read the arguments for and against, but with the price of both much the same, which is better really? orWhere can I get some further (no bullshit) info?
do a search..... on this forum for other peoples opinions. If that doesnt sway you one way or another, then do a search on the net. Cheers
Costs... you can get an Apexi SAFC II off ebaY for around $360 AUD, freight would be probably around $60 AUD. Had no probs with JDM and they delivered in around 7 days. And what bullshit were you referring too? As previously stated this should be the last mod you do as your mixture will change when you put on an exhaust and pod filter/headers etc. Catcha
mixture will change with new exhaust? Thats an interesting concept but to my knowledge is only valid for MAP sensor based EFI, not AFM based.AB
Mine did When I removed the shit mufflers that were on my car my A/F leaned out by around .2 across the rev range. Remember in WOT there is no mixture feedback to the ECU(there is but it ignores it), therefore no compensation. New exhaust more flow more air in , leaner mixture, makes sense? Catcha.
except there is still feedback from the AFM otherwise if a TT wound up the boost, it would run much leaner, which it doesn't.AB
What the hell? Why do you think people buy AVCRs? Most turbo engines run way too rich at WOT and running higher boost is a simple and effective way to lean out the fuel map for more power ie if you had a A/F ratio of say 10.0 at 9 PSI, upping the boost up to 12 PSI would lean the mixture out to say 11.5 which would be an immediate power gain, not just from the boost but from the mixture. Remember the ultimate A/F ratio for max power in a turbo car is around 12 to 12.5 At the end of the day if you up the boost your A/F ratio will become leaner and most tuners exploit this when dyno tuning. As an example JT did exactly this and because his air/fuel ratio leaned off his power curve became smoother and the car made more power easily. What you are saying about the Air flow meter compensating for fuel is true to an extent, but its only going to compensate to a point that the ecu will allow because the original map is written for a standard car with no mods. As previously stated the ECU has no idea what the Air/fuel ratio is in WOT which is really all that matters. Cheers
Humm I see "no bullshit" seem to have offended, by that I mean results, comparisons and explanations of real life tests, not just the sales pitches.I've had a few pitches for the ECU swap if you look @ their site/s they tell you how cool their product is, and the Apexi SAFC II info says, ... well not much different.Just check the comments posted after yours, there is a shit load of different opinions out there.The Apexi SAFC II currently on eBay is $428.00 + P+H with 4 days to go.
That's cool I just read it wrong, still the first thing I would do is Advance your timing - this is the cheapest and not far off biggest power gain on the NA - it takes the double hump(flat spot) out of your dynograph and gives a nice smooth curve. The rest is up to you. I race my zed at the race track every month and when you're sitting on the redline for 8 minutes straight you want your a/f ratios fully sorted. For more info email me or call me for no bullshit experience. Catcha.
Errr, I think you're making it all too complicated. Free up the exhaust restriction, more air in through the air flow meter, and therefore more fuel in from the ECU controlling the injectors. Exactly the same principle as atmospheric changes with an AFM equipped car. THe AFM will detect the difference between hotter and/or less dense air, and colder and/or more dense air, and the ECU will set the mixtures accordingly. THe AFM is telling the ECU the mass of air that is entering the engine - It doesn't give a damn if that's due to altitude, temperature, or a low restriction exhaust.
Obviously... you've spent way more countless hours dyno tuning on an NA zed than me and have seen all the results right in front of you on what happens when you modify efi on a NA zed and how it compensates to a point in real life. You are correct in part theory but thats a whole lot different to reality. I've wasted way too much time on this thread, last one. Happy Easter.
