Geezabloke Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 I have plans on dyno'ing mine next week Mapping cost = £0 lol -Ian Excellent, is that the standard charge Ian? ......... Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul mac Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 idle is fine its a bit lumpy when the car is cold but spot on when warm, i'me going to fit an oil cooler as the car does run hotter, obviously the fuel consumption hasnt improved with the increased power but hey you cant have everything, Ian C your a lucky boy i wish i owned a dyno it does'nt really answer the question of what the average punter would pay for mapping an e-manage or stand alone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian C Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 idle is fine its a bit lumpy when the car is cold but spot on when warm, i'me going to fit an oil cooler as the car does run hotter, obviously the fuel consumption hasnt improved with the increased power but hey you cant have everything, Ian C your a lucky boy i wish i owned a dyno it does'nt really answer the question of what the average punter would pay for mapping an e-manage or stand alone Hahaha I wish I owned a dyno as well! my housemate may not approve though Anyway, I wasn't meaning to annoy you or anything it was just a silly off-the-cuff comment (which I paid for with Geeza's witty retort ) E-Manage mapping = £300. Standalone, no idea. -Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul mac Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 its all gone quiet on this thread c'mon Ian C and Paul E i was asked to put up the numbers when i had the car mapped, so hear they are again if you missed the first time T61 with SAFC and ITC 510 rwhp and 457 ft/lb torque, you seem a little shy with the numbers boys are they a trade secret, its all good and well sniggering at other peoples efforts but if you cant back it up with substance it dont mean jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonball Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 Just saw this Paul - and not aware of anyone sniggering - figures sound very good and congrats on getting it done! Hope it all goes well... BTW - Standalone system probably £600 to map inc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLicense Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 idle is fine its a bit lumpy when the car is cold but spot on when warm, i'me going to fit an oil cooler as the car does run hotter, obviously the fuel consumption hasnt improved with the increased power but hey you cant have everything, Ian C your a lucky boy i wish i owned a dyno it does'nt really answer the question of what the average punter would pay for mapping an e-manage or stand alone The going rate for mapping an AEM ecu seems to be £600-650 depending on where you go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopite Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 is that a fixed price Tony? how many hours are they quoting? that include any fuel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Harwood Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 its all gone quiet on this thread c'mon Ian C and Paul E i was asked to put up the numbers when i had the car mapped, so hear they are again if you missed the first time T61 with SAFC and ITC 510 rwhp and 457 ft/lb torque, you seem a little shy with the numbers boys are they a trade secret, its all good and well sniggering at other peoples efforts but if you cant back it up with substance it dont mean jack Unless all the car's you want to compare get their results from the same dyno, the figures are totally meaningless.... As an example, I know of one car that read ~460 rwhp on a dyno-dynamics wheel dyno, and ~600 rhhp on Thor's Dyna-pack hub dyno. I'm not saying either are wrong, but as you can see, they're worlds apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian C Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 its all gone quiet on this thread c'mon Ian C and Paul E i was asked to put up the numbers when i had the car mapped, so hear they are again if you missed the first time T61 with SAFC and ITC 510 rwhp and 457 ft/lb torque, you seem a little shy with the numbers boys are they a trade secret, its all good and well sniggering at other peoples efforts but if you cant back it up with substance it dont mean jack Well, I've got more coil packs on order so that I don't have to dyno on 0.9bar Full set of new ones, fix this recurring misfire once and for all. My efforts are going into getting the car sorted for 10otb, if I can fit a dyno in on Saturday I will. Hope that's alright with you, I wouldn't want to disappoint Not overly interested in the top end bhp figure anyway, apart from showoff material - it's how the car feels to drive that I'm after. Not only is it stupid fast at WOT, but I can also blast through the gears between 3-4000rpm on part throttle nicely. So that's good enough for me. Drivability can't be dyno'd though, so I guess it doesn't mean jack -Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geezabloke Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 its all gone quiet on this thread c'mon Ian C and Paul E i was asked to put up the numbers when i had the car mapped, so hear they are again if you missed the first time T61 with SAFC and ITC 510 rwhp and 457 ft/lb torque, you seem a little shy with the numbers boys are they a trade secret, its all good and well sniggering at other peoples efforts but if you cant back it up with substance it dont mean jack Did any week areas show up Paul? ie. any part of the rev range showing as running lean? and was it set up using various throttle positions throughout the rev ranges or all on WOT? Am very interested on your findings Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul mac Posted July 30, 2005 Share Posted July 30, 2005 Did any week areas show up Paul? ie. any part of the rev range showing as running lean? and was it set up using various throttle positions throughout the rev ranges or all on WOT? Am very interested on your findings Dave geezabloke sorry for the delay in answering i've been away touring the highlands of Scotland in the supe 1040 miles covered and the car ran like a swiss watch, well done Mr Toyota, the fueling is a compromise with the SAFC due to the limited resolution, Pete at thor made sure the the top end was safe then tweaked the rest of the range in as best he could finishing with a road test and final adjustments, the pesky bit is the 4000 rpm change over point but everything is safe which is the main thing, the car drives spot on and after doing 1000 miles the fuel consumption at normal speeds doesnt seem any different, i cant see what all the this anti SAFC snobbery is all about, i asked pete if there would be any advantage of going to an e-mange in the future and he said with my current set up he would'nt bother it would be a s**t load of hassle for very little gain and the best route to go if upgrading again would be a stand alone ecu, just to emphasise again i am very happy with the way the car drives throttle response is superb and the only "richness" i can detect is a bit of a burble on overrun, i think it speaks for itself the 2 biggest critics of this set-up on this thread wont post power figures (might be embarrasing eh boys) for whatever reason and hide behind "my cars more drivable than yours " as mentioned ealier in this thread i dont have pots of money to spend and dont want to have to rag the arse out of the car spending months mapping an e-manage, you pays your money etc, all i can say from my own expierience with a T61 with 550's the SAFC, ITC route is a relatively cheap method of control (total outlay including set up £400) that does a good job at my power levels, hope this helps fella Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now