getting tuned at technosqaure today =]
so all you have is an injen intake and HFC, not even an exhaust ? thats pretty damn good. how come the first chart scales the power around 280ish and the second one scales it much higher? also its odd that he tuned your car richer and made more power since factory their pig rich, almost seems like your baseline run is where the A/F should be .. near the 13's
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
From: ATX
I have heard that tadashi's dyno reads higher than a dynojet...but thats not the point...I can care less if he put 350 @ the wheels. I just want to know if his baseline was also done using the same dyno or not. If it was the same dyno then a 42whp gain is amazing. Every dyno is going to read a different number so peak number doesnt mean diddly squat to me.
But since I assume the charts are from Tadashi's dyno, I'm sure there are some stock dyno runs from this dyno out there somewhere... anybody? Bueller?
That would be the interesting comparison; stock versus tuned w/ mods.
Registered Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
From: Miami
yet again...very impressive!!!
I'm sure that the exact details are proprietary and values custom to your specific tune, but generally speaking, does anybody have a list of all the events that have been altered by a technosquare engine flash?
1) throttle position delimiter?
2) upped rpm delimiter?
3) aggressive timing?
4) fuel triming?
5) VVEL operation?
etc..
I'm sure that the exact details are proprietary and values custom to your specific tune, but generally speaking, does anybody have a list of all the events that have been altered by a technosquare engine flash?
1) throttle position delimiter?
2) upped rpm delimiter?
3) aggressive timing?
4) fuel triming?
5) VVEL operation?
etc..
Premier Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,346
Likes: 3
From: Colorado Springs, CO
The dyno is alright...I don't like the loss under 2500RPMs. Tadashi should have been able to increase it across the whole RPM band but you probably would have gained as much on the top end. My guess is you wanted max power.
Premier Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,346
Likes: 3
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Really? I've seen a couple other tunes by him (I think they are actually on the site) and one was good and one was bad IMO. The bad one looked similar to your but I think they guy gained a little more on the top end but he lost a lot on the bottom end. I remember him stating that he wanted it this way because he wanted the highest number. The good tune had gains throughout the RPM range but the gains were not as much as in your tune or the other guys. Interesting! I figured you told him to give you the best gain. It is not a bad tune but IMO you should try not to loss any power on the low end of the RPM range.
Really? I've seen a couple other tunes by him (I think they are actually on the site) and one was good and one was bad IMO. The bad one looked similar to your but I think they guy gained a little more on the top end but he lost a lot on the bottom end. I remember him stating that he wanted it this way because he wanted the highest number. The good tune had gains throughout the RPM range but the gains were not as much as in your tune or the other guys. Interesting! I figured you told him to give you the best gain. It is not a bad tune but IMO you should try not to loss any power on the low end of the RPM range.
u can go over there and tell him u want power power and more power he will give u power but thats gnna cost u in the long run beacuse all the oem cooling hardware isent ment for that much power, examples would be the radiator, the oil will warm up faster, i am super drunk right now so excuse the grammer, dont forget abou the risk of going into limp mode... his tune makes power and is still somewhat near stock mpg wich i really like, and he also asked me to put 91 or higher and to never ever put arco.....
