ECU editor and PC V
- Thread starter jellyrug
- Start date
And some tuners may not be proficient with the ECU editor software.
The reason I am asking is because I am thinking about getting another GenII to play with, as I plan keeping my current bike 100% stock.
I enjoy doing this stuff myself, so rather than a dyno, I will probably use a data logger and then start messing with the ECU. I like the idea of not using an add on PCV.
I enjoy doing this stuff myself, so rather than a dyno, I will probably use a data logger and then start messing with the ECU. I like the idea of not using an add on PCV.
I installed the boost by smith interface on my last Gen 2, it was a piece of cake... unfortunately had to sell it before I got to do much except the very basics with it. I'll do the same with the new one then use the PCV for dyno tuning. Not sure what mods I want to do yet. Maybe a set of carpenter heads and cams.
I would disagree with that.... the ECU Editor/WRT has twice the fine tune-ability over the PC.
Lycan6
Registered
Well I'm no tuner. But some pretty good ones have said ecu flash and PCV is the best tune you're going to get because you can make finer adjustments. Of course data logging is going to be different but that's not what we were discussing.
PC5 map is 10x47 = 470 cells of adjustment. This only accounts for RPM and TPS.
ECU Editor
IAP map is 21*43 = 903
TPS map is 23*43= 989
TPS idle map is 13*8=104
IAP idle map is 15*8=120
total 2116 cells of adjustment.
I was wrong, ECU Editor is 4.5 times finer than PC5.
Its 9 times finer if you count the fact that ECU Editor holds dual maps that can be switch on the fly.
for bolt-ons, PC is fine but if you want a big motor with aftermarket fuel injectors or any other real power adder, ECU Editor is the ONLY way to go. This doesnt even touch on the other awesome features of ECU Editor with clutchless full throttle shifts, lower rpm limiter on starting, fuel injector compensation settings ect....
ECU Editor
IAP map is 21*43 = 903
TPS map is 23*43= 989
TPS idle map is 13*8=104
IAP idle map is 15*8=120
total 2116 cells of adjustment.
I was wrong, ECU Editor is 4.5 times finer than PC5.
Its 9 times finer if you count the fact that ECU Editor holds dual maps that can be switch on the fly.
for bolt-ons, PC is fine but if you want a big motor with aftermarket fuel injectors or any other real power adder, ECU Editor is the ONLY way to go. This doesnt even touch on the other awesome features of ECU Editor with clutchless full throttle shifts, lower rpm limiter on starting, fuel injector compensation settings ect....
If that is what they prefer, I believe it is mainly because they do not have experience and understanding of everything the ECU is capable of.
Lets see what they say if they see this thread?
I have not looked at what a Hayabusa ECU is capable of, so I have no idea. I do understand Iceman's post though.
I have done a lot of work on fuel injection for Mercedes though and kind of tried to keep up with the times. I do not like add on third party accessories, plus the concept of putting a computer behind another computer to change what the first computer should have done initially just goes against my Engineering principles.
When it comes to my bikes, they are like my lady, no one else touches them.
My current Busa is still bone stock though.
Lycan6
Registered
Then maybe we shouldn't say things like you did about others capability and leave it as your opinion.Lets see what they say if they see this thread? I have not looked at what a Hayabusa ECU is capable of, so I have no idea. I do understand Iceman's post though. I have done a lot of work on fuel injection for Mercedes though and kind of tried to keep up with the times. I do not like add on third party accessories, plus the concept of putting a computer behind another computer to change what the first computer should have done initially just goes against my Engineering principles. When it comes to my bikes, they are like my lady, no one else touches them.
Correction: You are the one who insinuated a specific individual does not know what he is doing, not me. There is nothing wrong with suggesting that a tuner who prefers to work with a PCV does so because he has not fully explored ECU capabilities. Unless of course there is an ego issue?
Lycan6
Registered
That's your quote. Not mine.
Lycan, why don't we rather try and make this an educational discussion so we can all learn from it. Ask him to explain in some detail why he says that?
It is never important for ME to be right. What is important is to know what is right and what is best and understand the reasons why.....
Lycan6
Registered
That's all I've done. You should probably take your own advise. I mentioned that the tuners that I have spoken with both said the PCV has better fine tuning ability. I haven't said one person was right or wrong. Only what "qualified and experienced" individuals have stated.
This being more a technical discussion, I believe we want to understand a bit more about why they say that? If that does not float your boat, then OK.
Similar threads
