Jump to content

- - - - -

Another 2013 Dyno Graph - Stock 93 vs Visconti's EcuTek STG1 93


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#41 CornedOutVR38 Posted 27 June 2012 - 11:45 PM

CornedOutVR38
  • Banned
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,199 posts
Can you please link me to the 10.11 slip? I wanna analyze it and compare it to my slips.

View PostBill@SprayItRacing, on 27 June 2012 - 11:00 PM, said:



I went 10.17 at 134.18 with your tune in -80 DA with the catback on

The best weather we have had since I have had ecutek was +600DA and it went 10.11 with the catback off and seat out, I posted the slip on another post.

When you are maxing out the stock turbos, not a whole lot of power on the table.  Most of it is launch.  



What the heck are you doing 8's come on naw..  




I posted the slip of my 10.11 in my other thread, my only 6.49 1/8 mile.

Gonna run Javier on Sunday with his catback off, think that will be more fun, and line up at the track heads up :thumbsup:



9.870 @ 140.47
Bone Stock 3.8L


#42 Visconti Posted 27 June 2012 - 11:49 PM

Visconti
  • Vendors
  • EcuTek Tuner

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,445 posts
  • Location:Norwalk, CT
Mark forgot to tell you - your EcuTek cable will be here on Friday or Monday

;)



#43 CornedOutVR38 Posted 27 June 2012 - 11:50 PM

CornedOutVR38
  • Banned
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,199 posts
Thank you sir, please drop it off along with my turbos and rods when you get a chance.

Edited by CornedOutVR38, 27 June 2012 - 11:50 PM.



9.870 @ 140.47
Bone Stock 3.8L


#44 Bill@SprayItRacing Posted 27 June 2012 - 11:55 PM

Bill@SprayItRacing
  • Vendors
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,993 posts
  • Location:South Florida

View PostCornedOutVR38, on 27 June 2012 - 11:44 PM, said:

What does that consist of kind sir?

New fuel injection technology and a new timing map logic.  Using technology from the space shuttle that was recently declassified. Full desclosure I might be slightly exaggerating the NASA stuff...

Im testing a lot of stuff on the car while its stock turbo, to get a much data as possible.



#45 Bill@SprayItRacing Posted 27 June 2012 - 11:57 PM

Bill@SprayItRacing
  • Vendors
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,993 posts
  • Location:South Florida

View PostCornedOutVR38, on 27 June 2012 - 11:45 PM, said:

Can you please link me to the 10.11 slip? I wanna analyze it and compare it to my slips.

I posted this part of it.  Man you make me dig through my time slips. It was a 10.11 run

http://www.nagtroc.o...attach_id=37540



#46 CornedOutVR38 Posted 27 June 2012 - 11:58 PM

CornedOutVR38
  • Banned
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,199 posts
Is that new fuel injection technology to accommodate those new motorcycle fuel injectors you were testing on the GT-R?

Edited by CornedOutVR38, 27 June 2012 - 11:59 PM.



9.870 @ 140.47
Bone Stock 3.8L


#47 CornedOutVR38 Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:00 AM

CornedOutVR38
  • Banned
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,199 posts
What dragstrip was that from? How come the 1/4 mile ET and trap speed aren't shown?

View PostBill@SprayItRacing, on 27 June 2012 - 11:57 PM, said:



I posted this part of it.  Man you make me dig through my time slips. It was a 10.11 run

http://www.nagtroc.o...attach_id=37540



9.870 @ 140.47
Bone Stock 3.8L


#48 CornedOutVR38 Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:13 AM

CornedOutVR38
  • Banned
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,199 posts
Was that 6.49 in the 1/8 with the ecutek or Cobb?

Where's the 10.11 slip?


9.870 @ 140.47
Bone Stock 3.8L


#49 Bill@SprayItRacing Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:25 AM

Bill@SprayItRacing
  • Vendors
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,993 posts
  • Location:South Florida

View PostCornedOutVR38, on 28 June 2012 - 12:00 AM, said:

What dragstrip was that from? How come the 1/4 mile ET and trap speed aren't shown?

Its from PBIR, on EcuTek on a test and tune with drag radials.  Thats why its a 1/2 a slip because I was running with the N/T guys in the slick/dr lane.  

Here is a more complete cell phone photo of the slip.  
I don't want to post the MPH it was COMPLETELY off.  So its not a record time, thats why I never posted it.  

2012-06-10 17.13.38.jpg

Edited by Bill@SprayItRacing, 28 June 2012 - 12:27 AM.




#50 CornedOutVR38 Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:38 AM

CornedOutVR38
  • Banned
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,199 posts
I'm so confused... The 6.49 @ 107 you just posted as being with the Ecutek was posted last January as being with the Cobb here:

http://www.nagtroc.o...post__p__828625

Quote

"My best is now from PBIR I went 6.49 at 107.6mph. That was on M&H Drag Radials and HP Logic Cobb LC2 map. On that run the 1/4 mile traps did not work, just my luck."

So you're saying you ran a 6.49 @ 107 both with the Ecutek and Cobb on separate days and on both days there was an issue with the 1/4 mile traps? Wow, that's like winning the lotto. :lol:

View PostBill@SprayItRacing, on 28 June 2012 - 12:25 AM, said:

Its from PBIR, on EcuTek on a test and tune with drag radials.  Thats why its a 1/2 a slip because I was running with the N/T guys in the slick/dr lane.  

Here is a more complete cell phone photo of the slip.  
I don't want to post the MPH it was COMPLETELY off.  So its not a record time, thats why I never posted it.  

Attachment 2012-06-10 17.13.38.jpg

Edited by CornedOutVR38, 28 June 2012 - 12:39 AM.



9.870 @ 140.47
Bone Stock 3.8L


#51 CornedOutVR38 Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:43 AM

CornedOutVR38
  • Banned
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,199 posts
Wait a second, that 6.49 @ 107 with the messed up 1/4 mile trap speeds cannot be from with the Ecutek and your tune... How do I know? Because you didn't install the Ecutek on your car until April of 2012. Your post with the 6.49 and messed up 1/4 mile trap speed was from January.

So thus far your car has indeed been quicker with the HP Logic tune than with the Ecutek, just like Jack mentioned a page or two ago. :thumbsup:


9.870 @ 140.47
Bone Stock 3.8L


#52 Bill@SprayItRacing Posted 28 June 2012 - 12:51 AM

Bill@SprayItRacing
  • Vendors
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,993 posts
  • Location:South Florida

View PostCornedOutVR38, on 28 June 2012 - 12:38 AM, said:

So you're saying you ran a 6.49 @ 107 both with the Ecutek and Cobb on separate days and on both days there was an issue with the 1/4 mile traps? Wow, that's like winning the lotto. :lol:

I stand Corrected,

I went 6.497 @ 107.6 with the Cobb LC2 and Jack Map At PBIR, I have that slip too... that time the boards were off.  

I went 6.492 @ 107.2 with the slip above with EcuTek, the slip did not print properly, but the boards worked, I will wait till my buddy comes through with the whole video.

Out of the 200 or so passes I have done at PBIR, 30-40 of them messed up in some way.  Hell at least 10% of the time I get a bad slip.  I have 800-900 passes on the car, I have a lot of data.

I had some info here that was not 100% accurate, so I took it off.

To be perfectly honest, I don't think anyone will argue that Jack tuned E85 cars are not the cars to beat, because they are.

Edited by Bill@SprayItRacing, 28 June 2012 - 01:09 AM.




#53 CornedOutVR38 Posted 28 June 2012 - 01:08 AM

CornedOutVR38
  • Banned
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,199 posts
Just post a scan or photo of the complete 10.112 timeslip showing the date and time and I'll be happy. It's not that I don't believe you, it's just I'm seeking validation from the Ecutek. I'm interested in making the switch myself but only if I think my car would go quicker with it. I'm still on the fence...


9.870 @ 140.47
Bone Stock 3.8L


#54 Bill@SprayItRacing Posted 28 June 2012 - 01:26 AM

Bill@SprayItRacing
  • Vendors
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,993 posts
  • Location:South Florida

View PostCornedOutVR38, on 28 June 2012 - 01:08 AM, said:

Just post a scan or photo of the complete 10.112 timeslip showing the date and time and I'll be happy. It's not that I don't believe you, it's just I'm seeking validation from the Ecutek. I'm interested in making the switch myself but only if I think my car would go quicker with it. I'm still on the fence...

Marc I am a sceptic too, a lot of the stuff that happens, isn't online as you well know.

Video of everyone in short sleeves is probably the best I can do since the slip is really faded for some reason.  Im going back July 15th and even in the heat I think my new parts will put on a good showing.  To me its all about same day same lane, same mods.  (Or side by side)

The test for that is to go to the track, run, get your time (or 2), change tunes and run again (or twice) within 30min or so.  I honestly don't think HP wise very much is to be gained, since the turbos are maxed out, the gain is features and launching in boost.



#55 Mad_Mike Posted 28 June 2012 - 02:27 AM

Mad_Mike
  • Members
  • R34 Member

  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,645 posts
  • Location:Earth
Question..... Can maxed out OEM turbos with a good quality tune on E85 bring the OEM engine close or over it's level of mechanical integrity?



#56 Visconti Posted 28 June 2012 - 07:17 AM

Visconti
  • Vendors
  • EcuTek Tuner

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,445 posts
  • Location:Norwalk, CT

View PostMad_Mike, on 28 June 2012 - 02:27 AM, said:

Question..... Can maxed out OEM turbos with a good quality tune on E85 bring the OEM engine close or over it's level of mechanical integrity?

I would say Yes!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users