Considering Fi Jwt Turbo System Worth The Wait?
Being a Ca. driver, if PE were CARB legit I would probably agree on many of your points. However; they have not committed to CARB approval and given the ECU reflash and larger injectors in the base configuration probably never could be even if they tried.
I'm looking for a basic setup that has a CARB EO at the base level. I then intend to update it selectably for occasional track use. I can see a path to this with JWT , not with PE. Thats just my requirements. Others , especially most non-ca drivers won't care.
Also , if the ECU is provided adequate telemetry input and is tuned to remap timing and fuel for the added psi and larger injectors , then sure it is a superior solution. Unfortunaley this is not the situation with the factory ECU and MAF. So timing and Fuel delivery must be "correlated" to the limited MAF, RPM and throttle position inputs. Without either an adequate MAF and/or MAP it is pure extrapolation and less than ideal.
The benefit of a piggyback in this environment is that it can add the MAP element into the equation and close the control loop with respect to +psi. The MAF limitation is circumvented. Some piggyback arrangements are moire readily tuneable and easier to manipulate with multiple profiles possible at the flip of a switch.
Now from a pure performance aspect a full ECU replacement (one with MAP capablity) would be best , but then you would have a race only ,non-street legal configuration.
I'm looking for a basic setup that has a CARB EO at the base level. I then intend to update it selectably for occasional track use. I can see a path to this with JWT , not with PE. Thats just my requirements. Others , especially most non-ca drivers won't care.
Also , if the ECU is provided adequate telemetry input and is tuned to remap timing and fuel for the added psi and larger injectors , then sure it is a superior solution. Unfortunaley this is not the situation with the factory ECU and MAF. So timing and Fuel delivery must be "correlated" to the limited MAF, RPM and throttle position inputs. Without either an adequate MAF and/or MAP it is pure extrapolation and less than ideal.
The benefit of a piggyback in this environment is that it can add the MAP element into the equation and close the control loop with respect to +psi. The MAF limitation is circumvented. Some piggyback arrangements are moire readily tuneable and easier to manipulate with multiple profiles possible at the flip of a switch.
Now from a pure performance aspect a full ECU replacement (one with MAP capablity) would be best , but then you would have a race only ,non-street legal configuration.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post




