PE vs. Greddy
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
From: Maryland
PE vs. Greddy
i know i saw something like this but i cant find it...has anyone done a compare between the PE and Greddy TT kits? A link to the thread would be suffcient...
Nathan
Nathan
The parts list on teh PE is far better in quality in my opinion. The construct of the Oil pan (added oil capacity) is very good, the hand made SS exhaust manifold (although I think it's a wash on this point as they are both log-type manifolds and not equal length. However, I strongly prefer the superior ARC intercooler included in the kit, and the PE injectors (directly tunable by an ECU reflash AND a direct plug in into the harness)- unlike the RC injectors which require one to hack up the harness and make it impossible to be tuned by an ECU flash (at least the A/F curve side of things).
Of course there are the turbos themselves. I am still in the process of investigating this, but, since I have read COrky Bell's book on turbocharging, I have started t look at the whole project a little differently. I am talking about the size of the turbos. It would be very nice to know the A/R ratios and boost threshholds for the greddy turbos and the PE 1820 turbos. These would help us determine/preduct the most optimum rpm range for the turbos' operation and help deduce where in the rpm band the inefficiencies of the turbos lay. The obvious difference b/w the two is that the PE turbos are ball-bearing while the TD05H-18G 's are of course ofthe sleeve-type variety.
Greddy may be superior in the wastegate department; i do not know much about this so I cannot comment.
Gurgen
Of course there are the turbos themselves. I am still in the process of investigating this, but, since I have read COrky Bell's book on turbocharging, I have started t look at the whole project a little differently. I am talking about the size of the turbos. It would be very nice to know the A/R ratios and boost threshholds for the greddy turbos and the PE 1820 turbos. These would help us determine/preduct the most optimum rpm range for the turbos' operation and help deduce where in the rpm band the inefficiencies of the turbos lay. The obvious difference b/w the two is that the PE turbos are ball-bearing while the TD05H-18G 's are of course ofthe sleeve-type variety.
Greddy may be superior in the wastegate department; i do not know much about this so I cannot comment.
Gurgen
did a little back tracking...
https://my350z.com/forum/showthread....threadid=61552
https://my350z.com/forum/showthread....threadid=60840
from the first link... you can see my images of the kit. and make judgement calls yourself... (look up ETX, or ACP's greddy TT images...)
https://my350z.com/forum/showthread....threadid=61552
https://my350z.com/forum/showthread....threadid=60840
from the first link... you can see my images of the kit. and make judgement calls yourself... (look up ETX, or ACP's greddy TT images...)
I love the PE kit, but it has two drawbacks in my opinion...and several advantages to the Greddy kit.
Drawbacks:
1) Internal wastgates vs. Greddy's external wastgates
2) Steel manifolds are prone to cracking, regardless of welds. Greddy uses a case manifold. Case manifolds also contain heat better and improve gas flow and scavenging.
3) Cost: at least $2000 more expensive than the Greddy
Advantages:
1) More properly sized and efficient BB turbo. You only need to run 4psi of boost to achieve same results as Greddy at 6psi.
2) Permanent removal of the factory bumper support brace is not needed.
3) Comes with a VERY nice oil pan, and an upgraded fuel pump and reg...something that is missing from the greddy kit, but not needed if you are only going to boost less than 6psi
Drawbacks:
1) Internal wastgates vs. Greddy's external wastgates
2) Steel manifolds are prone to cracking, regardless of welds. Greddy uses a case manifold. Case manifolds also contain heat better and improve gas flow and scavenging.
3) Cost: at least $2000 more expensive than the Greddy
Advantages:
1) More properly sized and efficient BB turbo. You only need to run 4psi of boost to achieve same results as Greddy at 6psi.
2) Permanent removal of the factory bumper support brace is not needed.
3) Comes with a VERY nice oil pan, and an upgraded fuel pump and reg...something that is missing from the greddy kit, but not needed if you are only going to boost less than 6psi
those exhaust manifolds are AWESOMETrending Topics
Originally posted by gq_model_626
I love the PE kit, but it has two drawbacks in my opinion...and several advantages to the Greddy kit.
Drawbacks:
1) Internal wastgates vs. Greddy's external wastgates
2) Steel manifolds are prone to cracking, regardless of welds. Greddy uses a case manifold. Case manifolds also contain heat better and improve gas flow and scavenging.
3) Cost: at least $2000 more expensive than the Greddy
Advantages:
1) More properly sized and efficient BB turbo. You only need to run 4psi of boost to achieve same results as Greddy at 6psi.
2) Permanent removal of the factory bumper support brace is not needed.
3) Comes with a VERY nice oil pan, and an upgraded fuel pump and reg...something that is missing from the greddy kit, but not needed if you are only going to boost less than 6psi
I love the PE kit, but it has two drawbacks in my opinion...and several advantages to the Greddy kit.
Drawbacks:
1) Internal wastgates vs. Greddy's external wastgates
2) Steel manifolds are prone to cracking, regardless of welds. Greddy uses a case manifold. Case manifolds also contain heat better and improve gas flow and scavenging.
3) Cost: at least $2000 more expensive than the Greddy
Advantages:
1) More properly sized and efficient BB turbo. You only need to run 4psi of boost to achieve same results as Greddy at 6psi.
2) Permanent removal of the factory bumper support brace is not needed.
3) Comes with a VERY nice oil pan, and an upgraded fuel pump and reg...something that is missing from the greddy kit, but not needed if you are only going to boost less than 6psi
I agree with you on the advantages of the PE, but in terms of drawbacks, here are my 2 cents:
1) The PE Kit can be had for about a $1000 more, not 2000.
2) No one that knows the Japanese market would dispute that PE spares absolutely no expense in providing the best componenets available, unlike Greddy; tGreddy is clearly the budget option, while the PE and TS are the premium optins.
3) So on the point of the manifolds, there must be a reason why they chose the most expensive manifold manufacturing version yet - hand made SS. To paraphrase Corky Bell's book, both SS and cast iron provide very good heat expansion coefficients; he does NOT favor one over the other. Also, the PE turbos have a far lighter construction, so the manifolds are not going to be holding as much weight as the Greddy ones will.
4) The real drawback of PE: limited customer support due to the recent US market penetration.
5) far superior ARC intercooler.
6) Almost NO turbo lag, VERY good smoothness and efficiency with PE - much more streetable setup. However, Greddy will provide a better top end (5500-6500rpm) at the expense of lag.
So, cost and lack of good support are the only two drawbacks IMO, and I wish I had the support of Greddy with PE - who knows maybe I will.
Gurgen
1) The Greddy kit can be had for $5800-$6000, I thought the PE Kit was between $7500 or so for the street price.
2) PE makes quality parts...no questions. I saw the manifolds first hand, and the welds are a work of art, and the oil pan...i would kill for. I wouldnt exactly call the Greddy kit the budget option...LOL...I dont think any TT kits are budget. They are both good quality.
3) True, handmade TIG welded steel is the most expensive method. But as Corky Bell's book states
, if you use tubular steel, great care must be taken to insure the walls are sufficiently thick...at least 3mm. Believe me, ask anyone with tubular steel manifolds...they give off tremendous under the hood heat. Much more than cast. And nobody can dispute the cracking issue. One other thing...have you felt the weight of these turbos? They are quiet heavy, and even though the manifold weights less than a cast manifold, it still has to support the weight of the turbo, wastegates, downpipe, and needs to flex with the exhuast system to a point...especially if you run straight pipes...where the support brace is not used.
4) Don't believe the hype about BB turbos vs. conventional turbos. The Greddy TT has no turbo lag at all. I've posted my dyno charts before, and I am getting about 300lbs of torque at under 3000rpm. I can hit full boost in 5th gear at 2500rpm.
5) One other advantage of the Greddy kit...that i just thought of now. Although the PE/TS reflash ECU method is great if you want to "set-the-boost-and-forget-it". The eManage, with optional $30 timing harness and diodes, give us far more tuning options, and the ability to control fuel and timing, and have three different maps for different boost conditions. I prefer to have the option of tuning myself, or on the dyno, rather than a $500 reflash each time I wanna make changes. Also, the neat thing about the eManage is that it doesn't do any MAF conditioning...the stock ECU has no idea what's happening (no bad timing side effects)..it still things everything is normal. It clamps the MAF when it hits 5.0volts, and that's it....no limp modes....etc..etc. With the eManage, I can control fuel via 440cc injectors with great precision to insure proper richness at WOT. And with the injector scaling feature, it idles and cruises like a champ, at a 14.7:1 A/F.
2) PE makes quality parts...no questions. I saw the manifolds first hand, and the welds are a work of art, and the oil pan...i would kill for. I wouldnt exactly call the Greddy kit the budget option...LOL...I dont think any TT kits are budget. They are both good quality.
3) True, handmade TIG welded steel is the most expensive method. But as Corky Bell's book states
, if you use tubular steel, great care must be taken to insure the walls are sufficiently thick...at least 3mm. Believe me, ask anyone with tubular steel manifolds...they give off tremendous under the hood heat. Much more than cast. And nobody can dispute the cracking issue. One other thing...have you felt the weight of these turbos? They are quiet heavy, and even though the manifold weights less than a cast manifold, it still has to support the weight of the turbo, wastegates, downpipe, and needs to flex with the exhuast system to a point...especially if you run straight pipes...where the support brace is not used.4) Don't believe the hype about BB turbos vs. conventional turbos. The Greddy TT has no turbo lag at all. I've posted my dyno charts before, and I am getting about 300lbs of torque at under 3000rpm. I can hit full boost in 5th gear at 2500rpm.
5) One other advantage of the Greddy kit...that i just thought of now. Although the PE/TS reflash ECU method is great if you want to "set-the-boost-and-forget-it". The eManage, with optional $30 timing harness and diodes, give us far more tuning options, and the ability to control fuel and timing, and have three different maps for different boost conditions. I prefer to have the option of tuning myself, or on the dyno, rather than a $500 reflash each time I wanna make changes. Also, the neat thing about the eManage is that it doesn't do any MAF conditioning...the stock ECU has no idea what's happening (no bad timing side effects)..it still things everything is normal. It clamps the MAF when it hits 5.0volts, and that's it....no limp modes....etc..etc. With the eManage, I can control fuel via 440cc injectors with great precision to insure proper richness at WOT. And with the injector scaling feature, it idles and cruises like a champ, at a 14.7:1 A/F.
Originally posted by gurgenpb01
GQ
I agree with you on the advantages of the PE, but in terms of drawbacks, here are my 2 cents:
1) The PE Kit can be had for about a $1000 more, not 2000.
2) No one that knows the Japanese market would dispute that PE spares absolutely no expense in providing the best componenets available, unlike Greddy; tGreddy is clearly the budget option, while the PE and TS are the premium optins.
3) So on the point of the manifolds, there must be a reason why they chose the most expensive manifold manufacturing version yet - hand made SS. To paraphrase Corky Bell's book, both SS and cast iron provide very good heat expansion coefficients; he does NOT favor one over the other. Also, the PE turbos have a far lighter construction, so the manifolds are not going to be holding as much weight as the Greddy ones will.
4) The real drawback of PE: limited customer support due to the recent US market penetration.
5) far superior ARC intercooler.
6) Almost NO turbo lag, VERY good smoothness and efficiency with PE - much more streetable setup. However, Greddy will provide a better top end (5500-6500rpm) at the expense of lag.
So, cost and lack of good support are the only two drawbacks IMO, and I wish I had the support of Greddy with PE - who knows maybe I will.
Gurgen
GQ
I agree with you on the advantages of the PE, but in terms of drawbacks, here are my 2 cents:
1) The PE Kit can be had for about a $1000 more, not 2000.
2) No one that knows the Japanese market would dispute that PE spares absolutely no expense in providing the best componenets available, unlike Greddy; tGreddy is clearly the budget option, while the PE and TS are the premium optins.
3) So on the point of the manifolds, there must be a reason why they chose the most expensive manifold manufacturing version yet - hand made SS. To paraphrase Corky Bell's book, both SS and cast iron provide very good heat expansion coefficients; he does NOT favor one over the other. Also, the PE turbos have a far lighter construction, so the manifolds are not going to be holding as much weight as the Greddy ones will.
4) The real drawback of PE: limited customer support due to the recent US market penetration.
5) far superior ARC intercooler.
6) Almost NO turbo lag, VERY good smoothness and efficiency with PE - much more streetable setup. However, Greddy will provide a better top end (5500-6500rpm) at the expense of lag.
So, cost and lack of good support are the only two drawbacks IMO, and I wish I had the support of Greddy with PE - who knows maybe I will.
Gurgen
Some good points, GQ
PE is listed at Gruppe-S for 6800, and I am sure (b/c I have) negotiate a better deal- I.M. Racing already matched it.
You are right, but do you know what the thickness of the PE manifolds is? I am not sure tat's why I ask. But I do ultimately concede the point that I would love to have cast manifolds, but I will forgo that in favor of the other PE features.
Yes, the emanage is more programmable, but some would say that they don't trust teh MAF intersepting option - some say it does not always work. I gues b/c I would be getting the programming for free from TS (prototype for their ECU and TT tunign), I guess it is not a consideration for me.
Lets agree that there are advantages either way, and leave it at that. The first batch of 5 kits that is being shipped in MAy is already sold and one has got my name on it. I am gonna do this. Will of course report back.
Gurgen
PE is listed at Gruppe-S for 6800, and I am sure (b/c I have) negotiate a better deal- I.M. Racing already matched it.
You are right, but do you know what the thickness of the PE manifolds is? I am not sure tat's why I ask. But I do ultimately concede the point that I would love to have cast manifolds, but I will forgo that in favor of the other PE features.
Yes, the emanage is more programmable, but some would say that they don't trust teh MAF intersepting option - some say it does not always work. I gues b/c I would be getting the programming for free from TS (prototype for their ECU and TT tunign), I guess it is not a consideration for me.
Lets agree that there are advantages either way, and leave it at that. The first batch of 5 kits that is being shipped in MAy is already sold and one has got my name on it. I am gonna do this. Will of course report back.
Gurgen
wow..thats a great price for the PE...guess I wasnt looking hard enough, becuase everywhere I looked, they were in the mid to high $7K range.
Correction... the eManage does NOT do any MAF interception at all. The signal is left totally intact. That is the great thing about the emanage..it doesn't have the MAF intercept drawbacks that exist with an AFC device.
The fuel enrichment is handle by the 440cc injectors and increased pulse width. This is fully adjustable via the eManage fuel map. The only other thing the emanage does is clamp the MAF when it reaches 5.0V of airflow, so that the ECU wont go into limp mode. The MAF on our car actually maxes out pretty darn early...somewhere around 4500rpm at 5psi, so MAF clamping is critical.
The more I learn about the eManage, the more I like it for this application. I learned everything I know from ETX! You can even switch to an optional MAP sensor and eliminate the MAF altogether if you want! Then you can map manifold pressure vs. RPM and have a really kick-as* setup for higher boost applications.
Definatley keep us posted on your progress. We need more PE kit installation in the LA area. Cheston is the only one, and he lives in BFE, so we don't see him very much.
Correction... the eManage does NOT do any MAF interception at all. The signal is left totally intact. That is the great thing about the emanage..it doesn't have the MAF intercept drawbacks that exist with an AFC device.
The fuel enrichment is handle by the 440cc injectors and increased pulse width. This is fully adjustable via the eManage fuel map. The only other thing the emanage does is clamp the MAF when it reaches 5.0V of airflow, so that the ECU wont go into limp mode. The MAF on our car actually maxes out pretty darn early...somewhere around 4500rpm at 5psi, so MAF clamping is critical.
The more I learn about the eManage, the more I like it for this application. I learned everything I know from ETX!
You can even switch to an optional MAP sensor and eliminate the MAF altogether if you want! Then you can map manifold pressure vs. RPM and have a really kick-as* setup for higher boost applications.Definatley keep us posted on your progress. We need more PE kit installation in the LA area. Cheston is the only one, and he lives in BFE, so we don't see him very much.
Hey GQ
Todashi had (correction: HAS) Cheston's car at 8.5-9psi and has YET to see the car go into limp mode. So I am a little puzzled by it. Since I am not going to go above 8 psi any time soon, I am not too worried about it. I believe Siddazzle's setup used a custom port to plug in the MAF sensor intself (without the housing) and that may have been not as straight as the stock housing would place it. Or the maf was not on a straight section of the tube, creating turbulence... There are workarounds to this. We can use the Q45, or Mustang cobra (as two quick examples) MAF to get around the issue, as those would top out at a higher boost setting. Or, we can try to manufacture a wider tube section to slow down the gas (due to higher diameter) in that section and hence lower MAF reading.
Anywauys, I agree with you that the greddy is much more user tunable, but I still believe that the stock ECU reprogramming is the rock-solid way to go. They tend to hold the A/F, and hence torque, curve much smoother.
Also, the G35 Sedan AT Greddy TT is several months away at best and I did not want to wait that long (due to Frank's untimely death in his Greddy Test car)
Gurgen
Todashi had (correction: HAS) Cheston's car at 8.5-9psi and has YET to see the car go into limp mode. So I am a little puzzled by it. Since I am not going to go above 8 psi any time soon, I am not too worried about it. I believe Siddazzle's setup used a custom port to plug in the MAF sensor intself (without the housing) and that may have been not as straight as the stock housing would place it. Or the maf was not on a straight section of the tube, creating turbulence... There are workarounds to this. We can use the Q45, or Mustang cobra (as two quick examples) MAF to get around the issue, as those would top out at a higher boost setting. Or, we can try to manufacture a wider tube section to slow down the gas (due to higher diameter) in that section and hence lower MAF reading.
Anywauys, I agree with you that the greddy is much more user tunable, but I still believe that the stock ECU reprogramming is the rock-solid way to go. They tend to hold the A/F, and hence torque, curve much smoother.
Also, the G35 Sedan AT Greddy TT is several months away at best and I did not want to wait that long (due to Frank's untimely death in his Greddy Test car)
Gurgen
Gurgen....not to beat a dead horse here...but it's important that everyone understands accurately what happens with the eManage.
With the eManage, the A/F can easily be as stable as a reflashed ECU. Again, the reason some folks were having eratic A/F rations, is due to MAF conditioning, which caused the ECU to advance or retard timing in strange ways. This timing fluctuation cuase a slightly lean or rich condition...hence...the unstable A/F ratios.
With the eManage, we are not touching the MAF signal at all. Fueling is simply and accurately dialed in via the injector pulse width on the fuel table in the eManage. Example: The stock ECU think's its controlling the stock 280cc injectors. But of course, we have the 440cc injector with the Greddy kit. If we made no fuel adjustments, the car would be overly rich at idle and part throttle, and would probably run like crap. It would also be too lean at WOT. So the Emanage does two things:
1) Reduces the pulse width (or leans out the car) across the entire power band to compensate for these bigger injectors. THe result is a smooth natural idle, and 14.7:1 under cruising and idling conditions. This is exactly where you wanna be.
2) Then...then eManage will richen up the fuel map as airflow and RPM increase. For instance, at 6500rpm, the eManage is adding 35% fuel than the stock ECU fuel map is telling the injectors to fire. It isn't tricking the ECU, it is just taken the signal the ECU spits out to the injectors, and addes additional pulse width.
With the eManage, the A/F can easily be as stable as a reflashed ECU. Again, the reason some folks were having eratic A/F rations, is due to MAF conditioning, which caused the ECU to advance or retard timing in strange ways. This timing fluctuation cuase a slightly lean or rich condition...hence...the unstable A/F ratios.
With the eManage, we are not touching the MAF signal at all. Fueling is simply and accurately dialed in via the injector pulse width on the fuel table in the eManage. Example: The stock ECU think's its controlling the stock 280cc injectors. But of course, we have the 440cc injector with the Greddy kit. If we made no fuel adjustments, the car would be overly rich at idle and part throttle, and would probably run like crap. It would also be too lean at WOT. So the Emanage does two things:
1) Reduces the pulse width (or leans out the car) across the entire power band to compensate for these bigger injectors. THe result is a smooth natural idle, and 14.7:1 under cruising and idling conditions. This is exactly where you wanna be.
2) Then...then eManage will richen up the fuel map as airflow and RPM increase. For instance, at 6500rpm, the eManage is adding 35% fuel than the stock ECU fuel map is telling the injectors to fire. It isn't tricking the ECU, it is just taken the signal the ECU spits out to the injectors, and addes additional pulse width.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,703
Likes: 0
From: central ny
GQ, more than anything I think what Gurgen is saying is that when you flash the stock ECU, it's essentially less to dick around with. No added eledtronics/wires to fool with.
Not to hijack the thread, but guy died in a greddy test car? please inform.
Not to hijack the thread, but guy died in a greddy test car? please inform.
hey guys-
you both have very solid points...
each have their own strengths / weaknesses...
Gurgen stated correctly. i am boosting 8.5. and i have yet to see the engine cut out. and yes i am punching the car hard. perhaps this will arise once we tune the Z for higher boost. but i have yet to see any issues.
although the 'user-tunable' eManage seems attractive, and i have an unfair advantage of being so close to TechnoSquare where i can drop by for tuning, once you have a good setup tuned, whether it be by ECU or eManage, how often are you going to change the boost levels and/or need to swap emanage tune levels? i guess the best would be a combination of both worlds... having the BASE ecu program altered so that the timing and rev limiter issues are taken care of, and then having the a/f ratio controlled with a piggy back. but i dont forsee any need of the eManage or any piggy back for that matter once i have dialed in what i want in the ECU flash. true this isnt for everybody. but its far simplier for me. and i dont have crazy wiring or extra gadgets in my car (well.. if you dont count my gauges, edfc, and boost controller hehe)
has the timing issue been fixed with the eManage? i've browsed some threads but i'm not too well-read on that.. GQ: can you explain further?
GQ: if you will be at the Znationals. i would like to offer you to drive my TT and so i can drive yours, and then, we can make some good evaluations
you both have very solid points...
each have their own strengths / weaknesses...
Gurgen stated correctly. i am boosting 8.5. and i have yet to see the engine cut out. and yes i am punching the car hard. perhaps this will arise once we tune the Z for higher boost. but i have yet to see any issues.
although the 'user-tunable' eManage seems attractive, and i have an unfair advantage of being so close to TechnoSquare where i can drop by for tuning, once you have a good setup tuned, whether it be by ECU or eManage, how often are you going to change the boost levels and/or need to swap emanage tune levels? i guess the best would be a combination of both worlds... having the BASE ecu program altered so that the timing and rev limiter issues are taken care of, and then having the a/f ratio controlled with a piggy back. but i dont forsee any need of the eManage or any piggy back for that matter once i have dialed in what i want in the ECU flash. true this isnt for everybody. but its far simplier for me. and i dont have crazy wiring or extra gadgets in my car (well.. if you dont count my gauges, edfc, and boost controller hehe)
has the timing issue been fixed with the eManage? i've browsed some threads but i'm not too well-read on that.. GQ: can you explain further?
GQ: if you will be at the Znationals. i would like to offer you to drive my TT and so i can drive yours, and then, we can make some good evaluations
Cheston..you have a deal! I will be at the Nationals on Sunday morning...probably get there about 7:15am. We can trade then write up a Greddy vs. PE road test report.
The eManage timing has issue has been solved. If you have the basic Greddy kit, all you need to do is buy the ignition timing harness for about $30, and then splice in some radio shack diodes ($6) which keeps the coils from overheating between sparks. Originally, some people installed the timing harness without the diodes, and would fry the coils within a week or so, becuase the harness was supplying power to the coil all the time. ETX posted some really easy instructions on how to wire the harness so it works properly. The harness plugs into the eManage, and the you just tap the 6 yellow ignition wires from the ECU. Unfortunately, Greddy is back ordered on those harnesses for a few weeks.
so I am stuck at 5-6psi
Once that is done, you can easliy dial in timing retard, via the "timing retard map" on the eManage...it's very slick. You can do a basic RPM based timing retard, or map boost again retard. For instance, 1 degree of retard of every 1psi of boost...or whatever.
The eManage timing has issue has been solved. If you have the basic Greddy kit, all you need to do is buy the ignition timing harness for about $30, and then splice in some radio shack diodes ($6) which keeps the coils from overheating between sparks. Originally, some people installed the timing harness without the diodes, and would fry the coils within a week or so, becuase the harness was supplying power to the coil all the time. ETX posted some really easy instructions on how to wire the harness so it works properly. The harness plugs into the eManage, and the you just tap the 6 yellow ignition wires from the ECU. Unfortunately, Greddy is back ordered on those harnesses for a few weeks.
so I am stuck at 5-6psiOnce that is done, you can easliy dial in timing retard, via the "timing retard map" on the eManage...it's very slick. You can do a basic RPM based timing retard, or map boost again retard. For instance, 1 degree of retard of every 1psi of boost...or whatever.
Originally posted by Chebosto
hey guys-
you both have very solid points...
each have their own strengths / weaknesses...
Gurgen stated correctly. i am boosting 8.5. and i have yet to see the engine cut out. and yes i am punching the car hard. perhaps this will arise once we tune the Z for higher boost. but i have yet to see any issues.
although the 'user-tunable' eManage seems attractive, and i have an unfair advantage of being so close to TechnoSquare where i can drop by for tuning, once you have a good setup tuned, whether it be by ECU or eManage, how often are you going to change the boost levels and/or need to swap emanage tune levels? i guess the best would be a combination of both worlds... having the BASE ecu program altered so that the timing and rev limiter issues are taken care of, and then having the a/f ratio controlled with a piggy back. but i dont forsee any need of the eManage or any piggy back for that matter once i have dialed in what i want in the ECU flash. true this isnt for everybody. but its far simplier for me. and i dont have crazy wiring or extra gadgets in my car (well.. if you dont count my gauges, edfc, and boost controller hehe)
has the timing issue been fixed with the eManage? i've browsed some threads but i'm not too well-read on that.. GQ: can you explain further?
GQ: if you will be at the Znationals. i would like to offer you to drive my TT and so i can drive yours, and then, we can make some good evaluations
hey guys-
you both have very solid points...
each have their own strengths / weaknesses...
Gurgen stated correctly. i am boosting 8.5. and i have yet to see the engine cut out. and yes i am punching the car hard. perhaps this will arise once we tune the Z for higher boost. but i have yet to see any issues.
although the 'user-tunable' eManage seems attractive, and i have an unfair advantage of being so close to TechnoSquare where i can drop by for tuning, once you have a good setup tuned, whether it be by ECU or eManage, how often are you going to change the boost levels and/or need to swap emanage tune levels? i guess the best would be a combination of both worlds... having the BASE ecu program altered so that the timing and rev limiter issues are taken care of, and then having the a/f ratio controlled with a piggy back. but i dont forsee any need of the eManage or any piggy back for that matter once i have dialed in what i want in the ECU flash. true this isnt for everybody. but its far simplier for me. and i dont have crazy wiring or extra gadgets in my car (well.. if you dont count my gauges, edfc, and boost controller hehe)
has the timing issue been fixed with the eManage? i've browsed some threads but i'm not too well-read on that.. GQ: can you explain further?
GQ: if you will be at the Znationals. i would like to offer you to drive my TT and so i can drive yours, and then, we can make some good evaluations
Ahhh.....sorry guys.....
So Cheston and I were hanging out watching the Award Ceremony at the Z Nationals, and both of us decided to leave and beat the rush. Well, we start walking back to our cars, and I wasn't sure which one of us was going to mention the "test-drive swap" thing first. So anyways, I duck into Mr. Twisted car to grab something, then I walk over the Scott Webbs car and help him with his dead battery....gee...wonder why the battery went dead...could it have been the seven video screens, PS2 and enough wattage to power a small third world country?? Sorry...I digress.
Anyways, so I turn around to go talk to Cheston again...and poof...his car is gone! I didnt even hear him start it up or anything.
So the test-drive swap never happened. And in retrospec...this might have been a good thing. The weather was close to 95degrees outside. Obviously not ideal conditions for thrashing TT cars. And Cheston's car was boosting 8.5psi, while mine was at a measly 5psi, so it wouldnt have even been a close comparison.
Cheston, it was nice meeting you today...thanks for listening to my incessant babble about the cool features of the eManage. Your car looks great...we'll have to do the test-drive swap some other time.
So Cheston and I were hanging out watching the Award Ceremony at the Z Nationals, and both of us decided to leave and beat the rush. Well, we start walking back to our cars, and I wasn't sure which one of us was going to mention the "test-drive swap" thing first. So anyways, I duck into Mr. Twisted car to grab something, then I walk over the Scott Webbs car and help him with his dead battery....gee...wonder why the battery went dead...could it have been the seven video screens, PS2 and enough wattage to power a small third world country?? Sorry...I digress.
Anyways, so I turn around to go talk to Cheston again...and poof...his car is gone! I didnt even hear him start it up or anything.
So the test-drive swap never happened. And in retrospec...this might have been a good thing. The weather was close to 95degrees outside. Obviously not ideal conditions for thrashing TT cars. And Cheston's car was boosting 8.5psi, while mine was at a measly 5psi, so it wouldnt have even been a close comparison.
Cheston, it was nice meeting you today...thanks for listening to my incessant babble about the cool features of the eManage.
Your car looks great...we'll have to do the test-drive swap some other time.