Thread: Think I went with too big of a turbo...

Im not sure where you're going with this lol...

Ben is on fire today.

He may win poster of the week award.

still like 50 post shy.

You guys are right. Our factory ecus are getting into the territory of how Hondata is for Hondas. Still hondas run on map sensors and again its way easier and less of a hastle to tune on a map. You know exactly what you pressures are doing at all times and know exactly how much fuel is needed.

Again when I had my 60 trim setup the limitations of an 8k rev limit were still in play. Nistune was just coming out with their stuff a little later after. Again my old setup did well and had no issues or complaints and only praise for how well it ran. However, Maf's have their limit.

Your correct. 95% of this forum has no use for a standalone. We have soo many realtime factory ecu options now with great capabilities that its not even funny. So yeah that and its a 1/4 of the cost or less of a standalone. So why not use it if your going to be within the limitations of what it can do. No argement there.

It's all in the text. He doesn't need it but he sure does like it.



I've ignored your posts so far, but this one needs to be addressed. Way easier to tune a MAP based car than a MAF based car? Are you serious? Look at the amount of data you're referencing when tuning with a MAP/IAT... There's a VAST difference between MAP/MAF, MAF being MUCH easier to tune. Probably the most significant reason for running a MAP setup is ease of troubleshooting, not having to worry about MAF placement, or turbulence. Aside from that, MAF is so freaking easy a caveman can do it. It's a set of values on a table, and that's that.



And we now see the sarcastic, yet sensitive side of the Benj...

Cliff your right, Maf is pretty straight forward. As you have a hotwire rated for a certain voltage at a certain airflow requring a certain amount of fuel. Pretty simple. But map works the the same way for the most part just not as precise when it comes down to precise measurements. You can have one given pressure in your system and have different amounts of airflows. Thats known so you have to tune accordingly whereas a maf. You can throw a bigger turbo on there that at at the same psi flows more volume and a maf will self adjust to that extra flow wheras a map cant do that.

Im mainly stating the hastle of it being in the system. Ill retract my post of map being simpler than maf. I more meant to say the AEM is simpler and much more user friendly to tune with than on a stock ecu.

Ill give you that one. lol.

I'm running BKR6EGP in my car right now. Heat range 6 is fine until over 350whp. Then I go 7, or even 8 depending on availability. 6 is a bit hot for High CR turbo though. So I would up the range, just to be safe like Tekkie said.



The twin scroll sounds fancy, but for the response you gain, you lose top end power. Especially on a T3 flanged housing. I flattened out at 478whp but I didn't push more than 26-27psi at the most. The boost controller ran out of adjustment at that point. The 1.06 housing I use now flows like a .50-.60 ar single scroll. But it cuts on reversion and improves turbine efficiency by so much that it offsets the loss of power such a small housing would have.

Let me dig a little deeper into how Nistune ECU's and how Calum ECU's work. You have a "bin" file, which is essentially a dump of the whole ecu in one small file.

Then you have the address files, all an address file does is tell the tuning software where a certain setting is. Someone had to sit there and reverse engineer the BIN file to find where to point the address file (since nissan wasn't nice enough to tell us where everything is).

At this date and time, no one is really sitting there and trying to figure out where each setting is at, thus Calum ECU's and Nistune ecu's are forever stuck with what they have. Nistune did create calculators to help automate the process of changing values, but at the end of the day it's still a glorified calculator.

Now when Dave came along and brought us TunerCode, he actually sat there, read the code, tweaked the code, and noted down all of the address references. So TunerCode is basically exactly what Nissan would have when tuning the car, plus more (since Dave added cool features like spark cut rev limiter, injector size adjustment, etc.).

Nistune tuning is as limited as Calum tuning without TunerCode. Not trying to lecture you SR20GTi-R, just trying to explain the backend of the two ecu's for the people that look through this thread. Because I've seen a lot of people think that Nistune ECU's are superior to Calum's. When in reality the only difference is the daughterboard that they use. Now Nistune software on the other hand, is great, but all it is, is just built in calculators to simplify the ECU tuning. You can use a Calum ECU with Nistune software any day or night.

AEM's on the other hand are well documented, since they were always designed to be user tuned. The only reason you can get more power out of a standalone, is simply because every single feature is documented and tweakable. Now days with TunerCode you have the same documentation and most of the features, with oncoming NEMU boards, we are looking at new features similar to any standalone out there.



The max out might be due to the ECU that you use. Unless you adjust your maps for that much boost, you have to retard your base timing, by retarding your base timing you are loosing power across board just to not knock at that high of boost. Now if you are also using a piggy back, then it might be just fine .