When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
12 C63BS Magno Alanite Grey, 22 X3M Brooklyn Grey, 08 BMW E93, 22 Ducati Desert Sled, John Deere 3R
Originally Posted by JimGnitecki
I thought of that, but according to the online weather reports, the barometric pressure at Albuquerque has been above 30 in Hg for the past 3 days . . .
Jim G
He did stock, v6 and v7 as long as the Pressure and correction factor on all 3 runs is the same, then any variation would be consistent and the number really doesn't matter just the difference on the same day same settings same dyno. So seems like a decent improvement over v6 and stock!
He did stock, v6 and v7 as long as the Pressure and correction factor on all 3 runs is the same, then any variation would be consistent and the number really doesn't matter just the difference on the same day same settings same dyno. So seems like a decent improvement over v6 and stock!
I would agree except that when you run these environmental factors in the formulas used to correct to STD and SAE corrected values, you get the following:
Notice that the correction factors are 1.23 for SAE and 1.25 for STD?
(Yes, I see that the dyno itself calculated STD as 1.26 factor - close enough giving rounding errors)
Any dyno engineer will tell you that correction factors this high are untrustworthy (anything beyond 1.04 to 1.05 is suspect, as the formulas cannot handle corrections that large accurately).
So, yes there is SOME comparative value here, but you really need dyno tests done under more "normal" temperature, pressure, and humidity levels to make them actually trustworthy.
p.s. Notice that the correction mad eon the chart was to STD, not SAE. The STD results at this combination of temperature, pressure, and humidity are 2% more otimistic than the SAE results, and that means the SAE peak power was 2% lower than shown for baseline and for each tune. 2% of 442 rwhp = about 9 rwhp.
Jim G
Last edited by JimGnitecki; 07-21-2017 at 01:57 PM.
Reason: added comment about STD versus SAE
I am by far not an expert but I think that there is more left if I took it to EC and let Jerry play with the A/F mixtures and tweak it some more.
You can squeeze maybe 3-5whp but that's it I tried on my car and gave up untill I get my headers installed.
Here is my p31 coupe with your exact mods running oetuning file.they are almost identical!
I would agree except that when you run these environmental factors in the formulas used to correct to STD and SAE corrected values, you get the following:
Notice that the correction factors are 1.23 for SAE and 1.25 for STD?
(Yes, I see that the dyno itself calculated STD as 1.26 factor - close enough giving rounding errors)
Any dyno engineer will tell you that correction factors this high are untrustworthy (anything beyond 1.04 to 1.05 is suspect, as the formulas cannot handle corrections that large accurately).
So, yes there is SOME comparative value here, but you really need dyno tests done under more "normal" temperature, pressure, and humidity levels to make them actually trustworthy.
p.s. Notice that the correction mad eon the chart was to STD, not SAE. The STD results at this combination of temperature, pressure, and humidity are 2% more otimistic than the SAE results, and that means the SAE peak power was 2% lower than shown for baseline and for each tune. 2% of 442 rwhp = about 9 rwhp.
Jim G
Here is my take on it.. I went to a local shop and did a series of runs same as any joe blow in the country. These runs may not be "perfect" but it is what the average guy can expect to find in any given shop. The exact number may be off by a factor of X but given that these runs were made back to back and we see a general increase across the board we can safely conclude that the latest version made significantly more power than stock. Is it enough for you to spend your money on it ?? IDK that's up to you to decide. I am happy with the results both in the way the car drives and feels.
The power increase on the unicorn/v7 tune is old news. It got proven on the 500whp thread and the forum police,haters and skeptics got silenced and didn't even have the decency to give props. It's comical to see some of these clowns talk so much shyt and even start a new thread clowning the tune whom which will end up buying it or end up feeling stupid wether they admit it or not.
Thanks again for proving the point once more OP i mean "noob" really glad you are happy with the tune and also that it wasn't you just being a noob with a fancy description of the tune and a major "noob" placebo effect going on
For me the difference here, over the other 500hp original thread, is that C63fora2w1 came in here and said "lets try this, and see what it does" then just went out and did it, and posted it, and I thank him for doing that.
The original post in that other thread was pretty chest poundy, from a guy we haven't heard a lot from, and sounded pretty much like every other post that has come before and turned out to be BS from a guy who didnt know his *** from a hand grenade, and so the skepticism/abuse can't be surprising.
This is where I am at:
I had questions. I repeated them loudly. Never really did get an answer to the baseline question, which I think is a pretty reasonable one. If an answer was posted I missed it while I was away but I think Im caught up now.
Infiniti, you and I have had "personality conflict" over this, I think I can say, but I think we have those somewhat sorted, and I am prepared to acknowledge what you have been saying, and say that I believe what you are saying to be true. Congrats on that.
I still believe in Jerry and his product, having owned every version from v2 until 6, and having recommended it to everyone who will listen. Im glad that EC continues to push the envelope on an out of production motor, and excited re the possibilities.
I still think the handling of this was flawed from the start, and caused unnecessary flare-ups. I think everyone who has been in these threads in even a co-starring role has some responsibility for how its gone, and has probably given as good as they've gotten, myself included. And yes, Im kinda pissed at one or two. Still.
But.....
To be clear, Infiniti, if you are waiting for the moment where someone says "Damn, Infiniti, it looks like you were right all along and they have really unlocked some meaningful additional power, Im sorry I doubted you" then consider this that moment.
Sorry it took so long.
Cheers.
Here is my take on it.. I went to a local shop and did a series of runs same as any joe blow in the country. These runs may not be "perfect" but it is what the average guy can expect to find in any given shop. The exact number may be off by a factor of X but given that these runs were made back to back and we see a general increase across the board we can safely conclude that the latest version made significantly more power than stock. Is it enough for you to spend your money on it ?? IDK that's up to you to decide. I am happy with the results both in the way the car drives and feels.
Kudos to you for doing it Travis. No fuss, no muss, just went out, asked for the tune, announced you had it, you dyno'd, you posted.
No chest pounding, no propaganda or bs.
And they all held hands and sang kumbaya. I love a happy ending.
I was very skeptical at first also, for many reasons. That being said, I have the V6 tune and I"m sure I'll upgrade to teh V7 when I can. I'll use my butt dyno and post the results :-)
For me the difference here, over the other 500hp original thread, is that C63fora2w1 came in here and said "lets try this, and see what it does" then just went out and did it, and posted it, and I thank him for doing that.
The original post in that other thread was pretty chest poundy, from a guy we haven't heard a lot from, and sounded pretty much like every other post that has come before and turned out to be BS from a guy who didnt know his *** from a hand grenade, and so the skepticism/abuse can't be surprising.
This is where I am at:
I had questions. I repeated them loudly. Never really did get an answer to the baseline question, which I think is a pretty reasonable one. If an answer was posted I missed it while I was away but I think Im caught up now.
Infiniti, you and I have had "personality conflict" over this, I think I can say, but I think we have those somewhat sorted, and I am prepared to acknowledge what you have been saying, and say that I believe what you are saying to be true. Congrats on that.
I still believe in Jerry and his product, having owned every version from v2 until 6, and having recommended it to everyone who will listen. Im glad that EC continues to push the envelope on an out of production motor, and excited re the possibilities.
I still think the handling of this was flawed from the start, and caused unnecessary flare-ups. I think everyone who has been in these threads in even a co-starring role has some responsibility for how its gone, and has probably given as good as they've gotten, myself included. And yes, Im kinda pissed at one or two. Still.
But.....
To be clear, Infiniti, if you are waiting for the moment where someone says "Damn, Infiniti, it looks like you were right all along and they have really unlocked some meaningful additional power, Im sorry I doubted you" then consider this that moment.
Sorry it took so long.
Cheers.
Thank you kind sir now who's going to make the I'm sorry EC thread?
I just thought I would add this because the Barometer was brought up earlier.. This is the weather for the track tonight... you'll notice its almost identical as the ambient temp in the pulls..
I just thought I would add this because the Barometer was brought up earlier.. This is the weather for the track tonight... you'll notice its almost identical as the ambient temp in the pulls..
To be honest u picked like the worst baro to hit the track lol the correction factor will correct on the Dyno but don't be upset if u run 13s and can't trap over 114
To be honest u picked like the worst baro to hit the track lol the correction factor will correct on the Dyno but don't be upset if u run 13s and can't trap over 114
Last time out I was running 13.2 @ 107 corrected to 12.02 @117 anything faster is an improvement
Last time out I was running 13.2 @ 107 corrected to 12.02 @117 anything faster is an improvement
Look at the temperature [projections for later tonight (7-21). It looks like the later you run tonight, the better off you will be. The difference in temperature from 6pm to Midnight lowers the required SAE correction factor by almost 3%.
Thanks for doing what everyone has been asking for C63fora2w1 (even if a lot people gave you a really hard time about it). Nice comparative data for an increase. Looking forward to your report from the strip.
Thank you for going to the dyno shop for a baseline vs. v6 vs. v7 tune! The numbers look good and you backed up your butt dyno.
Originally Posted by C63fora2w1
I just finished dyno testing at an independent shop here in Albuquerque NM. My car is a P31 with AFE filters and ROW airboxes. I did a base and then loaded the v6 and finally the v7 Beta. The tests were done on a dynojet and ambient temp and correction factor are displayed. I'll let the numbers speak for themselves... These are the v7 beta numbers.
Thanks for going out to the dyno shop to get the v6 vs. v7 numbers! I'm glad that you didn't pull the, "I trust the word of my dyno operator and don't want to back up my butt dyno."
Max power was 443hp and 403 tq an increase of 53hp and 47tq over stock.
Look at the temperature [projections for later tonight (7-21). It looks like the later you run tonight, the better off you will be. The difference in temperature from 6pm to Midnight lowers the required SAE correction factor by almost 3%.
Jim G
Its new mexico in the dead of summer. Aint never a good time at 5000 ft in July.
Thanks for doing what everyone has been asking for C63fora2w1 (even if a lot people gave you a really hard time about it). Nice comparative data for an increase. Looking forward to your report from the strip.
So Far my best run of the night has been a DA corrected 11.91 @119.5 mph an increase of 1 tenth and 2 mph. Im still at the track so ill post pic when I get home.
As promised...
Last edited by C63fora2w1; 07-21-2017 at 11:16 PM.
When I first straight pipes my car, my tuner was using some German software to tune the car. It worked well and we got nice gains.
While waiting for my headers to arrive, HPtuners released their software for the M156. My tuner (who is a very good friend of mine) said that I should give the HPtuners a go. It was going to cost extra, as I had to but a license for my car for HPtuners, and I already had a license for the other software. But based on his experience using HPtuners on other cars, he was sure he could get more out of it.
After tuning with HPtuners, he mentioned that he got good gains because he was able to manipulate the variable valve timing with HPtuners.
So Far my best run of the night has been a DA corrected 11.91 @119.5 mph an increase of 1 tenth and 2 mph. Im still at the track so ill post pic when I get home.
As promised...
Let's see how close that da calculator is.i ran a bunch of times with similar 60 ft and I put down same exact power as you.
I ran on june 14 at New England dragway it was mid 70s by the time I ran around 8
Ok when I got there at 530 it was 70 but dropped down to 61 by the time I ran and the da was 300 pretty much the best day I'm going to see untill the fall and was the reason I went as the bara was 30.xx and a good day to put some good times up.
Let's see how close that da calculator is.i ran a bunch of times with similar 60 ft and I put down same exact power as you.
I ran on june 14 at New England dragway it was mid 70s by the time I ran around 8
Ok when I got there at 530 it was 70 but dropped down to 61 by the time I ran and the da was 300 pretty much the best day I'm going to see untill the fall and was the reason I went as the bara was 30.xx and a good day to put some good times up.
I was trapping 118-119 all night!
give it up bro, you were talking the most **** in the 500whp thread and you got proven wrong and conveniently stopped posting. if you're happy with your OE 104 map tune or whatever that's fantastic! this thread is about an improvement in a tune by EC that is proven once again. instead of trying to put the OP down you should try to get your 60 ft down....bro.
I make no claims I know its only an estimate and there is definitely going to be a fudge factor when you conciser that I am in a sky high desert with crazy heat and altitude. All I really wanted to see is that there was am improvement in MPH which there was considering the DA was effectively 1500 feet more last night. Skratch77's post is a good comparison ET's will vary depending on 60 ft times and track conditions I don't mind his input at all. What I really need to do is find a full drag slick that will fit. I mentioned to 604_C63 last night that I hate correction factors I want to just be able to run and say there it is I ran xx.x and be done with it. I plan to move back to Florida in the spring so hopefully I'll be back at sea level soon enough.
Last edited by C63fora2w1; 07-24-2017 at 12:04 PM.
07-21-2017, 01:49 PM
really glad you are happy with the tune and also that it wasn't you just being a noob with a fancy description of the tune and a major "noob" placebo effect going on 
