This morning after work, I did a base run log on evoscan, max whp was 319 at 6900 rpm, 304 wtq at 4900 (i know is not accurate, will do two byte fix later on), this is on buschur stage 1 flash with megan o2 housing, after the run I flashed my ecu with a modified mivec map which is more agressive specially on top rpms, anyways the graph shows 349whp at 7500 rpm, and 322 wtq 300 rpms sooner than the first one, and going just by observation and feeling, the car climbed the rpms all the way up to 7500 like a rape ape, and the butt dyno felt it too. Please dont look at the numbers just pay attention at the comparison between the two, also my knock sum went from 3 to 2 at peak torque (91 oct 23psi at 4500 feet altitude).

I was trying to put both graph on the same sheet but it only shows the power/torque for one, can somebody help me to figure out how to plot two graph on top of each other? Thanks

 

Did you do the power log in Evo Scan or DLL?

 

I think some would view more "aggressive" on top end MIVEC as meaning more intake cam advance. From my testing I think the car is more "aggressive" at high revs with less/zero intake cam advance.

Maybe you did this, but controlling temperatures/gradients etc with dyno simulators is crucial - same bit of road, two directions, similar driving behaviour before, cross over tests etc.

 

post your mivec map.

 

30whp on a flash is about right.
23 psi on 91 is high side. if it is a spike, its ok, but you should have it settle to 22psi.

 

For some reason not all cars respond to advance at higher rpm, but some do. He isnt using a MIVEC map thats secret but he has no need to repost it.

It would seem the MR's respond to it more than other IX's though.

 

How many runs did you do after changing the MIVEC map? From my experience using the power graphing, you need to do several runs to see a good average. I made my first run using the graphing and it had me over 400awhp and over 500awtq (suuuuuuuuuure) and after making a few more pulls it settled in right around 320ish awhp and 310-315awtq (just under what I dyno'd at, 336awhp/321awtq). Do a few more logs and see where it's at. If it stays around that number you might have to hook me up with that map... it's a great increase.

 

The test was conducted on same road, same direction same conditions.......like john said, the map is not secret, there is actually a real dyno post were the guy gained 20whp on a stock evo with just a "similar" map. Like I said before, even without evoscan powergraph you can tell by just how fast the rpm goes up without running out of steam all the way to 7500, before soon after 6800 the car would start falling on its face. 23 psi is the pike, is a litle high thats why I'm getting 3 counts of knock at peak torque but remember if you start from a stop in a drag race you'll never hit 23 psi since you are up in the rpms, I will still move the spike to 22 later on, i was just testing with octane booster to see the results.

 

I will make more logs on my days off, also remember I'm at 4500 feet where 23 psi is equivalent to 21.3 psi on sea level.

 

Running off the original JDM RS maps .. you'll gain no more hp by advancing the cams beyond 6500rpms .. it's best left at 0.0 ..dynoed with stock RS TD05-15G showed an average loss of 5-10hp .. for bigger turbos its less but still loss ..

 

Wouldn't mind seeing the Mivec map also to compare to the slightly altered JDM map I am using. Still feeling my way around this and other maps .

 

yep its that other motor that the mr's use




I would like to see the mivec table also,

Joe

 

I have yet to see 30whp gain on a real dyno strictly from a Mivec table change, and I have tried a million combos.

Most combos actually lose power by advancing past 6500 but sustain hp better.

 

Or maybe that the IX MR like the VIII MR has different lobe seperation and would respond to some advance. Yeah this isnt a peak hp debate, the MIVEC advance seems to hold power longer in most cases. Cars that have exhaust cams have typically needed a little advance over the stock map as well.

 

last time I checked the IX mr and IX motor were identical. You cant compare IXs t VIIIs