Just wondering if you would get good results with a new turbokit with the UTEC rather then the AEM?

 

With all things being equal, which they never really are, the two systems should extract the same or very close results. Asking this question in the UTEC forum, and you will received biased answers stating the UTEC is the way to go. Ask the same question in the AEM forum, and the answer will be AEM. Both systems are excellent, it is just the AEM might take a tad bit more knowledge, as it is a full standalone. The UTEC seems to be a bit more user friendly, and the new firmware (which is supposed to be out in a couple of weeks, about 2 months ago) will make a new turbo kit kick some a$$ with injector scaling, etc...

Now this is just my .02, so anyone else is free to chime in.

 

Yes the UTEC will be much closer to a full standalone when the new firmware comes out. With full timing, boost and fuel control we arent too far off the AEM EMS. I think if the car is a street car the UTEC would be best. For all out race car AEM EMS with speed density conversion. I would like to see how close in power the UTEC would be compared to the EMS with a larger turbo. I really dont think it would be that far off.

 

As long as you can address inherant flaws in the factory components, the UTEC is capable of it, and as said previously, results should be the same as any other Engine management given equal hardware.

AEM's advantage (which itself may be a disadvantage) is removing the MAF sensor in favor of speed density. There are only one or two standalone/piggyback devices capable of doing that. However that may not be a true advantage as the MAF sensor only becomes a restriction passed a certain point. I do agree that its a restriction though.

In the future, the UTEC would be capable of Speed density, however I don't believe in speed density conversions and would much rather see the UTEC directly support aftermarket blowthrough MAF conversions where you can retain the drivability you might lose with a speed density conversion.

The UTEC is capable of Fuel control, Boost control, and timing control and at the moment, direct control of timing and boost, open loop fuel control will become available with the new firmware. Then the AEM can control the stock boost solenoid, but most convert to the GM Boost control solenoid, we can do the same..

Therefore we would have control of boost and fuel...

 

yeah taking out the maf and all the other sensors enable more hp....

 

Removing the restrictions will allow more potential horsepower.. but a speed density conversion is not necessary. At the moment, using a blowthrough MAF and the UTEC can be more expensive than the AEM, however the huge advantage of the UTEC is the quick install, power potential, and no need to spend hours configuring it to work well with your car.

With the AEM, expect to spend quite a bit of time getting everything working right, A/C Cycling, part throttle cruise drivability, etc.. If you do it yourself then its certainly worthwhile but time consuming. I couldn't imagine paying someone by the hour to do this though since it could add up.

I have made it my personal mission to prove the UTEC can perform as well as any standalone.. Not because I dislike the AEM or anything else for that matter, but because I want to prove that you don't have to make compromises in legality, emissions, drivability, etc. to make good power.

 

that's a question I've been meaning to ask. I'm in the process of figuring out what upgrade path I would like to take with my evo. some kinda of ems, like utec or exed is one of the upgrades I'm looking into. with having to go thru emissions with my car. what and how would I go about going thru emission with say the utec. is it capable of just taking it off and drivening down to the emissions place and the pluging it back up or what would I do. and say, if I have larger injectors. would that make things more of a pain in the ****. I would appriciate any help. thanks

-Chad-

 

Jack,

A bit off topic.. But what if anything was done to compensate for the AIT now residing post compressor (HOT) when the the ECU is expecting to see AIT's pre compressor?

 

boostfed...if you get the remote map selector, all you do is flip it from the number your map is currently set on...to zero...and BAM your stock

 

so when I go to the emissions place and the plug up there scan tool to read the sensors on my car. It want interfer with there computer. just making sure. I don't wanna spend a hole bunch of money on the utec or whatever I go with and then not be able to drive my car once my tags expire. thanks for the help.

-Chad-

 

If you have larger injectors your car will not run well in stock mode. They should be able to run all the tests they can with the utec in there. With the UTEC your car should still be OBD II compliant. All you are doing is modifing the signals the ECU sees. With the AEM you remove its OBD II compliance making your car not legal to be licensed. Any car 96 and newer HAS to have OBD-II or it cannot be sold or licensed for street use.

 

You shouldn't have to remove it since the OBD-II portion still functions off the stock ECU.. However the stock ECU should not be showing any CEL's and if they are, you need to address them (mostly they would be due to some aftermarket component and not the UTEC)

With a pretty highly modified car, its unlikely you'd be able to, or want to remove the UTEC or run in stock mode because of oversized injectors or other issues.. but there's nothing wrong with creating a "Cruise/Emission" map specifically for low boost, clean emissions and drivability..

 

With the UTEC the MAF is still in the stock location, however if (eventually they offered) the Speed density setup were used, it would likely not have a huge affect until the engine is under boost..

On my setup, with the blowthrough MAF setup, the IAT sensor is next to the Hot-wire Maf in the upper pipe, The "black box" that comes with the setup produces the output signals.. Again, you are getting a real measure of the air in the intake after the compressor and not the outside air.. You would likely have to make some minor adjustments for it, but it shouldn't have a big affect since the air density would be calculated based on the air going through it and the air temp at the sensor, the output signals on the blowthrough MAF box are calibrated accordingly to make the stock ECU happy.. on the UTEC it really only looks at Karmann frequency as a measure of the air volume, and as I mentioned earlier, its already calibrated to provide an appropriate signal to the UTEC.

Hmm.. I think I rambled through this one..LOL sorry..

 

I have the speed density conversion in my Evo which I drive on a regular basis(506whp on low boost) and have no drivability problems whatsoever.

 

Not everyone has drivability problems with speed density, however looking at your modification list, you obviously can tolerate the quirks that come with a highly modified engine.. I'm the same way, part throttle cruise, fuel economy, just stupid things like idle and stumbling at part throttle just don't bother me..

I drive my car every day, and have owned cars with speed density setups, and things like loading, part throttle stumbling, occasionally needing a retune when the weather changes severely all were things that made me decide to stick with a MAF type sensor. Speed density to me equates to driving with a carburetor, it doesn't mean its a bad thing, just requires more attention at times.

Speed density isn't a bad thing, but because its calculated based on several sensors that dont actually read the actual amount of air that goes into the engine, it isn't always correct or little quirks can upset the drivability a bit..