I wanted to post in another Vendors forum, but for obvious reasons I also didn't want to start a war so I will post my comments here in our own forum.

Here is the map in question.




Now I am not going to go into alot of detail unless I have to.
Just a few points to clear up the misunderstandings. Also I am not worried about people copying work because I will not disclose any actual numerical data.

The cam phasing that is mapped into the ecu is very simple.
By adjusting the cam centerline with dynamic functionality we are able to increase and decrease the velocity thru the intake port. This will inturn effect the ability of the engine to breathe, thus increasing VE in theory.
Indirectly though we are also affecting the exhaust port harmonics. But we will not go into exhaust theory and thermodynamics in the thread.
We all know that cam ramp up, lift and duration play the largest role in volumetric efficiency for a particular engine.
The Mivec system was designed for this exact reason. It is there to increase VE in simple terms.
Now I will only say that because there is a reason why "Mitsu" wrote the code in this ecu the way they did. The values in these rpm and load cells are engineered this way to make the vehicle as responsive as possible for the profile of cam that is being used.
The problem with many people as they look at the map, is that they are focused soley on the numerical values. Or the 3D image if I may. It, to the naked eye, makes absolutely no sense.
But in reality it does. The Mivec works the way it is supposed to on this car.
It is not the reason why the car seems to fall off a bit at "3800" rpms.
Some have seen a kick in the mid to upper midrange as well when they compare it to an 8. Again it is said to have to do with the Mivec.
That though is only 70% true and only 30% of the equation.
The Evo9, as many have said uses a much more advanced ECU. This really is not the case. The code is a bit different, the equations may be slightly, the maps and mapping, but that is all.
Now if we want to see an advanced version of an ecu from Mitsu, we won't be waiting too long. In japan next year Mitsu will be using a completely different platform. Or as rumor has it. Similar to some of the advanced CANBUS versions being used in Ford, Land Rover, Subaru, Etc.
Now the 3800 rpm thing has a little to do with the Mivec map.
Lets see if anyone can guess the rest of the variables.

 

I'm very happy that you started this thread. I understand the need to protect trade secrets, but it would be nice if we could all work together on the theory in order to advance the state of knowledge in the community in general and hopefully benefit all.

As for your question about what else could be causing the 3800 RPM drop off ... I have no clue ... but how many possibilities are there? These are the ones I know of, and I've never tuned a car so I really know jack!!!

- MIVEC cam advance
- fueling
- ignition timing
- boost
- some mechanical issue involving the design of the head/cams/turbo/exhaust/who-knows-what

So I give ... do share and edumacate us please!!!!

- Josh

 

LOL,
good post.
It is hard to get into every detail. Now adays anyone and everyone will take what they can from you.
But anyway, The Mivec setup is only part of the equation.
Fueling is not.
Ignition timing- BINGO
Boost - Not really
Mechanical - Close

 

That doesn't make any sense, Josh. This is a business, not a utopian community. What good would it do for PD to teach all the other tuners how to accomplish X or Y? What benefit is there from helping the community as a whole if it doesn't increase the bottom line?

 

You bring up a very good point. Like I said it is hard to get into everything in detail.

 

Very good question. I believe it can make sense and I'm happy to explain my thinking on this matter and then you can feel free to shoot holes in it

First of all, businesses will and MUST operate based on what increases the bottom line, this is clear if they actually want to stay in business.

However, the assumption that sharing information is always negative to the bottom line I believe is short-sighted.

My position, stated succintly, is that sometimes sharing information CAN increase the bottom line.

Allow me to make a few points:

Why did Dave Buschur reveal through testing that EBAY O2 housings make more power than any product he offers? He does not make any money off of revealing this information. In fact, using your implied theory that sharing information is bad for the bottom line, he will lose money as people may purchase those O2 housings off of EBAY and not buy his ported/coated product.

However, by sharing this information with the community and advancing the state of knowledge for everyone with respect to this part, I (and many others I believe) gain respect for his HONESTY and INTEGRITY such that when he later tells me some other part that he offers does make power, I will be very likely to believe him and purchase that part. So, he may lose a few dollars on the O2 housings, but I believe he will recoup tenfold or more with other purchases because the community will reward him for his honesty, integrity, true enthusiasm and people are more likely to purchase his parts and services as a result. I know I am.

So, reason #1 why sharing can increase the bottom line:

Savvy consumers will ultimately reward vendors who they perceive to be honest and have integrity and who are obviously interested in advancing the state of the art for everyone in addition to just padding their bottom line. You may call this utopian or naive, but I again point you to the DB example. He's a smart man and has been in business for a long time ... and I believe his desire to advance the entire community by sharing information in addition to making a profit plays a part in his success. People would rather give their money to someone who they feel is giving something back to the community.

Reason #2 why sharing information can increase the bottom line:

By sharing information and advancing the state of the art with respect to any particular market (in this case Evo tuning, but this applies generically I submit), the size of the pie (the market) can increase, thereby increasing each vendor's slice.

Take MIVEC tuning as a simplistic example. Let's say that no one shared any information, everyone had to figure it out for themselves, and and a result, motors started popping (I'm not saying this is gonna happen! just trying to make a dramatic example). At that point, it might scare off a whole slew of people from flashing their cars. The market could shrink, and all tuners could suffer.

Conversely, let's say that the community works together to share knowledge and the result is significantly improved tunes for everyone. Evos go out and start beating Vipers and Z-06s regularly (dramatization again!) on the street/strip/road course. Damn, now everyone is gonna want a flash and even some of those Z-06 owners might buy Evos since they just got beat and they'll want flashes too.

Theory: advancing the entire community can increase the size of the market and thereby make each vendors piece that much bigger.

Keep in mind ... I didn't actually say that anyone should just show their tuned maps. I was looking for simply a discussion on theory. Of course it's always going to be up to each tuner to implement that theory in his or her own way in order to differentiate their services.


Finally, point #3 and my final and possibly most subtle point for this long-winded response

Information wants to be free. Those that resist this or don't see it will ultimately suffer I believe.

The internet, as exemplified by this very forum!, has brought about a new age of information sharing and availability. It is no longer the case that in every transaction there is an information gap to be exploited. Businesses in this new age require other means of differentiating their products and services in the absense of such a disparity to exploit.

Those differentiating factors could be something like good customer service!!!! If vendor A and vendor B both offer the same product at the same price, won't you go to the one that offers better service?!

Continuing to rely on attempts to keep information secret can distract businesses from focusing on things that will truly differentiate themselves.

That is not at all to say that a company should not be rewarded for their R&D efforts! I don't expect Buschur to post up CAD/CAM diagrams of his free flowing exhaust so that some Chinese company can go make it for less. Far from it! However, he can discuss the principals behind the design without giving away his R&D.

So, cliff notes:

- businesses must operate with the bottom line in mind, agreed
- sharing information and elevating the community knowledge as a whole CAN increase the bottom line because:

- the community will reward those vendors that are perceived as giving back to the community (a la DB)
- sharing information can increase the size of the total market, thereby increasing the size of each vendor's share
- the business model of exploiting information gaps (not speaking of R&D time) is dying and businesses need to differentiate themselves in other ways (customer service comes to mind as one)

 

Actually you make a good argumant as well. Probably with more morning behind it than just it shouldn't happen.
Let me make a point or just add something to what you and Warrtalon are saying.
It really isn't about the bottom line all the time.
Some information can and will be shared equally. The problem with some vendors is that with little to no knowledge about theory they get an easy road to "freedom"
"Tuners" should educate them selves in my opinion. They shouldlearn about HOW things work first. Then maybe they can have a grasp on what they are getting out of a forum like this. That is all and we can get back on topic now.


So does anyone have any guesses? So far we have made some progress with the answers by josh

 

damn vendors trying to create drama in their forums with teasers!

j/k of course

Here's my additional next-to-useless comments as I have 0 tuning experience ...

So you already mentioned timing was on the right track. It seems common that timing is lowered a bit around peak torque in order to avoid knock in this critical, potentially engine destroying, area. Is it more than this? I hope so, or else you probably wouldn't be asking

I hope you answer this rhetorical question eventually ... we have enough vendors asking rhetorical questions and then not answering them in other threads already!

 

Edited for posterity: Josh, that's the longest post I've ever seen. Unbelievable...

 

You raised a good point and I felt that it was important to answer. No one may ever read the whole thing, oh well

I just wish the community worked together more to advance our collective knowledge and I feel that would be good for everyone including vendors. It may be a hopeless cause though

 

No, the real point is that you want to satisfy your endless quest for knowledge that is beyond reason with as many smiley faces and winks as possible, which are intended to soften the frustration you know you cause. It's just too much, man...

 

Endless quest for knowledge that is too much? It's called being human ... I guess we should all just go bury our heads in the sand since you have it all figured out already ... we'll just ask you if we need advice and never question it.

Sorry for causing so much frustration by trying to learn and discover the truth about things ...

 

My guess is it's the turbo...
In response to the majority of the forum a lot of Vendors and/or tuners sometimes use certain discoveries as a loss leader for there businesses. Many like Buschur understand that as well as a few others who I know personally. The main problem behind the revelation of certain discoveries is that everyone wants to be the first, and never give credit where its soley do. PD, in my book is always getting the short end of the stick, only because naive customers believe everything they see when a mainstream Vendor says something. Like Nick said, tuners should figure out the whats & hows for themselves. My question to the Vendors is, who do they call when they have issues???? One person in particular knows the answer to that!!!!

 

Clay,

I agree that Joshd's post was one of the longest I have ever read.....That said, most on this site are in some form of "endless quest for knowledge", that is why we congregate at such sites and generally get along with fellow geeks ....Try to be nice dude...

Community,

I think the best way to end this flash debate is to just buy the mail in flash version of the big competitors and do a back to back dyno test with each. That way, if the tuners don't want to share their 'tricks' or 'trade secrets', we can at least find out which is the best -- better torque curve and more HP. IMHO

 

I guess no one else has any thoughts?