Interesting question. Anyone have the answer for this?

 

Interesting indeed....

 

Obviously, before traveling to an area for a "dyno" day, the serious road tuner consults a topological road atlas and finds a representative assortment of graded freeway sections.

He travels his tuning route several dozen times before the customers arrive, scribbling down which inter-exit portions produce which MAF frequencies.

I mean, duh.

 

That seems like a substandard way of finding the correct amount of ignition advance for every load cell.

I mean, duh.

 

Either I am a victim of your incredibly subtle use of sarcasm, or you are a victim of EZ76's. I think the latter.

 

Yet, it's still a simulation and not actually the "real" thing. There are varying opinions on which is better. Let me ask you something, lets look to the pro level cars in F1, NHRA, NASCAR etc. Do you think that they only tune the engine on a Dyno or do you think that they perform realtime logging on the track? I suspect that they first do a basic tune on a Dyno and then do the "real life" tune in "real life" enviroments.

 

They do all of the above and more, including a specific tune for each race (at least in F-1).

IMO it starts to be complete overkill for the average driver to go to those types of lengths in tuning. Certainly in my case, I know that I am not a good enough driver to notice +/- 3% in power output when I'm circuit racing, nor do I spend time doing 120+ mph down the freeway.

l8r)

 

"Originally Posted by jude
Who has been tuning the 4G63 the longest in the USA?"

Wow, I found this in my inbox. I can't even find it here. This thread blew up!

Jude, to answer you question, it isn't me HKS would still win the prize as they were doing it in Japan and started shipping parts here about the same time the cars were being sold here.

2nd place would go to Archer Racing in Minnesota. These guys won just about every type of Endurance and Road Racing Championship they ever entered with DSM's.

HKS and Archer have both moved on to concentrate on other things but they are the only two companies still around (as in open for business) that have been doing it longer than myself.

David Buschur
www.buschurracing.com

 

Right, none of us are going to tune our car for every location and every street we are going to drive down but this is the Road vs Dyno topic. I drive my car on the street every day. I've never driven my car on a Dyno. I realize that a dyno is a great tool for measuring power produced in a certain circumstance but it's not the be-all-end-all measurement tool. If the best of the best in the world dont rely 100% on dyno results for their tuning then maybe those that believe the dyno is the ONLY way for accurate results should reconsider their rigid opinions.

 

Vishnu tuned IX's show more midrange torque and HP than their VIII's due to the R&D and tuning lengths they went to concerning their MIVEC manipulation.

Maybe your VIII's and IX's are the same because you don't care to optimize MIVEC all that much, or just disable it all together to make you IX tuning essentially the same as your VIII tuning?



- Steve

 

Can we keep crap like this out of the posts, this guy is not a tuner and has no clue on what Shiv did for the MIVEC and does not even own a 9. It seems the Vishnu owners are so damn bitter, like Mac users almost.

 

So Al and Shiv are you guys going to have some sort of tune off?

 

The main problem with road tuning is the difficulty in re-creating the same set of circumstances, then logging the data, then analyzing the data, then doing it all again. Even if you were to find a nice level stretch of highway, it's still a public highway. Instead of watching your logfiles and/or gauges, you still have to keep your eyes on the road as you're doing a pull (which will exceed the posted speed limit), etc.

What you would really want to do is to have your car dyno tuned and then take it out on the road and datalog a couple of pulls to make sure that the tune hasn't changed. As several tuners have stated already (and most will attest to), if you have been properly dyno tuned, then the tune should change very little if at all when you are back on the road.

l8r)

 

Come on, SuperHatch, you're a smart guy and know a lot, but you are letting this stuff get to you. Al's comment that you quoted was a rebuttal to the notion that his tune could be so bad that the torque would be 40 less than the HP. Even if he WAS ignoring the MIVEC (which he is not if you go read any of his tuning/dyno threads related to IXs), the TQ would not be drastically lower than the HP. So, you're coming up with this Shiv superiority comment out of left field after taking a quote out of context that has nothing to do with MIVEC tuning (or lack thereof). It simply has to do with the fact that no Dynoflashed car (VIII or IX) has had such terrible results as what we saw on this car when it dyno'd, which indicates that something else was wrong other than the tuning itself.

 

Quite the contrary. As several tuners have stated already (and most will attest to), a dyno tune will very rarely be the same on the road. It's only possible with load-bearing dynos and even then, the conditions aren't the same, so the tune will not always be the same. Most of us have Dynojets around us, so think about trying to get every Evo in the country dyno tuned on a load-bearing dyno. That's simply impossible and not feasible. If the option is available, then dyno tuning on a load-bearing dyno is the safest method and will provide numerical proof of the tuning changes, and that's what some Dynoflash customers choose. However, the vast majority of the time, such leisures are not available, thus the road tune...