need tuning? - Tuning Forum - j-body.org

*Dual Mufflers are not a performance mod
*Throtte Body Spacer is not a performance mod
*Weapon Rice Trash Intake is same as any 50 dollar tube off Ebay

There is very little that can be done with the mods you have, if you can get a friend with HPTuners to tune your car for 100 bucks, it may be worthwhile. Otherwise just save your money and put together a decent forced induction setup.

___________________________________________________________________

Re: need tuning?

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 4:32 AM

with a good tune, you can probably pick up a good 10-20 horsepower, depending on what is done.

there seems to be something that alot of people have trouble understanding on this website... getting your car tuned is not just for boost applications or high horsepower NA applications.

when you tune your car, you can optimize it to perform better with the modifications that have been done to it. tuning it with what you have (or in this case, something like my setup) wont net you BIG numbers. but, you can fix alot of the drive ability issues that you dont like about your car.

hell, bumping your timing, adjusting your fuel trims, and your AFR being corrected by tuning can get you up to 10% right there. if you ball park it that you are putting out 150-160 crank HP as it sits, thats 15-16 hp than can be freed.

to answer your question the way i read it, it would be better for you to tune AFTER you get the mods done. if you tune before the mods, then you go an add all that stuff, your AFR and fuel trims could be dramatically off from where they need to be.

1997 Cavalier Z24 - 16.3 in 1320 and falling...

Re: need tuning?

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 7:21 AM

Tostyz HotZ

thanx guys, this is my every day car, so i really don't want to use it to experiment with boost or forced induction right now, since i've never done it before, maybe i'll do that once i get a junker to drive to work and school, most of my money is going into appearance for this car.

There's no pain like wrecking your first J

Re: need tuning?

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 8:38 AM

whitegoose( RedR-ZedR) wrote:with a good tune, you can probably pick up a good 10-20 horsepower, depending on what is done.

there seems to be something that alot of people have trouble understanding on this website... getting your car tuned is not just for boost applications or high horsepower NA applications.

when you tune your car, you can optimize it to perform better with the modifications that have been done to it. tuning it with what you have (or in this case, something like my setup) wont net you BIG numbers. but, you can fix alot of the drive ability issues that you dont like about your car.

hell, bumping your timing, adjusting your fuel trims, and your AFR being corrected by tuning can get you up to 10% right there. if you ball park it that you are putting out 150-160 crank HP as it sits, thats 15-16 hp than can be freed.

to answer your question the way i read it, it would be better for you to tune AFTER you get the mods done. if you tune before the mods, then you go an add all that stuff, your AFR and fuel trims could be dramatically off from where they need to be.

Misinformation FTL

___________________________________________________________________

Re: need tuning?

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 3:00 PM

BlackEco wrote:
whitegoose( RedR-ZedR) wrote:with a good tune, you can probably pick up a good 10-20 horsepower, depending on what is done.

there seems to be something that alot of people have trouble understanding on this website... getting your car tuned is not just for boost applications or high horsepower NA applications.

when you tune your car, you can optimize it to perform better with the modifications that have been done to it. tuning it with what you have (or in this case, something like my setup) wont net you BIG numbers. but, you can fix alot of the drive ability issues that you dont like about your car.

hell, bumping your timing, adjusting your fuel trims, and your AFR being corrected by tuning can get you up to 10% right there. if you ball park it that you are putting out 150-160 crank HP as it sits, thats 15-16 hp than can be freed.

to answer your question the way i read it, it would be better for you to tune AFTER you get the mods done. if you tune before the mods, then you go an add all that stuff, your AFR and fuel trims could be dramatically off from where they need to be.

Misinformation FTL

and the misinformation would be where?

1997 Cavalier Z24 - 16.3 in 1320 and falling...

Re: need tuning?

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 4:41 PM

The whole post is bull@!#$. You have no proof for any of that. Have you actually dyno'd the results for every mod and dyno'd differences from tunes?

Didn't think so.

___________________________________________________________________

Re: need tuning?

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 7:25 PM

Is tuning necessary? No.

Is it beneficial? A properly tuned car will always perform better than one that isn't.

Tire Industry Association (TIA) Advanced Tire Service Instructor
Graduate of Michelin Advanced Sales Training
Graduate of Rod Hall Off Road Driving School
Graduate of Vehicle Driving Dynamics, Michelin Laurens Proving Grounds.

2002 Ford Ranger Edge Extra Cab, Flareside
3.0L V6, 5 spd auto.
Bamachips Xcal2
160 hp, 196 ft/lbs (crank)
31X10.5R15 Bridgestone Dueler A/T 693
K&N flat panel
Custom side exit exhaust
Monroe Max Air Shocks
Infinity 6" Component Speakers
Credence 10" DVC sub
Dual Amp
Custom built passive x-over & sub enclosure

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 4:37 AM

BlackEco wrote:The whole post is bull@!#$. You have no proof for any of that. Have you actually dyno'd the results for every mod and dyno'd differences from tunes?

Didn't think so.

your right i dont have the proof of back to back dyno runs.

it is a fact though that when you tune a car, u can make it more efficient. the factory tune is very generic and leaves much room for improvement.

i can also tell you that personally, i have had over 2 seconds shaved off my 0-60 times from how my car came stock + an intake to the way it sits now with the intake, exhaust, and tune. its also not done yet and still has a bit more to squeeze out.

any engine, motor, etc has an efficiency... usually a fairly poor efficiency (hence the introduction of things like the rotary engine, regenerative breaking in hybrids, etc). every modification you do tries to make that engine more efficient, problem is, without a good tune, the things your doing to your motor to try and improve it are not working at their maximum efficiency either.

so like shane said, is it necessary... no.
is it beneficial... hell yes.

1997 Cavalier Z24 - 16.3 in 1320 and falling...

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 5:18 AM

I think we have two different points trying to be made here.

I think BlackEco's point is that the mods the original poster plans on doing won't have a significant enough impact on the car to merit HAVING to have it tuned.

Whitegoose's point is that tuning can/will make the car perform at its highest capabilities, what ever the modifications to it may be.

Both are valid points, no misinformation here.

Now having said that, I DO have a collection of data (for my truck mind you) that shows the impact of the mods I've done, & the differences various air/fuel ratios have on the power the engine produces. My data (which seems to back up what PLX suggests) is that having your air/fuel ratio off by a very small margin can have noticeable impacts on power production. .4 AFR represented an 7% difference in HP, & 8% torque with my truck, & I would expect similar results with other vehciles. I suspect BlackEco will back me up on that as I see he has both HPTuners & an Innovate WBO2.......he understands the importance of getting your AFR correct. I suspect Whitegoose will support that statement also, as even in more or less stock configuration, I would be VERY surprised to come across a car that produced a WOT AFR within .4 of optimum.

So the bottom line is tuning will make your car operate at its best, regardless of your mods. Whether the returns you get from it justify doing it is a decision each person must decide for themselves.

Tire Industry Association (TIA) Advanced Tire Service Instructor
Graduate of Michelin Advanced Sales Training
Graduate of Rod Hall Off Road Driving School
Graduate of Vehicle Driving Dynamics, Michelin Laurens Proving Grounds.

2002 Ford Ranger Edge Extra Cab, Flareside
3.0L V6, 5 spd auto.
Bamachips Xcal2
160 hp, 196 ft/lbs (crank)
31X10.5R15 Bridgestone Dueler A/T 693
K&N flat panel
Custom side exit exhaust
Monroe Max Air Shocks
Infinity 6" Component Speakers
Credence 10" DVC sub
Dual Amp
Custom built passive x-over & sub enclosure

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 6:20 AM

whitegoose( RedR-ZedR) wrote:
BlackEco wrote:The whole post is bull@!#$. You have no proof for any of that. Have you actually dyno'd the results for every mod and dyno'd differences from tunes?

Didn't think so.

your right i dont have the proof of back to back dyno runs.

it is a fact though that when you tune a car, u can make it more efficient. the factory tune is very generic and leaves much room for improvement.

i can also tell you that personally, i have had over 2 seconds shaved off my 0-60 times from how my car came stock + an intake to the way it sits now with the intake, exhaust, and tune. its also not done yet and still has a bit more to squeeze out.

any engine, motor, etc has an efficiency... usually a fairly poor efficiency (hence the introduction of things like the rotary engine, regenerative breaking in hybrids, etc). every modification you do tries to make that engine more efficient, problem is, without a good tune, the things your doing to your motor to try and improve it are not working at their maximum efficiency either.

so like shane said, is it necessary... no.
is it beneficial... hell yes.

You are running 16.3s in a car most people can run 15.5s in STOCK. I don't think you have any validity in attributing 2 seconds due to any sort of modifications. If you don't understand how many other variables can effect track times on such a small scale of measurement, you really have no business trying to use it as proof.

The fact is I have yet to see any proof that more than a few hp/tq can be gained from bolt-ons/tuning in either the 2.2 eco or OHV. The people that have made significant power changes w/ n/a configuration all have done headwork and cams (which one would expect to see some significant gains from tuning)

Shane there is no doubt in my mind that other platforms such as your truck can see greater results from minor fuel/timing tuning on essentially stock configurations. The evidence so far suggests Jbody isn't one of them

___________________________________________________________________

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 7:08 AM

the fact that a ran a 16.3 on a tired motor (220 000 kms) and an extra 300lbs of weight, actually makes it seem like a respectable time.

rule of thumb is every hundered lbs shaved off is a .1 second shave off your ET.

Quote:

C&D 1/4 mile times

1996 Chevrolet Cavalier LS 8.3 16.1
1998 Chevrolet Cavalier Z24 Conv. 8.7 16.8 (C&D Aug 98)

1996 Pontiac Sunfire GT 7.9 15.9
1998 Pontiac Sunfire SE Conv. 7.9 16.0

the average of those times is 16.2

if you take into account that those times were probably recorded with a manual transmission, and factor in that i have an auto (which is generally accepted as the slower of the two in a fairly stock form). if you take my 16.3 and remove the .3 seconds for the weight i had in my car, then i sit at a 16.0 even.

to me, that doesnt seem too bad for a car with my type of mileage. you run a good 1/4 mi time, but im sure you werent running 14.0's when you first started racing either.

regardless my point is tuning is beneficial no mater what is done to the vehicle as it can maximize the efficiency of the motor, but like shane said its up to the owner to decide if its worth it.

1997 Cavalier Z24 - 16.3 in 1320 and falling...

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 7:40 AM

whitegoose( RedR-ZedR) wrote:with a good tune, you can probably pick up a good 10-20 horsepower, depending on what is done.

whitegoose( RedR-ZedR) wrote:
hell, bumping your timing, adjusting your fuel trims, and your AFR being corrected by tuning can get you up to 10% right there. if you ball park it that you are putting out 150-160 crank HP as it sits, thats 15-16 hp than can be freed.

Let me know when you come back from the dyno with proof and have your "fuel trims tuned"

Please take the Bench Racing out of this forum.

___________________________________________________________________

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 8:03 AM

if all goes well i'll be hitting the dyno this summer. i'll post up the graphs then.

also, its not bench racing... bench racing would be me saying something like do you think with x, y, and z mods i can beat said car...

all i have said is basically what shane proved with his own example:

Quote:

My data (which seems to back up what PLX suggests) is that having your air/fuel ratio off by a very small margin can have noticeable impacts on power production. .4 AFR represented an 7% difference in HP, & 8% torque with my truck, & I would expect similar results with other vehicles.

and also:

SM-AFR video from PLX

if you watch the video they tell you that:

Quote:

with an NA motor the difference in a 13.0 and 13.3 (0.3 AFR) measurement can be as much as 10% hp. in a forced induction motor the difference between 12.5 and 12.2 (again, 0.3 AFR) can be as much as 20% power.

1997 Cavalier Z24 - 16.3 in 1320 and falling...

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 8:17 AM

whitegoose( RedR-ZedR) wrote:if all goes well i'll be hitting the dyno this summer. i'll post up the graphs then.

also, its not bench racing... bench racing would be me saying something like do you think with x, y, and z mods i can beat said car...

all i have said is basically what shane proved with his own example:

Quote:

My data (which seems to back up what PLX suggests) is that having your air/fuel ratio off by a very small margin can have noticeable impacts on power production. .4 AFR represented an 7% difference in HP, & 8% torque with my truck, & I would expect similar results with other vehicles.

and also:

SM-AFR video from PLX

if you watch the video they tell you that:

Quote:

with an NA motor the difference in a 13.0 and 13.3 (0.3 AFR) measurement can be as much as 10% hp. in a forced induction motor the difference between 12.5 and 12.2 (again, 0.3 AFR) can be as much as 20% power.

Im waiting for those dyno graphs, until then don't mislead anyone else.

___________________________________________________________________

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 9:07 AM

I have my own opinions on this subject, but the one thing that strikes me about the friendly banter back & forth between Whitegoose & BlackEco is this. BlackEco is discounting Whitegooses perspective due to lack of dyno sheets to prove his point, yet BlackEco has provided nothing to support his perspective either! Hmmm, interesting.

Until proof is forthcoming, perhaps we should agree to disagree.

Tire Industry Association (TIA) Advanced Tire Service Instructor
Graduate of Michelin Advanced Sales Training
Graduate of Rod Hall Off Road Driving School
Graduate of Vehicle Driving Dynamics, Michelin Laurens Proving Grounds.

2002 Ford Ranger Edge Extra Cab, Flareside
3.0L V6, 5 spd auto.
Bamachips Xcal2
160 hp, 196 ft/lbs (crank)
31X10.5R15 Bridgestone Dueler A/T 693
K&N flat panel
Custom side exit exhaust
Monroe Max Air Shocks
Infinity 6" Component Speakers
Credence 10" DVC sub
Dual Amp
Custom built passive x-over & sub enclosure

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 9:50 AM

I have done my own testing in the past. <Search> Here is a simple tune I did on my N/A configured cav with full set of bolt ons. Tests were also conducted with WOT AFRs between 12-13 with no significant differences, the only significant gains I was able to produce were from timing advancement.

What I did not do however was replace my bolt-ons with stock components to get a baseline for each mod. Regardless that doesn't have anything to do with this argument. The argument made has been quoted above. I would like to see someone prove me wrong.

___________________________________________________________________

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 10:01 AM

would have been nice to see that exported to excel to pick out actual values rather than trying to guess where your values are.

1997 Cavalier Z24 - 16.3 in 1320 and falling...

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 10:08 AM

whitegoose( RedR-ZedR) wrote:would have been nice to see that exported to excel to pick out actual values rather than trying to guess where your values are.

]

Yeah is that 9 or 10% gain, I can't tell.

___________________________________________________________________

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 10:43 AM

That adds validity to your arguement.

I would be pretty pleased to pick up the amount of torque below 4000 you did though - thats not insignificant by any means.

Although peak power did not improve in your instance, I have also seen just the opposite too. These Ecotec may not have been in J's but they are Eco's nonetheless.

http://www.pcmforless.com/images/dynosheets/06SolsticeLloyd.jpg
http://www.pcmforless.com/images/dynosheets/06solstice.jpg
http://www.pcmforless.com/images/dynosheets/sky.jpg

Tire Industry Association (TIA) Advanced Tire Service Instructor
Graduate of Michelin Advanced Sales Training
Graduate of Rod Hall Off Road Driving School
Graduate of Vehicle Driving Dynamics, Michelin Laurens Proving Grounds.

2002 Ford Ranger Edge Extra Cab, Flareside
3.0L V6, 5 spd auto.
Bamachips Xcal2
160 hp, 196 ft/lbs (crank)
31X10.5R15 Bridgestone Dueler A/T 693
K&N flat panel
Custom side exit exhaust
Monroe Max Air Shocks
Infinity 6" Component Speakers
Credence 10" DVC sub
Dual Amp
Custom built passive x-over & sub enclosure

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:06 AM

BlackEco, did you do those dyno runs before the deal with the PE Multiplier was figured out?

Tire Industry Association (TIA) Advanced Tire Service Instructor
Graduate of Michelin Advanced Sales Training
Graduate of Rod Hall Off Road Driving School
Graduate of Vehicle Driving Dynamics, Michelin Laurens Proving Grounds.

2002 Ford Ranger Edge Extra Cab, Flareside
3.0L V6, 5 spd auto.
Bamachips Xcal2
160 hp, 196 ft/lbs (crank)
31X10.5R15 Bridgestone Dueler A/T 693
K&N flat panel
Custom side exit exhaust
Monroe Max Air Shocks
Infinity 6" Component Speakers
Credence 10" DVC sub
Dual Amp
Custom built passive x-over & sub enclosure

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:14 AM

I'm not doubting it is plausible, I still haven't seen any evidence of substantial gains on a 2.2, factory tunes vary much between vehicles.
I believe those sheets are from the 2.4 VVT.

___________________________________________________________________

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:19 AM

Shane Hewitt wrote:BlackEco, did you do those dyno runs before the deal with the PE Multiplier was figured out?

No fuel tuning was just done using wideband and VE tables, being able to clamp down the AFRCMD will help with tuning in the future, This dyno was over a year and a half ago.

___________________________________________________________________

Re: need tuning?

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 11:31 AM