Yeah sure hehe..anyways...you did make some nice power but NONE of it was from the chip. And holy crap are u running lean. I'm starting to believe that EVERY car that has the uni-chip in it is now running way too lean. We need another CL-S w/ Intake, headers, exhaust to go to uni-chip for some more tuning. I don't know how they tuned it the first time but this isn't good at all!!!!!Plus if they say that most of the gains are from leaning the a/f ratio out and not from adjusting the timing...then we could of just bought a V-Afc...correct???Maybe they should start the tuning from a fresh start...adjust the timing and then work towards the leaning out...and only SLIGHTLY!!!!!!!

 

that dyno looks weird

 

Ah, a Dynapack...

Without the wheels/tires attached along with the elimination of the tire friction losses, this dyno is at least 15 WHP higher than what you would see on a Dynojet. Still very respectable numbers but more understandable now.

I must have missed the mention of the Dynapack earlier.

 

Anyway, about the misfire codes. That could very well be due to a lean condition. It could also be due to the interception of the CPK signal and its modification. If the engine thinks it is in one position relative to other signals, ignition coil pulse, etc. but gets alternative information. This could be interpreted as misfires.

Just a guess though as I would think it would be more prominent in others. However, the sensor could be positioned just slightly different making certain cars more susceptible.

Anyone watched the fuel trim values with the Unichip installed??

 

That is true but would be counter to what myself and others have found. Leaning it out only gave a few ponies. But combine that with a couple of degrees advance and you could see the gains originally mentioned.

 

 

CPK =

How would you watch the fuel trim values? What type of monitoring system is the best to watch things like this ?

I was also thinkin in some way that b/c my CELs were consistent that it may be where my car was leaning out too far..

Slowly but surely I'm starting to think a custom tune may be the best option.

 

CPK = Crank Position Sensor.

http://www.obd-2.com

 

What was the exact code u had Jonesi cause I had a P0336. At 5900 rpm and 70mph my car fell flat on it's face. Lost complete power and wouln't go anywhere. The code is for CPK sensor (A) noise.

 

where does the K come from?

 

Sent My runs to Jonesi for posting. For unichip it's not good news. In defense though it was hotter and more humid. I am also running leaner, but no where near as bad as everyone else. The good news is I'm getting the same amount of power using less gas. I gain 1-2 mpg on my last tank useing the chip and that included 7 dyno runs. I don't think it's worth 608 dollars though. I can't believe my but dyno is that off though. I know I feel a diference and even my friend that is my car once a week said how it felt different who didn't even know I put the chip in,also now I chirp 2nd everyonce in awhile when I never used to before. Since I have a rigged up ram air instead of a normal intake, maybe my car really needs moving air. Next test is the track, if I don't see an improvement there either then my but dyno really sucks.

 

The "K" in cranK silly

 

steve, when i talked to him i mentioned that the car would be more powerful w/o the wheels on but he said it wouldnt and i would actually dyno higher on a dynojet

 

no, how would dyno more power with your wheels on?? Not sure if this guy is too clued in....


perhaps he meant trq?

 

i guess the dyno is set to compensate for the weight of the wheels, i will call him tommorw

 

Nope, and this is pretty much Dynapack's information. The Dynapack is a hub dyno, not a wheel dyno. So there is an inherent difference. If the TCF is 1.0, which it was, then there is no correction applied.

Just a bit more reading on this matter:

http://www.vtec.net/articles/view-ar...&page_number=3

 

Is it just me are does the lean condition seem to be the common finding? Like someone said earlier, so far, no good dynos. How much info does UniChip need to make a correction? I sure am glad that they stand behind their product!

Has anyone seen the 10hp/10tq that we were originally told that we were going to get?

 

 

Unfortunatley.. I don't have a OBDII to scan codes.. I wish I did know b/c I'd love to monitor things to relay info back to UniChip.. But my car didn't fall flat on it's face just through a code and bogged down a little til the next gear..

 

I suggest others call/email Jack about our situation.. Jack would rather speak with us then to have us sit here and talk about them.. So if anyone has any concerns feel free to contact him..

 

Louie, I posted the graphs and forgot about the descriptions in the emails before I deleted them.. Please jump on here and explain.. Are you planning on contacting Jack or atleast sending the dyno's to him?

 

I sent him an email last week. Prior to all of the data that we have now. I think that we may have only had 1 or 2 dynos. I never heard anything back. We will see what happens. I think they will make a decision soon. How many more dynos can me get showing that the A/F ratio is too lean?

 

Thanks again Jonesi for putting the graphs up for me.

1st graph-

is the stock run with the green being the 1st run then red then blue. scenario was, it was 89 degrees that day and I drove 30min's from my work to the place and they right away strapped my car to the dyno. The second run was immediatly after the first. The third was with a 30min break to cool. The temp on the dyno said 86.3 F and hum. was at 21.5%

2nd graph

Is with the chip. Again my car was saying 91 today and I drove 30min's from my work. Once I arrived they right away strapped my car to the dyno which is the blue line. they reversed the sequence on the first graph, this one reads top to bottom. The first one is blue, then the second run again was done immediatly after the first then he gave the car only a 15min. break before the third run and the fourth was just a fluke because he thought he heard a ping and was just testing. The temp on the dyno said 87.5 F and hum. was at 36%

3rd graph

this was just a comparasion of the best stock and the best with chip. the red line was the chip graph.

I wil be sending these to todd or jack or both tomorrow, with the breif descriptions I gave here, to get them some more data. Hopefully they can come to a resolution.

 

That explains EVERYTHING! No wonder he made so much whp. I suspected this at first too; different dyno.

Impressive numbers none the less.

 

Theres no way that thing could account for the wheels. Every wheel is different. Some have more weight in the middle, some on the outsides, some wheels are heavier, others lighter, plus weight of the tires, height, width, etc ..

 

Oh I totally agree, the dynapack will always dyno higher than a dyno jet. Think about it, if you add lighter weight wheels to a car you will gain whp. If you have NO wheels obviously you will gain whp.

Darrin that guy is smoking something if he thinks it would dyno higher on a dynojet. Even you should realize that, you're a smart guy. Higher than 250 whp with your mods? What did the guy expect, you to put down 260 whp on a dynojet?? No chance.

 

i called him up today but i didnt really understand what he was saying, way too technical..
but he was saying that there is a correction factor used to get the whp w/o the wheels on
he said one reason for my high #'s is that the sae correction was very high cause of the high temps outside

maybe i will try a dyno jet next time, but i think i can put down atleast 240 to the wheels on any dyno w/o the chip

but 247 whp isnt inpossible or anything, my car did run a 14.2 w/ just i/h everything else stock, since then the only power added i've added is the ur crank

 

Good luck. 240 is almost a 50 whp gain off of a stock CL-S. Seems very high to me. Remember just because an intake adds 5-10 whp and headers adds 25-30 whp and a pulley adds 5-10 whp doesn't mean 10+30+10 = 50 whp gained over stock. Those gains are based on the stock motor. When you start adding them all together the amount of power gained isn't the MAX of what the mod says it will do. Based on everyone else's dyno in this thread and seeing other dynos done on other CL-S you should be happy with 225 w/o the chip, basically a 35 whp gain over stock.

What was your trap speed on your 14.2 run?

 

98 mph, if a stock cl-s dynos at 200, 240 whp isnt impossible w/ just i/h/p

 

A stock CL-S should dyno around 190-195 given 25% loss through the auto tranny

 

I've done a few 14.2s and a bunch more 14.3s at 98.xx MPH and I only put down 222 w/o the chip. Since our trap speeds are identical you should produce close to the same whp as me. I would be surprised if you put down 20+ more whp and still trapped at the same speed. With the UniChip I only gained around 7-10 whp, 5 whp PEAK and I picked up 1 MPH.

 

steve, different dyno are gonna out down different #'s on different days

i think mike's car put down 237 or 238 w/ just i/h

 

We'll just have to wait and see then

 

his car also went 14.2 or 1

 

any new info from uni-chip???I still haven't received my new kit yet

 

It sounds like he does know his own dyno very well.

The TCF is clearly shown on the plot and is at 1.0; in other words, no correction factor.

 

Here's the dyno link. The picture link is "funny." I can get the dyno to show if I keep hitting the refresh.

However, there have been a few times that I just couldn't get it to show.

Maybe someone could re-host this as I have the download of the file.


THREAD LINK: CLS'01 - 236 hp - 199 torque - 15k miles

I/H (AEM + Comptech headers) -> 236.5 WHP, 198.7 TQ, Temp 72.1 degrees F (He may have had the Toyos on -- but no light wheels).

H only (Comptech headers) -> 228.4 WHP, 192.2 TQ, Temp 68.6 degrees F (I'm pretty sure this was with stock MXM4s and stock wheels).

Baseline (Stock): 198.8 HP

That's no pulley, no SSRs. IMO, with the two, it could have easily hit 245+ WHP with the right temp and day...

 

Seems that way.... but for sure.

Steve,

The other issue is "correlation." It's pretty hard to know how each dyno converts to another with each different vehicle. The inertial, frictional, and other driveline elements are going to be different with each car. So, if someone actually says, "Well, this type of dyno generally read +/1 xx% high or low..." they would have to account for lots of different vehicles once the weight of the drum, or type of the resistance is changed.

IMO, it would be easy to do relative comparisons, but difficult to compare one car to another with so many different factors to compare.

Maybe one car really "slews" well, and another doesn't. Then there is that whole issue of just how the inertial issues are included -- or not included.

It’s a brake dyno, depending on the slew rate, the inertial effects could be dialed out.

There are a few Googled comments from some cars making around 200-300 HP that claim the Dynapack is showing about 10-20 hp more than the drum dynos (Dynojet).

And:

http://www.dynapack.com/

So, there are other issues too…

 

Hey guys, I received my 2nd unichip today which has the lower A/F ratio program I requested from Jack. In an earlier post I mentioned that I had unichip reduce the ratio 0.5:1 up to VTEC than an additional 0.5:1 till redline. This was an adjustment I requested based on MY dyno which reflected high A/F ratios up to VTEC and even higher after VTEC with the unichip, pretty much like most all have… excluding those west coast guys.

Well I hooked up the new unichip and I’ll have to admit the first WOT I made forced a genuine hell-yea out of me. Of course that’s just my poorly calibrated dyno-butt. Still there was a definite feel of increased torque. I know it’s too early to make that kinda judgment yet, but wanted to keep all in the loop. I’ll be making a trip back to the local dynojet shop hopefully Sat. morn’. The same shop, same dynojet, same tech, and about the same temps forecasted. Keeping my fingers crossed the D-butt matches the D-Jet. I'll post charts when I get back. See Ya.........

 

Great News. I hope your new dyno shows good results. If so, I would feel comfortable telling Jack to send me one with your new map. Being everyone has seen high A/F ratios, I see no reason why mine would not be the same. What do you think?