Customer feed back on Dezod/APR X1 inline ECU
08-03-2010 | 01:10 PM
#41
Is the xb that much different from the tc intake wise besides the larger I.D. maf tube. I dont understand why your having such an enormous problem with airflow readings. I literally plugged it in with 850s and set my FTs at idle and checked the comparisons of MAF readings from stock ecu to apr ecu and they were dead nuts at 65mm it never deviated at any load point. The apr is made pretty much to except any digital maf sensor as long as you adjust for it (maf adj). I guess i just dont understand whats going on here you should be able to dial it no matter what size intake pipe setup you have or maf whether it be gm, supra, or toyota for that matter. I'll give ya its gonna take ya awhile street tunin it to dial it in but it is fully capable.
08-03-2010 | 04:23 PM
#42
Banned
Scionetics
KAD
SL Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,936
From: Western NY
Well... yes and no. Yes, my intake deviates too far from the 4.0L X1 hard-coding but no, it isn't the only problem. Paul has told me that he's had to alter some of the X1's scalar settings pretty drastically from actual to compensate for MAF signal deviation. I've also seen from his calibrations that he's even added timing to compensate for the ECU pulling it due to falsely exagerated load readings.
08-03-2010 | 04:58 PM
#43
Banned
Scionetics
KAD
SL Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,936
From: Western NY
Paul took me for a spin in the Xb2 with the X1 being the only mod roughly a week ago when I went to get tuned; and let me tell you... when Paul shifted into second gear I thought we got rear ended by a truck and ran over a log at the same time. The torque was super impressive even going into third gear threw me back in my seat with a small chirp at the wheels haha. I damn near got my head snapped off my neck. Now I've never driven an Xb2, but since it also has the 2AZFE engine I can compare it to my tC and I don't ever recall my car displaying that kind of torque especially stock.
...Just my experience with the X1 to take or leave
...Just my experience with the X1 to take or leave
I kid you not, it's no joke for n/a with no mods.
08-03-2010 | 05:04 PM
#44
Banned
Scionetics
KAD
SL Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,936
From: Western NY
Is the xb that much different from the tc intake wise besides the larger I.D. maf tube. I dont understand why your having such an enormous problem with airflow readings. I literally plugged it in with 850s and set my FTs at idle and checked the comparisons of MAF readings from stock ecu to apr ecu and they were dead nuts at 65mm it never deviated at any load point. The apr is made pretty much to except any digital maf sensor as long as you adjust for it (maf adj). I guess i just dont understand whats going on here you should be able to dial it no matter what size intake pipe setup you have or maf whether it be gm, supra, or toyota for that matter. I'll give ya its gonna take ya awhile street tunin it to dial it in but it is fully capable.
Brett is using a smaller, poorly designed pipe that creates some odd form of turbulence and as a result, he's getting weird erroneous values on the X1 and ECU side. So, he needs to get that pipe redesigned, and the issues will fix themselves.
Dave from APR is even offering him assistance in tuning for the existing setup for free to show him that it works.
08-03-2010 | 08:46 PM
#45
Thread Starter
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 782
From: Buffalo, NY
Well... yes and no. Yes, my intake deviates too far from the 4.0L X1 hard-coding but no, it isn't the only problem. Paul has told me that he's had to alter some of the X1's scalar settings pretty drastically from actual to compensate for MAF signal deviation. I've also seen from his calibrations that he's even added timing to compensate for the ECU pulling it due to falsely exagerated load readings. Even the MafID's currently being used are altered to compensate for MAF signal deviation from the X1's hard-coded MAF signal slope and transfer function.
But... things being what they are, you're correct (IMO). If I want the X1 to work for me in it's current configuration, I need to use a new intake/MAF tube that more closely matches the MAF signal slope and transfer function hard-coded into the X1. IMO anyone planning to use the X1 on a XB2 better plan on using a ~3" intake/MAF tube because 2.75" doesn't work.
I would cut that 3" piece off the end but I strongly feel that the 2.75" maf pipe is too small for the X1's programming and a XB2. Therefore I plan to replace the existing intake tube with a shorter, straighter, smoother 3" intake. My air filter is a AEM dryflow with a venturi base, I'll keep that.
Thanks Don.
But... things being what they are, you're correct (IMO). If I want the X1 to work for me in it's current configuration, I need to use a new intake/MAF tube that more closely matches the MAF signal slope and transfer function hard-coded into the X1. IMO anyone planning to use the X1 on a XB2 better plan on using a ~3" intake/MAF tube because 2.75" doesn't work.
I would cut that 3" piece off the end but I strongly feel that the 2.75" maf pipe is too small for the X1's programming and a XB2. Therefore I plan to replace the existing intake tube with a shorter, straighter, smoother 3" intake. My air filter is a AEM dryflow with a venturi base, I'll keep that.
Thanks Don.
Good luck.
For the record, the piece that is welded there that has the sharp edge is what is causing the issue. You can't tune out mechanical problems. Perhaps the intake is one of the reasons you have had trouble with the FIC as well. Fix the intake and tuning should be much easier.
08-03-2010 | 10:12 PM
#46
Is the xb that much different from the tc intake wise besides the larger I.D. maf tube. I dont understand why your having such an enormous problem with airflow readings. I literally plugged it in with 850s and set my FTs at idle and checked the comparisons of MAF readings from stock ecu to apr ecu and they were dead nuts at 65mm it never deviated at any load point. The apr is made pretty much to except any digital maf sensor as long as you adjust for it (maf adj). I guess i just dont understand whats going on here you should be able to dial it no matter what size intake pipe setup you have or maf whether it be gm, supra, or toyota for that matter. I'll give ya its gonna take ya awhile street tunin it to dial it in but it is fully capable.
It just ocurred to me that I might be able to keep this intake after all. If I use the MafID that keeps the X1 and ECU airflow readings equal (~74mm) and then use the MAF adj table to lower those readings to where they should be, it might work. What do you think?
08-03-2010 | 10:28 PM
#47
Anyway, what do you think about using 74mm MafID and the MAF adj table to compensate for my smaller intake pipe? Currently my ECU is seeing 140% max load at 6psi and David tells me it should be closer to 125%.
08-03-2010 | 10:39 PM
#48
That sounds like fun.
Good luck.
For the record, the piece that is welded there that has the sharp edge is what is causing the issue. You can't tune out mechanical problems. Perhaps the intake is one of the reasons you have had trouble with the FIC as well. Fix the intake and tuning should be much easier.
Good luck.
For the record, the piece that is welded there that has the sharp edge is what is causing the issue. You can't tune out mechanical problems. Perhaps the intake is one of the reasons you have had trouble with the FIC as well. Fix the intake and tuning should be much easier.
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/SPE-9405
08-04-2010 | 03:01 PM
#49
Banned
Scionetics
KAD
SL Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,936
From: Western NY
I was referring to the boosted TC calibration you sent me with my X1. In any case, I suppose it's not really important how you get there as long as you get there. If entering 280cc for 320cc injectors and 73mm for a 71mm MAF pipe works, it works. I probably get hung up on such details more than I should. It really is the end-result that counts.
Anyway, what do you think about using 74mm MafID and the MAF adj table to compensate for my smaller intake pipe? Currently my ECU is seeing 140% max load at 6psi and David tells me it should be closer to 125%.
Anyway, what do you think about using 74mm MafID and the MAF adj table to compensate for my smaller intake pipe? Currently my ECU is seeing 140% max load at 6psi and David tells me it should be closer to 125%.
The load value is fairly spot on IMO there as the X1 reads the MAF and turns it into kPA.
The MAF sensors are damn near identical to the tC from the xB2. The part numbers are one digit different from the end of the part number.
According to TIS, on a tC
It will read 271 g/s of air, have a min voltage of .2V and a max of 4.9V
the xB2 will have
It will read 271 g/s of air, have a min voltage of .2V and a max of 4.9V
So I am not sure where you are getting your info from there Brett. This is DIRECTLY from Toyota. TIS = Toyota Information Systems
If the values at 74mm are close to stock, try 75 or 76. You want them to be as close as possible. All though your WOT values seem rather spot on, I'd be curious to see cruising values.
08-04-2010 | 03:02 PM
#50
Banned
Scionetics
KAD
SL Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,936
From: Western NY
I was referring to the boosted TC calibration you sent me with my X1. In any case, I suppose it's not really important how you get there as long as you get there. If entering 280cc for 320cc injectors and 73mm for a 71mm MAF pipe works, it works. I probably get hung up on such details more than I should. It really is the end-result that counts.
Anyway, what do you think about using 74mm MafID and the MAF adj table to compensate for my smaller intake pipe? Currently my ECU is seeing 140% max load at 6psi and David tells me it should be closer to 125%.
Anyway, what do you think about using 74mm MafID and the MAF adj table to compensate for my smaller intake pipe? Currently my ECU is seeing 140% max load at 6psi and David tells me it should be closer to 125%.
08-04-2010 | 07:34 PM
#52
Thread Starter
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 782
From: Buffalo, NY
Byder666 gave me a tuning idea that I may as well try since the intake is on the car. I'll probably still make a new 3" intake though. I'm considering the use of a Spectre 9405 MAF tube with a 3" aluminum J-pipe. Any opinion on the 9405?
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/SPE-9405
http://www.summitracing.com/parts/SPE-9405
08-04-2010 | 09:19 PM
#54
Banned
Scionetics
KAD
SL Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,936
From: Western NY
08-04-2010 | 09:28 PM
#55
whatya mean? the fact that the inj adj absolutely has to be tuned correctly for this unit to work and no one is doing it? I think there is a guy who sells these that has illustrated this point time and time again. I cant remember his name for the life of me though
^^^^^^
^^^^^^
08-04-2010 | 10:12 PM
#56
Banned
Scionetics
KAD
SL Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,936
From: Western NY
whatya mean? the fact that the inj adj absolutely has to be tuned correctly for this unit to work and no one is doing it? I think there is a guy who sells these that has illustrated this point time and time again. I cant remember his name for the life of me though^^^^^^
^^^^^^
08-04-2010 | 10:39 PM
#57
you mean the how from 0 load low rpms your takin a ton of fuel out and the higher rpms higher loads your putting the fuel back in and in some higher points even added a bit. 1.2 low rpms and loads interpolated to 1s .95s at higher rpms and loads. Wow thats hard to illustrate with words i wish i could cut and paste the 3d map i have in my head.
08-05-2010 | 12:47 AM
#58
i posted a new thread so we can help each other out with tuning this unit so we can leave the customer feedback thread alone for customer feedback.
MY FEEDBACK IS THAT THE ECU IS WAY MORE CAPABLE THAN I THOUGHT IT WAS GONNA BE AND IT IS THE BEES KNEES. IN OTHER WORDS ITS VERY TOP DRAWER. IN OTHER WORDS ITS THE CATS PAJAMAS. ok im done thats all the 1930s expressions i can think of.
MY FEEDBACK IS THAT THE ECU IS WAY MORE CAPABLE THAN I THOUGHT IT WAS GONNA BE AND IT IS THE BEES KNEES. IN OTHER WORDS ITS VERY TOP DRAWER. IN OTHER WORDS ITS THE CATS PAJAMAS. ok im done thats all the 1930s expressions i can think of.
08-05-2010 | 05:39 AM
#59
6 PSI of boost in kPA actually is about 140kPA.
The load value is fairly spot on IMO there as the X1 reads the MAF and turns it into kPA.
The MAF sensors are damn near identical to the tC from the xB2. The part numbers are one digit different from the end of the part number.
According to TIS, on a tC
It will read 271 g/s of air, have a min voltage of .2V and a max of 4.9V
the xB2 will have
It will read 271 g/s of air, have a min voltage of .2V and a max of 4.9V
So I am not sure where you are getting your info from there Brett. This is DIRECTLY from Toyota. TIS = Toyota Information Systems
If the values at 74mm are close to stock, try 75 or 76. You want them to be as close as possible. All though your WOT values seem rather spot on, I'd be curious to see cruising values.
The load value is fairly spot on IMO there as the X1 reads the MAF and turns it into kPA.
The MAF sensors are damn near identical to the tC from the xB2. The part numbers are one digit different from the end of the part number.
According to TIS, on a tC
It will read 271 g/s of air, have a min voltage of .2V and a max of 4.9V
the xB2 will have
It will read 271 g/s of air, have a min voltage of .2V and a max of 4.9V
So I am not sure where you are getting your info from there Brett. This is DIRECTLY from Toyota. TIS = Toyota Information Systems
If the values at 74mm are close to stock, try 75 or 76. You want them to be as close as possible. All though your WOT values seem rather spot on, I'd be curious to see cruising values.
I'm surprised the TC and XB2 MAF part numbers are different. They appear to be identical. I was referring to in-situ test results as measured with the FIC. Prior to installing my turbo I installed the FIC and made some 0-100mph WOT data logs with the FIC and my MAF signal peaked at 3.8V. AEM and others have done the same with the TC and recorded a peak MAF signal of ~4.3V. I attribute the difference to the difference in the MAF pipe diameters. My understanding is that Toyota has programmed the TC ECU to know that a 3V MAF signal = (say) 100 g/s and the XB ECU to know that 3V = 125 g/s.
Anyway, I'll have to send you some new logs and hopefully we can get this sorted out. I really wish Buffalo wasn't so far away...
08-05-2010 | 05:44 AM
#60
Thanks for your honest opinion. I guess I'll just have to find a shop that can mandrel bend 3" AL tube, fab a MAF adapter, bead-roll the tube ends and weld it up for me.