tigger73 Posted June 12, 2016 Author Share Posted June 12, 2016 Great to see that someone in the US has taken a leap of faith and got their car tuned. At the moment I believe there's only really remote tuning options available for you guys. The stock tune file in the US must be quite a lot different to the file we have in Aus so it sounds like this will be separate development. My first tune file was good, but the second was an improvement again. When I spoke to TH he said he's extracted about as much as he can from the Aus Liberty 2.5i. Though a 2 second improvement in 0-100 is definitely noticeable. I was in my dealer the other day pricing up some brake pads/rotors and took one of the service advisors for a spin around the block. He couldn't believe the improvement over the stock car as it is definitely a lot more urgent - particularly in manual mode. Tigger73's MY15 2.5i build Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_l_s Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 For those in the U.S. Interested in getting the tune! I am now on week two of the TH tune. The process for reading the ECU and sending it off to Matt was a piece of cake. Matt got the tune to me within 12 hours and then I started the process of flashing the ecu. Saving and downloading the tune was a learning process (for me). The program is free and pretty easy to use once you get the hang of it. I am not all about MPG but it is a nice bonus, I have noticed a difference in MPG. Before the tune I was averaging around 28MPG and after the tune I am getting around 32-34MPG (mix of highway and city). Throttle response is better, more even through the 1k-4K range, the "dead zone" is less noticeable. You can feel the torque a little more now hammering it in 1st or 2nd gear. The shifts are noticeable quicker and smoother. Matt said there is still much more to be discovered on the tune, so the more people with the tune means the more time he will spend on improving the tune! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Thanks for sharing, I'm definitely interested in tuning at some point in the future. Will probably wait until I buy out the lease just to be safe. Do you mind sharing your total cost? Just wondering how soon I should start setting money aside lol. Lighting Mods: $10 Footwell Illumination | Tail as Turn | Fog as DRL Diode Dynamics C-Lights | RX350 Bi-Xenon Retrofit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15LegacyRyan Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Thanks for sharing, I'm definitely interested in tuning at some point in the future. Will probably wait until I buy out the lease just to be safe. Do you mind sharing your total cost? Just wondering how soon I should start setting money aside lol. Yes it is something you should consider!! No problem, Tactrix Openport 2.0 - $169.99 Tune - $250 (AUS) $184.96 (USD) Which brings the total to $354.95 (USD) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_l_s Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Yes it is something you should consider!! No problem, Tactrix Openport 2.0 - $169.99 Tune - $250 (AUS) $184.96 (USD) Which brings the total to $354.95 (USD) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Wow, that's quite reasonable!! I was expecting $500+. Thanks for sharing:) Lighting Mods: $10 Footwell Illumination | Tail as Turn | Fog as DRL Diode Dynamics C-Lights | RX350 Bi-Xenon Retrofit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15LegacyRyan Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Wow, that's quite reasonable!! I was expecting $500+. Thanks for sharing:) A lot better than a dyno tune or an accessport tune for the WRX/STI! That includes free retunes for life Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustedbucket Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 Can you explain the 'work' involved? Just a shotgun explanation, perhaps? Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15LegacyRyan Posted June 14, 2016 Share Posted June 14, 2016 Can you explain the 'work' involved? Just a shotgun explanation, perhaps? Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk Yes, You will plug the tactrix into the car and download the program "ecuflash from tactrix website (1.44). Then you'll open it up and choose read ecu, Then you'll save it to your computer and email the file to Matt, Then you'll receive two files from Matt, one being the codes for the stock tune (xml file) and the other the tuned ecu (srf file) You'll then save both tunes onto your computer, Then you'll open up the program and download the files in and write the new ecu in! I gave a little more detail than you probably wanted/needed but that's really all it is I will warn you, not to scare you but to tell you so you don't get mad if it happens. I have Windows 7 and supposedly it's a lot harder to do it on Windows 7 than the newer ones. Just have an at least Windows 8. And make sure you save the file into the correct folders otherwise you won't be able to open them in the program when rewriting the ecu. I'm not a techy guy but it wasn't very hard once I started using the program Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Too40gawlf Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Can someone explain to me the idea behind buying a 17 second car (mated to a CVT no less) and then spending hundreds of dollars turning it into a high 16 second car (maybe)? If performance was a priority, why would anyone be buying a CVT equipped, 4 cylinder, NA, 3500 lb sedan? Also, has anyone mentioned that Subaru will stick the big blue weiner in deep and hard if a warranty issue should come up regarding engine internals, whether or not the tune has anything to do with it? Lastly, and maybe it was explained in the 7 page thread which I admittedly did not read fully, but the N/A 2.5 is rated at 175/174 at the crank - can anyone explain how the dyno chart shows 338 NM (249 ft/lbs) and 359 NM (265 ft/lbs)? Does not compute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15LegacyRyan Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Can someone explain to me the idea behind buying a 17 second car (mated to a CVT no less) and then spending hundreds of dollars turning it into a high 16 second car (maybe)? If performance was a priority, why would anyone be buying a CVT equipped, 4 cylinder, NA, 3500 lb sedan? Also, has anyone mentioned that Subaru will stick the big blue weiner in deep and hard if a warranty issue should come up regarding engine internals, whether or not the tune has anything to do with it? Lastly, and maybe it was explained in the 7 page thread which I admittedly did not read fully, but the N/A 2.5 is rated at 175/174 at the crank - can anyone explain how the dyno chart shows 338 NM (249 ft/lbs) and 359 NM (265 ft/lbs)? Does not compute. When you say 17 second I am guessing you are referring to the 1/4 mile? Depends on the reason for the owner getting the legacy. Could be they don't want the insurance bill of a WRX/STI. Needed the gas mileage. It is different. The reasons could go on and on. Now the CVT, there is a 6MT but only available to select countries. It is not available in the U.S. Otherwise I would have one. I waited to do the tune until my warranties are gone and had enough miles on the car. Generally any maintenance issues will happen in the first 10k miles The charts are not of my car, you would have to ask tigger for that info. His ecu has basically been completely written over. His 0-60 has dropped about 2 seconds, his torque was improved greatly because of the tuning of the cvt. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ammcinnis Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) ... his torque was improved greatly because of the tuning of the cvt. How does a transmission ... any transmission ... increase engine torque at the crankshaft? Or did you mean something else? Edited June 15, 2016 by ammcinnis "If you don't know where you're going, any road will take you there." ~ The Cheshire Cat (Alice in Wonderland) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigger73 Posted June 15, 2016 Author Share Posted June 15, 2016 If you could get a 20% improvement in acceleration why wouldn't you do it? Understand the warranty argument. It is a risk but the rewards are a more engaging/enjoyable car to drive. Torque values on the dyno chart are actual measured torque at the wheel/tyre. There is no way to measure flywheel torque easily without removing your engine from your car. It will depend on engine RPM and what gear you are in to calculate a flywheel value. There are inherent errors in doing this that is why measured torque at the wheel is the figure that my dyno centre provides. You run into the same problem trying to compare power figures to manufacturer flywheel figures when you have driveline losses on a car/dyno. The best thing to do is compare figures at the wheel. You can't easily compare to manufacturers engine specs as there is no practical way to rerun these tests. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Tigger73's MY15 2.5i build Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigger73 Posted June 15, 2016 Author Share Posted June 15, 2016 How does a transmission ... any transmission ... increase engine torque at the crankshaft? You tell the transmission to allow more through The torque is there it's just that it's not getting delivered to your wheels/road where it matters. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Tigger73's MY15 2.5i build Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ammcinnis Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 The torque is there it's just that it's not getting delivered to your wheels/road where it matters. That I can agree with ... especially with throttle-by-wire. "If you don't know where you're going, any road will take you there." ~ The Cheshire Cat (Alice in Wonderland) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigger73 Posted June 15, 2016 Author Share Posted June 15, 2016 Yes the dyno graphs tell you what is reaching the wheels. I know with the CVT transmissions there are limiters put in particularly in 1st gear moving off from stationary. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Tigger73's MY15 2.5i build Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Too40gawlf Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Yes the dyno graphs tell you what is reaching the wheels. I know with the CVT transmissions there are limiters put in particularly in 1st gear moving off from stationary. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk OK, so can you explain how the dyno graph on pg 1 of this thread shows what seems to be an NA 2.5 engine putting out a baseline of 249 ft/lb and an after run of 265 ft/lbs? The engine is rated at 174 ft/lbs of torque and given a 20% driveline loss, you would expect somewhere around 140 ft/lbs at the wheels. Does your dyno need calibration or am I missing something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigger73 Posted June 15, 2016 Author Share Posted June 15, 2016 OK, so can you explain how the dyno graph on pg 1 of this thread shows what seems to be an NA 2.5 engine putting out a baseline of 249 ft/lb and an after run of 265 ft/lbs? The engine is rated at 174 ft/lbs of torque and given a 20% driveline loss, you would expect somewhere around 140 ft/lbs at the wheels. Does your dyno need calibration or am I missing something? Torque at the driven wheels and flywheel torque are two totally separate measurements. They are related, however will depend on gearing ratio, wheel diameter, and a bunch of other factors including how the CVT transmission is programmed. Fundamentally, Torque = Force x Diameter Like I said previously all the figures from my dyno charts are wheel torque values. You can get the dyno operator to generate a "derived torque" that is a calculated value based on trying to convert back from the measured toque at the wheel to a flywheel torque value but it is based on a lot of assumptions about mechanicals of the vehicle which may or may not be correct. So any attempts that you make to relate the wheel torque values to engine torque that a manufacturer claims is just hypothetical. What I can do is compare my before and after value for real measured torque at the wheels and these values do have meaning and can be used for comparison. Any dyno operator that tells you the engine torque value is either making a lot of assumptions or has done all the calculations for every change in diameter and force exerted at every point along the driveline. In the real world nobody does this so the only meaningful value is the measured torque value at the wheel which is what is in the dyno charts I posted. Tigger73's MY15 2.5i build Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ammcinnis Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) OK, so can you explain how the dyno graph on pg 1 of this thread shows what seems to be an NA 2.5 engine putting out a baseline of 249 ft/lb and an after run of 265 ft/lbs? Discussed previously. That is torque at the rear axle (in "3rd gear"), not at the crankshaft. Edited June 15, 2016 by ammcinnis "If you don't know where you're going, any road will take you there." ~ The Cheshire Cat (Alice in Wonderland) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigger73 Posted June 15, 2016 Author Share Posted June 15, 2016 Discussed previously. That is torque at the rear axle, not at the crankshaft. I like your explanation. It's a little more concise Tigger73's MY15 2.5i build Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Too40gawlf Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Discussed previously. That is torque at the rear axle (in "3rd gear"), not at the crankshaft. No shit. How does a car that should put down 140 rwtq all the sudden put down 250 ft/lbs rwtq? Obviously the dyno is not calibrated, and thus throws off the rest of the 'data'. Regardless, taking into account the % delta between baseline and afterwards, you see a 4% increase in HP and 6% increase in TQ. OP's initial claim of 30-40% tq increase was BS and also puts into question the 0-60 claim improvement of 1.6 seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ammcinnis Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) No shit. How does a car that should put down 140 rwtq all the sudden put down 250 ft/lbs rwtq? And exactly how did you determine that the vehicle "should put down 140 rwtq?" Assuming zero drive line losses for a moment (pun not intended), torque at the rear axle should = (engine torque) x (transmission "gear" ratio) x (rear differential gear ratio). Rave on, Dude! Edited June 15, 2016 by ammcinnis "If you don't know where you're going, any road will take you there." ~ The Cheshire Cat (Alice in Wonderland) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigger73 Posted June 15, 2016 Author Share Posted June 15, 2016 Have a look at post #45 - it has dyno chart with derived torque values. It's not 100% accurate but it's an indication of engine torque figures. 0-60 improvement from stock is 2.0sec. I have not put the car down 1/4 mile but have run against a 10Hz GPS timer over multiple runs on the same stretch of road in both directions. In other threads people complain that there is no data. Here I'm providing data (at my own cost). I have given you an explanation/interpretation of the dyno charts. The real world drive-ability of the car is grealty improved. What would be nice is a little more urgency off the line, however I believe there are torque limiters in the CVT transmission which limits the delivery in 1st gear from low RPM. If there was launch control or some capability to allow the car to hook up a little faster I 'm sure you'd see 0-60 times in the low 7's. Tigger73's MY15 2.5i build Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Too40gawlf Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 And exactly how did you determine that the vehicle "should put down 140 rwtq?" Assuming zero drive line losses for a moment (pun not intended), torque at the rear axle should = (engine torque) x (transmission "gear" ratio) x (rear differential gear ratio). Rave on, Dude! You do realize how a dyno works, correct? For an automatic, AWD car, a GENERAL rule of thumb is 20% driveline loss. A RWD manual car might be 10-15%, but in general any car is going to put 10-25% less hp and tq to the wheels than what its rated at one the crank. If the reading at the wheels is 200% greater than what should be expected, then either there is a deceptive or incompetent dyno operator. Yes, running the dyno in different gears will have different variations, but you should not be seeing a 200% variation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Too40gawlf Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Have a look at post #45 - it has dyno chart with derived torque values. It's not 100% accurate but it's an indication of engine torque figures. 0-60 improvement from stock is 2.0sec. I have not put the car down 1/4 mile but have run against a 10Hz GPS timer over multiple runs on the same stretch of road in both directions. In other threads people complain that there is no data. Here I'm providing data (at my own cost). I have given you an explanation/interpretation of the dyno charts. The real world drive-ability of the car is grealty improved. What would be nice is a little more urgency off the line, however I believe there are torque limiters in the CVT transmission which limits the delivery in 1st gear from low RPM. If there was launch control or some capability to allow the car to hook up a little faster I 'm sure you'd see 0-60 times in the low 7's. You are not providing data - you are making claims. The only thing you have proven so far is that the tuning will yield an approximately 4% hp and 6% tq increase at the wheels. On a 400 hp car, would I spend $400 to get 15 rwhp and 20 rwtq? Hell yeah - and I have before. On a 175 hp car, the improvement is much less noticeable. Your claimed 0-60 decrease of 2 seconds is immense. Until I see a timeslip, I will remain dubious of that claim. An increase of 5 rwhp and 8 rwtq on a 3500 lb car cannot equal a 2.0 second reduction in 0-60. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15LegacyRyan Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 The real world drive-ability of the car is grealty improved. What would be nice is a little more urgency off the line, however I believe there are torque limiters in the CVT transmission which limits the delivery in 1st gear from low RPM. If there was launch control or some capability to allow the car to hook up a little faster I 'm sure you'd see 0-60 times in the low 7's. Are the limiters completely permanent in the cvt, so Matt can't remove them? Or has he just not tried to do so yet? If you know Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ammcinnis Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) ... in general any car is going to put 10-25% less hp ... to the wheels than what its rated at one the crank. [sic] Correct. ... in general any car is going to put 10-25% less ... tq to the wheels than what its rated at one the crank. [sic]Incorrect. This is not rocket science. It's simple high school level mechanics, and the fundamental principles have been well known for more than 2,000 years. Edited June 16, 2016 by ammcinnis "If you don't know where you're going, any road will take you there." ~ The Cheshire Cat (Alice in Wonderland) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now