Review: Motordyne E370

MaDMaXX · 03-20-2012, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seb@SZ

... Ignition timing changes on the VHR engines are different especially when it comes to NA tuning. Timing tweaks on the NAs do not make any noticeable differences...

...Jason wanted to tune at the end to better his AFRs and extract any more power available from his current modifications. Which I told you we were going to do at the end. I datalogged on that first run of tuning...

...Nothing more could have been to showcase the results nor any changes in the tuning...

Thank you Tripple's.

So i wasn't going crazy, i did read those posts

I've highlighted the areas that i think are pertinent here. To me, i personally think that what then happened at CAT, means timing tweaks *ARE* possible and *DID* make a noticeable difference.

Now i'm sorry to say this, but it doesn't take a genius to work out that, once the gains from CAT tuning the spark advance/timing were seen, it would not have been in SZ's interests to then show the loss again on their tune without the spark advance.

I also noticed that the optimal AF ratio was mentioned, but i can see that the comparison AF ration charts from CAT showed a large improvement in the AF.

Seb@SZ · 03-21-2012, 07:59 PM

I'll try to lay this all out so everyone can easily understand this or so I hope. I by NO meas want to make this a this versus that, etc...
I've played with timing tweaks or tried t on the new VHR engines for the last couple of years with no real benefit on an NA car. I was thrown under the bus somewhat in doing the testing for both the OP and Motordyne. I did a true comparison back to back originally when Tony @ Motordyne was at my shop. My job was simple, dyno on the OP's Invidia catback, install the Motordyne E370 catback, dyno the new catback and at the end unrelated to any of the exhaust tweak the tune for the changes the OP made in his mods.

Tony offered the OP a tune at Church as a consolation to the OP's unfavorable review of the exhaust. I personally have nothing to hide from as I have played extensively with the ignition maps and have done lots of talking with Jared @ Uprev about timing tweaks on the VHR. Jared and I spoke today via e-mail unrelated to this situation about knock maps on certain ROMs that have no High Det maps. Jared's response from today: "The newer ECUs do closed loop knock control somewhat differently. They don't use the "high det" map anymore, they just continue to pul timing as long as there is still knock so there's no switchover. The ECU will pull a LOT of timing. They will also advance the timing quite a bit on their own, which is why we're finding it so difficult to make good power gains on these newer Nissans."

How the dyno runs are performed can have an affect on power between runs. Letting the car cool down for longer periods of time, airflow, what gear the run is performed, etc... can all have an effect on the end result.

When I performed the testing on the exhaust systems and lastly the tune differences I did it in the exact same manner allowing for the same time to cool for each run, etc...

At the end of 3 pulls on the Church tune we reflashed to my tune. Here are the results of the runs and the differences in Air\Fuel using my equipment. Again, there are no smoke and mirrors on anything I did. I told the OP when I was reflashing after the 3 pulls we made and brought the laptop into the car at that point.

I will show all the pulls made and differences in AFR. I will also plot the runs in "speed" to show all pulls were made in the same gear as to not affect power. I like to run the mixture leaner at lower engine speeds to help bring up the low end torque. Blue runs were on the Church tune and the red runs are my tune. This was all done on the same day within an hour. The reason I feel that the first two Church tunes were lower across the powerband is because the timing was advanced to far and the ECU was pulling timing and by the 3rd run the ECU adapted to run its optimal timing. This is based upon what Uprev has said and my R&D the last several years.

Run 1

Run 2

Run 3

Run 3 of Church vs a 4th Pull on the SZ Tune to confirm.

I really hope to lay this all to rest and move on. For anyone looking to buy an exhaust the Motordyne is a nice quality piece. Tony put out a great looking system.

370Z JT · 03-23-2012, 01:15 AM

Here is an email received from Shawn Church in regards to the delta gain discrepancies from the two dynos.

Quote:

Hi Jason,

How would you like the files? The standard dynapack files are not readable without the dyno (older versions are, but they changed the format a couple years ago). I can either give you exports to .CSV files that you can use in excel,or I can send you screenshots of each set of run files?

BTW, sorry for the delay in responding. I just received a call from Tony asking me if I had read your thread. Didn't realize there was any sort of controversy going on.

Just so you know, with all due respect to the tuner at SZ, there are ways to increase timing on the VQ37VHRs. I have spent a ton of time working on my G37 to do just that. It's a bit of a bandaid to get there and I'd much rather have full control like the older VQ engines, but until then.....

As for the differences, or lack thereof, you might want to consider a couple of things. First of all, when we did the baseline runs on the SZ tune, the car did lean out substantially at higher rpms. This may be due to some AFR learning taking place over time as you drive the car. It would probably not have shown up during the original dyno tuning or right after a reflash as it takes for the learned fuel trims to adjust (they mainly change at part throttle). Seeing as how the AFR curve on your retest was flat, and I doubt that the guys at SV targeted anything _but_ a near flat AFR curve under load, that would suggest that any AFR learning had not taken place yet during your retest.

In fact, I would surmise that this is a big part of the difference. If you'll note, your baseline here at CAT showed the SZ tune was near identical to our tune between 2500 and 4500 rpm. The lines literally crossed back and forth many times. But once the car went lean at 5000 rpm, the SZ tune showed dips.

Finally, please note that a dynojet, especially at a smoothing factor of 5, hides small differences. Between the substantial mass of the dyno rollers and heavy smoothing factor, small differences can easily be lost. A Dynapack does not use any sort of smoothing factor at all, and does not have any inertia, allowing us much greater resolution for tuning. It is very hard to resolve differences of 1% or less on a dynojet, and your gains were just outside that range. As we stated when we tuned your car, the tune that was on there was pretty decent to begin with.

I of course have no comment about which exhaust might be better or worse. That I will leave to the exhaust makers.

SC

Is it typical for the AF to change like what Shawn is describing?

Seb@SZ · 03-23-2012, 09:22 AM

These ECUs learn quickly and by the 3rd or 4th pull we would have seen the AFR lean out if that was the case. As you can see on all the pulls the AFRs were nearly identical every time. Come back down if you like and we can again lay this to rest.

Motordyne · 03-23-2012, 10:06 AM

Hi Seb,

Just so you know, Shawn at Church Automotive Tuning was not given any details or background on the tune or comparison. The only information he was given is that it was previously tuned and to see if more could be made. No other information was given to him.

Other than the possibility of the ECU changing its short and long term trims, I can't say why they are different but I will vouch for Shawns integrity. He wouldn't fudge results as some have hinted. Not for me, not for anyone. Nor would I.

I'm thinking it is quite possible that both of your results were/are accurate at the time of testing.

Motordyne · 03-23-2012, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 370Z JT

RESULTS:

Here is the dyno plot with a re-tune for the E370. Red is the E370 re-tuned, blue is best run with Invidia.

----

Jason,

Here is the additional analysis of the 3 best runs of each system. The 3 runs were averaged together to give a clearer picture of the final results.

This is the 3 averaged delta plot of best runs with the AF tunes.

At the end of the day, it didn't quite meet your expectation of making 5 more HP, but it was close.

MaDMaXX · 03-23-2012, 02:51 PM

Tony, is that showing the SZ tune i assume? so without the spark advance.

MaDMaXX · 03-23-2012, 04:10 PM

Well i say that because it's comparing the Invidia Vs the MD, which can't be done on the Church/SZ tunes as Church never had the Invidia.

Seb@SZ · 03-23-2012, 04:15 PM

From what I can tell its just the differences between the catbacks is all. No tune differences.

MaDMaXX · 03-23-2012, 06:37 PM

Yeah, reading the titles, there's not tune changes there, just the cat backs and on the SZ tune.

370Z JT · 03-25-2012, 01:58 PM

Tony

Thank you for producing those graphs. Those are significant gains I did not expect to see. As a few here have questioned, are those plots representing gains only after a tune from Seb?

Can you make the same plots comparing the two systems without the tuning? This will be based on the first dyno graph you quoted me in. Strictly an exhaust to exhaust comparison.

Also, if we are comparing averages of three pulls, can you produce plots comparing best runs as well. It will be interesting to see how these plots stack up against each other. I'm sure it is very tedious to produce those plots but I and the community will appreciate your efforts.

It is too difficult to extrapolate just based on the one plot posted.

DarkJak · 05-16-2013, 01:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G37sHKS

Oh trust me that im the one who's confused not you and here is why

1st) Motordyne said in the past that they are making an exahust for VHR that nobody ever saw such a design/exhaust before, and after they release the E370 it looks just like all the exhaust produced for 350z/G35 coupe by Motordyne

Quote:

Originally Posted by Motordyne

Yes but this one is not ready yet.

I was reading through this thread and found this. Does anyone know if that's still an ongoing project?

03-21-2012, 07:59 PM	#167 (permalink)
Seb@SZ Enthusiast Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Chatsworth Posts: 277 Drives: Zs Rep Power: 24	I'll try to lay this all out so everyone can easily understand this or so I hope. I by NO meas want to make this a this versus that, etc... I've played with timing tweaks or tried t on the new VHR engines for the last couple of years with no real benefit on an NA car. I was thrown under the bus somewhat in doing the testing for both the OP and Motordyne. I did a true comparison back to back originally when Tony @ Motordyne was at my shop. My job was simple, dyno on the OP's Invidia catback, install the Motordyne E370 catback, dyno the new catback and at the end unrelated to any of the exhaust tweak the tune for the changes the OP made in his mods. Tony offered the OP a tune at Church as a consolation to the OP's unfavorable review of the exhaust. I personally have nothing to hide from as I have played extensively with the ignition maps and have done lots of talking with Jared @ Uprev about timing tweaks on the VHR. Jared and I spoke today via e-mail unrelated to this situation about knock maps on certain ROMs that have no High Det maps. Jared's response from today: "The newer ECUs do closed loop knock control somewhat differently. They don't use the "high det" map anymore, they just continue to pul timing as long as there is still knock so there's no switchover. The ECU will pull a LOT of timing. They will also advance the timing quite a bit on their own, which is why we're finding it so difficult to make good power gains on these newer Nissans." How the dyno runs are performed can have an affect on power between runs. Letting the car cool down for longer periods of time, airflow, what gear the run is performed, etc... can all have an effect on the end result. When I performed the testing on the exhaust systems and lastly the tune differences I did it in the exact same manner allowing for the same time to cool for each run, etc... At the end of 3 pulls on the Church tune we reflashed to my tune. Here are the results of the runs and the differences in Air\Fuel using my equipment. Again, there are no smoke and mirrors on anything I did. I told the OP when I was reflashing after the 3 pulls we made and brought the laptop into the car at that point. I will show all the pulls made and differences in AFR. I will also plot the runs in "speed" to show all pulls were made in the same gear as to not affect power. I like to run the mixture leaner at lower engine speeds to help bring up the low end torque. Blue runs were on the Church tune and the red runs are my tune. This was all done on the same day within an hour. The reason I feel that the first two Church tunes were lower across the powerband is because the timing was advanced to far and the ECU was pulling timing and by the 3rd run the ECU adapted to run its optimal timing. This is based upon what Uprev has said and my R&D the last several years. Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Run 3 of Church vs a 4th Pull on the SZ Tune to confirm. I really hope to lay this all to rest and move on. For anyone looking to buy an exhaust the Motordyne is a nice quality piece. Tony put out a great looking system. __________________ Z Car Specialists www.specialtyz.com Blog http://specialtyz.com/blog/

03-23-2012, 09:22 AM	#169 (permalink)
Seb@SZ Enthusiast Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Chatsworth Posts: 277 Drives: Zs Rep Power: 24	These ECUs learn quickly and by the 3rd or 4th pull we would have seen the AFR lean out if that was the case. As you can see on all the pulls the AFRs were nearly identical every time. Come back down if you like and we can again lay this to rest. __________________ Z Car Specialists www.specialtyz.com Blog http://specialtyz.com/blog/

03-23-2012, 02:51 PM	#172 (permalink)
MaDMaXX Enthusiast Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Oregon from England Posts: 292 Drives: 350z Rep Power: 13	Tony, is that showing the SZ tune i assume? so without the spark advance. Last edited by MaDMaXX; 03-23-2012 at 02:55 PM.

03-23-2012, 04:15 PM	#174 (permalink)
Seb@SZ Enthusiast Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Chatsworth Posts: 277 Drives: Zs Rep Power: 24	From what I can tell its just the differences between the catbacks is all. No tune differences. __________________ Z Car Specialists www.specialtyz.com Blog http://specialtyz.com/blog/

03-25-2012, 01:58 PM	#176 (permalink)
370Z JT A True Z Fanatic Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: United States Posts: 2,905 Drives: 370Z PW 7AT Rep Power: 378	Tony Thank you for producing those graphs. Those are significant gains I did not expect to see. As a few here have questioned, are those plots representing gains only after a tune from Seb? Can you make the same plots comparing the two systems without the tuning? This will be based on the first dyno graph you quoted me in. Strictly an exhaust to exhaust comparison. Also, if we are comparing averages of three pulls, can you produce plots comparing best runs as well. It will be interesting to see how these plots stack up against each other. I'm sure it is very tedious to produce those plots but I and the community will appreciate your efforts. It is too difficult to extrapolate just based on the one plot posted. __________________ Click for My Journal Top Secret \| EVO-R \| Fujimura Auto \| Shine Auto \| Seibon \| MRWorks \| Swift \| SPC \| SSR \| UpRev \| Project Kics \| NST \| Titek \| Eibach \| Nismo \| Whiteline \| Quaife \| Invidia \| Fly1 \| CF Element \| Carbon Signal

03-23-2012, 10:06 AM	#170 (permalink)
Motordyne Enthusiast Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 384 Drives: Z Rep Power: 16	Hi Seb, Just so you know, Shawn at Church Automotive Tuning was not given any details or background on the tune or comparison. The only information he was given is that it was previously tuned and to see if more could be made. No other information was given to him. Other than the possibility of the ECU changing its short and long term trims, I can't say why they are different but I will vouch for Shawns integrity. He wouldn't fudge results as some have hinted. Not for me, not for anyone. Nor would I. I'm thinking it is quite possible that both of your results were/are accurate at the time of testing.

03-23-2012, 04:10 PM	#173 (permalink)
MaDMaXX Enthusiast Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Oregon from England Posts: 292 Drives: 350z Rep Power: 13	Well i say that because it's comparing the Invidia Vs the MD, which can't be done on the Church/SZ tunes as Church never had the Invidia.

03-23-2012, 06:37 PM	#175 (permalink)
MaDMaXX Enthusiast Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Oregon from England Posts: 292 Drives: 350z Rep Power: 13	Yeah, reading the titles, there's not tune changes there, just the cat backs and on the SZ tune.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Review MOTORDYNE SHOCKWAVE E370	quagmire87	Intake/Exhaust	84	05-11-2023 01:30 PM
Ongoing Review For The Motordyne M370 ...	birdmanx1	Engine & Drivetrain	42	11-08-2017 10:42 PM
MOTORDYNE ART Pipes - Review	Kastley85891	Intake/Exhaust	1193	08-24-2017 02:22 PM
Motordyne ART pipes review	Methodical4u	Intake/Exhaust	21	02-17-2017 10:11 AM