MI16 tuning result not bad.
  • Help
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Fellow Frogger! racing405's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Traralgon
    Posts
    649

    Default MI16 tuning result not bad.

    So, I've spent most of the day with my 405Mi16 on the dyno.

    Current spec has an almost standard engine, exhaust cam offset key, running Jenvey throttle bodies, Pico injectors and a Haltech Sprint 500ECU.

    Initially, car would run but not well. It was displaying a real problem with the crank sensing. The Haltech guys were picking faults with my installation (almost at random) all of which we checked and confirmed I had them right. In exasperation, I suggested that they take a close look at the ECU. We had done some comparrisons between a couple of maps that Peter T had sent me and we should have been close to the money.

    In the end, we updated the firmware and ECU manager software, loaded a base map and all the same ignition details in and the thing just worked!!!

    So after about an hour of tuning, ran load run on the dyno and quickly go to the 100kW mark.

    The guys running the tune have never tuned a Pug engine befor, but are amazed at how the engine responds to tuning inputs, especially advance WRT RPM. I've left the car with them to finish up tomorrow, but their closing comment to me was that they have never tuned a more responsive 4 cylinder engine. Now that it is running, they love it. Pretty certain they will want to put their company name on the car now, at the outset they were almost sorry they had sold me the Haltech and agreed to tune it.

    Best thing from my perspective, the installation has been proven to be good.

    So on standard cams, should I be expeting more than 100kW??

    Advertisement

  2. #2
    1000+ Posts PeterT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Castle Hill, Sydney
    Posts
    7,555

    Default

    What's advance WRT?

    Was it a low compression XU9J4Z or high compression XU9J4?

    I think that's pretty well on the money. Did you advance or retard the exhaust cam?

    As a comparison:

    - new standard XU9J4Z 84kW
    - XU9J4, 10.8:1, Stage 1 inlet cam, chipped ECU 96kW
    - XU9J4, 10.4:1, Stage 2 inlet, big valves and 45mm TB's 113kW

    I understand your PM now.

    Did they tune by VE or injector times?

    '92 205 Mi16
    '90 Mi16x4

  3. #3
    VIP Sponsor
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Posts
    9,472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterT View Post
    What's advance WRT?

    Was it a low compression XU9J4Z or high compression XU9J4?

    I think that's pretty well on the money. Did you advance or retard the exhaust cam?

    As a comparison:

    - new standard XU9J4Z 84kW
    - XU9J4, 10.8:1, Stage 1 inlet cam, chipped ECU 96kW
    - XU9J4, 10.4:1, Stage 2 inlet, big valves and 45mm TB's 113kW

    I understand your PM now.

    Did they tune by VE or injector times?
    It was my old engine, J4Z, bottom end untouched from who knows when but had three angle seats, Owen's key on the inlet and good compression. It gave 83kw with standard inlet manifold.
    Graham

  4. #4
    Fellow Frogger! racing405's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Traralgon
    Posts
    649

    Default

    So there you go, pretty much a standard engine when we started.

    Looks like we are heading for 110kW. So 27kW gain for quad throttle bodies and a dry sump. Probably not a bad outcome, and in that case a 30% increase should be notable on the track!

    BTW, WRT = with respect to, sorry, my shorthand not always obvious.

  5. #5
    Fellow Frogger! racing405's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Traralgon
    Posts
    649

    Default

    Final result, 104.9kW, flat line from about 7,000RPM.

    Confirmed last night that cams are standard with the 4 degree key on the exhaust, bottom end standard. Fitted 40mm Jenvey quad throttle bodies and a dry sump. I am guessing that this is about 20kW more than the last time I had my car on the track - maybe crack the 2:00 minute mark on Phillip Island next time!

  6. #6
    1000+ Posts PeterT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Castle Hill, Sydney
    Posts
    7,555

    Default

    That's an awesome result for an otherwise bog standard low compression engine. Keep in mind that all dyno's are different and that you can really only compare with your own results. It's interesting that you say the offset key is on the exhaust but Graham fitted it to the inlet. From my experience the exhaust has too much flow anyway, so moving the timing around on a standard engine has little effect other than retarding it, where the later opening point increases torque due to the later opening point.

    '92 205 Mi16
    '90 Mi16x4

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •