computer programming

To get accurate AFR readings you will need to invest in a WB O2 sensor.
This is independant of what tuning system/ecu you use...
A tweecer RT, WB O2, and your factory ecu will probably meet your needs.

I would be concerned with using an outdated system ONLY because of customer support.
If you have a question on an outdated unit, where will you go for the answer?
(keep in mind though, I am not familiar with the speedbrain unit....)


There is a 'Tuning' section on this board with some useful info on the tweecer, and other systems as well.

EECTuning.org is the best source for info with the tweecer.

Other options you may want to consider...
Moates.net
Anderson PMS
(there are more options, but these are the most common with Mustang users)


good luck,
jason

Popular lately is to do the datalogging via tweecer/rt and a wideband 02, figure out what changes you want to do/run the log through EA, then implement the changes with a moates setup that can be reburned over and over thus freeing up your tweecer.

Matt

If that is your complete list of mods, you are likely wasting time and money on tuning equipment for your car.
There's nothing there that can't be tuned by adjusting the timing and or fuel pressure.
Foxbody mustangs don't require fancy gadgets to get them to run their best.
I've seen the stock computer NO tuning perform perfectly at 650rwhp.

e-cam has been known to cause problems.
76mm C&L is likely introducing some error. Question is 'how much'
A shot of nitrous could use a little tuning to perform better/safer.


just my take on it...

2000xp8 said:

If that is your complete list of mods, you are likely wasting time and money on tuning equipment for your car.
There's nothing there that can't be tuned by adjusting the timing and or fuel pressure.
Foxbody mustangs don't require fancy gadgets to get them to run their best.
I've seen the stock computer NO tuning perform perfectly at 650rwhp.

Click to expand...

I'm with Jason in that I guess we all have different ideas about what constitutes 'perfect performance.'
Imagine how much better the car would have run and how much extra power it would have made if it had a tune.

I feel that even a stock stang can be improved upon with tuning.

Easier solution.
Get a better meter from Pro M or pmas.
Using a C&L and a tuning device on a fox is a contradiction. A mediocre at best meter and an expensive tuner, just doesnt' make sense.

If someone has a problem with an E cam on a maf car, something is messed up, it's not the computer.

Guys run NA 11's with stock shortblock 302's without a grand in tuning equipment, they have been doing it for years.
Tuning devices have made no improvements on those times.

I've watched these cars tuned in person. If the car is assembled correctly and the timing and FP are set correctly, chips and programmers pick up less than 5 hp. They can improve driveability on wild setups, but if there is a driveability problem with an E cam and gt40ps, the problem is somewhere else, not the computer.

Instead of tuning equipment, spend the money on a better meter, and a custom cam, i'd bet that picks up way more hp than any tuner does.

Obviously there is a wide variety of opinions when it comes to tuning the eec-iv.

Please don't take the following as a personal attack... I'm just throwing out my opinion for discussion...

2000xp8 said:

Easier solution.
Get a better meter from Pro M or pmas.
Using a C&L and a tuning device on a fox is a contradiction. A mediocre at best meter and an expensive tuner, just doesnt' make sense.

Click to expand...

There is error introduced in 2 ways by calibrated MAF meters.
The first way is the obvious method by which the meter is calibrated. Since a C&L meter is not 'calibrated' as a system, there will obviously be a certain degree of error potential. This is due to the fact that a factory sensor is placed in a C&L housing and that system is 'calibrated' using a sample tube.
In this regard ProM would most likely be better, and according to the error numbers commonly cited, ProM is much better.
However, there is also a certain amount of error introduced by simply using a scaled meter in an ecu that was originally programmed for a 55mm MAF and 19Lb injectors.

The larger the aftermarket injector/MAF used, the larger that error would be.
It doesn't matter if the meter is from C&L or ProM...

Couple this error with the error created with an aftermarket cam...
Pretty soon error starts stacking up...

2000xp8 said:

Guys run NA 11's with stock shortblock 302's without a grand in tuning equipment, they have been doing it for years.
Tuning devices have made no improvements on those times.

I've watched these cars tuned in person. If the car is assembled correctly and the timing and FP are set correctly, chips and programmers pick up less than 5 hp. They can improve driveability on wild setups, but if there is a driveability problem with an E cam and gt40ps, the problem is somewhere else, not the computer.

Instead of tuning equipment, spend the money on a better meter, and a custom cam, i'd bet that picks up way more hp than any tuner does.

Click to expand...

You are completely focused on hp and track times.
I don't have an issue with this, but some of us want to drive our junk to work without issue...

I would like to see an example of a car that was professionally tuned, and didn't drop et or make more hp on a dyno...
If you do have an example you can bring to the table,
then my next question is going to be EXACTLY what tune parameters were modified????

I am very curious where you came up with the 'less than 5hp' number?

Again,
Just throwing out my opinion to fuel the discussion




shrbrt -
I get the impression that you aren't JUST looking for max hp or the lowest et... (I could be wrong though???)
Seems like you are also looking for an opportunity to learn more about the ecu, and how it opperates.

If my impression is correct, then you would probably fair pretty well with a tweecer rt/moates or PMS setup.

If I am way off base and you just want the stupid car to run right, then an SCT tune (performed by a professional) may be a better choice.

either way, good luck,
jason

A C&L 76 and an e-cam eh, I run the same exact setup with world heads and I've been fighting with tuning it to run properly. Until I actually started tuning it via the ecu you could flip a coin as to how it would run. An E-cam is not a great cam but it will give you some more kick and abit of a lope. I was not aware of their composition or limitations when I was putting this together or I would not have run one.

Matt

2000xp8 - I've seen some powerful cars run decent without a tune of any sort but I personally don't agree with it. Not slamming on your statment in anyway.

My thoughts are, why put tons of money into a setup that could possibly be running super lean or super fat. Get a safe tune put on it, fuel pressure adjustments are normally a bandaid on most mild to moderate combos.

I like that with my TwEECer RT I can change timing/fuel/rev limiters or anything else Ford wrote in the ecu program. Its nice to be able to have 4 different tunes at the turn of a knob, one for kill mode, one of daily duty, etc. I can even run maf/injector combo's that aren't matched, along with big injectors. The TwEECer has been one of the best investments I've made as it has given driveablilty a whole new meaning, not to mention power, esp. off idle.

Adam

My info comes from a source more credible than just about anyone on this message board.
Also comes from witnessing, dyno run after dyno run.
I've seen combo's dyno tuned properly with timing an FP, then custom programmed after. If the custom program is done after the timing and FP is done there is little to gain.
Now if you don't tune it properly first, then there is more to gain with a program.
If you have driveability issues with heads meant for the street, milds cams and smaller intakes, your car is messed up beyond what a program will fix.

AEM

2000xp8 said:

My info comes from a source more credible than just about anyone on this message board.
Also comes from witnessing, dyno run after dyno run.

Click to expand...

Your info comes second hand, and from watching someone else perform tunes?
Have you done any ecu tuning yourself?
I'm sorry to sound like a dick, but this is looking a little sketchy...

A couple of guys here have posted their first hand experience wtih ecu tuning. Search the board and you will find many more examples...

Again, sorry to come off as a jerk, that's not the intent... I'm just not sure how to say the same thing in a nicer way...



One of the first things I realized when trying to tune my own car, was that the quality of the tune was directly related to the knowledge of the tuner, and how much time he was willing to devote to the vehicle.
I don't mean that as a dig on your tuner friend (I don't even know who he is....). I state this only to illustrate that not all 'custom programming' is created equal....
In order to do a fair comparison between fuel psi/timing tuning and ecu tuning, then all the details of the ecu tune should be revealed...

2000xp8 said:

If you have driveability issues with heads meant for the street, milds cams and smaller intakes, your car is messed up beyond what a program will fix.

Click to expand...

I'm not really sure how to deal with this comment...
guess I'll just let it go

2000xp8 said:

I've seen combo's dyno tuned properly with timing an FP, then custom programmed after. If the custom program is done after the timing and FP is done there is little to gain.
Now if you don't tune it properly first, then there is more to gain with a program.

Click to expand...

Again, what parameters were changed during this 'custom programming'
You are still focused almost exclusively on dyno HP...



If you don't believe in tuninig an ecu for the exact hardware that's on the car, then that's your opinion.
Your justifications are sounding a little odd though... At least to me anyway...
jason

vristang,
As for i may of not proved to you, that you don't need a tuner, you really haven't proved to me that you do need it either.

I don't see what driveability is to be gained in shortbelts combo. The car should be perfectly driveable, there is nothing out of the ordinary there.

I just think his money would be better spent on better parts, not tuning equipment at this point. And considering that realistically there should be no driveablity issues, why not then worry about more power and better ET?
Tuning equimpment at this point would be fixing something that isn't broke.

My source is plenty credible, i prefer to not drop names on the board, but if you look around a bit, you will see who i mean.

I'm not offended by the way you have approached me either, that's not an issue, you haven't been rude.
We just have a difference of opinion.
And the reason i don't have a tuner, or custom program is that my mechanic didn't want me wasting money on it, when it just wasn't needed. If this were a modular car it would be a whole different story.

Let me share this with you, I have a 1988 GT with hci, larger injectors matched to the maf, short equal length headers, msd box etc, all the usual bolt ons. I used tuner rt pro and moates gear to set a basic tune and cannot go further without datalogging ability. All I did is input a better maf transfer, turn off the egr/emmissions stuff that throws codes. Wake up the spark table a tad, correct breakpoint and injector offsets and stuff like that. Fairly basic stuff and I got a lot of help learning HOW to do it on a different forum but thats irrelevant. Point is this, the car drives ok without a chip in it, it would love to surge but I have tuned it carefully prior to messing with the ecu so it won't. It is not terribly smooth but somewhat liveable. I burned my tune to a moates chip and when I pop it in the j3 port, the car feels completely different, more powerful/happy and gets better mileage. I maintain that any HCI car can benefit from a competent tune that involves a lot more than playing with timing and a/f ratio.


This has been my experience

Matt

2000xp8 said:

vristang,
As for i may of not proved to you, that you don't need a tuner, you really haven't proved to me that you do need it either.

Click to expand...

I've helped Matt (irish) a little with his setup...
His experience speaks volumes of the benefits of custom tuning.

My experience was similar...

I didn't realize how poorly the car ran, until I started making some changes to the tune.

2000xp8 said:

I'm not offended by the way you have approached me either, that's not an issue, you haven't been rude.
We just have a difference of opinion.
And the reason i don't have a tuner, or custom program is that my mechanic didn't want me wasting money on it, when it just wasn't needed.

Click to expand...

I'm glad you didn't take offense... I never know how my typed word will sound to others


I guess what Matt and I are getting at, is that there can be drivability issues without the owner/driver ever realizing it.


It does appear that we have different opinions
nothing wrong with that...



jason