I've been out of town on a movie, but flew back to California for a couple of days to pick-up my Crossfire from Auto Power Industries after they built the new roll cage. While I was picking-up the car I had a chance to have JBA Racing do two dyno pulls on the car.

What a pain in the A$$... And very depressing !!!

First, I don't think anyone on this forum has actually done a dyno pull on the car otherwise I would have heard the horror stories. As everyone knows, you have to pull the fuse for the traction control which is located in the ECU isolation housing. 3rd small blue fuse (15 amp) from the front. But, there is something else that prevents a full RPM (6,200) run. The car will only hit 5,200 RPM before the engine cuts out. We were unable to figure out what that is and were only able to do runs up to 5,200 RPM.

If anyone knows why the engine cuts and how to bypass it, PLEASE POST !

Anyway, now the depressing part. Bare in mind I had POWERCHIP GOLD 93 installed last year (which advertises 20 hp gain) and have dual CAI. The ambient temp was 72.8 degrees and I was running 93 octane pump gas, both cats are gutted with 02 sensors still in place. Plugs only have 2,000 miles on them.

The best # on the dyno logged 184.5 hp @ 4,785 rpm / 211 ft lbs tq. @ 4,350 rpm. fuel air ratio sucks (very lean) at 14.3 (should be 12.5 +/-) These are some terrible #'s IMO and the opinion of the Dyno tech...

I'm really PO'd at POWERCHIP and am going to be giving them a nice phone call when I get the chance... But I had the ECU done almost a year ago, so I think I'm screw'd.

I'll post the graph and print-out when I get the chance.

 

You are correct on not being able to put the car on a dyno. There was a thread a year or two ago on the same topic... how to bypass the limiters in order to get a dyno run. From what I recall, no one came up with a solution.

Thanks for the info and trying to get a dyno.

 

Elow got some members to chip in for dyno run earlier this year.

See here: https://www.crossfireforum.org/forum...highlight=dyno

So your 184, whilst disappointing, shows some potential since you couldn't hit peak revs and were running lean. Interestingly elow didn't have an issue with the TC.

 

Derek, I'm going to go way out on a limb here, and take a very un-educated guess (since I'm no mechanic). But could it be running lean because of the Saskins intake is actually "too" efficient? Also, aren't you running headers too? Wouldn't these two mods alone help create a lean mixture if the cars computer couldn't compensate for the increase air flow?
I'm not defending Powerchip, but I would think it was probably programmed for an otherwise "stock" engine.

 

Good points... I'm thinking it may be running lean because the CATS are gutted, yet the 02 sensors are still in place causing the ECU to trim back fuel... Any thoughts on this ?

 

Not to sound like a GRUMP, I think ELOW's dyno is bogus... I had the car at a highly respected professional race shop that spent nearly three hours trying to figure out why the car was cutting at 5,200 rpm... They couldn't bypass it, nor could they figure out why... Their finally opinion was that it has some sort of static speed limiter that inter-connects with the front wheels. Just as a checksum, we took the car out on the road and ran it to the normal 6,200 rpm fuel cut-off RPM limiter...

Either way, the max HP was generated at 4,785 rpm.... 184.5hp then dropped off to 112.6 at 4,857 rpm then 113.7 at 4,930, then 100.9 at 5,002, then 70.7 at 5,075 rpm with identical air / fuel ratios of 14.4.

 

I've read somewhere or saw it on a DYI auto show, that this is a problem with a lot of cars with traction control so there is a 4 wheel dyno that keeps the front wheels running at the same speed as the rear. Maybe you can find one of these dynos in your area? just my 2 cents.

 

that air fuel ratio is dangerously lean to most engines... a NA motor should see 13.0 at WOT... a turbo engine should see at least 12.5 or richer at WOT... basically the higher the EGTs the engine produces, the richer the mixture has to be to quench the combustion temperatures... golden rule, above 1,700 degrees... you melting the internals.

here is the worse part, the leaner mixture is actually producing more power than the 12.5 they suggested would... but it is not safe as the EGT (exhaust gas temperature) values climb very high at WOT load... the leaner the mixture the hotter the flame front and more violent the explosion, so long as the engine can hold this without puking its guts out, more power will be made... great thing is, we know this engine can hold alot more power, bad thing is, the aluminum pistons will expand more than they where designed to with elevated combustion chamber temps possibly creating some big problems.

the ECU has a long term and short term fuel adaptive. short term is adjusted when you drive around at non WOT condition (regular driving) based on 02 readings (most ECU's will allow a 25% trim + or - ). then when you finish your driving the short term adaptives for the different RPMs you drove at are stored in the long term adaptive memory. not having the catalysts in place means the upstream o2 sensor (fuel trim for optimal fuel mileage is recorded by this) is seeing the same value as the downstream o2 sensor (fuel trim for optimal catalyst efficiency is recorded by this). this gets sent back to the ECU as a failing catalyst at which point the ECU will elevate the EGT temperatures to attempt to bring the catalyst temperatures up so that it may do its job of burning off impurities... how does it do this ? by leaning out the mixture = raised EGTs = hotter cat...

now, although the adaptives are ONLY adjusted during non WOT conditions... they are applied to WOT conditions... so there is where i think you are getting your leaner than healthy mixture at WOT... the system is trying to raise the efficiency of the catalyst (which is not there but the system does not know this).

i've fought stock ECU programming for years and its not pretty but very doable...

use a Apexi Super AFC to counter act the programming, you can adjust up to 30 percent trim + or - with it... setting the hi/lo throttle switch off to 90% TPS signal before it goes between the hi/lo map on the AFC, i have been able to counter act the stock ECUs attempts to trim the fuel to raise the EGTs for the catalysts sake... i do this by connecting a OBD2 meter to the car and watching the short term adaptive at different RPMs, and i just counter act the ECUs cuts with the AFCs lo throttle map 1% by 1% until the stock ECU runs out of room to adjust... then i use the AFCs hi throttle map to tune the car to a perfect air fuel ratio which does not need to be monitored Vs the fuel trim of the stock ECU as the hi map is only active at WOT where the stock ECU does not adjust based on o2 feedback...

done right the results are spectacular... i was able to tune my brothers Eagle Talon TSI (front wheel drive + automatic !) after we put a large turbo on it and oversized injectors to run perfect at idle with the stock ECU (larger injectors with stock ECU = way rich all over) and still be able to pull off a 13.2 in the 1/4 on drag radials...

one thing to be careful with... you are messing with the ignition timing as well when making adjustments with a SAFC as it messes with the signal the MAF sees which is used in calculation of the ignition table as well...

i have also done research on using a Greddy Emanage Ultimate and Greddy Emanage Basic on the cross.. the Ultimate is out as it is very car specific according to greddy engineers but they are confident the basic will work. i am confident the basic unit can trim fuel and add it too just like the AFC does but i do not know if the ignition control part of the greddy unit will work on the cross even though the wiring they describe for v6 with individual firing is what the crossy uses (coil on plug system)...

 

this post makes me laugh, the other day i was saying the car is very underpowered considered to its competitors (just as jd power stated) and everyone seemed ot think i was expecting too much...looks to me as if you guys are just used to driving camrys or other 4 door sedans, oh wait...camrys put more power down...makes me chuckle.

 

You have a point there. It could be running lean with gutted cats but not for the reason you're thinking. At WOT most engine management switch to open loop operation (they ignore the O2 sensor) and use a fuel map that should normally be on the rich side. They sacrifice some performance to prevent detonation and save the motor. If you've opened up the exhaust and the intake, your motor may be moving more are than the ECU can compensate for. You can try larger injectors or tweak the fuel pressure up a few PSI so you get more squirt at WOT. Just my $.02.

 

Not sure why your shop had problems running the car on the dyno. Plenty of C32 & SLK guys have posted dyno numbers and very few have had any problems.

 

Bug off kid... go buy your Ricer or whatever it is your little heart desires... the folks on this thread got no time for children running around the room... if you read this and feel you just gotta reply (because your a real gowned up man now days) I care little what you have to say, so why waste your time... in other words find another thread, something along the lines of "See Spot Run", you should do great with that... hooah

 

Here are the possible causes from the book:

Restricted Fuel Supply
Fuel Strainer
O2 Sensor Circuit
02 Sensor Ground Circuit
O2 Sensor Heater Operation
Manifold Absolute Pressure Sensor Operation
Engine Coolant Temperature Operation
Engine Mechanical Problem
O2 Sensor
Fuel Pump
Fuel Contamination/Exhaust Leak

In addition, my own input: Knock Sensor. and/or Fuel Pump – I had the fuel pump problem with a Honda many years ago... in the mountains the car would only run up to an RPM… losing power until it drop back down to a lower RPM… no one ever could figure out what was happening with the engine. One day I replaced the electric fuel pump with one I purchased from the salvage yard, and would you know it, the problem was fixed.

By the way I got my letter from the VA... yes other people now have my social security number, dob, full name, home address, time in service, if I can see with both eye and so forth... so watch your back Vet. Hooah

 

right, even though i own 3 bikes ('05 zx6r, '94 zx7r, and '03 zx12r), an 11 sec t/a and my xf, i must be a ricer. hooah, btw my next car is a '01-'03 viper, so before you talk about see spot run, obviously i wasn't wasting my time, the point was proved that the xf is definitely underpowered compared to its competitors, and the funny thing is, it wasn't even ME who proved MY point...hooah

 

that's very possible, if you put together the cause of the leaner AFR than it ought to be (i posted my thought on why it is happening on the first page) and the higher EGT values that are being created, we have a very very good situation for ping to occur sending the knock sensor on a timing retard frenzy and possibly a limp mode that would not allow full rpm use... i have to scower the manual to see if such a limp mode exists in the crossfire...

 

Then somebody is blowing smoke on the MB forums... I spoke with the guru on MB engines here in Los Angeles and he said the circuitry prevents full speed pulls on a dyno unless you have a seperate system that over-rides all the parameters of the OEM computer.

I'm going to try to find the post by that other member who said he got his dyno done a few months ago and call the company that allegedly did it...

 

Then somebody is blowing smoke on the MB forums... I spoke with the guru on MB engines here in Los Angeles and he said the circuitry prevents full speed pulls on a dyno unless you have a seperate system that over-rides all the parameters of the OEM computer.

I'm going to try to find the post by that other member who said he got his dyno done a few months ago and call the company that allegedly did it...