Has anyone out there done or had any custom tuning? Is it not needed due to the "fly by wire" characteristics of our trucks and the variability of the ECU?
Engine tuning (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter SHAGGY101
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
There have been several threads over the years about chips and what not. But, I dont recall if any one has actually done a chip yet.
Tuning for a naturally aspired engine that is as inefficient as ours seems like it would be a fruitless endeavor. I can't imagine squeezing that many more ponies out in exchange for even worse milage. I think reliability is one of the hallmarks of our trucks, and tuning just compromises that.
Just my two cents on why there isn't much demand for a tune. For what its worth I do run a tune in my car, but that's a totally different application.
Just my two cents on why there isn't much demand for a tune. For what its worth I do run a tune in my car, but that's a totally different application.
- Thread starter
- #4
I tune does not necessarily mean worse gas mileage or less reliability or a chip. If done correctly by someone who knows what they are doing it can be extremely beneficial in performance and increase efficiency as well as causing the engine to run better at all rpm ranges. For example, you can change the air fuel ratios timing advance, as well as other parameters in order to flatten the torque curve of the engine and get the Hp curve to increase linearly with no dips. Inconsistencies in these curves can be seen in all of the dyno plots taken to this point.
https://forum.ih8mud.com/100-series-cruisers/457958-2-wheel-dyno-results.html
https://forum.ih8mud.com/100-series-cruisers/514381-dt-headers-dyno-result-thread.html
Just check out the dips in the curves.
A proper torque and horsepower curve should look like this:
http://image.automobilemag.com/f/features/news/6696996/0705_c+2008_infiniti_g37+dyno_chart.jpg
notice how there are no dead spots, dips, or plateaus in the curve, there is consistent torque and a continuous increase in horsepower. These engines are toyota's high performance engines of the time so I know they were engineered correctly and are able to produce proper curves. I find it hard to believe that there would not be a proper and consistent tune for this high performance system given all of the existing engine controls and sensors.
I know some of this could be caused by actual physical limitations however, there should not be drops, just limits (plateaus). I have seen dyno plots of engines that are not tuned properly and then the same engines that are and they go from curves all over the place to consistent linear curves as shown above. Since this seems to so closely mimic our dyno plots this is why I believe that there are benefits to having this engine tuned differently (at least in certain RPM bands).
Thoughts?
https://forum.ih8mud.com/100-series-cruisers/457958-2-wheel-dyno-results.html
https://forum.ih8mud.com/100-series-cruisers/514381-dt-headers-dyno-result-thread.html
Just check out the dips in the curves.
A proper torque and horsepower curve should look like this:
http://image.automobilemag.com/f/features/news/6696996/0705_c+2008_infiniti_g37+dyno_chart.jpg
notice how there are no dead spots, dips, or plateaus in the curve, there is consistent torque and a continuous increase in horsepower. These engines are toyota's high performance engines of the time so I know they were engineered correctly and are able to produce proper curves. I find it hard to believe that there would not be a proper and consistent tune for this high performance system given all of the existing engine controls and sensors.
I know some of this could be caused by actual physical limitations however, there should not be drops, just limits (plateaus). I have seen dyno plots of engines that are not tuned properly and then the same engines that are and they go from curves all over the place to consistent linear curves as shown above. Since this seems to so closely mimic our dyno plots this is why I believe that there are benefits to having this engine tuned differently (at least in certain RPM bands).
Thoughts?
Last edited:
I don't know squat about engine tuning but after reading your post I now am wondering why Toyota didn't just tune those dips out to begin with? I mean this is their flagship vehicle and all. I wonder if it was baselined like it is in order to meet govt. regulations on fuel efficiency, emission requirements or something similar.
I seem to recall on a Disco I once owned my LR mechanic telling me that the timing was slightly retarded in order to meet US import emmissions requirements. One of the first things he did was advance the timing and it was like driving a whole different vehicle. Could something similar be the case with the LC?
- Sent from a very small supercomputer.
I seem to recall on a Disco I once owned my LR mechanic telling me that the timing was slightly retarded in order to meet US import emmissions requirements. One of the first things he did was advance the timing and it was like driving a whole different vehicle. Could something similar be the case with the LC?
- Sent from a very small supercomputer.
I think that this question will remain a variable until someone actually finds a program to tweak the tuning, and then actually goes in and start making adjustments and testing them.
I know that on GM V8 powered trucks/SUVs, the OEM tune is crap. There is alot of slop in it. I ran a Black Bear Performance 91 octane tune in my 2000 Yukon 5.3 and it made a world of difference. Better economy, MUCH better throttle response, crazy good shifts, and better passing power - even on a truck with just an AEM intake. Actually thinking about doing a tune on the suburban, even with 233K on it. Alot of the increased pep had to do with the reduction of GM's "torque management" in the trans programming though...not sure if there is a similar program in place in the LC trans, and if there is I'm not sure how willing I would be to mess with it.
I would love to see someone actually dive in and start messing around with it though. Gotta find someone with A) programming/tuning experience B) a 100 series and C) the stones to start dicking with a famously reliable engine (or a combination thereof, I guess).
I know that on GM V8 powered trucks/SUVs, the OEM tune is crap. There is alot of slop in it. I ran a Black Bear Performance 91 octane tune in my 2000 Yukon 5.3 and it made a world of difference. Better economy, MUCH better throttle response, crazy good shifts, and better passing power - even on a truck with just an AEM intake. Actually thinking about doing a tune on the suburban, even with 233K on it. Alot of the increased pep had to do with the reduction of GM's "torque management" in the trans programming though...not sure if there is a similar program in place in the LC trans, and if there is I'm not sure how willing I would be to mess with it.
I would love to see someone actually dive in and start messing around with it though. Gotta find someone with A) programming/tuning experience B) a 100 series and C) the stones to start dicking with a famously reliable engine (or a combination thereof, I guess).
- Thread starter
- #7
I also believe this to be a timing issue. Looking at the AF ratio on the 4 wheel dyno, it is a constant 10.73. Meaning it is not fuel delivery so therefore, it must be timing which could have quite possibly been dicked with for emissions. What really tweaks me is the fact that there is about a 50 ft lb drop in torque in the low RPM band! WTF! (sorry, just venting my frustration) I just feel as though there is a whole lot to be gained in this engine through a better tune, just need to find the means and hoping to find some experience.
Also, as far as the AF ratio goes, the stochiometric ratio is 14.7 when in reality, 12 is best due to burn time characteristics. The AF ratio on the dyno plot shows it running richer than necessary. An AF ratio correction could bring the economy of this engine upward and not have to sacrifice anything.
I also got this idea from a friend with a BB tune on his 5.3 silverado.
Any toyota mechanics/ engineers/ diagnostic guys out there?
Last edited:
Keep in mind that there's two components to fuel: volume (AFR) and timing of the injector pulse. Traditionally timing implies ignition timing, but with modern vehicles it is the trifecta of ignition, fuel, and throttle. VVT-i adds a 4th component.
My guess is the torque drop is a resonance issue in either the intake or the exhaust (or both). Toyota probably tuned the resonance to a) meet CARB, b) meet fuel targets, and c) optimize the curve for the soccer mom.
It's a complex deal which is why things like straight pipes and deck plates don't necessarily help and can often hurt.Surprisingly, Toyota left such a poor header design on the silly thing. I'd still like to see a VVT-i header to see if there are any changes.
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2003
- Threads
- 69
- Messages
- 2,866
- Location
- Broomfield, Colorado
- Website
- www.gamiviti.com
I think we're on the right track here. First focus on getting rid of the exhaust, the header was a good first step IMO, I'm intrigued to see what type of cat-back system Kirk & Nick come up with https://forum.ih8mud.com/100-series-cruisers/514381-dt-headers-dyno-result-thread-4.html#post6940245 as a next step.
Then look at the intake side.. as a next step I'd be way into a similar dyno investment on a snorkel install, for example. Hypothetically speaking I'd be happy to toss RobRed $20 towards a snorkel- $10 for the snorkel, $10 for the dyno? Maybe he could get enough interest to make that interesting... and I have no idea if he even wants a snorkel. We'd also have to decide which snorkel though, and guess which would yield the most air and the coldest air? That also presumes we all agree the stock intake replacement, K&N style cold air intakes aren't the direction to go, and that they're in essence hot oily and somewhat dirty air intakes, and we want to keep our stock cyclonic filters. I actually think most here agree with that, though feel to challenge.
So we upgrade the air leaving the engine, then upgrade air going into the engine, then start work on fine tuning how to better manipulate it inside the engine, be it chips, or flashing ECU's, or whatever someone smarter than me comes up with. I know some Toyota techs, will bring this up them next time I see them.
Then look at the intake side.. as a next step I'd be way into a similar dyno investment on a snorkel install, for example. Hypothetically speaking I'd be happy to toss RobRed $20 towards a snorkel- $10 for the snorkel, $10 for the dyno? Maybe he could get enough interest to make that interesting... and I have no idea if he even wants a snorkel. We'd also have to decide which snorkel though, and guess which would yield the most air and the coldest air? That also presumes we all agree the stock intake replacement, K&N style cold air intakes aren't the direction to go, and that they're in essence hot oily and somewhat dirty air intakes, and we want to keep our stock cyclonic filters. I actually think most here agree with that, though feel to challenge.
So we upgrade the air leaving the engine, then upgrade air going into the engine, then start work on fine tuning how to better manipulate it inside the engine, be it chips, or flashing ECU's, or whatever someone smarter than me comes up with. I know some Toyota techs, will bring this up them next time I see them.
I think we need to look at comparable vehicles first like a Tundra, like a Sequoia or even a LS. Most likely the Tundra guys have been tuning for a while.
x2. I was about to say that I was pretty sure there are commercially available tuners for the tundras. Any really good speed shop could tune the motor. It isn't rocket science anymore.
I would chip in for RobRed's testing. Just tell me how much and where to send the $. Someone should start a performance tuning: mods and analysis thread where we can keep track of the individual mods and their performance altering results. This thread could also be a good spot to list contributers and keep track of how much things cost. I think if RobRed is willing to continue with his methodology and documentation, we should supplement the process for the benefit of the forum.
I say we just wait for the URD SC kit for the 100......or find a TRD one.......will be way better than a tune could ever dream of being.
ChipTorque Performance - Toyota Lancruiser 100 Series V8 4.7L 2UZ-FE
or
http://www.unichip.us/vehicle/vehicles/11-2000-Toyota-Tundra-47L
found here http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/1gen-tundra/60634-tundra-chip-tuner/
?
here is a result with the VVTi engine...245hp @ the wheels
http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/1gen-tundra/128642-gorillas-dyno-results-posted/
or
http://www.unichip.us/vehicle/vehicles/11-2000-Toyota-Tundra-47L
found here http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/1gen-tundra/60634-tundra-chip-tuner/
?
here is a result with the VVTi engine...245hp @ the wheels
http://www.tundrasolutions.com/forums/1gen-tundra/128642-gorillas-dyno-results-posted/
Last edited:
I would expect 225 at the wheels for a stock VVTI motor on a Landcrusier and the same stock torque as a non-VVTI motor. Having a truck in 2WD vs 4WD will change these numbers.
BTW those guys on the Tundra solutions really dont know what they are talking about regarding drive line loss. On the LC the loss factor (measured) was about 18% rated to actual. There is no standardized number for doing this so sayin my motor makes x horsepower at the crank is based on a made up number is really non-sense.
BTW those guys on the Tundra solutions really dont know what they are talking about regarding drive line loss. On the LC the loss factor (measured) was about 18% rated to actual. There is no standardized number for doing this so sayin my motor makes x horsepower at the crank is based on a made up number is really non-sense.
Probably just semantics, but if HP = Torque * RPM / 5252 how would there be a delta in HP but with Torque being static?
I'm assuming you mean peak torque wouldn't change, but that the distribution of the area under torque curve would, with the decay being delayed due valve timing.IIRC from a previous thread there was an increase in 06 of around 20 (?) lbs-ft. 2007 had a decrease, but this was thought to be due to a change in measurement standards?
- Thread starter
- #17
I dont really trust those chips, the are uber $$$ and they show bogus dyno plots. I would rather spend that money on a specialist who can take a dyno plot, analyze it, and then tweak what needs to be tweaked. I dont want to have to rely on a canned "solution." It would probably be more work but well worth it in the long run.
Probably just semantics, but if HP = Torque * RPM / 5252 how would there be a delta in HP but with Torque being static?
IIRC from a previous thread there was an increase in 06 of around 20 (?) lbs-ft. 2007 had a decrease, but this was thought to be due to a change in measurement standards?
I was simply stating that on our trucks the driveline is probably robbing 18% from the motor based on dyno runs made. This number against what toyota states is about 225 HP on a 2006 VVTi motor assuming drivelines are the same. Other variables apply but I think we can assume the 18% drag to be realistic and relavent. This math tipped us off that the initial posted dyno run was off - and it was.
As it pertains to the tundra thread on the other board they were using a 25% figure (completely invented) on 2WD's and working the other way taking there dyno and multiplying by 25%. In that scenario my LC makes 262 HP at the motor (doubtful).
We know the math is based on the torque but conversationally most everyone talks peak HP.
These are from the Toyota brochures:
2000-2002 LC:
230 hp @ 4,800 rpm;
320 lb.-ft. @ 3,400 rpm
2003-2005 LC:
235 hp @ 4800 rpm
320 lb.-ft. @ 3400 rpm
2006 LC:
275 hp @ 4800 rpm;
332 lb.-ft. @ 3400 rpm
2007 LC:
265 hp @ 5400 rpm
310 lb.-ft. @ 3400 rpm
2008 LC:
381 hp @ 5600 rpm
401 lb.-ft. @ 3600 rpm
Exactly. Not only is each make/model of vehicle different, but each individual vehicle is different. One LC could make 225 at the wheels with a tune, and another one could make 194 at the wheels with the exact same tune. There are a ton of variables in each rig. This is the reason why programs like EFI live + a scan cable are ideal for collecting data from a vehicle as opposed to cookie-cutter programmers like superchips and Edge and whatnot - they allow the programmer to tweak each specific variable, instead of just reflashing the ECU with a pre-set bank of data.
Want more economy? Tune for it. Want balls-out power? Tune for it. Lots more options that way. I know EFI live is GM specific (the last time I checked, at least)...does anyone know what kind of engine management software is available for Toyota V8s?
I keep bugging Gadget @URD for the SC kit. I ping him every 6 months or so, "still working on it" as of April. Maybe if more of us start asking and showing interest...
