Very nice indeed. You gotta be happy with that!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If he is anything like brian I doubt he will be happy with "only" 400 RWKW

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I gave Robin a drive of my car last October, when it had 360rwkw, at the time of Robin's Stage 2 Nizpro upgrade, and knew he wouldn't stop at that.

And for those who don't know Robin, his job gives him plenty of opportunity to really drive and enjoy his manual T, with a lot of commuting though the great twisty back roads between Melbourne and Albury.

The latest tuning result by Simon shows just how much the power output has changed with the introduction of the Edit. With the XEDE I was getting 340wrkw (later increases to 360rwkw), now the same package gets around 40-60rwkw more, at the same or slightly lower boost level.

It would seem that around 400rwkw is the new level for a Nizpro stage 3, or Typhoon Nizpro stage 2.

Well done Simon, enjoy it Robin.

Brian

Well done Robin, am keen to hear your thoughts on the new setup as we have taken a similar path thus far...

The latest tuning result by Simon shows just how much the power output has changed with the introduction of the Edit. With the XEDE I was getting 340wrkw (later increases to 360rwkw), now the same package gets around 40-60rwkw more, at the same or slightly lower boost level.

Firstly well done Robin and lets hope you have a blast with your new car.

Secondly, I'd like to know exactly how edit does what you claim it does.

That is achieving more power with less boost. If the piggybacks bend signals, at the end of the day it's all digital data doesn't matter what (edit, piggyback) does it.

I understand edit has more function due to its nature of being an edit, but to be able to run less boost and achieve more power certainly seems like a big call.

We've seen with JB's car that elimination of torque reduction allows greater mid range power but beyond that gains have to be made with greater boost.

I look forward to some sensitive input

Secondly, I'd like to know exactly how edit does what you claim it does.

That is achieving more power with less boost. If the piggybacks bend signals, at the end of the day it's all digital data doesn't matter what (edit, piggyback) does it.

I look forward to some sensitive input

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Feedback from Simon is that as the piggybacks change ignition timing they also inadvertantly change cam timing, which means you can't optimise cam and ignition timing, nor change them as separate functions, and so the piggybacks limit the power tuning potential of the upgrade. (independent cam timing for exhaust and inlet valves is a completely separate issue). This I believe is the primary reason. Additionally, there are other options available for more discrete tuning, which I won't go into in this thread.

Simon has now done enough of these Edits to get consistent power increases beyond the previously used XEDE and TSI solutions. Simon choses whatever ecu tuning capability he considers the best, but customers still have the option of choosing a piggyback if they want.

Brian

Secondly, I'd like to know exactly how edit does what you claim it does.

That is achieving more power with less boost. If the piggybacks bend signals, at the end of the day it's all digital data doesn't matter what (edit, piggyback) does it.

I understand edit has more function due to its nature of being an edit, but to be able to run less boost and achieve more power certainly seems like a big call.

We've seen with JB's car that elimination of torque reduction allows greater mid range power but beyond that gains have to be made with greater boost.

I look forward to some sensitive input

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you calling Robin a liar and his claims are or is this your way of asking a question?

Guys,

Please don't let another thread deteriorate, else mod action will be taken.

Brian

Secondly, I'd like to know exactly how edit does what you claim it does.

That is achieving more power with less boost. If the piggybacks bend signals, at the end of the day it's all digital data doesn't matter what (edit, piggyback) does it.

I understand edit has more function due to its nature of being an edit, but to be able to run less boost and achieve more power certainly seems like a big call.

We've seen with JB's car that elimination of torque reduction allows greater mid range power but beyond that gains have to be made with greater boost.

I look forward to some sensitive input

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you calling Robin a liar and his claims are or is this your way of asking a question?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Better air fuel ratios and cam control could certainly lead to a gain in power. As far as I'm aware the interceptor products do not have the ability to provide cam control. Also the factory system will have finer control over air fuel ratios I would suspect, which may help slightly.

Removing any other restrictions in the inlet system (ie manifold, intercooling, intercooler piping) will also 'give' you more power at 'less' boost, due to the fact that the system is experiencing less pressure drop, so the engine is actually seeing the same or more boost, even though the compressor is delivering the same or less boost.

And yes, accusations like 'liar' etc never help things..

Kris.

Good response to Steve's question Brian.

F6 Tornado,

I don't believe Geeseman comments / queries are calling me a liar. He is asking a valid question which others have asked previously as well. Brian's answer goes part way to answering it. I think as a better understanding of the algorithms used to control fuel, timing, cam control, boost control, torque limiting, etc in the Ford Black Oak ECU becomes more widely known the answers will come out in the wash. Til then, I think most tuners can only provide what they know currently. With edit (correct me if I'm wrong), the tuner sets target parameters and how these are "achieved" is determined by the Ford's OEM algorithms. When these algorithms are interfered with or "intercepted" by an interceptor, the result can never be as good as changing the target parameters or the algorithms themselves. Add the complexity of trying to control multiple outputs (ie timing, boost, fuel delivery) based on limited inputs, and the best you can ever achieve will be a compromise.

Anyway, I'll add a further update on the outcome of final tuning today. For those of you interested the spec of the build (which might explain why this power is achievable at lower boost) is:

1. Nizpro Stage II (ie all OEM intake plumbing / manifold replaced) resulting in reduced intake restrictions.

2. SMB 4 inch dump (ie reduced exhaust restrictions)

3. Full house Nizpro Stage III engine (all new internals) + Nizpro valve springs + Nizpro re-drilled hiflow injectors. These injectors are as big as the OEM injectors can be taken out to. ie. x2.75 greater flow than OEM capability.

Cheers

Robin.

F6 Tornado,

I don't believe Geeseman comments / queries are calling me a liar. He  is asking a valid question which others have asked previously as well. Brian's answer goes part way to answering it. I think as a better understanding of the algorithms used to control fuel, timing, cam control, boost control, torque limiting, etc in the Ford Black Oak ECU becomes more widely known the answers will come out in the wash. Til then, I think most tuners can only provide what they know currently. With edit (correct me if I'm wrong), the tuner sets target parameters and how these are "achieved" is determined by the Ford's OEM algorithms. When these algorithms are interfered with or "intercepted" by an interceptor, the result can never be as good as changing the target parameters or the algorithms themselves. Add the complexity of trying to control multiple outputs (ie timing, boost, fuel delivery) based on limited inputs, and the best you can ever achieve will be a compromise.

Anyway, I'll add a further update on the outcome of final tuning today. For those of you interested the spec of the build (which might explain why this power is achievable at lower boost) is:

1. Nizpro Stage II (ie all OEM intake plumbing / manifold replaced) resulting in reduced intake restrictions.

2. SMB 4 inch dump (ie reduced exhaust restrictions)

3. Full house Nizpro Stage III engine (all new internals) + Nizpro valve springs + Nizpro re-drilled hiflow injectors. These injectors are as big as the OEM injectors can be taken out to. ie. x2.75 greater flow than OEM capability.

Cheers

Robin.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Robin

Apart from the SMB 4 inch dump pipe what other mods to the exhuast have you done ?

Freddy