Mapping Conversation
20 August 2008, 04:33 PM
#31
I fitted a 2.5 to my last scoob,running standard ecu with plug n play chip,and 380's. Ran it for 1000 miles,no more than 3000rpm to run it in,no probs.First week i started giving it some welly it went pop! Massive det,and burnt piston. All down to being impatient and not fitting the 740's and pfc before playing!
Mit
Mit
... Unless, of course, you have deep pockets and couldn't care less...
20 August 2008, 09:01 PM
#34
Unmapped 12.4s @ 105
iTrader: (29)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Newcastle. 330bhp-289lb/ft @ 1bar boost - 12.4s @ 105mph
Posts: 11,776
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Go on then clever cloggs. Drop your 2.5 in without mapping it, wrag the **** off it and see how long it lasts. 
You're depending on too many variables. Especially non too reliable MAF sensors for one. But hey crack on though, when it goes pop I can tell you now I'll be the first to laugh my knackers off
You're depending on too many variables. Especially non too reliable MAF sensors for one. But hey crack on though, when it goes pop I can tell you now I'll be the first to laugh my knackers off
I recall a thread either here or on 22B
21 August 2008, 02:27 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 8,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so thats your secret then Andrew? 
http://maps-by-email.com
seriously though, can you answer the request on 22b for the pics of the reversed inlet to a phase 1.5 on the wanted thread?
http://maps-by-email.com
seriously though, can you answer the request on 22b for the pics of the reversed inlet to a phase 1.5 on the wanted thread?
21 August 2008, 05:29 PM
#38
Yeah I did and by christ I was lucky. It was over fueling, not mapped to its full potential on the 2 litre. and boost was limited to 1.4 bar. I also monitored things very carefully using wideband and lots of temp gauages. Not to mention the berrating I got from Pat on the issue. 
Sticky was talking of a fit, thrash and forget solution.
Sticky was talking of a fit, thrash and forget solution.
21 August 2008, 05:40 PM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zed Ess Won Hay Tee
Posts: 21,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go on then clever cloggs. Drop your 2.5 in without mapping it, wrag the **** off it and see how long it lasts.
You're depending on too many variables. Especially non too reliable MAF sensors for one. But hey crack on though, when it goes pop I can tell you now I'll be the first to laugh my knackers off
You're depending on too many variables. Especially non too reliable MAF sensors for one. But hey crack on though, when it goes pop I can tell you now I'll be the first to laugh my knackers off
you calling me cleverclogs when you have already admitted you know **** about the subject in hand?
you do realise i have been monitoring my ecu`s reported inputs for the past 5 years?
i am not a stupid clown that just takes peoples advice without checking things out for myself, i have checked my car every single step of the way and it has been 100% safe, otherwise i simply would not have done it
besides, even if it blew up and i had to buy a new bottom end, it would still be cheaper then paying TSL 10k ish for a rebuild
you with your admit idly "limited" knowledge on the subject are just following other peoples advice without trying it for yourself, i will be running in this engine in on my stock ecu, if it needs a new ecu when its ran in, then it will get a new ecu, that is the facts, which you seam to have skipped over when you thought it would be "funny" to laugh at my misfortune if it goes **** up.
good job daz
21 August 2008, 05:41 PM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zed Ess Won Hay Tee
Posts: 21,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
21 August 2008, 05:43 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zed Ess Won Hay Tee
Posts: 21,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wrong
sticky was talking about a fit, run in, monitor and if it needs it (lets be honest it probably will, but this ecu i have is freaky as hell), get it mapped, but you jumped the gun and never saw the full picture
fwiw i had spoken to andyf in my last email when trying to buy a bottom end from him telling him i expect to see him in 1k miles when its ran in
sticky was talking about a fit, run in, monitor and if it needs it (lets be honest it probably will, but this ecu i have is freaky as hell), get it mapped, but you jumped the gun and never saw the full picture
i am planning on getting a ecu fitted when the 2.5 is dropped in mind 
although i will probably run it in on the 97wrx ecu, just to **** off a few of the doom mongers
although i will probably run it in on the 97wrx ecu, just to **** off a few of the doom mongers
fwiw i had spoken to andyf in my last email when trying to buy a bottom end from him telling him i expect to see him in 1k miles when its ran in
Last edited by StickyMicky; 21 August 2008 at 05:49 PM.
21 August 2008, 05:58 PM
#42
LOL Talk about over sensitive. Get back in your box there's a good girl
The 10K rebuild was 5 years ago when I knew nothing about these cars and would be the first to admit I had the wool pulled over my eyes.
I wouldn't say I knew alot now. But no engine that I have built has ever let go. The last 2.5 I built made 452 bhp at 1.4 bar which was unmapped and I was lucky to get away with.
The one I'm currently building will be around the 600bhp mark. A mapper will be involved long before the key is first turned it will have a new ECU and will first get a running in map and then get a full map once its run in.
As for the high and mighty shi*e your coming out with. I've seen the quality of your work (DIY wide arch kit and respray in a car wash) and it's nothing to shout about. But hey you the man and all that
The 10K rebuild was 5 years ago when I knew nothing about these cars and would be the first to admit I had the wool pulled over my eyes.
I wouldn't say I knew alot now. But no engine that I have built has ever let go. The last 2.5 I built made 452 bhp at 1.4 bar which was unmapped and I was lucky to get away with.
The one I'm currently building will be around the 600bhp mark. A mapper will be involved long before the key is first turned it will have a new ECU and will first get a running in map and then get a full map once its run in.
As for the high and mighty shi*e your coming out with. I've seen the quality of your work (DIY wide arch kit and respray in a car wash) and it's nothing to shout about. But hey you the man and all that
Last edited by dazdavies; 21 August 2008 at 06:01 PM.
21 August 2008, 06:52 PM
#43
this an interesting debate! like someone said in an earlier post i was thinking i was snookered for ANY kind of power increasing mod unless i get a new ECU and remap (£800+). From the stuff i had read i was a bit chicken to even go as far as a bloody fastflow filter!!
i mean a different turbo would scare the **** out of me so props to you Sticky, i'm dead impressed
don't want to pee anyone off by hijacking so no need to answer, but if i put a fastcat exhaust and filter on and imidiately got it on my local RR to check everything (97 WRX wagon)....? reasonable chance it would be ok, with bit more power?
i mean a different turbo would scare the **** out of me so props to you Sticky, i'm dead impressed
don't want to pee anyone off by hijacking so no need to answer, but if i put a fastcat exhaust and filter on and imidiately got it on my local RR to check everything (97 WRX wagon)....? reasonable chance it would be ok, with bit more power?
21 August 2008, 08:33 PM
#44
Largely this one is a yes. However puting some induction kits on without mapping can be a recipe for disaster (APS Cold Air kit springs to mind).
If you're just going for a replacement cotton filter in the OEM induction box and an exhaust you'll be fine.
Re maps are needed when new turbos and fueling mods come into play.
Micky's got away with it because, and I'm sure he'll agree with this, he hasn't really done that much to require a remap/ecu. The turbo's he has had all perform around the same ball park, fuel pump isn't much of an issue where as changing for bigger injectors is (which he hasn't done).
Providing all your sensors are working ok there's no reason why a factory ECU can't cope with a certain amount. Afterall the manufacturers would have built in margins of error etc.
For example in Micky's case he's swapped turbos. His MAF and O2 sensors would be doing what they're supposed to do and detect the extra flow. The ECU has then adjusted fueling etc accordingly which of course is exactly what it's supposed to do. Problems begin where you start to go beyond the parameters the ECU has been programmmed for. That's my understanding of it anyway. Perhaps Andrew could go into more detail.
If you're just going for a replacement cotton filter in the OEM induction box and an exhaust you'll be fine.
Re maps are needed when new turbos and fueling mods come into play.
Micky's got away with it because, and I'm sure he'll agree with this, he hasn't really done that much to require a remap/ecu. The turbo's he has had all perform around the same ball park, fuel pump isn't much of an issue where as changing for bigger injectors is (which he hasn't done).
Providing all your sensors are working ok there's no reason why a factory ECU can't cope with a certain amount. Afterall the manufacturers would have built in margins of error etc.
For example in Micky's case he's swapped turbos. His MAF and O2 sensors would be doing what they're supposed to do and detect the extra flow. The ECU has then adjusted fueling etc accordingly which of course is exactly what it's supposed to do. Problems begin where you start to go beyond the parameters the ECU has been programmmed for. That's my understanding of it anyway. Perhaps Andrew could go into more detail.
Last edited by dazdavies; 21 August 2008 at 08:44 PM.
21 August 2008, 10:41 PM
#45
Unmapped 12.4s @ 105
iTrader: (29)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Newcastle. 330bhp-289lb/ft @ 1bar boost - 12.4s @ 105mph
Posts: 11,776
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Mines not mapped either, Daz.
My attitude is, (don't follow my advice on this) try it and see what happens. Which I believe is what I said on your thread on 22B.
If it lets go, it lets go.
If not, it's all good(for me).
Some people seem to get all het up, you must remap with an FMIC etc, thats all well and good, but I think if I got my car mapped as it is, it would make it slower(safer).
Sticky's DIY widearch is actually very good, so don't knock it. You were painting the Type-R in your garage IIRC, same difference. Not that I saw the need for you to mention it in this thread.
My attitude is, (don't follow my advice on this) try it and see what happens. Which I believe is what I said on your thread on 22B.
If it lets go, it lets go.
If not, it's all good(for me).
Some people seem to get all het up, you must remap with an FMIC etc, thats all well and good, but I think if I got my car mapped as it is, it would make it slower(safer).
Sticky's DIY widearch is actually very good, so don't knock it. You were painting the Type-R in your garage IIRC, same difference.
Not that I saw the need for you to mention it in this thread.
21 August 2008, 10:56 PM
#46
thank you Daz, a nice articulate reply i'm still trying to grasp which turbos are which, so thanks for that. No i would certainly not put an indution kit on, i understand the standard box is good well into gearbox hasseling teritory.
Yes, your thoughts mirror my understanding of the ECU -- just from what alot of people say it felt like its (safe) operational perameters are rather...tight! they probably are! i guess that the standard ECU (or any map on a tuneable one for that matter) runs on a set of rules which when fed with info from the various sensors generates "curves" for fueling etc, and by changing componetry we can generate situations where the required response falls outside of the "curve" due to them being too shallow or the wrong... er... shape!.....which is basically exactly what you said! ooops 
Good to think of exhaust and performance filter as an option though. TBH beyond this i would really want a map anyway!
i'm still trying to grasp which turbos are which, so thanks for that. No i would certainly not put an indution kit on, i understand the standard box is good well into gearbox hasseling teritory.Yes, your thoughts mirror my understanding of the ECU -- just from what alot of people say it felt like its (safe) operational perameters are rather...tight! they probably are! i guess that the standard ECU (or any map on a tuneable one for that matter) runs on a set of rules which when fed with info from the various sensors generates "curves" for fueling etc, and by changing componetry we can generate situations where the required response falls outside of the "curve" due to them being too shallow or the wrong... er... shape!.....which is basically exactly what you said! ooops
Good to think of exhaust and performance filter as an option though. TBH beyond this i would really want a map anyway!
Last edited by AshMurc; 21 August 2008 at 11:03 PM.
22 August 2008, 12:20 AM
#47
Mines not mapped either, Daz.
My attitude is, (don't follow my advice on this) try it and see what happens. Which I believe is what I said on your thread on 22B.
If it lets go, it lets go.
If not, it's all good(for me).
Some people seem to get all het up, you must remap with an FMIC etc, thats all well and good, but I think if I got my car mapped as it is, it would make it slower(safer).
Sticky's DIY widearch is actually very good, so don't knock it. You were painting the Type-R in your garage IIRC, same difference. Not that I saw the need for you to mention it in this thread.
My attitude is, (don't follow my advice on this) try it and see what happens. Which I believe is what I said on your thread on 22B.
If it lets go, it lets go.
If not, it's all good(for me).
Some people seem to get all het up, you must remap with an FMIC etc, thats all well and good, but I think if I got my car mapped as it is, it would make it slower(safer).
Sticky's DIY widearch is actually very good, so don't knock it. You were painting the Type-R in your garage IIRC, same difference.
Not that I saw the need for you to mention it in this thread. with a totally different colour too Incedently I'm with you on the mapping thing. It doesn't have be done after every mod but I wouldn't even dream of it if changing injectors etc.
My 2.5 scenario which you keep eluding to was a calculated risk as the engine was expendible. This time round with my closed deck forged 2.5 I won't be so blase about it. As its cost me a hell of lot more than the £250 the stock 2.5 bottom end cost me.
22 August 2008, 09:12 AM
#48
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zed Ess Won Hay Tee
Posts: 21,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lol @ bringing the wide kit into things 
you can probably judge that for yourself when you see the pro photos in the mag
nowt wrong with my bodgin skillz
been told i am pretty much garenteed a scoob mag feature when the 2.5 is finished, if i want it?
btw the first show i took it to after sorting the bodywork, and i walked away with 1st place trophy for car of the show LOL and i did not even know i was getting judged!
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y24...P5625-Edit.jpg
i only popped over because i was bored and fancied a chat with the lads
back to mapping, yes i do agree that i did not need a map because i did not change enough things to warrent it.
my car is mapped for boost up to 1.45bar (on a vf22) as standard, anything up to that is accounted for, now 1.45bar on a gt30 would probably push it over the edge, but i would never fit one of them.
the doom mongers (mappers) on this site claimed what i have done was impossible to do, only i have been doing this for the past 6 years without issue on a stock jdm ecu, which was reported to be "mapped" for 100 ron fuel and defo needed octane booster every tank (which i never done either) i could also point out that it has run full tanks of 95ron fuel at times when i have been stuck and while it was never ragged, i did use "enough" boost on occasion, and never ever saw any knock retard from the ecu going on, so it either never DET, or the ecu never picked any up (and i fitted a new knock sensor as well )
the full engine spec list at the moment has pretty much every single bolt on mod done to it, the only thing that "limited" the power IMO was the injectors (440`s) and the turbo, the rest of it was capable of handling quite a bit more without issue.
you can probably judge that for yourself when you see the pro photos in the mag
nowt wrong with my bodgin skillz
been told i am pretty much garenteed a scoob mag feature when the 2.5 is finished, if i want it?
btw the first show i took it to after sorting the bodywork, and i walked away with 1st place trophy for car of the show LOL
and i did not even know i was getting judged! http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y24...P5625-Edit.jpg
i only popped over because i was bored and fancied a chat with the lads
back to mapping, yes i do agree that i did not need a map because i did not change enough things to warrent it.
my car is mapped for boost up to 1.45bar (on a vf22) as standard, anything up to that is accounted for, now 1.45bar on a gt30 would probably push it over the edge, but i would never fit one of them.
the doom mongers (mappers) on this site claimed what i have done was impossible to do, only i have been doing this for the past 6 years without issue on a stock jdm ecu, which was reported to be "mapped" for 100 ron fuel and defo needed octane booster every tank (which i never done either) i could also point out that it has run full tanks of 95ron fuel at times when i have been stuck and while it was never ragged, i did use "enough" boost on occasion, and never ever saw any knock retard from the ecu going on, so it either never DET, or the ecu never picked any up (and i fitted a new knock sensor as well
)the full engine spec list at the moment has pretty much every single bolt on mod done to it, the only thing that "limited" the power IMO was the injectors (440`s) and the turbo, the rest of it was capable of handling quite a bit more without issue.
Last edited by StickyMicky; 22 August 2008 at 09:48 AM.
22 August 2008, 09:55 AM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zed Ess Won Hay Tee
Posts: 21,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ps. sorry but LOL at the other thread, i have just clocked the link and i had totally forgot about you running a 2.5 engine swap without getting it mapped
wowzers 
I never mentioned it being right or wrong or the best way to do things. I just thought it was interesting as everyone said get it mapped you'll never be able to run a rotated GT30R fed 2.5 engine on a 2.0L VF28 map without it blowing up the first time it comes on boost.
I did just that for over 7000 miles.
I did just that for over 7000 miles.
22 August 2008, 12:00 PM
#50
Too true, but as said I wasn't concerned about it blowing up as the bottom end only cost me two and a half hundred quid. If you look further down that thread you'll see the bollocking i got from Pat .
In Hindsight I was lucky to get away with it. Hoepfully you'll realise this before your lump goes pop.
As for me bringing the wide arch kit into, I'll apologise for that I'd had a long day and was as grumpy as f*ck last night
.In Hindsight I was lucky to get away with it. Hoepfully you'll realise this before your lump goes pop.
As for me bringing the wide arch kit into, I'll apologise for that I'd had a long day and was as grumpy as f*ck last night
26 August 2008, 01:24 PM
#51
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,602
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm...
I'm still unconvinced about the validity of the argument 'it still works' regarding the engine/ECU. If you're not mapping for the modifications, you won't be getting the most out of the mods. Most noticable here are things like uprated front-mount ICs, etc. which would allow far more advance to be run, but the (standard) ECU won't advance past where the original mini-top-mount could cope. That's a lot of power missing. Turbos are the same (larger so giving cooler output > higher density, yes, but there's room for more advance there too). Fuelling it will adjust for (until the sensor is saturated, anyway!) which is why your engine is still running, but the car won't drive anything like as well as one that's tuned rather than botched.
I'm rather surprised with the amount of modding you've done that you haven't got into mapping yourself? A whole new area of car fiddling, and one of the most rewarding (and cheapest, over time).
I'm still unconvinced about the validity of the argument 'it still works' regarding the engine/ECU. If you're not mapping for the modifications, you won't be getting the most out of the mods. Most noticable here are things like uprated front-mount ICs, etc. which would allow far more advance to be run, but the (standard) ECU won't advance past where the original mini-top-mount could cope. That's a lot of power missing. Turbos are the same (larger so giving cooler output > higher density, yes, but there's room for more advance there too). Fuelling it will adjust for (until the sensor is saturated, anyway!) which is why your engine is still running, but the car won't drive anything like as well as one that's tuned rather than botched.
I'm rather surprised with the amount of modding you've done that you haven't got into mapping yourself? A whole new area of car fiddling, and one of the most rewarding (and cheapest, over time).
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
12
18 November 2015 07:03 AM