RevLimitLaunch
Member
- :
- 06 MS6/03.5 MSP
sick, now ill add for something like the 5th time to get on that pnp business lol...i want it more than ever.
Custom Performance Engineering's complete SPEED6 tuning solution
- Thread starter www.cp-e.com
- Start date
VinnieBeachbum
Member
- :
- Mazda, Speed6
+1
InlineTwin
Member
- :
- Mazdaspeed6
EE-Geek said:Thanks for the vid clip, I've seen a few of those machines before. For how slow it moves, depending on how many parts are on the board, it could take quite a while to make the hundreds of them you are planning on producing!
The moment I thought this something else occurred to me... Seeing as half of the fun we have is the tweaking and upgrading (not just driving a modded car), why not provide another way to offer this? I'd love to buy this when it finally comes out but I know $700 will prevent me for at least a little while; it'd be great if you made this available as a kit we could assemble ourselves for a bit less $$$. This may come across as a bit bizarre but I probably would enjoy building and installing this more than I would enjoy installing a ready-made device. This may be because I'm a "double 'E' " but, if the board isn't too complex, there may be a market for something like that.
I guess not everyone has a hot-air soldering iron for surface mount devices but I figure you made it surface mount for automation and not for size constraints. A through hole board might be possible then?
(Queque the laughing and pointing at the EE Geek)
Oh, and you're not looking for test engineers are you
I would be interested in building the board from a kit as well, but it would really depend on the discount. It probably costs CPE less to build it than I think it is worth in time spent on assembly, but I would be interested in any case. I've designed and built 4-axis cnc machines for foam cutting and the boards I've built had 700+ pinouts with a 44 pin microprocessor. I did not find it hard to do the assembly and I am just an aerospace engineer! (Ha, we all know AE's are way cooler than EE's!) I would just lay a piece of solder across the pins and run the iron over it. Solder flows right into the joints. I think it would be easier for the less experienced to do surface mount than through hole.
CPE would have a harder time with validating the components functionallity before sodering as it is very possible damage may occur to what is likely a sensitive microprocessor chip would be due to soldering or humidity changes. How can they control this when it is assembled? Most microchips have a limited shelf life before soldering because of humidity. This would also be a limiting factor.
www.cp-e.com
Member
EE-Geek said:Did the assembler break?
Even some descriptions and docs on your webpage would be nice to have just to get familiar with installation, etc.
We're working on it. Our webpage has been seriously neglected lately since we've been so busy with production. But we plan to host several documents that will explain in detail, the features of several of our products. We work very hard on some product details that aren't exactly flaunted (and should be!), and we'd like to change that. Things like our machined MAF housings in our cold air kits, or details behind our upcoming intercooler kit are two good examples of this. We just need to find some time to get it done!
InlineTwin said:
You're echoing many of the things our electrical engineer (Lou) told me when I asked him about DIY Standback kits. We all think it's a pretty cool idea, and we're thrilled that there are people out there as 'techie' as we are, but it really isn't in our best interest, and maybe not even our end users best interest either, partially for the arguments you have voiced. But what it came down to is quality control. Since people wil be installing this product into a $25k car, we need to be sure that everything is in working order before we send out our kits. That's why Lou took the time to make another board which basically simulates the MZR in the lab. So whever we complete a Standback, he hooks it up to the engine simulator and verifies its functionality of the unit before it gets shipped. Now if a wire were installed incorrectly, we'd know immediately and lose nothing, whereas the end user may fry either the Standback, or even your ECU. So we're really trying to proect ourselves and our customers.
And regarding the official release of the unit, we've been sending out units that we still consider to be a beta version to everyone who pre-ordered a Standback. Once we fill those orders, get a little feedback from them, and start stocking final versions, then we'll put it up on our website for everyone to order. I think as of today, we have about 15 Standbacks shipped, and we're waiting for dyno results from several people.
Jordan
www.cp-e.com
Member
MS6mike said:
Should be going to the powder coater this week (headbang)
Jordan
sweet! Is that stock otherwise? It would be nice to get numbers for the Standback on stock, CAI, CAI + DP, DP + catback, etc.
I wish there was a release date. That would be so much better than checking their page and the forum multiple times a day. I feel like I'm OCD. Oh right, I am...
I wish there was a release date. That would be so much better than checking their page and the forum multiple times a day. I feel like I'm OCD. Oh right, I am...
I might be able to help out with the dyno results. I've currently got CAI, DP, and full exhaust (all CPE). I'll be doing a pre-dyno with my current mods, and then a dyno with the addition of the FMIC and EMS. Maybe that will help some. I should be doing in within the next couple of weeks. Just waiting on the release.(alright)
EE-Geek said:
www.cp-e.com
Member
EE-Geek said:
We're working on getting more dyno numbers, but please keep in mind that we don't have a dyno within our facility, so any time we dyno a car we're paying for the time just like any other customer. And dynoing all of those combinations would be expensive! But we're slowly getting some numbers from customers and we're working on getting some stock-tuned numbers as well.
The guy who made 272whp and 300lbft. (a 32whp and 40lbft. gain over untuned) had an AEM cai (along with a nasty fuel cut), cp-e downpipe, and cp-e catback exhaust. The tuner not only added a great deal of power, but he was also able to eliminate the fuel cut that the intake was causing. We asked for dyno graphs, but we have yet to receive them.
And you can buy the Standback now, but we're still calling them beta units and as such they're not being sold on our website. Once we're confident that we've worked out all of the bugs, then we'll start officially releasing it. But if you were to buy a beta unit and something needed to be changed, then you send the unit back, we'll make the necessary adjustments, and send the unit right back to you. It's up to you if that's enough to make you wait for the final version or not. So far we found and rectified one issue, and only one person was affected by it so far.
MUSOM said:
You're the man (cabpatch)
Just wanted to let you know that we didn't quite get the FMIC to the powdercoater today
. We weren't able to finish the BOV flanges in time, but that's literally the last piece that needs to be addressed. So you'll hear this for the very last time: "It'll be done next week." 
We also finished a Standback installation yesterday on a customer's car and he's at the dyno today to get some numbers. His combination is a cp-e XCel intake, cp-e downpipe, and cp-e catback. As soon as we get the numbers/graphs, I'll post them up here.
Jordan
Quote "The guy who made 272whp and 300lbft. (a 32whp and 40lbft. gain over untuned) had an AEM cai (along with a nasty fuel cut), cp-e downpipe, and cp-e catback exhaust. The tuner not only added a great deal of power, but he was also able to eliminate the fuel cut that the intake was causing. We asked for dyno graphs, but we have yet to receive them."
This does not seem right - the cp-e downpipe, and cp-e catback exhaust alone are advertized at " The best part is when the catback is paired with our upcoming downpipe, one can expect on the order of 30hp and 40lbft of torque to the wheels!"
So the cp-e downpipe, and cp-e catback exhaust add 30hp and 40ftlb , add a CAI and standback and get the same ? How did the tuner add power? Looks like bad math to me. I must be missing something.
Can someone explain this? Thanks
This does not seem right - the cp-e downpipe, and cp-e catback exhaust alone are advertized at " The best part is when the catback is paired with our upcoming downpipe, one can expect on the order of 30hp and 40lbft of torque to the wheels!"
So the cp-e downpipe, and cp-e catback exhaust add 30hp and 40ftlb , add a CAI and standback and get the same ? How did the tuner add power? Looks like bad math to me. I must be missing something.
Can someone explain this? Thanks
www.cp-e.com
Member
flyrevs said:
Well first off, I think you may be looking at the dyno results for our SPEED3 equipment, whereas these numbers were generated by a SPEED6. I'm not sure if that's confusing you? I'm just not sure which part you're questioning? Are you querstioning the total power the customer was making, or the gains from the Standback?
The car came in with the turbo back and intake installed, AND THEN they tuned the car. With just his bolt-ons and no tune, the customer made 240whp/260lbft. Altered Atmosphere's owner and tuner, Mike Mahaffey, told us that the car had a nasty fuel cut and was running extraordinarily lean because of the AEM intake. After adding some fuel, upping boost to a modest 16psi, and pulling a degree of timing up top, they made 272/300. This was a conservative map however, since a little more boost and timing (below the knock threshold of course) could make a significant difference.
Is that clearer? If not, explain where the confusion lies and I'll do my best to clear things up.
Jordan
Yes,I am referring to the Speed3, but I thought the 6 would be about the same since it has the same engine. I was under the impression the the cp-e dp and cat back added 30hp 40tq on the speed. I thought the tuner and CAI would bump the 30hp 40 tq up from there. I'm not bashing cuz I love CP-E and what you guys are doing for the Speeds, just wondering why the hp-tq numbers are not higher with the standback / CAI. Thanks for your help.www.cp-e.com said:
www.cp-e.com
Member
flyrevs said:
No, no problem, I didn't take it that way (drinks)
I think the problem is that as you add performance parts to your car, the tune drifts as the stock maps are no longer ideal for the newly added hardware. In other words, individually, these parts may add a lot of horsepower, but when you install all of them on an untuned car, they may not make nearly as much power as they did individually because their combined affect on the OE tune is detrimental despite the added breathing benefits. Hence the lean mixture that Mike was referring to. So the tune essentially made the most of the new combination. In an ideal world, if the ECU could constantly tune itself, then I would imagine that he would have made closer to 260whp with the modifications he had on the car (boost was increased slightly too). This is why tuning after you make modifications to the car is so important.
Another complicating factor is that these cars can dyno stock anywhere from 190whp to as high as 230whp. That's a variance of as much as 40whp! Here's someone who made 193whp stock:
http://tinyurl.com/2mz7rx
and here's someone who made 225whp stock:
http://tinyurl.com/2kptyv
I also got a ride in the car in question yesterday, and let me tell you that it literally transformed the car. The difference from tuned to untuned felt like the difference between a full bolt-on car and a stock car. The customer said that he has a friend with an Eagle Talon that typically beat him by about three car lengths whenever they race, and now he says he has no problem pulling on the Talon
Jordan
Jordan.....you're kinda like a victoria secret underwear model..... all you're doing is standing in the showroom window in a pair of pink frilly panties waving a leather beatin stick teasing us with some dyno results. quit teasin' and get your panty wearing ass off of the computer and get back to makin' my car a low 8 sec 1/8er. (yupnope)
On a more positive note, thanks kid. You're making me even more anxious to get these two upgrades. I'm looking forward to it!(bowdown) (yippy)
On a more positive note, thanks kid. You're making me even more anxious to get these two upgrades. I'm looking forward to it!(bowdown) (yippy)
www.cp-e.com said:No, no problem, I didn't take it that way (drinks)
I think the problem is that as you add performance parts to your car, the tune drifts as the stock maps are no longer ideal for the newly added hardware. In other words, individually, these parts may add a lot of horsepower, but when you install all of them on an untuned car, they may not make nearly as much power as they did individually because their combined affect on the OE tune is detrimental despite the added breathing benefits. Hence the lean mixture that Mike was referring to. So the tune essentially made the most of the new combination. In an ideal world, if the ECU could constantly tune itself, then I would imagine that he would have made closer to 260whp with the modifications he had on the car (boost was increased slightly too). This is why tuning after you make modifications to the car is so important.
Another complicating factor is that these cars can dyno stock anywhere from 190whp to as high as 230whp. That's a variance of as much as 40whp! Here's someone who made 193whp stock:
http://tinyurl.com/2mz7rx
and here's someone who made 225whp stock:
http://tinyurl.com/2kptyv
I also got a ride in the car in question yesterday, and let me tell you that it literally transformed the car. The difference from tuned to untuned felt like the difference between a full bolt-on car and a stock car. The customer said that he has a friend with an Eagle Talon that typically beat him by about three car lengths whenever they race, and now he says he has no problem pulling on the Talon
Jordan
New Threads and Articles
-
2017~2025 no transmission maintenance interval recommended in owner's manual?- Started by jadmt
- Replies: 4
-
-