has anyone tried the mp3 to p5 ecu swap?

[70]

Man, how many times has this question been asked?

My car was the one that we played with.

As you can see, the MP3 with a Protege 5 ECU showed no real dramatic change in the power curve or numbers. The dyno shows no real benefit from the ECU swap.

However, the Protege5 with their turbo and the MP3 ECU did show a gain...The dyno showed about five horsepower and about seven more torque.


It's hard to say. I don't think the Protege 5 would have shown that much of a gain if it had been N/A with the swapped ECUs based on what happened in my MP3. But the slightly advanced timing and the fact that there was trubo made a gain.

What I have determined is, if you run about 6 psi, and have decent gas, say 93 octane, you will not experience dramatic knock over 5000 rpm like I did when we installed the turbo. I recenlty found 93.5 near my house (a rare find in Denver) and have not heard the dramatic knock that we heard on the dyno.

Personally, it's not worth it to swap ECUs in either case. the N/A Protege 5 will not get much out it, and there is a negligible difference for the MP3.

 

[70]

ok one last question how much of a horsepower loss am i lookin' at only the 10 differnce or more? can you feel the loss?

There won't be a ten horsepower difference...I would say if any, five tops.

The MP3 ECU will not give anyone a ten horsepower increase. There is more to the whole MP3 set up that leads to the ten horsepower difference...

 

[bjdesire]

There won't be a ten horsepower difference...I would say if any, five tops.

The MP3 ECU will not give anyone a ten horsepower increase. There is more to the whole MP3 set up that leads to the ten horsepower difference...

but arent they both 2.0 fs-de engines?? what else is different with the mp3 besides the ecu? i thought they were exactily the same but the mp3 ecu had advanced timing and was differently tuned for those 10 more hp

 

[kylenls]

either way i think i am going to do it i have heard that the only problem will be a cel and i can handle that i just want to be safe thats all.

 

[Captain KRM P5]

but arent they both 2.0 fs-de engines?? what else is different with the mp3 besides the ecu? i thought they were exactily the same but the mp3 ecu had advanced timing and was differently tuned for those 10 more hp

the exhaust system is different, the intake manifold is different (this is what causes the CEL, the vtcs)

not really "exactly the same", more so when you examine the suspension.

 

[Captain KRM P5]

either way i think i am going to do it i have heard that the only problem will be a cel and i can handle that i just want to be safe thats all.

won't the car run in "limp mode" with a constant CEL?

 

[70]

but arent they both 2.0 fs-de engines?? what else is different with the mp3 besides the ecu? i thought they were exactily the same but the mp3 ecu had advanced timing and was differently tuned for those 10 more hp

The dynos show that the ECU is not where all of that power is coming from.

Like it has been mentioned, the lack of VTCS has something to do with it, as the MP3 was rated as an LEV where the Protege was rated as a ULEV.

And, the axle-back appears to be more efficient than originally thought. Surprising I know.

Yes, the ECU should have played a bigger part in it, but you can see where the advanced timing of the MP3 ECU comes into play. Over 5000 rpm, the MP3 ECU is slightly higher than that of the Protege 5.

And for some reason, the Protege 5 ECU had the wierd sine wave in the beginning of the run, as where the MP3 does not.

It's a combination of everything put together that gives that precious ten horsepower to MP3 vs the regular Protege...