Why you should go AccessPort with any sort of mods
- Thread starter chimmike
- Start date
Any day:
CAI/DP/Tune-
93 Octane at 1.09CF:
93 Octane at 1.01CF (Dynojet):
E85 at 1.01CF:
E85 at 1.09CF (Dynojet):
I like how this debate still goes on today. Since a lot of people rambling ricer math, throwing out irrelevent maf flow, etc, I'll throw in my 2 cents since I've actually used both platforms.
Cliffnotes. I gained 12whp and about 10ftlbs of torque on the same mods HT vs v200 AP OTS map, same road. AP>HT lets stop beating the dead horse guys.
Hypertech is still a good tool you AP fanbois. It's much better then stock tune. It does increase boost, and has a more agressive timing curve, with approximately the same afr's as stock maybe a bit leaner. While there is no doubt in my mind that the hypertech flows less (I was seeing mid 240g/s vs mid 250's on AP OTS), AP was running around 14-15 degrees advance vs the AP OTS 8 degrees of advance at the same 6k point. And yes I'm sure most people understand you can get a lot more out of an AP OTS tune. But that's not the point.
IMO HT is fairly close powerwise to the cobb OTS.
Hypertech is a good place to start, it's conservative. For me it was a stepping stone, it was also what I first used when there were issues with the AP. Cobb had officially left the platform....load cap was everywhere. There was no way I would have felt comfortable using ATR when I first came on this platform. I had no idea what I was doing. Now I'm big turbo and know a lot more about the platform.
But for the novice HT is a good place to start on limited mods. Where AP really shines is the use of ATR to fine tune engine parameters and make more.
Cliffnotes. I gained 12whp and about 10ftlbs of torque on the same mods HT vs v200 AP OTS map, same road. AP>HT lets stop beating the dead horse guys.
Hypertech is still a good tool you AP fanbois. It's much better then stock tune. It does increase boost, and has a more agressive timing curve, with approximately the same afr's as stock maybe a bit leaner. While there is no doubt in my mind that the hypertech flows less (I was seeing mid 240g/s vs mid 250's on AP OTS), AP was running around 14-15 degrees advance vs the AP OTS 8 degrees of advance at the same 6k point. And yes I'm sure most people understand you can get a lot more out of an AP OTS tune. But that's not the point.
IMO HT is fairly close powerwise to the cobb OTS.
Hypertech is a good place to start, it's conservative. For me it was a stepping stone, it was also what I first used when there were issues with the AP. Cobb had officially left the platform....load cap was everywhere. There was no way I would have felt comfortable using ATR when I first came on this platform. I had no idea what I was doing. Now I'm big turbo and know a lot more about the platform.
But for the novice HT is a good place to start on limited mods. Where AP really shines is the use of ATR to fine tune engine parameters and make more.
So, what we are seeing (so far), is that unless you run E85, and changing to a 3 bar map so you can run insanely high boost pressures, and running a 3 port EBCS, you get about the same 300 whp give or take with AP tuning - even custom AP tuning on the stock K04 on 93 octane fuel. I'll even concede that AP might produce maybe 10 whp more. Maybe.
I still contend that this extra power is being made by holding boost at higher levels out to redline and at leaned out AFR's. My view, and I know the AP crowd rejects it out of had, is that it DOES matter to push the K04 off of its efficiency map by holding boost above 15 psi beyond 6,000 rpm and leaning out afrs. Mazda designed this engine to have combustion chamber cooling under high load high rpm conditions by use of rich unburned fuel and that Mazda deliberately made afr's stay rich at high rpm as a protective factor. That also keeps KR down and controls EGT's to safe levels.
By staying faithful to Mazda's design philosophy and staying within the efficiency range of the K04, you can still be pretty aggressive with timing without developing KR and can build significant power that way, power up to or pretty close to the the maximum potential of the K04 on pump gas.
That guys are having to post up VD charts on engines custom tuned for E85 to produce substantially better numbers tells me that the performance of the two tuning options are actually virtually identical for the 99% of us that will never even consider running E85 mixes or who want to actually have our little K04 turbos last the life of the car rather than turned into flamethrowers or ultimately hand grenades if we hold boost at 18-20 psi on pump gas with leaned out afr's.
I'm not going to run 18-20 psi out to redline on pump gas and this turbo. I'm not going to give up Mazda's designed cylinder cooling from super rich AFR out at high rpm. I'm not going to make a tuning mistake and blow up my engine.
Stay with me. I'm not totally adverse to taking risks. I'll make a comparison:
I am seriously into hand-loading ultra accurate, ultra high velocity rifle ammunition for hunting and target work. I'm working with gunpowder guys. Lots of different types, different burning rates, different energy rates. Different performance with different cartridge case sizes and shapes, different bullet weights, different primer flame temperatures. Lots of variables. If I want to push a little 55 grain bullet to 4100 feet per second in a 6 mm Remington case, I had damn well better know WTF I'm doing. And I do. That's based on doing this carefully, safely and repeatedly, building on past experience for about 40 years. With care, I can reach that goal. Make one stupid or simply absentminded mistake and when I pull the trigger on that rifle, I may produce chamber pressures that will blow up the rifle, explode in my face and maybe take my life. I build in a lot of checks and balances into this process to produce this level of consistent performance and do it safely. Nothing is taken for granted and everything is double and triple checked. And that load is only safe in that rifle and no other.
Or I can buy off the shelf ammunition and get between 90-95% of the maximum performance level. "Plug and play" ammo, if you will. Some if it is loaded hotter than the standard loads, but still safe in all well-maintained rifles. Sort of like HT. That's damn good ammo and I have to work very hard and very carefully to beat it. But I can . . . marginally and only in my own rifle.
So for the 95-99% of hunters or shooters or the 95-99% of us with MazdaSpeed DISI engines, which is the better option? Chances are that almost all of them will choose the higher performance off the shelf "canned" ammo over the regular standard ammo, but will not want to spend the time, energy and effort to learn how to sqeeze that extra 5% or less performance out of the rifle by handloading the ammo to maximum safe levels for that particular rifle.
I don't trust myself to make the critical judgments necessary to squeeze that extra 5% from my engine with AP, if that. And no, I'm never going to run E85, don't even know if I can buy it here, what it would cost, and what the long term effect will be on engine reliability. For this engine platform, I'm more like the 99% of gun owners that will never be making the decision as to whether one tenth more grain of ReLoader 19 powder will make my load unsafe and blow up my gun and maybe me, regardless of what my training and experience is telling me about any impending signs of excessive pressure.
It just ain't worth it for me.
290-300 whp on HT tune for my car is not going to get enough better with AP custom tuning on this turbo and pump gas to make the effort worth it. Maybe 10 whp? Hummmm. Nah. Thanks, but these engines are expensive and I'll take 95-99% and stay safe.
I still contend that this extra power is being made by holding boost at higher levels out to redline and at leaned out AFR's. My view, and I know the AP crowd rejects it out of had, is that it DOES matter to push the K04 off of its efficiency map by holding boost above 15 psi beyond 6,000 rpm and leaning out afrs. Mazda designed this engine to have combustion chamber cooling under high load high rpm conditions by use of rich unburned fuel and that Mazda deliberately made afr's stay rich at high rpm as a protective factor. That also keeps KR down and controls EGT's to safe levels.
By staying faithful to Mazda's design philosophy and staying within the efficiency range of the K04, you can still be pretty aggressive with timing without developing KR and can build significant power that way, power up to or pretty close to the the maximum potential of the K04 on pump gas.
That guys are having to post up VD charts on engines custom tuned for E85 to produce substantially better numbers tells me that the performance of the two tuning options are actually virtually identical for the 99% of us that will never even consider running E85 mixes or who want to actually have our little K04 turbos last the life of the car rather than turned into flamethrowers or ultimately hand grenades if we hold boost at 18-20 psi on pump gas with leaned out afr's.
I'm not going to run 18-20 psi out to redline on pump gas and this turbo. I'm not going to give up Mazda's designed cylinder cooling from super rich AFR out at high rpm. I'm not going to make a tuning mistake and blow up my engine.
Stay with me. I'm not totally adverse to taking risks. I'll make a comparison:
I am seriously into hand-loading ultra accurate, ultra high velocity rifle ammunition for hunting and target work. I'm working with gunpowder guys. Lots of different types, different burning rates, different energy rates. Different performance with different cartridge case sizes and shapes, different bullet weights, different primer flame temperatures. Lots of variables. If I want to push a little 55 grain bullet to 4100 feet per second in a 6 mm Remington case, I had damn well better know WTF I'm doing. And I do. That's based on doing this carefully, safely and repeatedly, building on past experience for about 40 years. With care, I can reach that goal. Make one stupid or simply absentminded mistake and when I pull the trigger on that rifle, I may produce chamber pressures that will blow up the rifle, explode in my face and maybe take my life. I build in a lot of checks and balances into this process to produce this level of consistent performance and do it safely. Nothing is taken for granted and everything is double and triple checked. And that load is only safe in that rifle and no other.
Or I can buy off the shelf ammunition and get between 90-95% of the maximum performance level. "Plug and play" ammo, if you will. Some if it is loaded hotter than the standard loads, but still safe in all well-maintained rifles. Sort of like HT. That's damn good ammo and I have to work very hard and very carefully to beat it. But I can . . . marginally and only in my own rifle.
So for the 95-99% of hunters or shooters or the 95-99% of us with MazdaSpeed DISI engines, which is the better option? Chances are that almost all of them will choose the higher performance off the shelf "canned" ammo over the regular standard ammo, but will not want to spend the time, energy and effort to learn how to sqeeze that extra 5% or less performance out of the rifle by handloading the ammo to maximum safe levels for that particular rifle.
I don't trust myself to make the critical judgments necessary to squeeze that extra 5% from my engine with AP, if that. And no, I'm never going to run E85, don't even know if I can buy it here, what it would cost, and what the long term effect will be on engine reliability. For this engine platform, I'm more like the 99% of gun owners that will never be making the decision as to whether one tenth more grain of ReLoader 19 powder will make my load unsafe and blow up my gun and maybe me, regardless of what my training and experience is telling me about any impending signs of excessive pressure.
It just ain't worth it for me.
290-300 whp on HT tune for my car is not going to get enough better with AP custom tuning on this turbo and pump gas to make the effort worth it. Maybe 10 whp? Hummmm. Nah. Thanks, but these engines are expensive and I'll take 95-99% and stay safe.
Last edited:
I can't say this relatively epic thread was "fun" to read but it has been both educational and the most revealing thread I've read here in quite some time.
It's unfortunate these topics seem to devolve into techno knowledge pissing matches but a pissing match is a very popular discussion forum activity. It's fun to argue when you know your s***, or at least think you do.
Taken from a noob perspective comparing the two ( that would be my perspective ) even if running OTS maps with both products, the HT is dead simple to use, comes within a handful of peak HP to the AP and costs significantly less. It's also proven safe. Consider the decision a person like myself is making. No plans to ever go farther than CAI and a RP/TP. Bone stock otherwise and the car is my DD. I absolutely cannot afford to blow it up. The additional features of the AP don't appeal to my needs or desires and it's more expensive.
This is the crux of the marketing angle Hypertech is taking.
The law of diminishing returns applies. As MSMS3 has illustrated almost metaphorically in his work with ammunition, you can put a whole lot more into something and only get fractionally more out of it past a certain point. Any mistakes and disaster can occur. You better know what you're doing or have the resources to pay somebody with that knowledge to do it for you.
If I didn't have a family and a mortgage and the MS3 were my toy, I might invest the time to learn how to tune it with the AP and invest in a bigger turbo, FP internals, FMIC, go fully bolted and take advantage of the additional investment and features the AP offers. Just learning all the s*** you guys were throwing back and forth is pretty significant all by itself. Frankly there are plenty of other things I'd rather be doing or NEED to be doing these days.
I'll keep the extra coin saved going with the HT, save myself the time and effort to learn much more than how to choose items off its menu, update it off the internets, and upload the tune to the ECU and put the savings toward another set of V12 Evos.
It's unfortunate these topics seem to devolve into techno knowledge pissing matches but a pissing match is a very popular discussion forum activity. It's fun to argue when you know your s***, or at least think you do.
Taken from a noob perspective comparing the two ( that would be my perspective ) even if running OTS maps with both products, the HT is dead simple to use, comes within a handful of peak HP to the AP and costs significantly less. It's also proven safe. Consider the decision a person like myself is making. No plans to ever go farther than CAI and a RP/TP. Bone stock otherwise and the car is my DD. I absolutely cannot afford to blow it up. The additional features of the AP don't appeal to my needs or desires and it's more expensive.
This is the crux of the marketing angle Hypertech is taking.
The law of diminishing returns applies. As MSMS3 has illustrated almost metaphorically in his work with ammunition, you can put a whole lot more into something and only get fractionally more out of it past a certain point. Any mistakes and disaster can occur. You better know what you're doing or have the resources to pay somebody with that knowledge to do it for you.
If I didn't have a family and a mortgage and the MS3 were my toy, I might invest the time to learn how to tune it with the AP and invest in a bigger turbo, FP internals, FMIC, go fully bolted and take advantage of the additional investment and features the AP offers. Just learning all the s*** you guys were throwing back and forth is pretty significant all by itself. Frankly there are plenty of other things I'd rather be doing or NEED to be doing these days.
I'll keep the extra coin saved going with the HT, save myself the time and effort to learn much more than how to choose items off its menu, update it off the internets, and upload the tune to the ECU and put the savings toward another set of V12 Evos.
This entire thread has sucked, lol. Thanks, Mike.
Wurf, you pretty much nailed it, and it's about the same thing I tell people when they ask me about the two devices. If you are someone that wants push button power, even though it may not be as much power as is potential, then it's for you. If you are one of those people, save the cash and get a HT, you would be wasting money on an AP to run an OTS tune. It's relatively safe, it's easy, it's for those who will never want more.....unfortunately, most people do want more after they get the bug, and that is the point where hypertech is no longer a viable option.
If you want more, or want to maximize the potential of a particular setup, then the AP wins, hands down. You don't need to learn anything, because there are plenty of knowledgeable folks who are willing to help, or you can simply hire a tuner. Once you go down that road, the comparison between a canned HT tune and a custom tune for a particular setup is moot. The "pro" (and I do not mean Cobb certified pro tuner in this case) tune will make more power, should do it safely, and it should drive smooth as butter and get good gas mileage. On top of that, we can completely revamp how the car drives to make it how you want it.
As for what some of us do with our cars, we understand the risk. Without risk, there is no gain; there is nothing learned. A year ago, everyone said we couldn't run E85....look how far we've come now. E85 is now possibly the easiest, simplest, and cheapest way to make power in these cars....but you have to have an AP to see those gains
BUT, that is not what MSMS3 was saying...He very explicitly said "I continue to laugh when I see how close the can-o-tune HT can come to the mighty AP, and sometimes exceed (not tying to say it's "better" whatever that means, anyway) when we stick to the stock K04 and bolt on mods." So if you want to compare our VD numbers, you will see that mine makes about 50hp more than the HT at 4k rpm, and makes a minimum of 10hp more at the narrowest margin, along with carrying more power for longer. Sorry, but the HT just can't compete with a proper tune on a "basic bolt on" car, let alone bigger turbo's or any serious engine work.
Two different market segments here. As long as you are happy with the car and whatever you have you consider safe, I don't care what you run.
Wurf, you pretty much nailed it, and it's about the same thing I tell people when they ask me about the two devices. If you are someone that wants push button power, even though it may not be as much power as is potential, then it's for you. If you are one of those people, save the cash and get a HT, you would be wasting money on an AP to run an OTS tune. It's relatively safe, it's easy, it's for those who will never want more.....unfortunately, most people do want more after they get the bug, and that is the point where hypertech is no longer a viable option.
If you want more, or want to maximize the potential of a particular setup, then the AP wins, hands down. You don't need to learn anything, because there are plenty of knowledgeable folks who are willing to help, or you can simply hire a tuner. Once you go down that road, the comparison between a canned HT tune and a custom tune for a particular setup is moot. The "pro" (and I do not mean Cobb certified pro tuner in this case) tune will make more power, should do it safely, and it should drive smooth as butter and get good gas mileage. On top of that, we can completely revamp how the car drives to make it how you want it.
As for what some of us do with our cars, we understand the risk. Without risk, there is no gain; there is nothing learned. A year ago, everyone said we couldn't run E85....look how far we've come now. E85 is now possibly the easiest, simplest, and cheapest way to make power in these cars....but you have to have an AP to see those gains
BUT, that is not what MSMS3 was saying...He very explicitly said "I continue to laugh when I see how close the can-o-tune HT can come to the mighty AP, and sometimes exceed (not tying to say it's "better" whatever that means, anyway) when we stick to the stock K04 and bolt on mods." So if you want to compare our VD numbers, you will see that mine makes about 50hp more than the HT at 4k rpm, and makes a minimum of 10hp more at the narrowest margin, along with carrying more power for longer. Sorry, but the HT just can't compete with a proper tune on a "basic bolt on" car, let alone bigger turbo's or any serious engine work.
Two different market segments here. As long as you are happy with the car and whatever you have you consider safe, I don't care what you run.
Last edited:
Phate. Thank you. Finally some objectivity and sense. I must point out that my datalog that produced that VD chart was with ambient temp of 90 degrees, so I think the numbers could be a bit higher in cooler weather, and I made no SAE correction for the high temps.
In November I developed a boost leak (fell to wastgate spring pressures) which I chased for a long time before discovering a tiny partial split in the hose from the turbo compressor side ( close to the nipple where the pill is) to the wastgate actuator and another one in the fitting going to my manual boost gauge. Those leaks developed after that October run, so I'm not trying to make any excuse. But chasing them down (finally with a boost leak tester) and fixing them, has dominated my spare time until lately. Now it's the rainy season here. So not much WOT datalogging opportunities since then. I want to replace the plugs and clean the AEM dryflow filter, get some spring weather, find a local dyno that can handle fwd, and maybe track the car one more time. Need new tires too! It never ends, does it?
But maybe a dyno and some new drag strip numbers would sort of lay this issue to rest. I am sort of concerned that boost is building late, as you observed and that I may still have a leak that is unaccounted for. Torque should not be so low when first going WOT, so something is not quite right and I don't think very much of that is in the tune. Maybe I'm wrong. The datalogging software I'm using seems to have a very slow resolution or frame capture rate. We may be seeing boost data that is laggy, running behind rpm and the time slip part of the data. I just don't know. I'm talking to ScanXL Pro (the manufacturer) about that and I may need a faster USB dongle. You'll see that I was only logging about two frames per second and that's not enough. I also think I'll let some of you guys look at an new datalog over on the MSF board if you don't mind a HT user seeking some advice. My wastgate duty cycle data is different than it has been in the past. I'm playing with a Grimmspeed EBCS in two port mode right now.
Anyway, thanks for the honest and straight up post. If I ever decide to try E85, I'll jump to AP and try to get carefully into tuning. I still worry that some guys are oversimplfying the technical knowledge required to do it right and downplaying the risks of making a mistake. Finally, I don't want to be dependent on a tuner that may become unavaillable or rely too heavily on board help. If I can't do it safely myself, I'm not inclined to want to take the risk.
Thank you for the informative post.
In November I developed a boost leak (fell to wastgate spring pressures) which I chased for a long time before discovering a tiny partial split in the hose from the turbo compressor side ( close to the nipple where the pill is) to the wastgate actuator and another one in the fitting going to my manual boost gauge. Those leaks developed after that October run, so I'm not trying to make any excuse. But chasing them down (finally with a boost leak tester) and fixing them, has dominated my spare time until lately. Now it's the rainy season here. So not much WOT datalogging opportunities since then. I want to replace the plugs and clean the AEM dryflow filter, get some spring weather, find a local dyno that can handle fwd, and maybe track the car one more time. Need new tires too! It never ends, does it?
But maybe a dyno and some new drag strip numbers would sort of lay this issue to rest. I am sort of concerned that boost is building late, as you observed and that I may still have a leak that is unaccounted for. Torque should not be so low when first going WOT, so something is not quite right and I don't think very much of that is in the tune. Maybe I'm wrong. The datalogging software I'm using seems to have a very slow resolution or frame capture rate. We may be seeing boost data that is laggy, running behind rpm and the time slip part of the data. I just don't know. I'm talking to ScanXL Pro (the manufacturer) about that and I may need a faster USB dongle. You'll see that I was only logging about two frames per second and that's not enough. I also think I'll let some of you guys look at an new datalog over on the MSF board if you don't mind a HT user seeking some advice. My wastgate duty cycle data is different than it has been in the past. I'm playing with a Grimmspeed EBCS in two port mode right now.
Anyway, thanks for the honest and straight up post. If I ever decide to try E85, I'll jump to AP and try to get carefully into tuning. I still worry that some guys are oversimplfying the technical knowledge required to do it right and downplaying the risks of making a mistake. Finally, I don't want to be dependent on a tuner that may become unavaillable or rely too heavily on board help. If I can't do it safely myself, I'm not inclined to want to take the risk.
Thank you for the informative post.
Last edited:
MSMS3, thanks for that post. I usually get a little pissed off at your long winded posts about the glory of the HT, but I actually can appreciate what you are saying in here. As Phate said, the HT is a great option for someone who wants a simple plug and play off the shelf tune with no logging/ monitoring capabilities. I REALLY suggest and AP for someone using a Grimmspeed, etc. Simply being able to tweak the MAF scale/ boost/ WGDC/ Error comp tables is worth it to me.
I absolutely agree with your assessment that relying on just a tuner is a little naiive, and I try to coach any and all customers on how to operate ATR on their own. Its the only way to be.
I absolutely agree with your assessment that relying on just a tuner is a little naiive, and I try to coach any and all customers on how to operate ATR on their own. Its the only way to be.
Last edited:
Road and Track got similar numbers to wsbucker's on a STOCK ECU MS3 with just the the Mazdaspeed intake and exhaust, and attributed the gains to the intake alone, although I think the exhaust may have added a little bit. No tune whatsoever. Agreed that is on a Dynojet with its correction, but it is a real dyno under real world conditions.
So, what did AP do? Well, it held the power out well past the horrible drop off of stock tune, that's a benefit, but it does not seem to do that any better than HT does. AP does not show me anything better than HT, and only comparable to stock tune with similar mods, based on wsbucker's VD data. If wsbucker had stock intake on his car, then AP is doing nothing more than an intake mod will do for a LOT less, including that he had to pay for the AP and for the HPFP internals upgrade to duplicate what a simple intake alone would have done.
Here's the R&T dyno chart from their website. Draw your own conclusions. Not meaning to be difficult. Just stating the facts.
So, what did AP do? Well, it held the power out well past the horrible drop off of stock tune, that's a benefit, but it does not seem to do that any better than HT does. AP does not show me anything better than HT, and only comparable to stock tune with similar mods, based on wsbucker's VD data. If wsbucker had stock intake on his car, then AP is doing nothing more than an intake mod will do for a LOT less, including that he had to pay for the AP and for the HPFP internals upgrade to duplicate what a simple intake alone would have done.
Here's the R&T dyno chart from their website. Draw your own conclusions. Not meaning to be difficult. Just stating the facts.
Last edited:
My car is stock right now. Stock intake, stock exhaust, stock intercooler, etc. It literally has the AP and the HPFP internals.
Exactly, wsbucker. So how much did the AP and the pump internals cost you compared to a simple intake that would have produced the same power? Seems like a very expensive alternative to an aftermarket intake.
I realize you have or did have other mods that you could put back on the car, but your example does move the ball further down the field for AP's supposed superiority over HT, or even over an untuned car with simple intake alone.
I realize you have or did have other mods that you could put back on the car, but your example does move the ball further down the field for AP's supposed superiority over HT, or even over an untuned car with simple intake alone.
Last edited:
I would agree that tune+HPFP is not the right route. Tune+HPFP+intake for sure is though. Ill be getting my car back together piece by piece to document what gains each part has.
I will DISAGREE that simply slapping on an intake and exhaust is a good option, though. I am sure fuel trims are off on those cars and they CERTAINLY are not optimizing timing/ boost/ fueling.
Well, Mazda approves slapping on the Mazdaspeed CAI and their CBE on the stock tune, and the results are in the dyno chart I posted. They are damn good on stock tune for such a simple basic mod, and virtually all of it is from the intake alone. With the air straightner, that CAI is within the adjustment range of the ECU for MAF calibration, although probably not perfect, or Mazda would not be selling it as a dealer installed option, and the performance results were pretty dramatic.
Agree, however, that AP or HT would optimize the MAF calibration, would eliminate the 0-60 holdback in the lower gears, would allow for increasing idle speed (great benefit for those of us running aftermarket motor mounts), increase load limits so that the 17.5 psi load cut is no longer there, raises boost sensibly, remove top speed limit, adjust rev limiter, and make tweaks to the tune that hold power on out to redline instead of falling off the cliff at 5,600 rpm or so as with the stock tune. But both AP and HT do those things. They approach the goal differently, but they both just about optimize the potential of the K04 turbo on pump gas and any bolt-on mods.
I see no clear benefit for AP over HT when on stock K04 and pump gas with simple bolt ons. AP is good, but not better, until you start going big turbo or messing with fueling (E85) etc. Then AP shines and HT is no longer in the game. But up to that point, they reach similar results through different tuning philosophies, and HT is cheaper and is not going to cause you to go zoom, zoom, boom through a tuning mistake.
Agree, however, that AP or HT would optimize the MAF calibration, would eliminate the 0-60 holdback in the lower gears, would allow for increasing idle speed (great benefit for those of us running aftermarket motor mounts), increase load limits so that the 17.5 psi load cut is no longer there, raises boost sensibly, remove top speed limit, adjust rev limiter, and make tweaks to the tune that hold power on out to redline instead of falling off the cliff at 5,600 rpm or so as with the stock tune. But both AP and HT do those things. They approach the goal differently, but they both just about optimize the potential of the K04 turbo on pump gas and any bolt-on mods.
I see no clear benefit for AP over HT when on stock K04 and pump gas with simple bolt ons. AP is good, but not better, until you start going big turbo or messing with fueling (E85) etc. Then AP shines and HT is no longer in the game. But up to that point, they reach similar results through different tuning philosophies, and HT is cheaper and is not going to cause you to go zoom, zoom, boom through a tuning mistake.
Last edited:
<-this guy doesn't care.
Also, have no problems supporting family, paying mortgage, feeding wife and child, paying car payments, bills, and student loans, and still dicking around with the ms3, becuz not poor, and becuz not bought because can't afford something nicer.
Just thought I'd throw it out there.
Wurf, I think you've proven how dumb you are, k? thanks.
AP is the best tuning solution availble for the MZR DISI motor right now, period. So far there's no indication any aftermarket standalone could even be made to work with DISI.
Also, have no problems supporting family, paying mortgage, feeding wife and child, paying car payments, bills, and student loans, and still dicking around with the ms3, becuz not poor, and becuz not bought because can't afford something nicer.
Just thought I'd throw it out there.
Wurf, I think you've proven how dumb you are, k? thanks.
AP is the best tuning solution availble for the MZR DISI motor right now, period. So far there's no indication any aftermarket standalone could even be made to work with DISI.
