ECU Question: Why Piggy-back, Not Re-flash?

[~tc~]

Fuel economy has also improved, which was my main reason for installing the piggyback.

How much? How are you measuring? How many tanks have you calculated it on?

There is a ton of variability in MPG - it takes some real data analysis to determine if the improvement is "real" or not. The science is there that this really should work (unlike most any other "increase fuel economy" scam) so I hope to see some real data, might consider buying one then!

By real data, I mean at least 10 tanks worth of varied driving before and after.

[bjspinner]

Fuel economy has also improved, which was my main reason for installing the piggyback.

How much? How are you measuring? How many tanks have you calculated it on?

There is a ton of variability in MPG - it takes some real data analysis to determine if the improvement is "real" or not. The science is there that this really should work (unlike most any other "increase fuel economy" scam) so I hope to see some real data, might consider buying one then!

By real data, I mean at least 10 tanks worth of varied driving before and after.

At the moment with driving consistent to prior installing the piggyback I am on average an improvement of 60 km per tank.
Has dropped about .5 lire per 100km at least.

Without going into what the piggy back does and seeing the programing that RRM have done within the software controlling of the unit, I was quite surprised how well it works.

Am in the process of getting an AFR, EGT sensor logging steup as I feel there is more scope to tune.

More power and better economy with out a doubt as shown by the cars trip computer data, which is all I will go off as it is the only constant which I can compare to.

[Hawkzilla]

It's not shocking to find out that a car company didn't tune the engine to get the max performance from an engine, but the improvements would have to be rather drastic and well documented before I would consider investing that much money.

Good info to have though... keep it coming!

[~tc~]

Actually, most car companies do a pretty decent job - I'm actually surprised this much improvement is possible. In my "previous life" with Toyotas, it was common knowledge that chips/piggybacks/reflash were wasted money unless you had a ton of mods (like superchargers, etc) that clearly put the ECU out of its range.

[Hawkzilla]

Actually, most car companies do a pretty decent job - I'm actually surprised this much improvement is possible. In my "previous life" with Toyotas, it was common knowledge that chips/piggybacks/reflash were wasted money unless you had a ton of mods (like superchargers, etc) that clearly put the ECU out of its range.

Not in my experience, but thanks for correcting me yet again... oh holy car expert. lol

[bjspinner]

At the moment 60km further on a tank the piggyback will pay for itself in under 10 months.

You can by the unit cheaper however then you must figure out the wiring and have a setting programed.
These are the things that RRM have put the time into in their development.
As I said before the driveability of the car has improved alot in the low down revs with the cvt, power is a noticable increase.

[billj]

It has been many months since posting on this forum . I am still a pleased owner of my Kizashi S vehicle which has included the various RRM upgrades . I have approximately 35,000 trouble free miles and would highly recommend those few upgrades to which I installed. I have never had the vehicle on a chassis dyno nor at a track but firmly believe my weight reduction of near 20 lbs along with the reported increase of power of near 20 is very realistic. I have to admit that I have kept very good fuel logs,my overall average of 30 mpg with this setup is realistic. This setup is fun to drive.