Yamaha YXZ Forums banner

Installing GYTR Gen 1 Turbo kit with some tweaks, FTECU or Big Name tuning?

22865 Views 149 Replies 8 Participants Last post by  RobBeck
Hoping to get the last tuning piece of the puzzle sorted so I can get my GYTR turbo kit installed soon, I am tired of having boxes of parts gather and not getting to enjoy them. The problem is that the kit has undergone some changes and will likely need some custom tuning due to some tweaks to the kit, such as:

1) using the Gen 2 GT2554R turbo on the Gen 1 (massaged flange/collector) manifold. With the boost coming on earlier, this could possibly leave some to be desired with the tuning on the Gen 1 GYTR Turbo ECM? I have heard that both the Gen 1 and Gen 2 GYTR Turbo ECM's are basically the same tune, but this is not 100%.
2) using a bellmouth turbo outlet to v-band to 3" to 2.5" custom exhaust (using KRX Trinity Stage 5 full 2.5" through muffler with YXZ mount bracket). Likely the bigger component to lead to the absolute need for custom tuning, but desired to keep backpressure at the lowest possible levels while providing optimum boost response.
3) further massaging to the Internal wastegate as I've heard the smaller units (such as the GT2554R) with very free flowing exhaust can lead to boost creep issues. If anything this will help stabilize tuning and keep boost control effective.
4) using the Gen 2 water to air radiator (from the YFZ450R). This should not really affect tuning and rather stabilize IATs.

Some tuning aids that will be in place:
1) AEM WBO2 to give some visibility of A/F.
2) AEM boost gauge/controller. Likely will not touch boost for a long while.

Initially I plan to get it together and monitor AFR to see how it looks and the machine feels, but based on my reading custom tuning will be eminent mainly because of the exhaust. I am not sure if this is mostly because of tuning around boost creep (with exhaust), or if the machine will just run leaner with the exhaust even with stable boost control.

Ultimately if tuning is in the near future then I am trying to determine if the FTECU is something that is manageable. I do of course have the GYTR Turbo kit (Gen 1) ECM to start, so it seems that will get tuning fairly close. From there all I feel that needs to be done is ensuring that boost control is effective (ie. 6-7psi) throughout the power band even in the taller gears and that the A/F is reasonable and rich. I am really not trying to get TOO crazy or aggressive with the tuning at all, more so want something reliable and to minimize exhaust backpressure (on the turbo, engine, etc) while being as responsive as possible.

Honestly I'd MUCH prefer just getting a tune from a big name and calling it a day, but am concerned for myself (and for them lol) that it will be a huge undertaking to get this right, which means I'd constantly be mailing my ECM back and forth. With that I am considering just getting the FTECU and attempting to modify the original GYTR Turbo Kit ECM file as needed (minimally).

Anyone out there have any input?

See less See more
1 - 17 of 150 Posts
I'm also looking into all of this as well. I have the full base gen 1 GYTR kit installed, and really want to just pull the trigger on the Alba stage 3 with injectors.

But, I also want to be able to have the machine custom dyno tuned down the road, as I build and inevitably want more power and upgrade.change components.

I need to call FT and Alba when life is less busy, but I've been collecting questions:
1. Flashtune has a yxz turbo tune, but charges an extra 100 dollars for it? Who's tune is this? Is it any good? Is it editable? Could it be [email protected]? map for turbo charge! for yxz1000r non spotshift ?
2. Does Alba just use FT software with their own custom map? Could this map be purchased as a FT file so I don't have to ship ECUs? map for turbo charge! for yxz1000r non spotshift ? - Page 3
3. Are some maps locked for reading? Is the factory GYTR map locked, or is it editable? Does any of this locking prevent us from purchasing Alba's ECU tune, registering our ECU with FT and reading/editing the map with FT? Am I not allowed to FT my own ECU after Alba does it without wiping it completely, leaving me with no factory tune to read and no alba tune if I want to FT? I don't want to scam anyone, but I want full control of my system, and not be vendor locked.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 1
I can't answer a lot of the questions, but one I can is relative to the licensing of the ECU and re-programming with a different FT set-up. You will have to buy another license for each programmer you intend to use. The license maps to the programmer/ECU combination. So even if Alba is using FT, the license for your ECU they obtain will not work for you on a different FT programmer set-up.
The extra license and cost wouldn't bother me, but I'm pretty sure I read that if an ECU is tied to a different license, you have to wipe it to get it tied to another license, thus losing me the ALBA tune and the Factory tune. THATS the horror show I want to avoid, otherwise I'd pay alba the $900 for their injectors+stage3 tune and ship it, pay FT the 500 for the license and hardware, and have a known good base tune for my setup and tune as needed/if I find a shop to fine tune.

As it stands with what I know, I'm probably just going to get the tune+injectors+Slip-on from Alba, and eventually do the Engine Build + AFR + Boost controller and forget about FT. I love customization and tweaking things, but I don't think it's to be.
  • Sad
Reactions: 1
I can possibly answer some of your questions
1. It's my understanding that FTECU no longer sells their turbo tune. They don't
want to be reliable.
2. Alba does not use FTECU. I just talked to Nate a couple weeks ago and although he didn't say what they use, he did day is not FTECU.
3. As for the ecu being locked, who knows. I emailed someone at FTECU awhile back and his thought was that I could get into the ecu with their software but would not necessarily be able to see or make changes to a previous non-factory tune. Nate at Alba wasn't exactly sure either. So it would be a gamble with your license. So I returned mine before trying
Some good info. This is all looking to boil down to buying a canned tune, or find a tuner with a spare day to fudge around with FTECU without any base map to work from (unless FTECU can read the GYTR tune, which the whole chatter around "no turbo tunes" sounds like it might not.
Have emailed both GYTR Turbo (Gen 1 and 2) ECU read files to FTecu. They are supposed to look at them and check definitions, said should be able to correct everything within a couple of days. If everything works out and they are onboard I'll suggest that they put them on their website to make everyone trying to turbo their YXZ lives easier.
This is awesome news! I'm still concerned about running an open loop system in general, but really don't want to drop 4k on a full closed loop system. I'm excited to see what you come up with using the FTecu.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Had a nice chat with Ken at Push Turbo on the phone today.

The $1100 is verified as a bare ECUMasters EMU Black ECU. It's the same as what Larue is offering with support and cables for 3x the price: Yamaha YXZ Plug-and-Play ECU Engine Management System

It sounded like he didn't support it much we were on our own with wiring, and he wasn't sure about SS/MCU/TCU compatibility, but he assumed it would just be a few signal wires(might very well be). I forgot to ask him about the YXZ can-bus interfacing.

He said he has some base tunes for it to get into the neighborhood, and then could use the ECU autotune and/or closed loop from there. I forgot to ask him if the tunes were locked or not. I assume not with the ability to modify them.

He said a good middle ground could be the PCV, which would give some telemetry, have it's own dash tool and would provide the closed-loop safety net I want.

He's also working on an EMTron solution he says will be drop-in plug and play for ~$3000.

If I had a 3 pedal, I'd have an EMU Black+ 4.9 Lambda + knock sensor + 2/3 EGT probes on order right now.
See less See more
Yeah, I've been trying! Looks like I have a choice to keep this up indefinitely, or draw some line in the sand and go firm on the return/refund at that point. Late next week I will probably go this route with the next reach out (if don't hear back first lol).
Frustrating. Did you point your FT contact at this thread and how many people are very interested in this?

It would be a really really nice way to be able to do everything the canned tunas are doing, and be able to make adjustments wherever you were. It would still be annoying because I believe you have to be engine-off while modifying the tables v.s. a decent standalone/PC5/6 with an autotune-like function that will adjust live/on the fly. But it would unlock other important settings modifications.
Good news today, I hope. Before following through with the promised payment dispute, I figured I'd give them one last call to discuss in person. Chris answered the phone and he kindly spoke for about 20 minutes, which was appreciated, to try to get an understanding if this had any last chance of ever going anywhere.

What he was explaining, unfortunately, I did not quite entirely comprehend (I am no software engineer). But what I did grasp is that the software ID of these GYTR ECU files are the same ID as the OE YXZ files, so for some reason they could not change their definitions without it then affecting all the definitions for every other OE YXZ files out there. So this put them in a pickle in determining a solution, as fixing it for the GYTR YXZ ECU would only break it for the OE YXZ ECU.

The good news is that he said HE could provide a new GYTR file with a new software ID (separating it from the OE YXZ ECU), which I'd have to write to my ECU first. Within this file he could provide all of the original GYTR Turbo Kit ECU data I'd provided to them, but make it readable with the tool without anything becoming corrupted.

So basically what this means is that in order to tune a GYTR ECU using FTecu, you must first WRITE the files provided to any YXZ ECU (which would make it a GYTR tuned ECU). This means the data that is on that ECU will be overwritten with a file that can be read and defined properly by FTecu, thus you will be building your tune from that file and NOT what was on your actual ECU. However you could write it back if you wish (assuming you read and saved the file in advance), but then again it would not be able to be read and defined properly by FTecu.

Once I confirm all is well with the project, I will provide these new provided files in this thread. Please note I take no responsibility for anything, but from what I am being told this would be the way to get this done for any of us wanting to tune using FTecu starting with the GYTR Gen 1 or Gen 2 basemaps (maps are those which were read from the 2 ECU's that I'd provided them).

FWIW he stated about the GYTR Gen 1 vs. Gen 2 ECU data that: "They are NOT the same.. Gen 2 had an internal label stating it’s limiter was set to 10psi". So now I am trying to figure out exactly what that means, to otherwise determine which would be better to use as the basemap.
Wow. They ghosted you for months because they couldn't make a dropdown box selection after reading the ECU ID to ask if it was "NA" or "GYTR"?! And their solution, instead of providing a simple drop down option for selecting your ECU type, is to smash whatever is currently on your ECU?

Do we know if the v2 is identical to the v1 ECU? If not, that's going to add an extra headache for the v2 guys who want to do this.

For us v1 guys, this is great news! I still wish we could get a closed loop setup for 500 bucks, but, oh well.

And, WOW, I missed the v2 part. I'm guessing what that means is, it fuel cuts if it detects over 10psi of boost at the 3 bar map sensor. I actually really, really like the v2 having a 10psi limiter in it. Did he say if the v1 had any limiter? It's in the back of my mind that the only thing stopping my turbo from producing 20psi of boost is a rubber hose, some zip ties and a spring loaded cast part.
Yeah, would've been nice if they just told me this a long time ago. I guess most people just go away eventually? Or perhaps I should've just picked up the phone sooner.

As for what they needed to do, I'd suppose if it were that simple they'd had done it quickly. As stated, I am not a software engineer and did not understand most of what he said and that was just my takeaway. I'm sure he remembers me if you want to get a better software based understanding give him a call, I did explain to him I have others watching this progress but I probably was not the best ambassador to understand and communicate how they program their stuff. All I know is for them it was not going to be as easy as they initially had hoped and with their current workload they just kept pushing it back, so this was a way to end all of that and get something workable.

But yeah, if you want to use FTecu, you may need to overwrite your data. This may not go well for those already tuned from say Alba. Although, I am very curious if the Alba tune would read correctly with the FTecu? I hate to buy it to only smash it, but it would be really nice to get that tune if it could be read especially, that way I can build from that file if/when needed.
NOTE: I am pretty certain I will need further tuning once I add my exhaust, which is not the typical setup.

You could be right about the 10psi limiter being fuel cut, I have requested more info on that. I'd like it for the safety but not if I ever wanted to up the boost (and fuel system). And he made no mention of the Gen 1 ECU having any limiter, he made it sound like that was the only difference between them.

PS. They sent me the Gen 1 AND Gen 2 files I'd sent them, but updated with the new ID so it can be read. So both Gens are covered with this "fix".
I pretend to be a software engineer for about 20 hours a week, and what you said about the ID makes a lot of sense. You plug in an ECU, the software reads an identifier, and it searches a list of identifiers in the database to find the correcet decoding tables. If there's two of the same identifiers in the database, the software doesn't know what decoder tables to use, and all hell breaks loose, and then the user might have to input a selection that they might make incorrectly(GASP).

I imagine it either was their fear of customers being confused about a menu option, or just deciding it wasn't worth their time to add a potentially bug-creating feature like that for a couple of thousand dollars. I'm both shocked that Yamaha/DASA are the only ones reusing their IDs like that, and that they would ever do that in the first place.

I think most people agree that the other tuners, at minimum, are locking their tunes with some sort of key that's different from factory/DASA. I think FTECU allows you to lock any tune you do down with a password?

Usually, rev limiters are a fuel cut. I'd just assume a boost limiter would be the same. I actually really would like to have that limiter until I built bigger, and would be amazing if it was a tunable value. Definitely my #1 concern and is a large part of why I want a standalone ecu, is the general safety that can be brought with it.

Very cool though, they got it done pretty quick after that RMA request!
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Since I have no idea and maybe one or both of you may….
How does someone like Alba create a tune and then install it in my stock ECU? Do they just have some programming tool that you guys can’t get or perhaps it is very expensive????

Just a curiosity. You guys are way past me on all this!
These ECUs are just very reliable, slow, expensive, specialized computers with input and output hanging off of them. I don't know what comp architecture they use, but at the end of the day, they are just readings bits from input and memory, doing some math, comparing some numbers, and pushing bits out to output and memory, the same as whatever you are typing these posts on.

Putting files on, pulling files off, and erasing files on the ECU is nearly as simple as copying files from your computer to a thumb drive. It takes a not-even-that-special cable that probably has a total BOM cost of 3 dollars.

The actual editing of the files is special. You could open the file in notepad, change some numbers, save it and push it to your ECU, but it wouldn't work right. You could spend hundreds or thousands of hours reverse engineering and designing a GUI that allows you to make changes to the underliying function of the ECU, or you can beg/borrow/steal the program and/or design software from Yamaha/Mitsubishi/whoever has it. I almost wonder if all of these low budget Mitsubishi ECUs are the same, and FTECU and Nate just leveraged past tools/efforts to change the tune. The Alba Nate thing is especially weird, considering his tune disables one of the fan outputs! It makes me wonder if it's because instead of FTECU he used some weird older software that only had one fan output and not two?

And, like all Software as a Service(SaaS), the 100 dollars per license FTECU charges is just revinue stream. There is nothing special about marrying an ECU, and was implemented to prevent you from sharing the $500 dollar $3 dollar cable freely with your friends(or shops from not paying licensing fees).
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Just to ensure we are speaking on the same things, we are specifically talking about the tuning of the Turbo Based GYTR ECU's (not to get mixed up with the tuning of the N/A standard ECU's). While it appears all are the same actual ECU physically (and can be programmed each way with the right tools), the programming of each as they come are significantly different.

That said yes I think Alba is using the older GYTR basemap files that probably came about with FTecu and the Gen 1 YXZ's, but surely they have enhanced these files quite a bit over the years to provide a good safe tuning for those wanting to run a slip-on. The support for tuning the Standard N/A ECU's seems to be of no shortage, likely because they have much always had much more demand.
Actually, Nate's could be sidewinder flashes. That could be how he gets access to a 3 bar tune, and I assume snowmobiles don't need a whole bunch of fan relays.

I'd assume the base GYTR ECU is originally a sidewinder flash that was properly modified I also don't know how he'd get around the SS's TCU and the ECU communicating/working together issue either.
Don't think so in the slightest as those FTecu sidewinder files would not read any of these ECU's, all bombed out, and I believe it's control is a bit different as well (don't remember specifics and don't want to get thread off track, but if you study the system it has different hardware such as drivetrain/ECU controlled BOV/etc). I was hoping for some help there too using FTecu (it had sidewinder selections), but using it was only more discouraging and I do not believe it is the route anyone would take.

The 3 bar tune is part of the standard GYTR kit now and always has been since day 1 (which FTecu supported way back when and now again with these new files). It really is likely as simple as they used the original FTecu GYTR Gen 1 YXZ (16-18) basemap files and use the same final product for all years now, I mean why not as it would get the job done (but have only one fan control).
These facts almost make me think that it IS a sidewinder map. Yamaha could have easily taken the BOV output control and changed it to a second fan relay, and if Nate was working with some custom sidewinder tune, that output could just be left connected to the fan without any real downsides. A pin-out would help us figure that out better. Annoyingly, the service manual doesn't seem to have any pinouts.

Finding a pin-out resource for these ECUs and TCUs would be really really helpful actually.
  • Haha
Reactions: 1
From my discussion with them I wouldn’t be surprised if your KRX aftermarket exhaust wouldn’t work with their stg. 2 tune.

When I was there dropping off my ECU for flash, it was clearly stated that I could use ANY open aftermarket exhaust with this tune. Not a big fan of the Trinity but bought it ONLY because that is what they tuned their stage 2 to and I was attempting to eliminate variables.

So here’s a question…..
Would afr values change because you took a muffler off? The readings are taken upstream from the muffler, right?
These engines purely work on VE(Volumetric Efficiency), with zero feedback(AKA Closed loop tuning). In a VE system with zero feedback, every change to the engine's ability to ingest air and expel waste products changes the tuning. Basically, the "VE" coefficient is a guestamate of how good your intake, engine, and exhaust are at flowing air. Any change in the ability to pump air from the inlet to the outlet can't be sensed by the engine, and has to be tuned for. If you make any changes to anything outside of manifold air pressure or manifold air temperature, you need to modify your VE Coeficient to match.

This makes our systems "double dumb" because they not only try to simply approximate the volume of air entering the cylender though the measurement of air pressure and temperature and multiply that by a magic VE coefficient, but they don't have any ability to correct on the back end with AFR readings. In most cars(besides performance turbo cars), I'd call them "double smart" because they both directly measure the air volume with a MAF sensor, AND can correct for AFR on the back end by reading the exhaust. This is why you can throw a pod filter and a rattle can on your honda civic and not blow anything up, but you do that to a YXZ and, like Nate's old posts, end up "Scary lean" with the GYTR tune. The MAF sensor in the civic is directly measuring the volume of air enering the intake, AND if there's any weridness happening, the lambda sensor will catch it on the back end and correct it. Some factory turbo cars(apparently the mozdaspeed3 is one) is actually VE + Lambda, or a "single smart" system. If you have AFRs backing you up, the VE model isn't a problem.

Not to bitch about VE tuning models either, tons of success in the turbo racing world with them. All the guys who aftermarket turbo anything are using VE models now. It's mostly the lack of AFR compensation that's killing us on the Y.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 1
A tuner would need a method to tune though and that is what I've been working on for months now, trying to get the GYTR Turbo ECU's readable to a format that has correct definitions within FTecu. There are no other known interfaces to tune these things that I am aware of, so that was a pretty large hang up. Shipping the machine back and forth across the country for a dyno tune seems a bit extreme to me, especially if I want to ever do it again for further upgrades. But this has been the mentality of this platform for what I guess has been forever, cookie cutter it or ship it off and pray; however this does not help the allure of modifying the YXZ.

Now that I believe there is a FTecu solution the plan is to go ahead and install the kit as GYTR intended, and spend some time teaching myself how the newly Turbo'd machine is fueled using the WB02. Then once I add my exhaust I can slowly edge in to see how far it is off, keeping an eye on the boost to ensure it is still being controlled ok (ie. no boost creep, etc); and with that I can immediately start adjusting/adding fueling on the maps as/where needed. I will see how that goes with some time and testing, and if is more frustrating than I'd hoped I may just jump into the DynoJet PC6/Autotune piggyback setup to run over the top of it.

Most ideal would be to get a good safe tune that does not require the piggyback, but I will not know if that is required until I start fiddling with the fueling tables. I do have dyno access and a professional tuner I'm fairly close to nearby, but honestly I do not care as much about the last 10whp as I do a well setup/designed kit that is safely fueled. That said I could easily toss it on the dyno at some point and have him mess around with timing/fueling further as he sees fit, but it seems these things are never really all that well fueled even with the big dog tunes (just rich/safe). Personally I believe most all of the gains from the tune/exhaust is from the exhaust, and the tune is likely just to keep it safely fueled.

The Standard GYTR ECU maps should be pretty good as a basemap, but no doubt will need fuel tossed into them with a full custom exhaust. Without this latest FTecu revelation, I was temped to just run the GYTR ECU with the DynoJet PC6/Autotune piggyback and call it a day.
I remember somewhere reading that Nate isn't messing with timing. I'd guess that no tuners are messing with timing. Timing is always the dangerous/touchy feely part of tuning, and is part of why a standalone with no support would be a bit scary without knowing what the base GYTR timing is doing.

The FTECU should be all you need to get it usable. You will also need to log your AFRs, and then you can eyeball where it looks like you are lean or rich and play with it until it's rich and safe I'd probably not bother with the dyno too, seeing as these have zero compensation and now that I've learned 0E fuel is probably responsible for a full half-point AFR swing in my SxS vs everybody else at E10.

If I were you, with the working FTECU, is put at least the GYTR turbo system on and have some fun, with the knowledge that you should be able to tune out any issues. Nate doesn't use piggybacks and doesn't have issues, and the FT Tune is doing what the piggyback minus the autotune is doing, and more, which is why I wanted it. Def turn off that 9500rpm 5th gear limit!

Boost creep/overboost has nothing to do with our dumb ECUs, and wont be any more/less of an issue than the base kit(basically none if you don't have a boost controller.)
See less See more
If they are not messing with the timing, all that is really left is the fueling. Messing with the fueling is all I was really planning initially, would need dyno time to see where to go from there with timing but I'd prefer to keep it less aggressive/safe when said and done and that likely is going to be best found with what is standard with the GYTR timing maps.

The basic things, fan temps/RPM limiters/etc are easy to change in FTecu.

My boost creep mention has to do with adding free flowing exhaust, especially when you have high RPM engines with smaller turbos (this Gen 1 GYTR turbo is pretty well sized, but never hurts to confirm). Longer pulls in taller gears boost can get away if the wastegate can't keep up, so not confirming boost was still under control after adding (a full custom) exhaust could be engine suicide. Well unless the Gen 2 GYTR ECU hits fuel cut (at 10psi) as we have supposed, then that would be another indicator, but I'd rather just monitor the gauge I already will have in place.
I was figuring the v1 turbo was big enough that boost creep wouldn't be a concern at the boost levels we are running, but having a gauge to keep an eye on things couldn't hurt. That's another reason I have to giggle at marketing behind the v2.

I really don't think the bigger exhaust is going to do much at our boost levels. It will have an effect, and the effect will be to creep leaner than the current aftermarket sets, but I doubt it will be barely enough to tune about. Honestly, I think E0 vs E10 fuel will have a bigger impact on the tune than moving from aftermarket glass packed to straight giant pipes.
You need to get that fuel in there to see what is up, before putting too much more thought into your fueling issue. But you could be 100% right, your "rich" issues could be from the pure fuel. There is no doubt Alba (and surely others) are just trying to get a good all around safe spot for that one and done for everyone everywhere regardless, with no compensation that is all they can do.

To be clear about the boost creep, aside for being commonly possible, it is also something that Nate had mentioned in our discussion. Albeit at the time I was talking to him was about running the GYTR v2 turbo (which was another saga that lead to me returning it) AND my custom exhaust, he'd just made mention that boost creep could set in... almost as if it could happen even with the GYTR v1 turbo. That said yes I'm going to definitely keep it in mind and I actually have already done some wastegate "massaging" to the housing just as a further preventative measure.
It's not a bad thing to keep an eye on, but I think the gen1 is fairly safe.

And actually, thinking about it, I'm even more sketched out by the gen2 turbo... I bet they added a 10PSI boost fuel cutoff specifically to prevent possible boost creep issues...

It would be a great feature for everyone to have and be able to be tunable. You should def see if FTECU can figure out how to change that value. Super powerful tool to prevent our engines from blowing up, and if that is an actual tunable option, if I don't go standalone, I'll definitely go FTECU. There's no safer way to deal with dangerous engine conditions than having the ECU respond with limp-style modes, as much as everyone hates them.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Yes, I was thinking the same thing. More than a safety measure, but could be to help protect what they know may happen at some points. Maybe the v1 turbo was a better sweet spot after all? I guess when more v2 GYTR kits get out there, we may start hearing "my car cuts out sometimes on a long pull, what is happening?" type posts... lol.

As for FTecu I will keep pushing them. First let me see if what they have works for fueling anyway. I am assuming if more jumped in with the "I want to purchase BUT this or that's" they may prioritize more development on it. You are correct that another table for fuel cut vs. boost level would be awesome for those ready to increase boost (and have the injector capacity).
I imagine even the v2 will only overboost in the most abusive of cases, BUT it's funny that they suddenly decided to add the safety measure after putting in a smaller turbo that would theoretically be more prone to it? And it could be a "soft cut" sort of setting to, where it just pulls fuel so momentarily that no one will notice it, as it will go from making 10psi to, well, less psi than 10, depending on how aggressive the system is.

I'm still so on the fence about this whole limping along of our already flawed engine management system. I'm into alba $400, FTECU will be $500, and the EMU Black ECU itself is only $1200. With a homemade wiring harness, I'd probably only be into it for $1500, and I want to give it a look after riding season to see if it's possible.

Damn I wish these ecus were closed loop.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Yeah but you know how that goes, what other BS do you run into (and you know you will) even if you went to the EMU Black or Motec even after the initial cost/harness debacles?

Having this FTecu setup with some eyes on a WB02 to get dialed, and confirm things ok during seasons/elevations/etc, should be enough.

It is possible your Alba purchase may just turn into a sunk cost, provided you want to further enhance your fueling, but least has possibility to resell it to try to get something back. Or you can just leave well enough alone for now and enjoy your ride as it is.

At the moment I am in for the FTecu and extra v2 GYTR ECU I bought just to read/compare with the v1 GYTR ECU that came with my kit. Adding in the Dynojet/pc6/autotune I hope I can avoid. I am pretty much turned off from going Stand Alone at this point now that I think FTecu has provided this avenue.
I think that, if you aren't going standalone, and if you can figure out how to modify the boost cut value, the gen2 was worth a few hundred lost $. I imagine you are outside the return window on it. I also wonder who's making these gen2s.

Also, didn't you say the same tune is on the v1 and v2, from what FTECU can tell? That would suggest a VERY loose tune with all the VE changes the v2 kit must have.
1 - 17 of 150 Posts