2 Stroke Racer

iTrader: (11)

Apparently everybody but you? Lol
Have you tuned a 98 PCM for speed density?
I'd like to hear any advice. I'm all for trying it with the 98.

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

The '98 boxes are too slow to do what? I have a friend at GM Powertrain that would be very interested in hearing this explained. LOL

You guys read too many internet message boards. Lots of keyboard experts around, that haven't actually tuned enough to know anything. Myself and a couple other guys tuned speed density '98 LS1s long before your tuning software even existed. Unless your running a lot of boost, there is no advantage to speed density anyway. Even then, LPE's big MAF is a better deal. But, what the hell do they know?

They can't put anything on the internet that isn't true, everybody knows that. Right? LOL

2 Stroke Racer

iTrader: (11)

Well how do you suggest I use my MAF sensor with a super Vic and an open 4150?

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

Not being able to mount a MAF doesn't mean it will run better, or faster, with a different PCM. It won't.

2 Stroke Racer

iTrader: (11)

Well with the new set-up, I'm going to have to go SD.
Like I said, I have no problem giving the 98 PCM a try.
If it works that would be great! I've never heard of anyone
Going to SD while still using the 98.

Vetal

iTrader: (3)

I've swapped because I wanted real-time tuning capabilities of HPTuners. Unfortunately in reality they are not very mind-bogging anyway...
P.S. I have MAF Nissan and SD LS1, SD is 100X times more stable. Maybe it's Nissans bugs but tune seems to change from day to day and I can't even say it depends on weather...

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

There is something wrong with your Nissan.
I have five MAF vehicles, and they all run great all the time. Sounds like a flakey tune.

James@ShorTuning

Nothing wrong with a GM MAF... the ONLY problems I have personally ran into with a 98 box is one bricking them during flashing and on a few C5 auto corvettes the PCM not being able to control the transmission. There is too much data on a C5 with an auto to keep up with for a 98 controller. Had a car that just would not shift at the track no matter what you did to it. And randomly would shift fine. Re-pinned the factory harness for an 0411 PCM and never skipped a beat!

Other than that unless you need something more than a 2bar SD operating system there isn't a real need to go to a 99-up PCM.

I personally do prefer the newer PCM's just mainly due to the better resolution of alot of tables and flexibility of controlling 4L80 transmissions and other various small things.

But back on topic, on a F car the alternator control in the tune needs to be disabled because the alternator isn't controlled by the PCM like the newer cars are.

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

James, I have some pretty fast '98 Vettes out there, with no shifting issues. The deal is **** WOT be RPM, not MPH.

James@ShorTuning

Ed I don't have hard data that shows the PCM as being the fault. All I do know is we tried basing the shifts off RPM only with an abnormally low mph as to not affect shifting and then we also tried it the other way by setting WOT shift RPM to quite a bit lower and using speed to shift and either method still gave the same results. This was using a custom SD OS that was being ran on a high strung NA engine. The newer PCM solved the issue in this case.

Ed Wright

iTrader: (1)

I have not tried that with a custom OS. Just mid-nine second nitrous cars, still using a 85mm MAF.