InMotion Dyno Results

DOC4444 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:38 pm

2005 CRD Ltd, 36K miles. I received my OEM ECU back from InMotion on Wens along with a "clone" ECU with their "StageII" programming. I drove the Jeep for 3 days with the modified ECU in place in order for it to have an opportunity to "optimize" itself and then headed to my local DynoJet chassis dyno center late today.

We made the runs on the InMotion ECU first, in order to give it every opportunity to "show" as well as possible, then put in the OEM ECU and repeated. The Jeep was run with OD off (required to be 1-to-1) and careful, consistent throttle technique was utilized to avoid disruptive shifts of the AT.

We were able to obtain almost identical results on several consecutive runs in each configuration. This makes the differential obtained between the ECUs have a high level of validity.

Please do not pay any attention to the ABSOLUTE numbers (too many variables). The only relevant numbers as far as I am concerned are the differences between the 2 ECUs in immediate, back-to-back testing under identical conditions.

Verdict: Stock 2005 ECU: Max HP 144.6 @ 3250 RPM Max Torque: 250.6 @ 2600 RPM

InMotion ECU: Max HP 170.7 @ 3400 RPM Max Torque: 303.9 @ 2750 RPM

(Keep in mind that the OEM ECU was not given any opportunity to "optomize", so the actual differences may be even less.)

Now, for those people who are getting all hopped up about the "absolute" numbers:

In particular, why are all the torque numbers so low? My understanding is that these motors make max torque at about 1800 rpm. Because of the characteristics of the AT and the DynoJet, it is just not possible to make effective runs in that RPM range. Also, since I don't have a Suncoast TC, I would not have done runs there, even if I could have, because that would have exposed the tranny to max potential for damage (oh, for a 6-speed manual box).

Cost: Used ECU: $145
InMotion "Cloning" Fee: $100
InMotion Tuning Fee: $350
Overnight shipping + insurance: $39

Total: $634

Cost per HP increase: $24.38
Cost per ft/lb increase: $11.74

I am awaiting receipt of Sean Kammer's latest handiwork, his new SP Diesel "4-level", add-on tuner.

I plan to run it "back-to-back" with the stock ECU, just as I did here, thus eliminating any differences in the test conditions between today and whenever that test is executed. James at InMotion advised against "stacking" a module with their Stage II ECU, but I may do a few dyno runs to see if the gains with each ECU could be non-linear.

Will report when the data is available. (If anyone would like to send any add-on tuner boxes to me for testing, feel free. Testing any other reprogrammed ECUs will be difficult because each one would have to be "cloned" to mine first, then altered.)

Best Wishes,

DOC

CATCRD · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:24 pm

Can you post the graphs? I'd like to compare them to mine that I posted last year.

DarbyWalters · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:39 pm

Those are actually pretty good numbers that high in the RPM Range at the rear wheels. 18% increase in hp and 21% increase in torque. I would bet that the usable range of power in certain RPMs is increased. Nice Work!

DOC4444 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:43 pm

I can't get the graphs to display properly on the viewer I have. I will post if I can get it to work. Where is your dyno data posted?

Thanks,

DOC

CATCRD · **Posted:** Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:51 pm

DOC4444 wrote:

I can't get the graphs to display properly on the viewer I have. I will post if I can get it to work. Where is your dyno data posted?

Thanks,

DOC

Mine are here http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=24280

Also, do you have a scangauge or boost gage or anything that you might've been able to observe boost with? Have you had the F37 recall? And what was the SAE correction factor off your dyno sheet?

DOC4444 · **Posted:** Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:10 am

Kammer has my boost gauge at the moment.

SAE Factor was 98.

I could not open your graphs. (The linkage seems to be broken.)

BTW, our results seem quite similar, though I gather your runs were not back-to-back.

(I found roughly the same HP increase and a bit more torque gain.)

DOC

chrispitude · **Posted:** Sat Apr 05, 2008 6:56 am

Hi DOC4444,

So the ECMs are not coded to the vehicle? I have been thinking of selling my Inmotion ECU if Kerma releases a tune. I'm hoping it would be as simple as trading my Inmotion ECM with someone's stock ECM through the mail, then upgrading that one.

- Chris

Uffe · **Posted:** Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:14 am

Odd, max torque should occur at 1800-2400rpm - did you check your boost while on the dyno? I suspect there is a little overboost going on at 2600 rpm

I'm a little disappointed in seeing the numbers of the stock unit, I had hoped for better power

Perhaps F37 is to blame?

DOC4444 · **Posted:** Sat Apr 05, 2008 10:54 am

Chris,

See my post. I understand that each vehicle ECU has been encoded since 2000, hence my reference to "cloning". InMotion stated that if presented with my Stage II ECU and another ECU that has exactly the same version of the OEM software, they can "just clone" for $100 and their performance code stays in place. If they have different versions, however, it would be no different than from starting from scratch. So, resale of a performance tuned ECU without losing all of the value you have paid for will be difficult, but is, theoretically, possible.

Uffe,

Please reread my post regarding testing at the 1800 rpm torque peak.

I had no way to check boost at the time.

You must not understand about chassis dynos if you are disappointed with the absolute numbers. The factory rates these motors @ 160 HP at the flywheel with no losses from ancillaries. I expected to see no more than 120HP on a chassis dyno. However, I think the power numbers on the dyno I used were inflated because there has to be at least a 40HP loss through the driveline in a vehicle like this. Again, I was only interested in the differences between the ECUs in immediate, back-to-back testing, thus eliminating/minimizing as many variables as possible. Comparing numbers from dyno to dyno makes no sense to me.

This vehicle has supposedly had the F37 "upgrade" including a new TC, but I'm not convinced that changing to a pre-F37 TCM would have significantly changed these results.

DOC

Pablo · **Joined:** Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:06 pm **Posts:** 1201

DOC4444 wrote:

Chris,

You must not understand about chassis dynos if you are disappointed with the absolute numbers. The factory rates these motors @ 160 HP at the flywheel with no losses from ancillaries. I expected to see no more than 120HP on a chassis dyno. However, I think the power numbers on the dyno I used were inflated because there has to be at least a 40HP loss through the driveline in a vehicle like this. Again, I was only interested in the differences between the ECUs in immediate, back-to-back testing, thus eliminating/minimizing as many variables as possible. Comparing numbers from dyno to dyno makes no sense to me.

DOC

Interesting read:

http://www.msprotege.com/forum/showthre ... =123629978
http://www.sdsefi.com/techdyno.htm

007husky · **Posted:** Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:34 pm

CATCRD wrote:

DOC4444 wrote:

I can't get the graphs to display properly on the viewer I have. I will post if I can get it to work. Where is your dyno data posted?

Thanks,

DOC

Mine are here http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=24280

Also, do you have a scan gauge or boost gage or anything that you might've been able to observe boost with? Have you had the F37 recall? And what was the SAE correction factor off your dyno sheet?

Your results are way different from DOC4444, and seems the only difference on the vehicle is the f-37 f31 right ?

I got the tune a month ago, you can feel the difference,. is absolutely worth it.

Except the fuel consumption ( is more tempting to step on it, my fault there)

DOC4444 · **Posted:** Sat Apr 05, 2008 11:04 pm

007Husky,

I completely disagree. I regard my dyno results to be virtually identical to CATCRD's. There is no significant difference between his set of data and mine regarding anything that is meaningful.

DOC

CATCRD · **Posted:** Sun Apr 06, 2008 12:01 am

Looking at the dyno sheets would give us a better idea. For my second ones I just took pictures of the sheets with a digital camera, since I didn't have access to a color scanner.

retmil46 · **Posted:** Sun Apr 06, 2008 12:53 am

Interesting. I think you might find that if you add a Suncoast TC to the mix you could possibly add roughly 10 HP to both results.

Last Sept I and Ranger1 attended a TDR Dyno Day event in SC. Dyno was provided by, and all runs made by, David Dunbar.

Both our vehicles are '05's, with near identical mods. Suncoast TC/shift kit/new oil pump, Kennedy lift pump, aftermarket high flow fuel filters, aftermarket high flow muffler, V6 air box mod, ORM/SEGR, Provent, aux trans cooler, return line fuel cooler.

Main difference was in software. Mine had never been F37'd and was running the CE version of the factory tune. Ranger1's had been F37'd prior to installing the Suncoast, and he was running the Inmotion StageII tune.

David Dunbar operated both vehicles, 3 successive runs each. Mine was the first run of the day, Ranger1's vehicle immediately after mine. OD was NOT locked out, tranny was allowed to shift normally.

My CRD posted 150 to 152 HP on it's three runs. Ranger1's posted 180 to 182 HP on his three runs.

Shape of the graphs showed quite a difference. Ranger1's HP curve was much steeper, reached peak HP quite a bit earlier, and showed less of a dropoff at high rpm's.

Uffe · **Posted:** Sun Apr 06, 2008 5:22 am

DOC4444 wrote:

Uffe,

Please reread my post regarding testing at the 1800 rpm torque peak.

I had no way to check boost at the time.

You must not understand about chassis dynos if you are disappointed with the absolute numbers. The factory rates these motors @ 160 HP at the flywheel with no losses from ancillaries. I expected to see no more than 120HP on a chassis dyno. However, I think the power numbers on the dyno I used were inflated because there has to be at least a 40HP loss through the driveline in a vehicle like this. Again, I was only interested in the differences between the ECUs in immediate, back-to-back testing, thus eliminating/minimizing as many variables as possible. Comparing numbers from dyno to dyno makes no sense to me.

This vehicle has supposedly had the F37 "upgrade" including a new TC, but I'm not convinced that changing to a pre-F37 TCM would have significantly changed these results.

DOC

I am disappointed because another user on here reported better than factory results on a dyno. He had also not had the tuning done to his car in that run.

The 1800rpm torque peak can easily be obtained by switching O/D off and let it lock up. I have no problems going on the torque peak locked up (that's about 40-45mph, I got 4.10 ratio diffs) - can you tell me what is different when you are on a dyno? Not allowed to spin your wheels so fast?

What factors did you use to calculate the absolute numbers? (transmission factor, diff factor) I assume these absolute numbers measured at the dyno are translated from what you measure at the wheel and calculate back to the flywheel using the ratios on the vehicle.

Awaiting your reply

CATCRD · **Posted:** Sun Apr 06, 2008 10:53 am

Uffe wrote:

The 1800rpm torque peak can easily be obtained by switching O/D off and let it lock up. I have no problems going on the torque peak locked up (that's about 40-45mph, I got 4.10 ratio diffs) - can you tell me what is different when you are on a dyno? Not allowed to spin your wheels so fast?

What factors did you use to calculate the absolute numbers? (transmission factor, diff factor) I assume these absolute numbers measured at the dyno are translated from what you measure at the wheel and calculate back to the flywheel using the ratios on the vehicle.

Awaiting your reply

I don't believe the engine has an 1800rpm torque peak. Period. In stock form mine didn't peak until 2400 rpm. We had it locked up at 1600rpm and rolled into the pedal. It shouldn't take that long to build boost, so I believe the torque peak is much higher than what the factory would have us believe.

And no, it does not take drivetrain losses into account.

Uffe · **Posted:** Sun Apr 06, 2008 11:51 am

CATCRD wrote:

I don't believe the engine has an 1800rpm torque peak. Period. In stock form mine didn't peak until 2400 rpm. We had it locked up at 1600rpm and rolled into the pedal. It shouldn't take that long to build boost, so I believe the torque peak is much higher than what the factory would have us believe.

And no, it does not take drivetrain losses into account.

OK - good.

Next question:

How do you floor the pedal with the TC still keeping locked up?

retmil46 · **Posted:** Sun Apr 06, 2008 1:12 pm

The ENGINE may well be mechanically designed to have peak torque at 1800 rpm, but with an electromic injection system and controls the SOFTWARE may well be the determining factor in where peak torque occurs.

CATCRD · **Posted:** Sun Apr 06, 2008 1:29 pm

Uffe wrote:

CATCRD wrote:

I don't believe the engine has an 1800rpm torque peak. Period. In stock form mine didn't peak until 2400 rpm. We had it locked up at 1600rpm and rolled into the pedal. It shouldn't take that long to build boost, so I believe the torque peak is much higher than what the factory would have us believe.

And no, it does not take drivetrain losses into account.

OK - good.

Next question:

How do you floor the pedal with the TC still keeping locked up?

You get it rolling on the dyno and gradually accelerate until the torque converter locks. At that point you smoothly floor it (should take 1 second at most) and it will hold it locked until redline. Flooring it too quickly will unlock it for sure. You have to experiment.

jdbewl01 · **Joined:** Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:00 am **Posts:** 9

When comparing results from owners in different areas, keep in mind that there can be quite a bit of variability from one dyno to another, and that environmental factors may also cause a lot of variability in results, hence absolute numbers should not be compared. Instead, the relative increase from baseline to final modified form is the most telling data.

-Jeremy

InMotion Dyno Results

Who is online