[Lockjaw]

Is anyone using one of these on an NA truck? I have done a search, but don't see much.

If you are using it, how well does it work? Seems to me it could cure the rich condition these engines seem to have.

Thanks

 

[keiphers]

Is anyone using one of these on an NA truck? I have done a search, but don't see much.

If you are using it, how well does it work? Seems to me it could cure the rich condition these engines seem to have.

Thanks

I doubt it'd do much. I think, besides a full standalone, that the Unichip is the only real piggyback option that works.

 

[bloodypulp]

yes the SAFC works, as well as other Japanese piggyback air/fuel controllers.

 

[Lockjaw]

Have you installed one? How involved was it? What did you gain? Was it hard to tune?

I really want to try one, but would like some good feedback from someone who has used one.
:ts:

 

[TRDKEAU]

Have you installed one? How involved was it? What did you gain? Was it hard to tune?

I really want to try one, but would like some good feedback from someone who has used one.
:ts:

http://www.gadgetonline.com/fuel.htm#Apex Super AFC:


Gadget has had sucess with this product. xxxxxxxxxx

IMO, i would squat for a while and see how the unichip does. It would be your best bet if all turns out right.

http://unichip.us/faq.html

there may be a 2nd group buy, be paitent

 

[silverTRD]

i tuned one on a 99 subaru impreza 2.5rs with a turbo. let me tell ya that car is sweeeeeeet! but anyway it seemed to work pretty well. some of the settings are hard to change just because they are hard to find. there is a manuel that tells you where to go in the safc to change certain setings. that would have helped me a lot.

after i tuned the car...it ran real strong, had 250hp to all four wheels and and got 19mpg city. boy was i impressed. however, my buddy switched over to a complete stand alone called link, this unit far surpassed any safc ive ever seen.

i thought about installing one on my truck after i supercharge it, but i am not quite sure how to install it. i love to work on cars but i hate doing electrical on them. but who knows i might find that its easier than expected.

does anyone make a standalone for the tundra?

 

[TRDKEAU]

does anyone make a standalone for the tundra?

No specific apps, but you could always use a jumper harness with a AEM EMS, this would be your cheapest standalone option. another route would be Motec, I couldnt see spending 3g's and up for a EMS for this truck.

 

[keiphers]

No specific apps, but you could always use a jumper harness with a AEM EMS, this would be your cheapest standalone option. another route would be Motec, I couldnt see spending 3g's and up for a EMS for this truck.

Yeah I'd never go Motec on my truck unless I'd increased displacement, gotten new cams, and done a custom turbo app... Otherwise it'd be fairly useless when a Unichip could produce the same results, since most of our trucks are basically stock.

 

[Lockjaw]

So what is the dollar figure on a unichip? I can get a S-AFC for about 200 to 250 off ebay.

yes perhaps not as precise, but I don't want something I have to take to an "installer" to put in my truck. Nor do I want something someone else has to tune. and Unichip is only saying 5 to 9% increase on an NA engine. Sorry but I have to say if the engines run as pig rich as people are showing, there is probably more power available then 5 to 9%.

 

[keiphers]

yes perhaps not as precise, but I don't want something I have to take to an "installer" to put in my truck. Nor do I want something someone else has to tune. and Unichip is only saying 5 to 9% increase on an NA engine. Sorry but I have to say if the engines run as pig rich as people are showing, there is probably more power available then 5 to 9%.

Your not going to even get 5-9% from the SAFC. Plus, you can order the Unichip pre-mapped, meaning that the install is as simple as taking apart your glove box and plugging in a harness. But, you still have the option of a custom tune. Before you do anything else, read up on the Unichip here: http://www.ppdbillet.com/Unichip-1.html. It'll answer a ton of questions you could think of, and even has dyno graphs.

 

[GlynnC]

IMO, the SAFC is just another flashy gizmo. Looks cool, but will definitely not do the job as what the unichip is advertised to do.

 

[Lockjaw]

hey I hate to be a doubting thomas, but the dyno graph for a stock 2000 model shows 245HP. I don't buy that for a second, most all the dyno numbers I have seen show ~200.

What gives?

 

[silverTRD]

Your not going to even get 5-9% from the SAFC. Plus, you can order the Unichip pre-mapped, meaning that the install is as simple as taking apart your glove box and plugging in a harness. But, you still have the option of a custom tune. Before you do anything else, read up on the Unichip here: http://www.ppdbillet.com/Unichip-1.html. It'll answer a ton of questions you could think of, and even has dyno graphs.

i have to disagree. being that i have used the safc, i know that it works. of course, not as well as a stand alone but that was never the argument. i am not a huge fan of the unichip, i do not care for how it makes the trucks run so rich, in my opinion stock tundras are a bit rich. there are a lot of problems that show up down the line when your engine runs that rich. sure it is ideal for certain race engines but then again those get rebuilt after every race. not something i am looking forward to tackle. if the unichip is so great, it should give that 9% propossed increase in power as well as making the truck more efficient. i dont know about all you guys but i sure have a lead foot and i do not need my truck to run any more rich than it already does. do you know how much gas cost on southern california? i mean come on! well, just my opinion. dont kill me guys

 

[Yellbird]

How did you come up with the Unichip causes the engine to run rich?
Mine is running about 10.5.

i have to disagree. being that i have used the safc, i know that it works. of course, not as well as a stand alone but that was never the argument. i am not a huge fan of the unichip, i do not care for how it makes the trucks run so rich, in my opinion stock tundras are a bit rich. there are a lot of problems that show up down the line when your engine runs that rich. sure it is ideal for certain race engines but then again those get rebuilt after every race. not something i am looking forward to tackle. if the unichip is so great, it should give that 9% propossed increase in power as well as making the truck more efficient. i dont know about all you guys but i sure have a lead foot and i do not need my truck to run any more rich than it already does. do you know how much gas cost on southern california? i mean come on! well, just my opinion. dont kill me guys

 

[Lockjaw]

10.5 is pig rich, ,my turbo Z car is only running 11.5 to 1.

I would like to see about 13 to 1.

 

[Yellbird]

Sorry hit the wrong key it runs 13 to 12.5.

10.5 is pig rich, ,my turbo Z car is only running 11.5 to 1.

I would like to see about 13 to 1.

 

[Verndog]

i have to disagree. being that i have used the safc, i know that it works. of course, not as well as a stand alone but that was never the argument. i am not a huge fan of the unichip, i do not care for how it makes the trucks run so rich, in my opinion stock tundras are a bit rich. there are a lot of problems that show up down the line when your engine runs that rich. sure it is ideal for certain race engines but then again those get rebuilt after every race. not something i am looking forward to tackle. if the unichip is so great, it should give that 9% propossed increase in power as well as making the truck more efficient. i dont know about all you guys but i sure have a lead foot and i do not need my truck to run any more rich than it already does. do you know how much gas cost on southern california? i mean come on! well, just my opinion. dont kill me guys

I can confirm Yellbirds post, I'm running unichip. Your post is the exact opposite of true (False). A stock Tundra runs rich in open loop and unichip fixes this. My before A/F reading were 10.0-1 to 10.5-1 and now are 12.8-1. 12.5 to 13.0-1 is maximum power range. And 14.7-1 is maximum fuel efficiancy and emmisions range. Unichip states 5-9% gains depending on vehicle, and how well tuned it is. I got right at the 7%?? Where are you getting your info?

http://www.tundrasolutions.com/photopost/data/500/178492003-Headers-Catback-Intake-med.jpg

Kevin

 

[Verndog]

hey I hate to be a doubting thomas, but the dyno graph for a stock 2000 model shows 245HP. I don't buy that for a second, most all the dyno numbers I have seen show ~200.

What gives?

Read on...all dynos are back to the flywheel (BHP). There is a full explaination on how this DOES work in "what the numbers mean and why"....on that same page.

http://www.ppdbillet.com/images/Unichip/the numbers 2-23-04.txt

Kevin

 

[Lockjaw]

Sorry but this pisses me off. That link is complete BS. So what if his method of backing into BHP is accurate to within 3 hp on a manual transmissioned vehicle with up to 400HP. Where is the proof of that? And lets just say what proof would be, dyno the engine on an engine dyno, and then throw the engine in a car, and run it again. I doubt seriously this Jack guy has done anything even resembling that.

And that tells me absolutely ZIP about what a Tundra does, since the V8 tundra doesn't come with a manual transmisson. Why not just publish the RHWP and leave it at that?

Sorry but I don't just BELIEVE everything I read on a VBB.

 

[Toasted Coastie]

Sorry but I don't just BELIEVE everything I read on a VBB.

then I guess you wont believe me when I tell you that you are LOSING 2 RWHP using the k&n drop filter, compared to the oem paper!