UpRev Cipher: anybody try theirs yet?
Former G35driver Vendor
iTrader: (23)
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 85
From: Los Angeles California
I can't tell you how many times I've seen this crap on the dyno or street.
The simplest way to say it is "Our ECU's suck."
People talk about some engines being factory freaks, but all of our ECU's are certifiable fatory freaks. Your data is so typical. It buged me for a while but there is nothing that can be done about it untill a comprehensive engine management system comes out.
I have no idea why it does that garbage.
Including the big step shift at ~3500.
I needed a Greddy EU on my sedan to dial some of it out.
Not only its not good for performance, running lean like that can't be good for the engine.
One thing you can probably take from it is that each step shift in the RPM spectrum represents a different level or phase of a continually shifting fuel map.
If that truely is the case, it shows poor continuity in the maps. And I won't even start on the cam angle.
The simplest way to say it is "Our ECU's suck."
People talk about some engines being factory freaks, but all of our ECU's are certifiable fatory freaks. Your data is so typical. It buged me for a while but there is nothing that can be done about it untill a comprehensive engine management system comes out.
I have no idea why it does that garbage.
Including the big step shift at ~3500.I needed a Greddy EU on my sedan to dial some of it out.
Not only its not good for performance, running lean like that can't be good for the engine.
One thing you can probably take from it is that each step shift in the RPM spectrum represents a different level or phase of a continually shifting fuel map.
If that truely is the case, it shows poor continuity in the maps. And I won't even start on the cam angle.
Last edited by Hydrazine; Apr 16, 2006 at 10:26 AM.
MechEE, please post chart or your injectors (INJ PULSE-B1 & B2) at WOT from 2K to 5K RPM. I wonder if ’06 ECU is also trimming pulse or trying to have stoic. AFR while in open loop. Thanks
Originally Posted by MechEE
I've written a RoadDyno application used by the WRX crowd that I'll soon be expanding to support the Cipher, so those of you with Ciphers will soon have a free dyno on tap. 
Here's a sample "dyno" output from a tuned STI (the program accepts RPM versus time datalog along with vehicle parameters like mass / gear ratios / drag coefficient / etc to calculate power versus RPM):
Here's a sample "dyno" output from a tuned STI (the program accepts RPM versus time datalog along with vehicle parameters like mass / gear ratios / drag coefficient / etc to calculate power versus RPM):Also any new updates on the issues with bank 1 and 2?
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Me? What for? I didn't know Cipher was lacking something for this experament. I'm open to suggestion
We're working on a new release right now, but I'm not sure how any of the new features are going to help w/ this experament.
We're working on a new release right now, but I'm not sure how any of the new features are going to help w/ this experament.
For progress 
Which experiment?
If you’re asking about B2 being leaner than B1 then I am guessing this is because of how Nissan designed it, without fuel return system and were fuel is coming to B1 and then via siphon tube to B2. So one closer to source …
If you’re asking about MechEE RoadDyno application, I don’t know. It looks like he decided to ignore us
If you’re asking about my cams (angle separation), I have no clue. But it looks scary to me.
Which experiment?
If you’re asking about B2 being leaner than B1 then I am guessing this is because of how Nissan designed it, without fuel return system and were fuel is coming to B1 and then via siphon tube to B2. So one closer to source …
If you’re asking about MechEE RoadDyno application, I don’t know. It looks like he decided to ignore us
If you’re asking about my cams (angle separation), I have no clue. But it looks scary to me.
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco
Originally Posted by dovla
For progress
Which experiment?
If you’re asking about B2 being leaner than B1 then I am guessing this is because of how Nissan designed it, without fuel return system and were fuel is coming to B1 and then via siphon tube to B2. So one closer to source …
If you’re asking about MechEE RoadDyno application, I don’t know. It looks like he decided to ignore us
If you’re asking about my cams (angle separation), I have no clue. But it looks scary to me.
Which experiment?
If you’re asking about B2 being leaner than B1 then I am guessing this is because of how Nissan designed it, without fuel return system and were fuel is coming to B1 and then via siphon tube to B2. So one closer to source …
If you’re asking about MechEE RoadDyno application, I don’t know. It looks like he decided to ignore us
If you’re asking about my cams (angle separation), I have no clue. But it looks scary to me.
Regarding the RoadDyno application, I haven't had a chance to tweak it. I just have too many side projects going on in parallel!
Former G35driver Vendor
iTrader: (23)
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 85
From: Los Angeles California
Well... Unfortunatly I don't see a clear correlation between the cam timing and A/F. I wish there was because it would be simple. Some parts fit and some dont.
I also doubt the fuel rail is the reason because pressure drop would increase exponentially with increasing RPM... And the change in A/F doesn't appear to be following a continuously divergent exponential trend.
...Even with your good data analysis, I still don't know for sure why its doing that.
Could there be low level issues with the repeatability of the cam solenoids or the cam position sensors?... I hate to ask this question because we will never have anything more than speculation to run on.
I also doubt the fuel rail is the reason because pressure drop would increase exponentially with increasing RPM... And the change in A/F doesn't appear to be following a continuously divergent exponential trend.
...Even with your good data analysis, I still don't know for sure why its doing that.
Could there be low level issues with the repeatability of the cam solenoids or the cam position sensors?... I hate to ask this question because we will never have anything more than speculation to run on.
Last edited by Hydrazine; Jun 6, 2006 at 12:37 AM.
A very interesting discussion yall brewing here! 
How come this Cipher thingie wasn't around when I was sooo heavily involved in R&D of the G/Z ECU (more than a year)???
What a nifty little toy!!! I may consider getting one for myself to play with.
I haven't had a chance to read through the entire thread, but the funny AF bump at around 3750 is programmed into the ECU injector map and can be addressed. I have also noticed the variance between bank 1/2. It looks like a fuel trim thing. If you reset your ECU (via battery discon) ... then immediately log some WOT pull soon after ... you'll see the variance is nearly zero.
... still at work here; can't chat much right now (busy).
Hey Tony ... good seeing you here!
How come this Cipher thingie wasn't around when I was sooo heavily involved in R&D of the G/Z ECU (more than a year)???
What a nifty little toy!!! I may consider getting one for myself to play with.I haven't had a chance to read through the entire thread, but the funny AF bump at around 3750 is programmed into the ECU injector map and can be addressed. I have also noticed the variance between bank 1/2. It looks like a fuel trim thing. If you reset your ECU (via battery discon) ... then immediately log some WOT pull soon after ... you'll see the variance is nearly zero.
... still at work here; can't chat much right now (busy).
Hey Tony ... good seeing you here!
Me too just read this discussion... have been missing out on some good info.
Tony, you and I discussed this a few tiems. this totally validates what I am seeing with my car. IN my case. the bank difference certainly appears electronic. Nor sure why. If I had (when i have) the cipher, i will do some major logging to see what the deal is. It's interesting, because at certain lighter-yet-open-loop loads, i get a perfectly balanced AFR (say, 12.8:1); increaseing this load ever sligtly upsets teh afr in a major way...goes 0.5-0.8 AFR units leaner on B2 (p-side). I have verifyied this many times. Could be a trim issue... this is why i need the cypher to verify... but part of me doubts it, since, a) i have logged all 6 inj duty cycles (right on), b) swapped the injectors side to side (still no change, B2 leaner), and it only occurs in certain open loop load points, NOT all open loop load points or at closed loop loads. It's gotta be the cam, or just inequality of air distribution. Latter les likely, since i have the MREV2+ setup (super stuff).
Tony, you and I discussed this a few tiems. this totally validates what I am seeing with my car. IN my case. the bank difference certainly appears electronic. Nor sure why. If I had (when i have) the cipher, i will do some major logging to see what the deal is. It's interesting, because at certain lighter-yet-open-loop loads, i get a perfectly balanced AFR (say, 12.8:1); increaseing this load ever sligtly upsets teh afr in a major way...goes 0.5-0.8 AFR units leaner on B2 (p-side). I have verifyied this many times. Could be a trim issue... this is why i need the cypher to verify... but part of me doubts it, since, a) i have logged all 6 inj duty cycles (right on), b) swapped the injectors side to side (still no change, B2 leaner), and it only occurs in certain open loop load points, NOT all open loop load points or at closed loop loads. It's gotta be the cam, or just inequality of air distribution. Latter les likely, since i have the MREV2+ setup (super stuff).