Lancer CS3/EX Owners...Please Check in Part IX

[Mazda323]

haha...WRX no need to test drive one la...already tested last time...my frens one...hehe!!!

[Mazda323]

oooo....icic!!!

[Turbonetics]

i buy my car also never test drive.

[Mazda323]

waaa...serious bo? neva test drive u buy liaoz??

[Turbonetics]

can't find any PI allowed test drive of my make.

however after i book my car,i went to mitsubishi showroom with a friend who was looking at a lancer and he asked the executive to let me test their cvt model.

[Mazda323]

oic...like that dam sian man...cannot test drive when buying car...lol..

 

but about the same rite when u test drove the CVT model?

[Turbonetics]

i was pretty satisfied with the cvt and was thinking manual should be better as iam more used to it.

[Icekitten]

i thought manufacturers tune a/f ratio to its standard level which is 14.7:1

ofcourse it will fluctuate slightly maybe +-0.3.

 

Nope manufacturer don't tune to optimum. They tune slightly richer, maybe 14 to 14.3. Supposedly to delay wear & tear. This I found out when doing research on a/f ratios on the net, and also echoed by some more knowledgeable friends.

 

So what tuner does when we install piggyback is to try and tune to optimum, ie. 14.7.

And for those who specifically request for performance, some try to push it by tuning leaner.

 

Too rich, it makes engine work harder to achieve combustion. Too lean may result in detonation or pinging due to 'too efficient' combustion. So yup, the thing is to strike a balance lor. But sadly tuning is not as easy as simply being able to set the a/f ratio at 14.7:1.

[Mazda323]

oic...well i've sat in yur car and i would say..itz a gd car....pick up dam gd....

[Turbonetics]

my stock car's a/f ratio is hovering around the region of 14.7:1.

[Jb15]

ive just chked wif my friend driving a vios and this is the observation:

 

vios, stock: 2.5-3k rpm to reach 100kmh

cs3, unichip: 2-2.5k rpm to reach 100kmh

 

how abt u guys? can provide data for cs3, stock?

 

so my assumption is... if i can reach required speed at a lower rpm, i save more fuel becos the engine is not working as hard?

 

For CS3 Lancer Stock MANUAL : 2.5k-3k rpm to reach 1000kmph...

 

i think the CS3 Lancer Stock AUTO is also ard 2-2.5k

best to test fairly and provide data on flat straights because elevation on highways affects RPM reading too

Btw how come Auto can go to that speed but lower rpm than a manual?

[Jb15]

ive just chked wif my friend driving a vios and this is the observation:

 

vios, stock: 2.5-3k rpm to reach 100kmh

cs3, unichip: 2-2.5k rpm to reach 100kmh

 

how abt u guys? can provide data for cs3, stock?

 

so my assumption is... if i can reach required speed at a lower rpm, i save more fuel becos the engine is not working as hard?

 

Actually....unichip shouldn't affect the rpm range leh...

 

But I am still learning too, so maybe I am wrong. Hopefully some guru can enlighten us...

 

To my knowledge Unichip works by adjusting the a/f ratio.

 

Rpm range shouldn't be affected unless you change the final drive or gear ratio.

 

Sis (rite?), urs is cvt or manual? If CVT I think ard 2.5k rpm 100kmh is normal?

Might affect if the chip's job is to tune a/f ratio which gives the car to perform at optimum power with low rpm Possible IMO..

[Mivec9]

Is it necessary to have the chip to turn a/f ratio or we can purely tune it without any extra chip?

[Icekitten]

Ur EG or CVR?

 

My tuner actually told me that Honda cars come tuned to pretty optimum levels already, so they can't change much if only tuning is done.

 

If CVR, possible reason I might think of is that Mitsu never meant to market the car as a family car anyway. It is considered their baby Evo. So possibly tuned closer to optimum levels as well.

 

But a/f readings always fluctuate, so how do you come to a conclusion that the a/f ratio of the car is set to XXX? Is is the a/f when car is idling or what? This I have always wondered too.

Edited October 10, 2008 by Icekitten

[Icekitten]

I don't know the reasoning, but yes, auto or CVT cars usually operate at a lower rpm than a manual at the same speed. (same engine & make)

[Josephteo]

wah, the manual car can reach 1000 KMPH - faster than the budwiser dragster rocket.....

 

i give way to your manual CS3 next time bro

 

yes bro.. i purposely put one more ZERO so that u can come in to discuss...

[Josephteo]

i was pretty satisfied with the cvt and was thinking manual should be better as iam more used to it.

 

so bro..your ride is a manual right? I love manuals too.. haha.. EXCEPT during traffic jams...

Edited October 10, 2008 by Josephteo

[Icekitten]

Might affect if the chip's job is to tune a/f ratio which gives the car to perform at optimum power with low rpm

 

My thinking was 'performance' refers more to the torque rather than the speed. So it's more of a 'faster pick-up' kind of thing. Like you don't have to go as hard to achieve that pick-up and you eliminate the lag in rpm-rise as compared to before.

 

So similarly, if you have better performance, what it means is that your rpm manages to rise faster and hence you reach a certain speed faster than before, but you don't have to open the throttle as much as before to reach that rpm and speed. Or the same pressure on the throttle as b4 will give you a higher rpm and speed. But it does not give you a higher speed PER rpm as compared to before if you get what I mean.

 

In another thread speaking about rpm and FC too, it was mentioned that two different driving styles result in different FC for the same rpm range. Flooring to reach 3k rpm and 'normal pressure' on the accelerator and 'waiting' for it to reach 3k rpm. Why is flooring 'useless' and only consumes more fuel? Coz how fast the rpm rises is dependent on the engine's capabilities. So flooring isn't going to make it reach 3k rpm much faster than the other method and hence only wastes fuel.

 

Is my reasoning correct? It's good to share technical info and learn more from each other like this.