XFI vs TT SD

[TurboTnZ06]

For a mostly street car, with some track events with a goal of mid 9's, what is easier to get working and dialed in, XFI or a TT SD chip? I have to buy everything, I don't even have a laptop.

Is it easy to switch from pump gas to race gas and back with both?

What are some unforeseen consequences of ditching the MAF?

 

[Blazer406]

For a mostly street car, with some track events with a goal of mid 9's, what is easier to get working and dialed in, XFI or a TT SD chip? I have to buy everything, I don't even have a laptop.

Is it easy to switch from pump gas to race gas and back with both?

What are some unforeseen consequences of ditching the MAF?

Both will work. It would probably be easier to "switch" between pump gas and race gas tune with the XFI. They do have a "switch" you can install that works like the old thumbwheel chips.... except it switches "tunes" in the fast.

Both use no MAF..... so neither has an advantage.

If you are computer savy..... and like to tinker and play..... long enough to learn the FAST.... by all means.... Call Cal and get you one.

If you want to put a chip in.... crank it up and go driving.... and it will be decently close right out of the box..... go with the chip. The switch from pump gas to race gas could be handled a couple ways..... the most straight forward would be to buy two chips.... and swap between them. If you have enough timing adjustment in the chip (consult Eric @ TT), you could adjust the timing back in the chip for street driving on pump gas.

I'm sure others will chime in....

 

[Nick Micale]

You would be lacking 2 VERY important items going with a chip over the XFI when trying to go mid-9's.

First, you have no data logging ability to know what the tune is or it is doing, and then what corrections you should make. I seriously doubt you can get a chip to work properly the first time out on a mid-9 build? Maybe after 10 or 20 tries?

Second, there is no capability to make instantaneous fuel correction through the RPM and load range.

There are some "band aids" for stock computers to help in this area, but by the time you spend the money on them, you could have purchased the XFI.

No matter what, with the stock computer you will still have 30 year old technology.

A simple mis-step, or bad chip, in the mid-9's can easily cost you more than the price of a XFI.

Just my opinion, but do not know why anyone would want to spend over $20K to run mid-9's reliably and not use the best and latest engine management system.

 

[TurboTnZ06]

That's the problem with the factory chip, if it loses power then the custom adjustment settings have to be reapplied. I assume the XFI has persistent memory even if its disconnected from the battery?

 

[Blazer406]

That's the problem with the factory chip, if it loses power then the custom adjustment settings have to be reapplied. I assume the XFI has persistent memory even if its disconnected from the battery?

Yes.... the XFI will retain what is programmed and stored into memory.

 

[Blazer406]

You would be lacking 2 VERY important items going with a chip over the XFI when trying to go mid-9's.

First, you have no data logging ability to know what the tune is or it is doing, and then what corrections you should make. I seriously doubt you can get a chip to work properly the first time out on a mid-9 build? Maybe after 10 or 20 tries?

Second, there is no capability to make instantaneous fuel correction through the RPM and load range.

There are some "band aids" for stock computers to help in this area, but by the time you spend the money on them, you could have purchased the XFI.

No matter what, with the stock computer you will still have 30 year old technology.

A simple mis-step, or bad chip, in the mid-9's can easily cost you more than the price of a XFI.

Just my opinion, but do not know why anyone would want to spend over $20K to run mid-9's reliably and not use the best and latest engine management system.

Nick.... the TTSD chip (per the TT website) requires a powerlogger. It also uses wideband 02 correction at WOT.

If it does correct at WOT then it would still compensate after the power had been removed.

The XFI does have awesome datalogging capabilities, however.... the powerlogger isn't any slouch. It will see everything the stock ECU sees + boost.... + (properly equipped) EGT's, fuel pressure, and oil pressure.

Also..... if you think you will have a mid 9 tune ironed out on a new XFI install first time out......you are kidding yourself.

Both have their place....

 

[TurboTnZ06]

Also..... if you think you will have a mid 9 tune ironed out on a new XFI install first time out......you are kidding yourself.

That's why I said goal, I don't expect to run 9's out of the box, but I'll start from low boost and work my way up until the head gaskets pop, then I'll port the heads and put on some cometics and wire the wastegate shut.

 

[Blazer406]

That's why I said goal, I don't expect to run 9's out of the box, but I'll start from low boost and work my way up until the head gaskets pop, then I'll port the heads and put on some cometics and wire the wastegate shut.

My jab was at Nick saying it would take 10-20 times out to get the chip dialed in...... like the XFI would be spot on the first time out. Honestly, I think he was probably referring to a chip that has no WOT fuel correction...... like the old 5.6 (or earlier) TT chip, or a RA chip.....

Neither would be "on" fist time out.

The TTSD wideband controlled chip would be spot on very quickly (maybe even on the 1st pass) if you were honest to Eric on the power your car would be making and a target boost level..... he would have it really close right out of the box....the rest would be automatically tweaked by the WOT correction.

I'll give a personal example of how today's wideband TT chips perform. My old combo was a bone stock motor with stock turbo and bolt-ons...and alky... and the TT wideband chip. I had it tuned at 22 lbs on the stock turbo with alky. Target AFR was set to like 11.3 AFR. Stock turbo went out. I bolted on a TE-60.... without changing the wastegate setting. 1st time I mashed it to the floor and went thru the gears.....watching the wideband gauge.... AFR stayed around 11.3....boost was still at 22 psi. Car was way quicker with the 60 at 22 psi vs the stock turbo at the same boost level. The chip compensated right there. The old chips would have had my AFR probably 13:1 or better.

 

[DR BOOST]

My jab was at Nick saying it would take 10-20 times out to get the chip dialed in...... like the XFI would be spot on the first time out. Honestly, I think he was probably referring to a chip that has no WOT fuel correction...... like the old 5.6 (or earlier) TT chip, or a RA chip.....

Neither would be "on" fist time out.

The TTSD wideband controlled chip would be spot on very quickly (maybe even on the 1st pass) if you were honest to Eric on the power your car would be making and a target boost level..... he would have it really close right out of the box....the rest would be automatically tweaked by the WOT correction.

I'll give a personal example of how today's wideband TT chips perform. My old combo was a bone stock motor with stock turbo and bolt-ons...and alky... and the TT wideband chip. I had it tuned at 22 lbs on the stock turbo with alky. Target AFR was set to like 11.3 AFR. Stock turbo went out. I bolted on a TE-60.... without changing the wastegate setting. 1st time I mashed it to the floor and went thru the gears.....watching the wideband gauge.... AFR stayed around 11.3....boost was still at 22 psi. Car was way quicker with the 60 at 22 psi vs the stock turbo at the same boost level. The chip compensated right there. The old chips would have had my AFR probably 13:1 or better.

its easier to control afr's in the 12 sec range than it is in the 9 sec range. i believe the xfi has a much faster processing speed than a stock computer.

if you are using the wideband control to compensate for a mismatched program or chip setting, then you are not going to get very far.

remember....in order for a wideband to demand a fueling correction, it has to sense a need for correction which means the car is off tune.

on a well tuned xfi car, you can turn the correction off.

 

[Blazer406]

its easier to control afr's in the 12 sec range than it is in the 9 sec range. i believe the xfi has a much faster processing speed than a stock computer.

if you are using the wideband control to compensate for a mismatched program or chip setting, then you are not going to get very far.

remember....in order for a wideband to demand a fueling correction, it has to sense a need for correction which means the car is off tune.

on a well tuned xfi car, you can turn the correction off.

I can't say what the processing speed is..... on the stock ECU compared to the fast. The stock ECU could digest 18 FPS on the old direcscan logs.

IMHO most that use the XFI still use WOT O2 correction. If the tuneup is on however.... it will be close. A chip is no different.

Why would you purchase a $2000 system and not use it (WOT wideband O2 correction) unless there was a good reason not to. The wideband correction could compensate for a fuel pump issue for instance.... and might just save your motor..... any good tuner should be able to see (looking at the datalog) the correction going up where it would normally be near 0 correction..... and investigate.

FWIW...I have seen some XFI tuners set the correction % to 0 in the cells that correspond to where the motor is while it is on the two step..... so that the ECU can't compensate there.....cause strange things happen (to AFR and correction %) to the 02's when you start dropping cylinders on a two step....

 

[TurboTnZ06]

Hopefully I won't have any issues with the new Weldon pump setup, and if the tune is close both can do WB corrections to a certain % as well as logging. I like the idea of a switch to change tunes for gas changes, I'll probably want 4 tunes, pump 93, GT100, 116 and maybe alky if I go that route with this car. I've been so used to just swapping chips between race and street it would be cool to still have a multi purpose car.

 

[Nick Micale]

I do have to admit that I have no recent experience with a 9 sec. GN running mid 9's with a chip?

Also do not know if proven chips are available for 9 sec. builds?

I do know however, that there are MANY XFI programs for different builds that would be an excellent starting point for a mid 9 sec. build in a GN.

The new XFI upgrade has a self-learning capability that will make it easier and safer for a novice to get started and up to speed rather quick. Nothing like that is currently possible with a chip.

Not to fault Eric but it is typical of chips to be re-burned, as I have had many customers request their chip to be "tweaked" to optimize performance, and have had extender chips sent back for the same reason.

I personally know it is NOT easy to tune, or even build, into the 9's, but using current 21st. Century technology is certainly easier, more reliable, and more precise than 30 year old computers and technology using piggy-back modifications.

As far as changing programs, XFI has an optional thumbwheel switch that will allow switching between 4 different programs. :smile:

 

[Blazer406]

I do have to admit that I have no recent experience with a 9 sec. GN running mid 9's with a chip?

Also do not know if proven chips are available for 9 sec. builds?

I do know however, that there are MANY XFI programs for different builds that would be an excellent starting point for a mid 9 sec. build in a GN.

The new XFI upgrade has a self-learning capability that will make it easier and safer for a novice to get started and up to speed rather quick. Nothing like that is currently possible with a chip.

Not to fault Eric but it is typical of chips to be re-burned, as I have had many customers request their chip to be "tweaked" to optimize performance, and have had extender chips sent back for the same reason.

I personally know it is NOT easy to tune, or even build, into the 9's, but using current 21st. Century technology is certainly easier, more reliable, and more precise than 30 year old computers and technology using piggy-back modifications.

As far as changing programs, XFI has an optional thumbwheel switch that will allow switching between 4 different programs. :smile:

It's not the norm, but there are many 9 sec chip cars out there..... alot of them still doing it old school.... Have you seen my thread? :biggrin:

http://www.turbobuick.com/forums/general-turbo-buick-tech/338222-fastest-chip-car.html

The self learning feature in the new XFI 2.0 software isn't officially out yet.......I was told (around Christmas) that the self learning feature will be disabled for anything running a MAP sensor bigger than one bar.... basically any boosted motor won't have this feature enabled. With them delaying the 2.0 software release.... maybe they are working on this too? I know in early January they were working on the VVT stuff like in the latest LS motors..... where it could control valve timing.

The fact that Eric builds in overall fueling adjustments that the end user can tweak himself probably saves alot of customers from having to send theirs back. Put ontop of that... the WOT wideband O2 correction (realtime), it is not 30 year old tech anymore.

XFI's aren't immune to screwing up either....our box has been sent back to fix the IAC driver..... because if you unplug the IAC on an XFI car and plug it back in.... while the XFI has power.... it will smoke the IAC drivers. Don't ask me how I know. We also flashed the fast with a new update once..... successfully......and it inverted the TPS table (it thought 0 volts was WOT and 4.9 volts was idle) along with a few other tables when we opened up an earlier tune.

The datalogging of the FAST is definately more robust for the all out racer. We log 6 EGT's on Alan's IROC.... that is the shiznit. It can log everything.

Like I said.... there are plusses to each.....and drawbacks to each.

 

[DR BOOST]

I can't say what the processing speed is..... on the stock ECU compared to the fast. The stock ECU could digest 18 FPS on the old direcscan logs.

IMHO most that use the XFI still use WOT O2 correction. If the tuneup is on however.... it will be close. A chip is no different.

Why would you purchase a $2000 system and not use it (WOT wideband O2 correction) unless there was a good reason not to. The wideband correction could compensate for a fuel pump issue for instance.... and might just save your motor..... any good tuner should be able to see (looking at the datalog) the correction going up where it would normally be near 0 correction..... and investigate.

FWIW...I have seen some XFI tuners set the correction % to 0 in the cells that correspond to where the motor is while it is on the two step..... so that the ECU can't compensate there.....cause strange things happen (to AFR and correction %) to the 02's when you start dropping cylinders on a two step....

its easier to spot a problem in an uncorrected afr datalog than a corrected one.

high rpm/boost misfires can also skew corrections.

i find it easier to review an uncorrected datalog and make adjustments to the tables than to base my adjustments on correction percentage.

 

[BEATAV8]

remember....in order for a wideband to demand a fueling correction, it has to sense a need for correction which means the car is off tune.

on a well tuned xfi car, you can turn the correction off.

Same is true for a TTSD chip... (I prefer not to use closed loop correction)

In general, my advice to the OP:
A chip like the TTSD allows tunability at a limited level, with access to grouped areas of the calibration such as WOT, idle, cruise conditions...etc.. and it can work damn good for what it can do. 9's is not a problem for that particular chip.

The XFI allows access to individual cells of the maps (and much much more). A lot more access for sure... it'll permit the car to run harder so long as the user has the time and knowledge to make use of it.

Something like HPTuners has similar capability as XFI. I used it on my '04 GTO and the WOT tune was just the start. After several months of tinkering, I had improved clutch engagement torque, cold ambient timing compensation, lean cruise timing and lambda offset (34-36mpg on the highway), modified the powertrain protection behavior, changed the fan control, blah blah blah... it was a completely different car. But I also had 54 calibration revisions and dozens of hours of playing with it and datalogging. That would be extremely expensive if you had to pay a fella for his time to do it.

 

[GNBRETT]

XFI has traction control option as well. SD TT does not

 

[TurboTnZ06]

I've used HP Tuners on my Z06, just edit cells etc, lean cruise mode, fan turn on temps etc, fairly easy to use, sort of, if you are an engineer and understand the developers of it would make the user interface mimic the implementation (terrible UI idea for ease of use btw, it should be designed for use by the users goals but I won't go any further than that here).

I'm leaning towards XFI in order to be able to switch between tunes, persistent memory and have more control. What am I going to have to buy the wife to get this purchase approved...

 

[HighPSI]

The self learning feature in the new XFI 2.0 software isn't officially out yet.......I was told (around Christmas) that the self learning feature will be disabled for anything running a MAP sensor bigger than one bar.... basically any boosted motor won't have this feature enabled. With them delaying the 2.0 software release.... maybe they are working on this too? I know in early January they were working on the VVT stuff like in the latest LS motors..... where it could control valve timing.

The self-learning 1 bar restriction is only for the EZ EFI setups. Unless something changes, the self learning feature will be available on all 2.0 applications regardless of MAP. In other words, it will work on the turbo Buick V6 engine. Remember, it is only as good as the WBO2 data that it is receiving, so some big cam engines may struggle with it at idle.

This update is going to have a lot of changes, but certainly isn't needed for everyone. I will be giving a "sneak peak" for those interested at the Casper's event in two weeks.

 

[HighPSI]

The XFI does have awesome datalogging capabilities, however.... the powerlogger isn't any slouch. It will see everything the stock ECU sees + boost.... + (properly equipped) EGT's, fuel pressure, and oil pressure.

I have heard rumors of individual cylinder control. If you are logging EGT's for this reason, I would exercise caution since the stock computer will almost certainly have the stock wastespark setup.

 

[Blazer406]

I have heard rumors of individual cylinder control. If you are logging EGT's for this reason, I would exercise caution since the stock computer will almost certainly have the stock wastespark setup.

I am unaware of possible individual cylinder control for stock type setups. I too agree with waste spark.... things might not be as they appear always....

I was actually referring to monitoring one EGT with the powerlogger.