Chrome noob- chrome or aem for 850whp

[kywhitelightning]

Each has its pros and cons.

The biggest thing the flash ECU offers is drive ability in all types of climates with out retune... Think stock here. Get in, turn key, go fast! Most AEM tunes can never come close to this.

Also with the flash ECU you use your stock sensors. And, at least with a Clone ECU, you can use any boost control solenoid.

You keep the obdii port and the ability to pass your smog test.

Now there are some areas the AEM is good at. .. compete flexibility. With the flash ECU you are stuck with what ever size table is predefined in the ROM. The stock rom had limited timing and afr maps while Chrome has expanded maps. So far no one has had a problem with the map sizes.

No speed density. And to be honest, no one has yet to be able to give the Chrome developer a solid concrete basis for why speed density is better which is based on sound and proven theory and not purely opinion.

No live tuning. You must flash upload all tune changes. Not a show stopper as the flash process is quite quick.

The aem requires a larger up front investment. By using your stock sensors, wiring, etc, your up front costs are significantly lower over AEM.

Again, your tuner will have a preference.

I hope this helps out a bit.



Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

Good luck adapting a MAF to work at that power level. Until Chrome enables SD, AEM would be the only way to go for an anticipated power goal like that. That is the Chrome downfall right now and TBH it's really not a downfall, it's just something not explored yet. A slot style MAF would make a power goal like that achievable but the plumbing size would have to be pretty large and without a honeycomb investment drivability would suffer from that style setup. OP doesn't seem to be terribly concerned with drivability now but I have seen first hand how slot style sensors can be all over the place with the huge tubing required to make the power goal suggested.


Jeff

[familyMAN]

Actually you can tune the fail over tables so that you are more normal. This is not perfect. But it is a "fail over" mode to get you from point A to point B to complete repairs vs being towed home.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

Cool. Didn't realize that you could tune that! My other statement still holds for speed density and the highest hp chrome user just confirmed and expanded upon that as well

[Greg E]

I'll give you a speed density perk...pop a coupler and still drive home even if it's in a hard to get to spot....maybe under the bumper.

Sounds like this isn't going to be an issue for the OP as it seems he's building a track car.

You guys do know that Chrome has the same ability as the stock ROM with the Limp Mode right? Basically the way it works is instead of calculating airflow, the ECU just looks up the IPW from the TPS and RPM based table. The advantage to this in chrome is it can be tuned simply by logging TPS, RPM and IPW. All you have to do is populate the table.

This way if, for whatever reason, you need to disconnect the MAF, the engine will still run. Back when I was tinkering with this in my NA, I was actually able to get the car to run quite will without the MAF plugged in. What's even cooler about the code is it still uses AIT and Baro compensation.

[familyMAN]

Sounds like this isn't going to be an issue for the OP as it seems he's building a track car.

You guys do know that Chrome has the same ability as the stock ROM with the Limp Mode right? Basically the way it works is instead of calculating airflow, the ECU just looks up the IPW from the TPS and RPM based table. The advantage to this in chrome is it can be tuned simply by logging TPS, RPM and IPW. All you have to do is populate the table.

This way if, for whatever reason, you need to disconnect the MAF, the engine will still run. Back when I was tinkering with this in my NA, I was actually able to get the car to run quite will without the MAF plugged in. What's even cooler about the code is it still uses AIT and Baro compensation.

Wait, so what I hear you saying is you tuned it well as essentially speed density.....but I thought speed density was bad?

[arm0red1]

Good luck adapting a MAF to work at that power level. Until Chrome enables SD, AEM would be the only way to go for an anticipated power goal like that. That is the Chrome downfall right now and TBH it's really not a downfall, it's just something not explored yet. A slot style MAF would make a power goal like that achievable but the plumbing size would have to be pretty large and without a honeycomb investment drivability would suffer from that style setup. OP doesn't seem to be terribly concerned with drivability now but I have seen first hand how slot style sensors can be all over the place with the huge tubing required to make the power goal suggested.


Jeff

Good luck? I think Matt's 1100 hp car did quite well at that level on his ford maf.

For the pipes, you dont have to upsize everything, just have one spot bubble to accomodate the maf in blow through.

Otherwise for draw through, have the pipe sections post maf joined with neumatic vbands and reinforment braces (see vibrant performance)

Its not an outrageous stretch, and at those levels, a lot of the car is customed tailored to begin with.

As noted before by greg, its not the ecu thats limited, its the sensors and data collection that you need to address, and they're plenty of sensor upgrades to support that power.

...all of which offer much better resolution and dynamic tuning than SD.

For what your paying and forgoing for access to SD, the payoff seems marginal.


My PRO argument for a stand alone is that you have total control of everything at the ecu level, you define the parameters, you can finitely control lots of minute features, rescale to your needs ect ect.

The flash ecu doesnt offer all of that per say, but then again, it still gets the same job done and doesnt need it.

[Greg E]

Wait, so what I hear you saying is you tuned it well as essentially speed density.....but I thought speed density was bad?

Who said SD was bad??? It's not bad like drunken sloppies with a fat chick. It's just good enough like sober hot model lovin.

Good luck? I think Matt's 1100 hp car did quite well at that level on his ford maf.

For the pipes, you dont have to upsize everything, just have one spot bubble to accomodate the maf in blow through.

Otherwise for draw through, have the pipe sections post maf joined with neumatic vbands and reinforment braces (see vibrant performance)

Its not an outrageous stretch, and at those levels, a lot of the car is customed tailored to begin with.

As noted before by greg, its not the ecu thats limited, its the sensors and data collection that you need to address, and they're plenty of sensor upgrades to support that power.

...all of which offer much better resolution and dynamic tuning than SD.

For what your paying and forgoing for access to SD, the payoff seems marginal.


My PRO argument for a stand alone is that you have total control of everything at the ecu level, you define the parameters, you can finitely control lots of minute features, rescale to your needs ect ect.

The flash ecu doesnt offer all of that per say, but then again, it still gets the same job done and doesnt need it.

Good post! The initial run ray did with Todd's car using the flash ECU with the ARC wasn't stupendous but to be fair, I wasn't there. I know what needs to be done to make it work, I just need a courageous volunteer with the proper setup and some dyno time.

[kywhitelightning]

Good luck? I think Matt's 1100 hp car did quite well at that level on his ford maf.

Have the bugs between the arc 2 and Chrome been ironed out yet?

Jeff

[familyMAN]

I am planning on upgrading to AEM Series2 from 1. Cost wise, I could do Chrome no problem but there seems to be too many unknowns for me. (What maf works for x hp, does it need a separate maf controller, ecu boost control work for big boost, flex fuel, future upgradability, support 5 yrs from now.) AEM is simple, GM IAC, any Map sensor you want and go tune. Serial or USB depending on Series. AEM provided tuning and logging software. Any decent tuner in the country (hell world) knows how to use it.

Counter-intuitive but full standalone seems much more simple to me.

Greg, maybe you can convince me otherwise but I will be going with another AEM.

Edit: the expressed is only the opinion of one man and not representative of all. Also Greg you have done a heck of a service for the "community" bringing this to fruition. Was not trying to be disrespectful of your baby in any way!

[Greg E]

Have the bugs between the arc 2 and Chrome been ironed out yet?

Jeff

The only issue was the load numbers reporting too low when tuning with the car and large injectors. It's simple really. The device is reporting less airflow, therefore the numbers are also smaller. I just need the opportunity to play with it.

GM MAFT works well with chrome, so I don't see any reason why the arc can't either. Both these devices worked just fine for over a decade with the stock ECU....

I am planning on upgrading to AEM Series2 from 1. Cost wise, I could do Chrome no problem but there seems to be too many unknowns for me. (What maf works for x hp, does it need a separate maf controller, ecu boost control work for big boost, future upgradability, support 5 yrs from now.) AEM is simple, GM IAC, any Map sensor you want and go tune. Serial or USB depending on Series. AEM provided tuning and logging software. Any decent tuner in the country (hell world) knows how to use it.

Counter-intuitive but full standalone seems much more simple to me.

Greg, maybe you can convince me otherwise but I will be going with another AEM.

Edit: the expressed is only the opinion of one man and not representative of all. Also Greg you have done a heck of a service for the "community" bringing this to fruition. Was not trying to be disrespectful of your baby in any way!

Didn't take any offense. I know what it is you want. I appreciate you holding out this long for me to present the option for it to you.

Ease of tuning is subjective to the experience the user has. For a noob starting fresh, chrome seems to have been a better option for simplicity sakes as the initial setup is very straight foreword and the new tuner can progress easier as their car runs decently off the bat with minimal effort.

I wish I could get away from evoscan and adapt ECUFlash to interact with the ram live. I also wish we could setup some kind of hardware to monitor the CPU live for storing logs within the ECU case itself. The sad truth is the hardware is better on more aftermarket devices.

If AEM wants to hire me, I'd program a better OS for them from scratch too.

[JasonY]

Only bug with ARC2 is you cant leave it untuned/dialed out and just use Chrome for your tuning(with the ARC for your MAF upgrade)
OP are you building a drag race only car?

Jason