Just e-mailed Jamie at Fuelmoto...

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Jul 5, 2009 | 12:58 PM

jeff.georgalas

Thread Starter

Outstanding HDF Member

Joined: Apr 2009

Posts: 2,523

Likes: 3

From: Illinois

Just e-mailed Jamie at Fuelmoto...

I've had my Rinehart pipes for awhile now, as well as the SE Heavy Breather, and think I'm going to use Jamie's Power Commander for my fuel management system. I already have the SERT, but think I'm going to go Power Commander instead, but I've got some questions. For those of you that have the PC, do you reccomend the III, or the V, and why? Also, I'm planning on doing 103 stage 2 this winter, and if I use the PC III, or V, do you reccomend the auto-tune feature? If so, why? And last but not least, if using the auto-tune, do you believe it gets you close enough to "optimal tuning" without dyno'ing. I don't mind giving up 2-5 HP/TQ, but wouldn't want to lose much more than that. Thanks fellas, I appreciate your input!

Jul 5, 2009 | 01:04 PM

Hammer107

Road Master

Joined: Apr 2009

Posts: 973

Likes: 1

V because it's smaller, thinner and easier to install plus it's compatible with the autotune. If you are going to build a standard 103 then the autotune is probably not necessary as Jamie has a large database of maps.

If you are going to go extreme then the autotune is probably a great idea.

Jul 5, 2009 | 03:09 PM

iclick

Extreme HDF Member

Joined: Sep 2005

Posts: 11,615

Likes: 50

From: Baton Rouge, LA

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeff.georgalas

PCV for the reasons already given by Hammer. Also, you can connect an on-off switch to toggle two maps (e.g. one for cooling, another for mileage) without the $150 hub required for the PCIII.

Quote:

Also, I'm planning on doing 103 stage 2 this winter, and if I use the PC III, or V, do you reccomend the auto-tune feature? If so, why?

I would ask Jamie if he has a map already for that configuration, which he probably does since it is very common. If so, I would say that you don't need AT. It's good for odd configurations where no specific maps are available, incremental upgrades, and/or incorrigible tweakers like me.

Quote:

And last but not least, if using the auto-tune, do you believe it gets you close enough to "optimal tuning" without dyno'ing. I don't mind giving up 2-5 HP/TQ, but wouldn't want to lose much more than that.

I don't feel that a dyno tune is necessary for either a Fuel Moto map and a basic PCV or a PCV-AT, and IMO any improvement that would be made would be insignificant and unnoticeable either way. Optimal AFR for performance is 13.0:1 and if AT is programmed for this AFR that's what you'll get. Although 1/10 AFR plus or minus might make a small difference either way I don't think anyone would notice it.

Detractors will say that ignition advance isn't altered by auto-tune, which is true, but that is not as important for performance as the AFR tables, and is generally optimized in Fuel Moto's base maps.

I'm not sure how you deal with a PCV on top of SERT, but I'm sure it can be done and Jamie would be the one to ask. If you order the PCV be sure to tell them ahead of time. Since SERT is adjustable I would think you would have to get the ECU back to stock or Stage 1 for one of Jamie's PCV maps to work properly, but I'm just speculating since I've never done it.

Jul 6, 2009 | 07:48 AM

jeff.georgalas

Thread Starter

Outstanding HDF Member

Joined: Apr 2009

Posts: 2,523

Likes: 3

From: Illinois

Thanks guys, I appreciate it. But iclick I must have worded my initial question incorrectly. I do have the SERT, but none of it's been installed yet. I'm selling the SERT to a buddy of mine and going with the PCV, based on what you guys are telling me.