SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner
1 - 20 of 62 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,762 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
One huge advantage of softloaders is the ability to swap tunes in under 5 minutes (4:40 for 1st Gen BSR PPC, 3:10 for new RICA iSoftloader). That, when combined with the advantage of having a g-tech allows you to measure real world performance gains on the same road, same car, same outside temps. That when combined with access to a test S60R MT with 2xCAI, BMC air filter, and custom 3"-2x2" exhaust has all the makings for a great thread.



So, in a first for the R Forum, here is how the RICA stage (?) stacked up against BSR Stage one and stock. I honestly wish I could tell you what stage tune the RICA was, but unfortunately while RICA claims the iSoftloader can hold 4 tunes, it only allows you to either tune the car, or return to stock (see above), so I have no idea what stage got loaded. It could be stage 1, since that was the last stage that was downloaded onto iSoftloader. Stage1 and Stage2 were downloaded twice successfully, but since neither shows up on softloader, who knows?

Additional things worth noting, RICA iSoftloader caused an SRS Failure message on the 2004 S60R test car, as other people have previously noted. Interestingly, the BSR PPC cleared this code when BSR software was loaded, so I'm convinced it is a failure of iSoftloader to properly clear error codes, and not something to do with their tune, which has been around for years and did not cause SRS message when loaded using BSR's PPC device.

Additionally, before we get to the graphs, remember these were not hard launches (only 3K rpm or less), and car was NOT powershifted (foot came off gas while clutch was depressed). Test car exhibited a scary clutch slippage yesterday, after some great launches, so it was all about consistency and clutch survivability today.

Stopped by Laguna Seca to add some 97 octane for test (just to be safe running BSR with DP, needed to up crap CA 91 to 93 octane). Added 5 gallons to get me up to 93, and it only cost me $40 (San Jose was much cheaper at $6 for 100 octane). After I stopped crying from spending that much on gas, my eyes cleared and I noticed a HUGE vacant paddock area, and it just seemed appropriate to do some 0-60 runs... I mean, its Laguna Seca and all...

RICA was first up (remember, easy launching/shifting)
0-60 HP

0-60 Speed


Stock
0-60 Speed (note, somehow the tires slipped a little on second run, resulting in minimal bog and a great launch)

0-60 HP


BSR (only was able to do 1 run before I uh, had to leave, and it was pretty boggy 0-60 5.924)

But, I did manage to find an abandoned straight road that had a gate left open, so I was able to do some proper 1/4 mile testing...

BSR (blakc/red) vs RICA (green/blue)



Stock (black) vs BSR (red) vs RICA (green)



This last HP graph is the most informative IMO, as it shows the RICA delivering more HP earlier in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gear.

So this confirms it, upping the boost on your turbo car with an aftermarket tune will make it faster...

Unfortunately, until RICA explains how to select between tunes on the iSoftloader, I won't be able to evaluate if there are any measureable differences between stage 1 and stage 2.

Hope you all enjoyed the info, remember it isn't about the ultimate results (lots of bog today unlike yesterday where there was light coating of sand on the parking lot closer to beach where I was ripping off 4.8 second 0-60 with RICA and 5.5 sec 0-60 stock), but how they compare with each other. Also, none of these runs compare to the runs I was able to do on a test car in Germany on BSR, 40 deg temps and snow tires with minimal bog (1/4 mile 13.3 @ 108)

Having said all that, I should probably start a donation fund for the test car's clutch replacement...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,062 Posts
I would like to see the TQ -vs- RPM numbers for your runs. HP can be very misleading since TQ x RPM = HP.

All these HP -vs- Time tell us less about the difference between the tunes than the TQ -vs- RPM spectrum would.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,062 Posts
Yes, the new forums photo formatting features makes these hard to read. If you are loading these to photobucket its probably best to chose the thumbnail with link to full size image option to cut and past here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,944 Posts
I'd like to see how to zoom pictures without having to save them.
In Firefox, right click and do view image. Should be something similar on IE.

Back on topic - I find it interesting in that last comparison graph how little the tunes seem to help at the top of the rev range.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
785 Posts
GREAT thread. How much does this G-Tech Data unit go for?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,762 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
785 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,762 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
It wouldn't happen to double as an OBD2 scanner, would it?
Its only connection to the car is through the cigarette lighter and suction cup to windshield, so doubtful (able to read RPM through variance in electrical signal).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
I'm not sure I follow the different test results. In first run with RICA, the test appears to be made on November 24 and you reach an end speed of ~81mph on 1/8 mile.

In the comparison with BSR, the RICA run's are done March 11 and you reach an end speed of ~83mph. If the tests are done on different days, different whether conditions etc, the comparison of test results does not say much with so minor differences, especially with a launch from 0 mph and including shifting of gears etc.

But thumbs up for actually making a test comparison!! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
785 Posts
Its only connection to the car is through the cigarette lighter and suction cup to windshield, so doubtful (able to read RPM through variance in electrical signal).
Dam. If it would have doubled, I would be all over this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,628 Posts
I'm not sure I follow the different test results. In first run with RICA, the test appears to be made on November 24 and you reach an end speed of ~81mph on 1/8 mile.

In the comparison with BSR, the RICA run's are done March 11 and you reach an end speed of ~83mph. If the tests are done on different days, different whether conditions etc, the comparison of test results does not say much with so minor differences, especially with a launch from 0 mph and including shifting of gears etc.
The date was wrong in Kelly's GTech unit. The runs were done on the same day.

Thanks Kelly for posting the results ::thumbs up::
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,762 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 · (Edited)
I'm not sure I follow the different test results. In first run with RICA, the test appears to be made on November 24 and you reach an end speed of ~81mph on 1/8 mile.
Joe is exactly right, I noticed the date was wrong on the g-tech mid-way through the testing. G-tech hadn't been plugged into a power source since early 2008, I'm assuming 23 Nov 09 is when the last vestige of juice ran out. All testing was done within 2 hours of each other, the 0-60 runs at Laguna Seca, 1/4 mile runs done on abandoned road on old Army base.

I will check to see how much of a pain it will be to post the torque/hp graphs Stealthy wants, but this took over 4 hours of processing, sorting runs, creating jpegs, hosting images, writing it up, and new forum software SUCKS for making long posts (cursor will not stay in one place when scrolling/using cursor). Not only that, but G-tech connects to computer via a serial port, which I don't have on my "new" desktop purchased in 2007, so I had to go connect it to my daughters computer (aka my old desktop) and install software there, then transfer data over, lol. Fortunately, someone helped fix my home network recently ;)

BTW, the owner of the test car is still waiting to hear back from RICA on why iSoftloader doesn't show more than one tune loaded onto unit, anyone else got any experience with multiple tunes on iSoftloader?

Really would like to evaluate RICA stage 1 vs stage 2...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,628 Posts
It looks like George has a fix for the SRS warning light:
If you have been experiencing an SRS warning light after programming your car, please contact us! We have an update available to resolve this for all customers with this problem. Please email me at [email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
717 Posts
Thanks!

RKelly,

Thank you for taking the time to post this great data! Now, I am trying to figure out if it is "Worth it" to pay for the tune. My wife's 2004 VR with the auto transmission needs a performance boost. It's torque limiter is keeping the boost down to 9.5-10 [email protected]#$%

John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,628 Posts
RKelly,

Thank you for taking the time to post this great data! Now, I am trying to figure out if it is "Worth it" to pay for the tune. My wife's 2004 VR with the auto transmission needs a performance boost. It's torque limiter is keeping the boost down to 9.5-10 [email protected]#$%

John
Its worth it just to get the torque limiting removed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,762 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
RKelly,
Thank you for taking the time to post this great data! Now, I am trying to figure out if it is "Worth it" to pay for the tune. My wife's 2004 VR with the auto transmission needs a performance boost. It's torque limiter is keeping the boost down to 9.5-10 [email protected]#$%
John
OMG, yes. You will have a COMPLETELY different car after the tune. Even for MTs it is worthwhile for the rev limiter increase, extra power and gas mileage, but for '04/'05 GTs, it is a MUST to get an IPD or RICA tune with torque limiter delete.

I obviously am a huge fan of softloader convenience, but IPD has a great tune as well and cool data logging features if you have the time and correct laptop operating system...

Now is a great time though with RICA and EST in a price war on the RICA. Be sure to pick up IPD R Intake to feed the extra boost though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
I have my SR with Rica Stage Two, my wife's VR is stock, there's a noticeable level of difference. More than the numbers suggest, that should be about 20%.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,762 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
good job kelly

now you just have to produce results for IPD's, Heico's & Autotech's tunes :)
If any of those companies would like to send me their tune, I can probably load it on my buddies car and test it. :)
 
1 - 20 of 62 Posts
Top