Pathetic low end torque

The OP mentioned a supercharger to "fix" his low end torque issue, but i don't believe that would help in the low end (take-off). It would give a nice increase in hp & torque once it kicks in but the same ppl would still complain about the same low end torque or some other lame b/s imo.

 

I really want crawl control on my 2nd gen cuz I am noob on off-roading

 

Now that the OV tune alpha is making it's way into some trucks, we're going to find out if it's been software all along. I also had a 2GR-FE in a RAV4, ran like a scalded cat.. low end was great too (I realize it was quite a bit lighter, but the engine response was totally different).

 

Superchargers are "on" all the time. I think you are thinking about turbos.

 

I am optimistic about this. If the drive by wire is really hampering driveability, this would be a big improvement.

 

Depends on when/how you mash the pedal. Traction Control dials the engine back from a stand still.

This engine makes good power, but needs ROMs to get it. Part of that may be the tune.

It's not my old hot rod or Z28, but this truck scoots when you tell it to. You just have to speak loudly.

 

This is a fascinating subject, and the OP did include it in his post so I hope I\we are not deviating from it.
Superchargers apply boost in direct proportion to the engine RPM and will provide more horsepower at high engine speeds and less boost at lower engine speeds, so you still need to get to higher the RPM range which some ppl seem to hate.

And yes they (supercharges) are always “on” and suffer less lag and are best choice for dragsters and tractor pulls.

If our engines were the higher torque at lower RPM type, such as push rod and long rod type to produce it, we’d get the results the OP is longing for.
Having said that I do think the supercharger is a better choice for us because the Atkinson produces less exhaust pressure to run a standard turbo imo.

But a supercharger would take a bigger bite out of the mpg goals than a turbo and is therefore less desirable, so we’re left with designing a more efficient turbo (than we already have) to work with the Atkinson, and if one could be made I’m pretty sure it would cost an arm and two legs lol!

I would like to see something developed just for kicks though, because I’m a fan!
Cheers!

 

Sorry, correction . Your numbers are 99% made up, and 1% anecdotal, but still slightly related information.

As for the supercharger/turbo debate a few pages back, a supercharger is undoubtedly the way to go. You get much higher torque from the jump and don't have to worry about the fact that this motor makes almost no exhaust pressure. Good luck spinning up a pinwheel with the flow coming out of this trucks exhaust.

You guys should really check out the thread about the OVTune. Check the Dyno graph. It's giving +30 lb-ft of torque at low rpms and similar gains in hp, between 2500-4000 the tune manages to fairly consistently add those kinds if gains. Looks very promising, especially since multiple testers have reported better throttle response as well.

 

Did you mean to quote me because I didn't provide any numbers? I just stated how flimsy Fuego's budget assumption was.

 

Didn't read any of the 12 pages but man you guys really took the bait. OP has his one and only post here and bailed.

 

Slow weekend..... gave us another shot at beating the same dead horse.

 

I don't really have a problem with the power output from the engine. I think it's fine. I think the transmission it's paired with is the problem. The SSP fixes most of what ails it, but I think at the end of the day a transmission with taller gears or the old 5spd would be better.

 

My fault meant to quote the quote that you quoted

 

All is well, have a good weekend

 

OP, just go trade it in on a new Ridgeline. I hear the VTEC kicks in at 1500 RPM, yo!

 

Just have to say, TW restricts members from posting buy and sell until 50 posts, but no restrictions on making new threads. I really like the way TW operates, but putting some restriction on new members creating threads doesn't seem "unreasonable".

How many solid members were banned after being drawn into a shitstorm in the making thread started by a member with very few posts? I can think of a few.

Happy 4th brothers and sisters

 

Wasn't exactly joking when I asked the question... Neither am I an idiot, it was an honest genuine question...The displacment is onnly deviating my .1 liter... Not nearly enough to account for the extra 60hp at the crank... According to toyota I'm pushing 278hp at the crank as opposed to 328hp (understated) advertised by Nissan/Infiniti. With 91 octane being a constant in performance aspect, the only other possible reason for the difference in power would be the cycle in which the fuel is ignited in the engine... Anyone else have any suggestions?

 

Smaller displacement, higher revving engines limited to 12,000 RPM as opposed to our redline which starts at 6k... Also... Weight to power ratio

 

Yeah bro. I know. I was being sarcastic.

 

You were claiming that the 3.7 litre in the Nissan has 200 more horsepower then the 3.5 litre in the Toyota.