2016 Tacoma Dyno Time!!!

The potentiometer itself is probably linear, but the ecu decides what it want's to do. The add-in box makes it non-linear (more sensitive to small movements) and this makes the ecu think that you are being more aggressive with the throttle input.

 

most likely, yes

 

Just read about the box, and basically it just up the voltage from your pedal position. So, when you push the pedal halfway through, the ECU will think it's pushed 100%, and reacts accordingly. It just fools the driver in thinking the truck is faster with less pedal engagement. Does not change linearity of ECU reaction.
http://outbackjoe.com/macho-divertissement/macho-articles/sprint-booster-is-it-worth-it/

 

Anyone good in computers up for a challenge? Anyone?

 

the Toyota 86 ecu has been reprogrammed, although I imagine they expect that's part of that cars livelihood, it will happen eventually

 

I wonder if this addin box would help those of us with a manual to Rev match on down shifts. I have the toughest time with the 2016 when trying to do this. With the clutch in during a downshift I have to floor it to get the rpms to climb fast enough and high enough to Rev match. It feels very unorthodox.

 

Toyota 86 is the frs/brz with d4s

 

Google ecutek racerom, it's a 2016 Toyota fully unlocked

 

This statement is correct.

You are wrench-illiterate (among other things) as you are so fond of pointing out in your posts.

 

I thought the FRS/BRZ used a Subaru ECU. Only thing on there that's Toyota are the injectors.

 

I could be wrong though

Bullydog did crack the 2nd gen ECU.

 

Yeah the frs/brz don't use a Toyota Ecu and that's pretty much their only saving grace.

For perspective, I own a 2013 FRS that I have tuned and modified. I will be trading her in for a 2016 taco off-road up here in Canadaland soon.

 

That was tuning errors. Their S/C tune on the Tundra netted 90 ft/lbs and IIRC, around 60 hp.

N/A tunes are generally worthless as most manufacturers try very hard to tune for max efficiency which subsequently is max power. However, manufacturer tunes do have some play and sacrifice some power to allow for adaptability as they know no two trucks or truck owners are the same. They have checks, feedback loops, and logics in their tune that adjusts based off sensor inputs to insure the engine doesn't blow. Erring towards safety, there is some slack you can tighten up in a stock tune to net a few more HP.

For you specific vehicle, climate, driving habits, you can generally dial in a tune that eliminates the manufacturer safety biases but power increase won't be all that incredible. The best power gains for an NA engine will be netted from increasing timing for higher octane fuel but that can be dangerous as its generally trial and error (just ask @Torspd).

The issue with this approach is your tune is now stagnant and many of those feedback loops are no longer working how they should. For that reason, you can't make a specific and stagnant tune that is applicable to every vehicle. If you make a tune that specifies how an engine will run, you lose the adaptability and the fudge room that the manufacturer originally programed and depending on the vehicle, the location, the air temp, the altitude, the spark plugs, a clogged intake, whatever, you can damage or blow your engine.

I would be hard pressed to recommend a "tune in the box" but we're getting off topic a little. BullyDog did crack the code for the Tundra (and Tacoma), despite their abilities (or inabilities) to tune a vehicle.

 

Just to add on to this, this is why lots of people have a specific tune for specific seasons (at least a winter and summer tune).

 

Since I was brought into this I'll give my 2cents on what I skimmed over a picked up from this loooooong thread. While I'm not "drag racing" our Tacoma. I still feel the 0-60 times, 1/4 mile times and HP and Torq numbers are relevant to a new truck. We've modified a lot of Toyota's in the past 20 years (15 years doing it as DO). You always want the most HP and TORQ you can get from your base vehicle, why you ask? Because it doesn't matter if you are adding bigger tires and heavy bumpers or putting a load in the back, a truck is a truck. Either it's hauling off road equipment or it's hauling a load. Both of which you want as much bang for your buck as you can get. I understand why Toyota did what they did CAFE required it (we could draw our own conspiracy theories over the big three influence on the government) But it is what it is. The engineers are far smarter than me and I would estimate most of us here as to why they went this way. In my dumb down thinking I would have just liked to see the 4.0 thrown some fancy tunning and added a little more HP and TORQ but it is what it is. This still feels like the engine that should have come between the 3.4 and the 4.0. That all being said, the truck IMO makes up for in creature comforts like no tacoma before it. I give them an A+ on options and comfort. I give them a C- on the engine. Again as I drove it into work today with 35's installed on the truck and it's not re-geared yet it actually feels punchy to me and wants to move. But I haven't driven a 4.0 taco in months and I haven't driven the Tundra in a couple weeks.

One more thing I'd like to add to Toyota claiming they did this for mpg is we should have milage numbers with it empty and with it carrying roughly a 1000lbs those numbers compared to the old 4.0 would be an interesting comparison IMO. I can tell you from experience that I'm not getting great mileage from this new set up with the big tires and added weight. I think my best was 14mpg. In comparison, I've done that with our Tundra on 37's s/c with 4:88 gears. So MPG I'm not impressed and frankly won't be till we see a 5mpg difference.

All in all, I still like and enjoy the truck, it's actually fun to drive.

Here's another video I saw the other day that made me scratch my head.

https://youtu.be/jbmOYTMirrw

 

Yes. In my Sig.

Here is of mine, in stock-ish trim. Still in line with completely stock trim 4.0's.

 

What are you doing in here? STS have a turbo kit for the 3.5 that you are planning to start over with?

 

Thanks for the information.

 

Side by side. Take with a grain of salt, but gives a good idea of how these two engines make power differently.

IIRC, the torque dips @ ~2-4k rpms on the FKS engine are due to the injector transition. Not sure why Toyota can't smooth this out