^ooh that's the fancy stuff. Nice quality choice A+

 

OK, I'm up and running! Test drive was hard to judge added power because everything is snow covered. But it sounds bad ass!

 

No issues with the mods?

 

No issues. I didn't push it hard yet, but was over 3k rpm and 45mph.

 

That is most definitely interesting.

 

jibberjabbs, congratulation for getting your car up and running with no issue. Wasn’t it a nice Christmas present you can drive your supercharged Honda Fit despite the snow?

I swapped position in the rear inlet pipe bracket and everything lines up. There is no issue with the stock air box being too high. The car is very quiet with all stock components. You wouldn’t know that it is there. I was hoping for a bit more attitude and grunt during my morning test run but instead of quietly zooming up to 80 mph and above with ease. My hiccup during abruptly lifting off throttle is gone with ECU reset. I think my gas mileage is going to suffer with being heavy foot.

There is something wrong with Fuzzyfunk’s car. If there is nothing mechanically wrong with the ignition system and the fuel system and fuel injection system, the intake and the exhaust I believe should not be a problem. However, there could be something wrong with the sensors, the electronics that interpret the signal from these sensors and the wiring that are intercepts these signals. These are some of things that I would look at. Some of them are very easy to nail down.
* Fried ECU
* Bad SMT8L
* SMT8L with incorrect map file loaded
* Incorrect wiring between ECU and SMT8L
* Difference in wiring and ECU among 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012—not too likely
* Bad MAF sensor
* Coolant sensor
* Incorrect wiring between ECU and SMT8L: tee is not so bad if map file is correct for the Honda Fit but the intercept and fudging could wreck havoc
- Connect B / Pin 31 intercept Mass Airflow signal
- Connect C / Pin 32 intercept RPM signal

Does anyone know if the Honda Fit has a limp home mode?

 

Steven, Yes best Christmas present ever! I really want to find some dry pavement. I found one patch without snow and it was fun. I think you will like a short ram intake it will let you hear the whine a bit more. So far I am very pleased with the drivability. As for Fuzzy I personally suspect wiring issues because that was the most complex part of the install. It's a tight area to work in and there are multiple wires with the same color like in the circle connector there was like four blue wires.

 

I just heard back from my tuner and the car is running fine now. He is just doing more tests before I pick it up. I'll get more info from him once I go over there. One of the reasons was there was fuel mixture so it wasn't running right. Before I handed the car to him with the sc, I had run my car to empty then replaced my fuel with 91 octane. I should have just let him done it from the beginning. There was a wiring issue as my tuner had to get a new wiring diagram from Gary because the first one we got didn't solve the issue. I have to give some major props to my tuner as he worked on my car during Christmas just to make sure I can get it sooner. It's my only dd and commute a lot. Very thankful that we have a great guy like him here in SoCal. He truly takes care of his customers. Hope everyone is having a nice Christmas!!!

 

Fuel mix? If you ran it down and then put 91, I would've thought it would be fine.

As for wiring, I only know that I got a link for the non-USDM version for a while and haven't compared it to the USDM version. Steven did say some of the colors were a bit similar, so that could've been an issue.

Yeah, props to him for working on Christmas. I'd guess being able to work on a "rare" supercharger for the Fit was interesting in and of itself.

~~~~~

That being said... I guess the issue with mapping vs additional mods is leaning towards making the most out of everything, and less of throwing codes and other issues.

So, for at least two people, the mapping is able to handle the additional mods, beyond that, dunno.

 

That was my thinking too, but he told he removed all the fuel and refilled it with 91. When I ran it empty, I only filled it with 4 gallons of 91. Not sure if that was a factor or not. Pretty sure the wire coloring was an issue. Yea, I definitely gave him a challenge on this one. He installs plenty of superchargers almost on a weekly basis, but this one stumped him a bit. He's thankful though that I chose him to do this. The guys loves to learn new stuff. He works on everything too from trucks to motorcycles. I'll have to ask him if kept the Injen cai or replaced it back with the oem air box since I brought the airbox with me when I first left it there just incase.

 

You might have gotten a bad batch of gas with too much water content. It is not that uncommon. If you intend to dyno your car, one suggestion is get a tank full of 91 octanes and run it down to about ½ tank full. Fill it up with oxygenate racing gasoline such as Sunoco CF 96 octane and have some fun before heading for the dyno. You will see a bit more power in the dyno session from the oxygenate gasoline as well as the race gas property against pinging and knocking.

I wonder what pin out diagram Gary gave to your tuner. These are the different ECU for the various years that I got from Bernardi parts online. I don’t know why there are two engine controls listed per year except for 2013. You can dig up the ECU wiring harness and examine the ECU wiring harness part number. They might provide some insight for ECU cross year compatibility and an inference to wiring compatibility. The Honda service manual would be the best source. I have a printed 2009 Honda Service Manual that confirmed the pin out for the connections that SMT8L needs. Other years’ services manual would have to be look at.

2009
37820-RP3-309, CONTROL MODULE, ENG
37820-RP3-305, CONTROL MODULE, ENG

2010
37820-RP3-A04, CONTROL MODULE, ENGINE (REWRITABLE)
37820-RP3-A64, CONTROL MODULE, ENGINE (REWRITABLE)

2011
37820-RP3-A15, CONTROL MODULE, ENGINE (REWRITABLE)
37820-RP3-A75, CONTROL MODULE, ENGINE (REWRITABLE)

2012
37820-RP3-A17, CONTROL MODULE, ENGINE (REWRITABLE)
37820-RP3-A77, CONTROL MODULE, ENGINE (REWRITABLE)

2013
37820-RP3-A77, CONTROL MODULE, ENGINE (REWRITABLE)

 

I strongly recommend against doing that^

Going in on a more stable fuel and getting tuned to that knock threshold is an absolute disaster waiting to happen on the stock rotating assembly when you go back to 91 oct E10 gas from the corner station. Especially in a boosted hi-comp motor.

Get tuned on the fuel you will be running day to day.

 

Just for dyno session run not for tuning.

 

Unless you have a tune for it, you won't see much in the way of gains anyways.

 

Ah, I see. 7 hours of sleep in the last two days has done a number on my reading comprehension.

But in that case, wouldn't you rather know what it makes day to day?

If the fuel has the same or close to same stoich, and it brings more oxygen to the party leaning out a bit but without knocking there will be a bit more heat. So even without changing timing or boost it could pick up power at the same IAT.

I agree it won't be much though.

 

As tempting as Steven's suggestion sounds, I will just dyno it on just 91. Any suggestions on which dyno I should use? Evasive motorsports which is close to me uses a mustang dyno. There is also Bisimoto near by who uses dynapack. I know there are a lot of arguments out there on which is better and why, etc. This will be my first dyno so I thought I'd ask the community based on their experience as some of you guys probably used several different types already. Let's not get into a long debate on which is better or not, just a recommendation will do.

If I can pick it up today, I'll try and dyno it tomorrow if any are open.

 

While waiting for my 2 1/2" intercooler aluminum connector to arrive I found some 2 1/2" aluminum pipe in the garage. Here is a first prototype of my 4" long 2 1/2" diameter MAF tube. It is very close to the factory MAF tube and maybe off by 1/8" by eye balling the mock up.

Slot cut for the Hitachi LS3/LS7 Corvette MAF flange. The MAF flange is just sitting on top of the tube and need to be braze on.


MAF sensor without the flange and with the flange for comparision.


Here is the factory MAF tube. The factory MAF tube sits around 2.75 mm to 3 mm higher than mine prototype.

 

I hope the OP doesn't mind, or I can move this to a new discussion..

I don't know that I would say any are better, outside of one that can't "load up" the engine properly. Meaning that since you are effectively on a treadmill there is no aero-drag, and you are not pushing against the car's actual mass.

All Dynos suffer this problem, but a good tuner leaves a margin of error that will account for the added load seen in real world operation.. be it leaving a bit more fuel in or leaving some timing out, etc.

The Dynapack will give you a much higher figure than other types (especially compared to Mustang or Superflow) as it takes power at the wheel hubs, and not the Tire OD so not only is that taken out of the equation but there is also no rolling resistance either.

Dynapack owners will sometimes give their customers the "Estimated Flywheel" number which will be even more inflated and is literally just whatever percentage they added on top of the number taken at the wheel hubs.

For example: the 597whp my 1G made recently was on a Mustang Dyno, which is known for reading as much as 9-11% lower than a local DynoJet when the same cars were run on both.

Which would put it as high as ~660whp on the upper end of that range.

Consider that just as a function of physics Dynapack will read higher than a DynoJet or similar and you can see where things just get silly. Dynapacks are probably a bit more convenient to own, but they are easy to manipulate like DynoJet units. It's often done to stroke egos and for advertising.

But really, a number made on the dyno is supposed to be used to compare changes made.

So just saying I made "XXX" whp doesn't really tell you a whole lot, even when you qualify that number with dyno type, atmospheric conditions, fuel, setup details etc.

It DOES however give you a baseline for the future. Ideally, you would then get the car weighed and take it to a local drag strip to see what Trap MPH it will hit consistently. Comparing your Trap vs. Weight to the figure you made on the dyno as well as what your power curve looks like IS a useful set of information to have.

Then, any future changes you make will have something to compare to. This will tell you if what you have done has benefited your setup.

So, if I go back to the same dyno and change the tune and pick up or lose power.. I'll have an idea of what that has actually done for the performance of the car.

Then again, a great many people do not care about any of the above.

 

+1 for just sticking with 91.

The stock ECU's knock control still works 100%. It will always go as far as it is comfortable with the spark timing and can still detect good or bad fuel.

What the SMT8 does is remove timing as a preventive step. It subtracts timing from whatever value is presented to it. We only remove timing under boost.

160whp is what we saw on a Dynojet in a boosted CRZ. What often gets overlooked are simpler equations and simpler answers.

You can look at boost pressure as a "percentage of power gain", via airflow measurement. 6psi is 40% more air than 14.7psia (absolute atmospheric pressure) . 8psi is 54% more air than 14.7psia. Add the right amount of fuel, and you should see +40% or +54% more power respectively. That's just meant as a basic equation.

 

That doesn't work though, even for illustrative purposes.

A TD05H-16G @ 25psi on my setup would make about half the power the HX52 does at the same boost with the same "Engine Demand Flow" .. primarily because of charge density.

This Supercharger, Garrett .48A/R T25 and the Greddy (MHI) TD035HL-14GK at the same PR.. lets say 6psi, on the same car in the same weather will all make different power. I would wager a range as wide as 30-35whp for that matter.