I couldn’t stay away!
Many claims have been made and a lot of educating (myself included) has gone on in this specific thread. I think that is great. Personally this product is still not for me, and Quirt can take this feedback or leave it but the following is my attempt to explain my continued skepticism. Yes some may believe that my standard of proof is high and that is okay with me. All and all though I will say that Quirt has been very professional and I commend him for sticking to his guns.
Directly from the
Crawford Performance website:
1) As explained, and forgive me if I have this wrong, the device repositions the MAF sensor to a different flow stream within the inlet. This tricks the ECU into believing there is less air flow and trims fuel and possibly other engine systems to run at a different open loop map.
Having never seen the Toyota source maps, I do not know for certain that the open loop map is not trimmed by the closed loop map trim. It would seem simple enough for the ECU to learn what the closed loop offsets are and apply them to the open loop to hit the desired set point but that's just me. Let’s presume that this isn’t the case and that the engine system will function as described previously.
Post #65 by Quirt
Knowing that no optimization has been done is a bit scary considering I for one am presuming that Toyota did optimize their system. But let’s presume that this device does ‘fix’ a Toyota optimization failure.
Steve W. posted the following on a different board
Post #7 on 6-15-2006
Pickler posted the following on a different
board on 01-23-2015
Both of these show where peak power vs. peak economy occur. Perhaps Toyota is unaware of this optimization. Additionally in the second graph you will notice the increase in EGT and cylinder head temp curves which may be of interest to reliability for some.
Flow velocity profiles can be found here and knowing where this sensor is baselined on a profile and being repositioned to could help you improve the product. I really have to question what data or math drove the decision process mentioned above.
2)
Air filters vs dyno (skip to 1:55)
30 hp on an air filter. If this is true, we should all go change our filters! Just a friendly reminder for doing general maintenance can provide a really good boost to your vehicle all around
30 hp / (400 hp?) ~ 8%... where did the 8% gain claim originate for the eco block? The
charts posted thus far show 60 to 63 hp (5%) and 190 to 200 hp (5%).
Single dyno runs have been a long standing tradition of the aftermarket trade. I admit that I have never put my vehicle on a dyno. There are many variables in play all of which can contribute to showing gains or a lack thereof. For example, the baseline could be a well warmed up engine and transmission with the AC blasting and a dirty air filter while the modified run is a cold engine and transmission with all accessories off and a brand new air filter (OEM or other) with the ECU recently reset. I asked in
another thread just the other day if the person had recorded any extra vehicle sensor temps during their dyno runs and if they had a dyno calibration spec sheet. More data is better and independent 3rd parties are best
Here’s a video showing back to back runs without changing hardware (6:45 ~ 210.7 hp, 7:00 ~ 204.3 hp = 3% variation) Actually that video is rather interesting with respect to dynos and "snake oil". I could even tell you that the reason the aftermarket filters used didn’t increase power was because they didn’t allow time for the ECU to reset… almost as if one wants to see positive results, one sees positive results and if one wants to see negative results, one sees negative results when it comes to pseudo science type stuff.
If you want to optimize the spacer for power and have access to a dyno, why not record MAF, TPS, O2, Fuel injector duration, pressure… to fine tune the product?
3) I had a section on patents here but someone else took care of that… the only other speculation I had was perhaps the patent/pending wasn’t in the US but I guess we’ll never know especially if it’s not marked on the packaging or part.
4) There is no statement on the website that this is an ‘off-road’, non ‘street legal’ device. If this device is modifying emissions, efficiencies, and power output as claimed, then it should be CARB approved seeing as how this is being sold out of a California facility without restriction (
Escondido Toyota).
Blue color adds 20 hp
I look forward to everyones results.
Trust but verify and best of luck to you all.
