Infiniti Q50 Forum banner

1 - 20 of 73 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Today was the day I replaced my previous Ecutek tune with one from AMS. The difference is amazing! I can’t wait to get it on the Dyno, but when looking at my logs, I see Torque Actual at peak at 893nm at about 4800 rpms.
Converting 893nm to ft lbs is 659. The car feels amazing but 653 ft lbs sounds unrealistic.

Thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,214 Posts
I'd be shocked if you're actually getting 659 foot-pounds of torque. Somethings not right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I'd be shocked if you're actually getting 659 foot-pounds of torque. Somethings not right.
Agree. Is the Torque Actual accurate in the data log? It’s 350nm greater than my previous tune. I can post the relevant section of the datalog if it would be helpful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,214 Posts
Agree. Is the Torque Actual accurate in the data log? It’s 350nm greater than my previous tune. I can post the relevant section of the catalog if it would be helpful.
Since I haven't migrated to an EcuTek tune yet, I'll let someone who is familiar with EcuTek logging answer that question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,392 Posts
I got 645 tq at 3,225 rpm in my last EcuTec log peak. Just as a comparison. What ever that means.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I got 645 tq at 3,225 rpm in my last EcuTec log peak. Just as a comparison. What ever that means.
As reported by the Datalog which is in nm?
645nm = 475.7 ft lbs. That sounds about right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,718 Posts
Today was the day I replaced my previous Ecutek tune with one from AMS. The difference is amazing! I can’t wait to get it on the Dyno, but when looking at my logs, I see Torque Actual at peak at 893nm at about 4800 rpms.
Converting 893nm to ft lbs is 659. The car feels amazing but 653 ft lbs sounds unrealistic.

Thoughts?
I'm not sure how the ECUTEK software is logging that information, It's very possible the log is looking at how much torque the engine is producing at the transmission via some type of sensor.
Or (and most likely) providing an estimate based on wheel-speed, acceleration (G's) and speedometer etc.

Regadless the only way we can validate is at the wheel and considering 15-20% for drive-line loss and you'd be in the 520-550ft-TQ at the wheel on the Dyno.
Which makes sense as that is what many of us would consider the limit for a stock transmission, I'd have some serious concerns if AMS had you running
over 600Ft-TQ at the wheel on a stock transmission...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,392 Posts
As reported by the Datalog which is in nm?
645nm = 475.7 ft lbs. That sounds about right.
Yes, nm. My tq dropped off after the peak, held 600's till 4425 RPM then started to slowly drop after that. At 5000+ RPM your # is very high, a very hot tune. A "dyno" map.

At 400ish hp/450ish tq my transmission was showing signs of overheating b4 my Level 10 upgrades.

If that's what you are getting on a dyno. AMS has pretty hot tunes from what I've seen. I don't think I'll see those # on the 21st when I redyno my car. I want a street/track tune. Pavement is much different than a dyno, and I want a safe/reliable tune. Seb has made himself available while my car is on the dyno the 21st to look at my data logs to compair to the log I just sent him. Not sure if he will make any changes to my maps b4 I go the 21st.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Q60NH:
Great numbers. What is the bank1/bank2 psi you are logging.
I also have an AMS EcuTek tune. On 93 octane I am seeing ~ 22psi. (Data log shows max 37psi - 14.8 = 22.2 psi)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Can the transmission handle the extra torque? I thought I read that the Jatco JR711E transmission is rated only to below 600Nm?

The QX80 has 560Nm and the hybrid 546Nm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
I certainly hope these torque numbers are not an indication of actual torque. Mine peaks at 640nm at 3388rpm in 3rd gear. Once I go into 4th it only peaks at 557nm at 6025rpm.

Note: I am also tuned be Seb at Specialtyz.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
I certainly hope these torque numbers are not an indication of actual torque. Mine peaks at 640nm at 3388rpm in 3rd gear. Once I go into 4th it only peaks at 557nm at 6025rpm.

Note: I am also tuned be Seb at Specialtyz.
557Nm is at the wheels not at the transmission.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,392 Posts
Can the transmission handle the extra torque? I thought I read that the Jatco JR711E transmission is rated only to below 600Nm?

The QX80 has 560Nm and the hybrid 546Nm.
I think this is why Pat at Level 10 saw evidence of overheating in my transmission when rebuilding it. Pre build 0-100 in 9.01 sec. So it was making good power on Sebastian's map. Post transmission rebuild Seb had issues with the new torque table caused by the new valve body. It was a PITA for Seb to get around the new changes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Thanks for all the feedback so far. Attached is a snap of the data log with pertinent columns. I too am concerned about the transmission.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
241 Posts
Wow! Your torque demand is way higher than mine. I don't think that is necessarily relevant to engine torque but at John stated, it is more related to transmission torque which may be related to the converter load.

I also just noticed your log says your in 2nd gear. Maybe you should try a log in 4th gear to see if the Torque Actual reads the same values.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,487 Posts
Can the transmission handle the extra torque? I thought I read that the Jatco JR711E transmission is rated only to below 600Nm?

The QX80 has 560Nm and the hybrid 546Nm.
Yes but this is JR710E, a.k.a.RE7R01A, which supposedly has lower torque rating. Nissan said it's been beefed up when paired with VR30 but provided no details what they really meant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Wow! Your torque demand is way higher than mine. I don't think that is necessarily relevant to engine torque but at John stated, it is more related to transmission torque which may be related to the converter load.

I also just noticed your log says your in 2nd gear. Maybe you should try a log in 4th gear to see if the Torque Actual reads the same values.



Good idea. I'll log a 4th gear pull this afternoon and post it up.


Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,718 Posts
Can the transmission handle the extra torque? I thought I read that the Jatco JR711E transmission is rated only to below 600Nm?

The QX80 has 560Nm and the hybrid 546Nm.
The transmission kept the same Part number but Nissan confirmed it was revised for the VR30 application, as per Q50adix post.

Yes but this is JR710E, a.k.a.RE7R01A, which supposedly has lower torque rating. Nissan said it's been beefed up when paired with VR30 but provided no details what they really meant.
Pretty sure they did confirm at least some of the changes. A different valve-body and higher line pressure being the two that come to mind, but they posted
that information years ago so take that with a pinch of salt. If nothing else I can't say we've seen any durability issues under 500ft-lbs of torque when measured at the wheel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,392 Posts
Sebastian asks me to log from 2k to redline in 3rd gear. I have done a few in 4th, and in automatic WOT 0-120ish
But the torque # i posted was in 3rd gear, not 2nd!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
Pretty sure they did confirm at least some of the changes. A different valve-body and higher line pressure being the two that come to mind, but they posted
that information years ago so take that with a pinch of salt. If nothing else I can't say we've seen any durability issues under 500ft-lbs of torque when measured at the wheel.
At one point, AMS mentioned that the transmission would be good for 600 ft-lbs, and Nostrum Energy kept their recent calibrations from exceeding 600 ft-lbs due to the transmission. It would not surprise me if the reason AMS has the Red Alpha 600 target is due to the transmission's limitations; very few people will do a stage upgrade that requires transmission building, so I believe they chose a target just before that point.

I would like to know what Level 10's recommendations are on their built transmission's capabilities (my current plan is to go down that route next spring, so I have not yet reached out to them).


Edit: don't take the statements as gospel, as I am too lazy to track down their comment on the matter, and that comment is at least a year to year and a half old -- estimates could be different now as more data points have been acquired.
 
1 - 20 of 73 Posts
Top