this almost make me thinks about re-swapping the VVEL back in the Z .. lol

Pretty damn impressive jordo.

Do you know exactly what was changed and by how much?

While this is great news with nice results, I'm still a bit nervous about what the safe operating range is before the valves decide to meet in the middle and have a catastrophic party.

Not sure how this adds more power considering Nissan makes the GT-R but subscribed for curiosity

:confused:

What does Nissan making the GTR have anything to do with adjusting VVEL to make more power?

In a simple way.
Think of this as being able to add a better intake cam to the car, but by doing so via tuning software. It gets more complex than that and some goes above my head.

My thinking is that efficiency is maximized and there is little to no room for improvement. Maybe there is for FI

Jordo's dyno results prove the exact opposite, and he's not FI.

Well the debate has always been, the system is smart and very efficient for the OEM engine/exhaust setup but does it adapt when upgrades are added (NA or FI). I think between O&G (FI) and now Jordo! (NA setup) we can see there is room for improvement via software tuning when you start to modify the car greatly, potentially not when you just add exhaust or intake but maxing out NA upgrades.

Is this tuning capability generally available in UpRev or is it still beta? Reason I ask is my car will be getting tuned for FI in the near future.

not in Beta anymore and any Pro Tuner cable has access to it , I cant say for the Tuner version.

Ill see if I can dig up a NA with full bolt ons dyno graph and show how much low end wtq can be added with VVEL tuning later. JTran did one 2 weeks ago, we were all very impressed.

sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note

Subscribed. Very interesting full mod NA results.

Yep, I don't know about just an intake and cat back, but if you start to get into different intake manifold or headers, there are definitely additional gains to be made over simply adjusting fueling and spark.

That said, it remains an empirical question -- I should think it's certainly worth exploring with intake, exhaust and anything other than the OEM CAT (i.e., HFC's or TP's).

There are max limit tables that prevent taking things too far, so no worries of damage so long as you leave that alone.

Based on evidence from other folks with the PPE headers that suggested adding a mechanical restriction to the PPE headers (e.g., a cat) minimized the small dip in torque down low (around 3.8-4.5K), we decreased cam overlap in that region, and made nice gains, with the exception of a very narrow band (about 4 - 4.2K -- seemingly a resonance issue) where it just didn't budge.

Experimenting with increasing overlap there reduced power, and confirmed that we were making changes in the right direction. I suppose we might play with it all more another time -- I'll keep everyone posted.

Anyway, in the mid range to up top, we increased overlap and made nice gains from about 5K to redline. A small touch up of fueling to help maintain target AFR's and we were done.

Generally speaking, the goal is to set cam overlap, duration, and lift to optimize cylinder filling and exhaust pulses at a given RPM so you achieve an optimal mixture for making peak torque -- it can take some trial and error, although we had a few clear ideas of what to change and where.

However, this is a protuner feature only -- email Martin at rsenthalpy@gmail.com for more specific details on the tune or to arrange for a tune yourself.