CM2350 factory file comparrisons...
02-28-2020, (Subject: CM2350 factory file comparrisons... ) 
Post: #28
RE: CM2350 factory file comparrisons...
(02-28-2020 )Rawze Wrote:  
(02-28-2020 )Carhauler Wrote:  Thanks Rawze,




Just curious, what is accelerator noise control exactly?

basically an algorithm that softens the acceleration and deceleration a bit if memory serves me right.

Ah ok. Was mainly looking to rid of Smart Torque... it doesnt seem so smart to me
replyreply
03-15-2020, (Subject: CM2350 factory file comparrisons... ) 
Post: #29
RE: CM2350 factory file comparrisons...
Not sure if an x15 relates to this thread but I'm curious about my ecm code HD10381 CPL4343 and the difference between 485 all the way up to 605.
replyreply
09-03-2020, (Subject: CM2350 factory file comparrisons... ) 
Post: #30
RE: CM2350 factory file comparrisons...
Hi all, is there any file that is compatible with EF10057 that is higher than 500hp?
replyreply
03-06-2021, (Subject: CM2350 factory file comparrisons... ) 
Post: #31
RE: CM2350 factory file comparrisons...
Was also looking into uprating X15 CPL4343 605hp trucks. I'm thinking 605hp 2050tq is probably the ceiling for the trucks, but it would be nice to squeeze a little more out them if possible with factory files.
replyreply
03-06-2021, (Subject: CM2350 factory file comparrisons... ) 
Post: #32
RE: CM2350 factory file comparrisons...
What do you have now in it? Running Rough has been tinkering with x15s and actually prefers the 565/1850 file over the 605/2050 version, and performs better than the 605 file. What application are you running? 2050 isn't really needed in most situations and can be overkill.
replyreply
03-06-2021, (Subject: CM2350 factory file comparrisons... ) 
Post: #33
RE: CM2350 factory file comparrisons...
(03-06-2021 )lane458 Wrote:  Was also looking into uprating X15 CPL4343 605hp trucks. I'm thinking 605hp 2050tq is probably the ceiling for the trucks, but it would be nice to squeeze a little more out them if possible with factory files.

the more you up the torque, the shorter the engine lifespan... by a LOT!

At 2050 torque, you'de be doing good to get 650k miles out of a highway truck as it is before the head had to come of it vs. close to a million miles at 1750-trq.

It is far cheaper to replace the rears with a better spec than it is to torture your engine.


User's Signature: ->: What I post is just my own thoughts and Opinions! --- I AM Full Of S__T!.
replyreply
03-07-2021, (Subject: CM2350 factory file comparrisons... ) 
Post: #34
RE: CM2350 factory file comparrisons...
I think that 2050 torque program makes all the additional torque in the lower rpm's, you definitely don't want that.


User's Signature: Warranty??? Yeah right, I am the warranty!!!
replyreply
05-22-2021, (Subject: CM2350 factory file comparrisons... ) 
Post: #35
RE: CM2350 factory file comparrisons...
any thoughts sir on the ef10059 compared with the ef10060?
replyreply
05-22-2021, (Subject: CM2350 factory file comparrisons... ) 
Post: #36
RE: CM2350 factory file comparrisons...
(05-22-2021 )jaltb4k Wrote:  any thoughts sir on the ef10059 compared with the ef10060?

Program EF10059...
EF10059 = 485HP/[email protected] RPM(CPL3938). Accelerator noise control = ON, Smart Torque = OFF.

EF10060 = 500HP/[email protected] RPM(CPL3938). Accelerator noise control = ON, Smart Torque = OFF.


The 2 programs are fully interchangeable. The differences in detail are...

* The EF10059 program actually tops out at 497HP in the 1500-1700 rpm range.

* The EF10060 program tops out at 512HP at 1700rpm and is 500 HP from 1600 - 1800 rpm.

=== Clearly there is not a lot of differences in peak HP. On average, there is only about 6 hp in total peak across the 1500 - 1800 range between the 2 programs. Most of the differences are in the low-end torque only, where the EF10059 program contributes towards more low-end torque, but this is at a cost of increased engine wear. That is where the biggest differences are.

Someone using that higher torque a whole lot due to tall gearing will end up with an engine that lasts up to about 400k miles LESS overall engine lifespan before the head had to be removed on it vs. than the EF10060 program. If someone was driving the engines in their 1500-1800 rpm range like they should be when pulling hills to avoid excessive wear under high engine loads, then there will be very little difference between the 2 programs.

that is what I see any ways.


User's Signature: ->: What I post is just my own thoughts and Opinions! --- I AM Full Of S__T!.
replyreply
 Thanks given by: JimT




NOTE: Rawze.com is not affiliated, nor endorses any of the google ads that are displayed on this website.
  
  
Theme by MyBB Addict
Contact Us | Rawze.com | Return to Top | Return to Content | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication