Guys, Posted seperately here as it's more performance related.
I've included dyno plots for those that have sent them to me, I'll add more as I get them
Dyno Results
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: Unknown existing SP Customer who was there on the day
Name: Bill Lang
Mileage: 25K
Power Mods: TTE Turbo 7-8PSI
Expected Power: 180bhp
Actual Power: 178.8bhp
Expected Torque: 188 ft/lb
Actual Torque: 215ft/lb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: Evileye
Name: Phil Martin
Mileage: 9K
Power Mods: Stock
Expected Power: ?bhp
Actual Power: 138bhp
Expected Torque: ?ft/lb
Actual Torque: 125ft/lb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: MuffDan
Name: Jason Fielder
Mileage: 79K
Power Mods: Che Header
Expected Power: 138bhp
Actual Power: 106bhp
Expected Torque: ? ft/lb
Actual Torque: 114 ft/lb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: Turbo Steve
Name: Steve Aland
Mileage: 32K
Power Mods: Hass Stage II Turbo 10PSI
Expected Power: 220bhp
Actual Power: 214bhp
Expected Torque: ? ft/lb
Actual Torque: 214 ft/lb
(http://www.mr2roc.org/Repository/misc/pictures/dynoextravaganza25112006/turbosteve.jpg)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: SimonP
Name: Simon Prowse
Mileage: 25K
Power Mods: TTE Exhaust, markiii inlet pipe, TRD Filter, no precats, unichip
Expected Power: 145-150 bhp
Actual Power: 145 bhp
Expected Torque: ? ft/lb
Actual Torque: 129 ft/lb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: Philster_d
Name: Phil Dittum
Mileage: 30K
Power Mods: C2 Power Turbo (V2) 12PSI
Expected Power: 220bhp
Actual Power: 269bhp
Expected Torque: 210 ft/lb
Actual Torque: 246 ft/lb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: bossman23780
Name: Chris Dargavel
Mileage: 43k
Power Mods: TTE Turbo 7-8PSI, TRD Flywheel, TRD LSD, C-1 Drive train Pulley
Expected Power: 175bhp
Actual Power: 184bhp
Expected Torque: 160 ft/lb
Actual Torque: 216 ft/lb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: Gazz
Name: Gary Bacon
Mileage: 37K
Power Mods: TTE Turbo 7-8PSI, TTE Exhaust, markiii inlet pipe
Expected Power: 180bhp
Actual Power: 200bhp
Expected Torque: ? ft/lb
Actual Torque: 211 ft/lb
(http://www.mr2roc.org/Repository/misc/pictures/dynoextravaganza25112006/gazz.jpg)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: Spit
Name: Ste Pittey
Mileage: 91K
Power Mods: C2 Power Turbo (V1) 12PSI, Exeddy Clutch
Expected Power: ? bhp
Actual Power: 267bhp
Expected Torque: ? ft/lb
Actual Torque: 230 ft/lb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: Chris
Name: Chris Roy
Mileage: 36K
Power Mods: Unichip, Remus Dual Exhaust
Expected Power: 140 bhp
Actual Power: 143.9 bhp
Expected Torque: 130 ft/lb
Actual Torque: 130 ft/lb
(http://www.mr2roc.org/Repository/misc/pictures/dynoextravaganza25112006/chrisroy.jpg)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: Loadsawine
Name: Nigel Eccles
Mileage: 17K
Power Mods: PE Turbo 7.5-7.9 PSI, MWR Chargecooler, Top Secret decat pipe, TTE Exhaust
Expected Power: 180 bhp
Actual Power: 199 bhp
Expected Torque: 170 ft/lb
Actual Torque: 185 ft/lb
(http://www.mr2roc.org/Repository/misc/pictures/dynoextravaganza25112006/loadsawine.jpg)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: Heathstimpson
Name: Heath Stimpson
Mileage: 31.5K
Power Mods: Unichip, TRD Filter, H&S Dual Exhaust, markiii inlet pipe
Expected Power: 150 bhp
Actual Power: 144 bhp
Expected Torque: 135 ft/lb
Actual Torque: 144 ft/lb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: TommyD
Name: Tom Dawson
Mileage: 30K
Power Mods: Stock
Expected Power: 125 bhp
Actual Power: 133 bhp
Expected Torque: 130 ft/lb
Actual Torque: 124 ft/lb
(http://www.mr2roc.org/Repository/misc/pictures/dynoextravaganza25112006/tommyd.jpg)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: Leggy
Name: Alex Dove
Mileage: 38K
Power Mods: Cstom Twin Exhaust, Che Manifold, Panel Filter, markiii inlet pipe
Expected Power: 140 bhp
Actual Power: 146 bhp
Expected Torque: ? ft/lb
Actual Torque: 130 ft/lb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: FGRob
Name: Rob Stanyer
Mileage: 6.9K
Power Mods: Ce manifold, Blueflame exhaust, K&N Panel Filter
Expected Power: ? bhp
Actual Power: 147 bhp
Expected Torque: ? ft/lb
Actual Torque: 128 ft/lb
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: markiii
Name: Mark Jones
Mileage: 40K
Power Mods: Hass Stage II Turbo 9.7PSI, Custom Exhaust, Apexi Intake, RPS Streetmax Clutch and Flywheel
Expected Power: 200 bhp
Actual Power: 264 bhp
Expected Torque: ? ft/lb
Actual Torque: 252 ft/lb
(http://www.mr2roc.org/Repository/misc/pictures/dynoextravaganza25112006/markiii.jpg)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and for comparison Phil emailed me his TTE run from Hypersports wwho use teh same dyno as WRC. Phil has a TTE Turbo
(http://www.mr2roc.org/Repository/misc/pictures/dynoextravaganza25112006/philreedhyper.jpg)
Some interesting stuff there that will fuel many lines of debate. It was great to be there when so many cars were dyno'd .
For the record, I think my own boost figures were actually 7.5 to 7.9 according to the charts that Thor produced. ( haven't changed it since they set it up)
Some stonking figures there, guess that reflects the effort that our members go to in setting up their cars.
thanks Nigel I've ameneded that
All fly wheel figures ?
If so why dont we use WHP ?
no idea
its often easier to compare flywheel figures as these are the one manufacturers use (ie what more than 14o are you getting)
it appears that wastage through the 'two's gearbox is around 17% if you wanted to work it out
Conversion factor used to get to flypower on the day was 12% for the '2s (and IIRC 15% for the TVR)
excellent so as Phils big heavy 17" wheels cause more parastic losses I probably put out more power :-) :-) :-) in real terms
Sure s;) ;) s;)
(http://194.24.233.106/SP.jpg)
Quote from: "spit"Conversion factor used to get to flypower on the day was 12% for the '2s (and IIRC 15% for the TVR)
That's what the WRC guys told me. They reckoned the loss was quite small on the '2 due to the axles being driven virtually straight off the gearbox, whereas the TVR has a short propshaft.
Quote from: "philster_d"Sure s;) ;) s;)
(http://194.24.233.106/SP.jpg)
yep I am
(http://www.mr2roc.org/Repository/misc/pictures/dynoextravaganza25112006/markiii.jpg) s:wink: :wink: s:wink:
speaking for the NA boys the big surpirise of the day was the amount of gain people were getting from the che manifold.
With some people running around 133bhp standard the che manifold engines were putting out 145-147bhp with only panel filter changes.
Not bad considering you could get one for less than £200 what with the weak dollar.
EDIT: Except MuffDan whose che header managed to lose him over 30bhp from stock!!! - Something very wrong there!???
You can't beat the exchange rate of "bang for the buck!"
Yep, the Che's headers don't seem bad value do they? s:) :) s:)
I mean I would have even more if I threw on the other wheels s;) ;) s;)
Purely for reference:
274.6bhp
315ft-lb
(http://www.slacey.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/images/griffdynonov06.jpg)
Sean, im a stats man, was wondering if you knew what your 0-60 was, etc on the griff also is that a good representation of the kinda power it should be producing?!
i have no clue s:? :? s:?
Quote from: "bossman23780"Sean, I'm a stats man, was wondering if you knew what your 0-60 was, etc on the griff also is that a good representation of the kinda power it should be producing?!
i have no clue s:? :? s:?
Weight/horsepower. s8) 8) s8)
Whats the weight then? s:lol: :lol: s:lol:
TVR's figures - 340bhp, 340ft-lb - they are WAY over-inflated s:wink: :wink: s:wink:
275bhp & 300ft-lb is what a healthy Griff 500 should produce, so I'm on the money for horsepower and up on torque. O-60 is in a proven 4.8 - 5 seconds, and the power to weight ratio is 266bhp per ton (vehicle weight is 1050kgs).
Nice s8) 8) s8)
Quote from: "Slacey"TVR's figures - 340bhp, 340ft-lb - they are WAY over-inflated s:wink: :wink: s:wink:
saw those figures on the net and thought it was more wishfull thinking!
been thinking again! ...
looking at the dyno results and other TTE dyno's, i wondered why that roughly on average the TTE turbo seems to be in the correct zone of BHP that was quoted origanally by TTE! yet nearly everyones torque figures seem to be well above what TTE say it should have been!
i wonder why this is?
mapping, easier to trim down than tune up
Quote from: "simonp"Except MuffDan whose che header managed to lose him over 30bhp from stock!!! - Something very wrong there!???
s:oops: :oops: s:oops:
Yeah, I had suspisions that I had a blocked main cat, this dyno run was to confirmed it s:) :) s:) SP agreed and fitted me their nice down pipe along with a TTET and SP back box earlier this week, the car is a little bit faster now s:D :D s:D Wish I had an updated dyno run I could post you, I don't like being the slowest car dyno'd!
a little bit faster s:?: :?: s:?:
welcome to the turbo club, numbers are only part of it the driving expierience is the best bit s:D :D s:D s:D :D s:D s:D :D s:D
see you got your sp down pipe and back box , ordered and payed for mine but im still waiting for it now been told it will be in the new year s:( :( s:( s:( :( s:( s:( :( s:(
Quote from: "firepower"a little bit faster s:?: :?: s:?:
welcome to the turbo club, numbers are only part of it the driving expierience is the best bit s:D :D s:D s:D :D s:D s:D :D s:D
( s:( :( s:( s:( :( s:(
Yeah, the car is seriously quick now, I wanted to go straight for the SP240, but Matt couldn't get that done for Christmas. Will be going back in the new year for that and then I'll get a dyno run and see what she's pushing.
The SP exhaust and SP back box do sound nice and look great, there's a fantastic burble when it's ticking over, and sounds great when you wind it up too. Very pleased with the overall package, you're going to like!
can't wait s:) :) s:)
so when did you decide to have the tte turbo and sp exhaust fitted s:?: :?: s:?:
about this time last year, but over the last 12 months I broke my leg, stopping me from driving and suffered another pre-cat failure on top of other various engine problems.
It was worth the wait though. Everyone should get a turbo, its fantastic and great fun surprising BMW's and hot-hatches when you destroy them on a bit of dual carriage way! s:D :D s:D
yeah the turbo's fantastic , especialy when you have just dusted a hot hatch like a civic type r off your exhaust pipe and in to the weeds s:lol: :lol: s:lol:
how long did it take for sp to get your exhaust in stock s:?: :?: s:?:
Not sure, I booked my car in a week before the Dyno Day last month, but had to wait until this last week for them to have the time to install everything.
mmm s:!: :!: s:!: ordered mine 30th september , mat telephoned me on the 14th december , i paid for the system using credit card and thought i would have had delivery this week now told it will be in the new year
bad hold up , it will be a month at least since i paid in full before i get the system s:evil: :evil: s:evil:
That sucks, the wait must be killing you.
I did actually book my car in and ordered my parts around the beginning of August paying a deposit then but had to cancel due to a pre-cat failure taking my engine out. I rescheduled last month for everything except the turbo and down pipe because my replacement reconditioned engine was still having a few issues.
When they got the car, Matt did some tests and discovered the engine was actually fine and it was just a partially blocked main cat so we then went ahead with the works as originally planned.
Maybe you were earmarked for mine as we weren't expecting to be installing my exhaust system until the new year s:oops: :oops: s:oops:
maybe , ah well i just hoped to be able to fit the system while off work over christmas
a little bit miffed that i have paid in full and the system is'nt even ready for delivery s:( :( s:(
good to hear your car is running fine and can't wait now to get my exhaust system fitted s:) :) s:)
hey firepower!!
dont forget to get it dyno'd then you can update your sig!
sure will mate s:wink: :wink: s:wink: when i get it
I shouldn't really be reviving this thread it's 11 years old but I really don't think I've seen it before.
Very interesting reading having all those roadsters on the same Dyno at the same time and with some charts too.
I never knew the C2 kit was 12psi with big power and torque.
It does suggest that for more naturally aspirated bolt on power, the exhaust is the best place to look.
Quote from: lamcote on July 28, 2018, 08:57
It does suggest that for more naturally aspirated bolt on power, the exhaust is the best place to look.
Maybe not just for NA.
The 2 Hass kits put down very similar bhp but massively different torque.
Nigel's PE is making more bhp than the TTE turbos but less torque.
And talking about TTE turbos I can't believe those torque figures far higher than official.
Surely the different exhausts are involved there although I suppose general engine condition tyres and clutch could all be involved.
Quote from: Anonymous on December 7, 2006, 22:47
been thinking again! ...
looking at the dyno results and other TTE dyno's, i wondered why that roughly on average the TTE turbo seems to be in the correct zone of BHP that was quoted origanally by TTE! yet nearly everyones torque figures seem to be well above what TTE say it should have been!
i wonder why this is?
Scott
Resurrected or not, good find. Never seen before.
Had to go back and read from the top.
The post I've quoted seems to echo your thoughts and my observations. Bhp in the right area. Torque above quoted. Interesting.
If that is the same Spit. Well played sir.
Quote from: Ardent on July 28, 2018, 09:40
Quote from: Anonymous on December 7, 2006, 22:47
been thinking again! ...
looking at the dyno results and other TTE dyno's, i wondered why that roughly on average the TTE turbo seems to be in the correct zone of BHP that was quoted origanally by TTE! yet nearly everyones torque figures seem to be well above what TTE say it should have been!
i wonder why this is?
Scott
Resurrected or not, good find. Never seen before.
Had to go back and read from the top.
The post I've quoted seems to echo your thoughts and my observations. Bhp in the right area. Torque above quoted. Interesting.
If that is the same Spit. Well played sir.
You've read itnin Moore detail than me missed that one.
@spit (https://www.mr2roc.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=823)
@loadswine (https://www.mr2roc.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=524)
You guys were there any information to add?
What on earth was the c2 setup made out of??
Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk
Quote from: jvanzyl on July 28, 2018, 14:33
What on earth was the c2 setup made out of??
Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk
Bigger turbo.
Have seen spits at ding day.
Those are some huge torque figures :o. Mines only 188lb/ft
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 13:33
Those are some huge torque figures :o. Mines only 188lb/ft
And it runs on stock ECU :)
.. And there you are with your fancy standalone
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:00
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 13:33
Those are some huge torque figures :o. Mines only 188lb/ft
And it runs on stock ECU :)
.. And there you are with your fancy standalone
How's that even possible.
And I think there's some Engine management envy here ;).
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 16:02
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:00
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 13:33
Those are some huge torque figures :o. Mines only 188lb/ft
And it runs on stock ECU :)
.. And there you are with your fancy standalone
How's that even possible.
And I think there's some Engine management envy here ;).
I keep saying this... The Toyota ecu really is something else. It's got cleverness hidden in it well beyond our understanding. It is immensely flexible and intelligent.
Much to our detriment,or if you can harness it, much to our benefit
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:04
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 16:02
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:00
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 13:33
Those are some huge torque figures :o. Mines only 188lb/ft
And it runs on stock ECU :)
.. And there you are with your fancy standalone
How's that even possible.
And I think there's some Engine management envy here ;).
I keep saying this... The Toyota ecu really is something else. It's got cleverness hidden in it well beyond our understanding. It is immensely flexible and intelligent.
Much to our detriment,or if you can harness it, much to our benefit
Imagine there was someone who actually knew the inside outs of it :o
What I want to know is how the TTE piggyback interfaces with it.
I reckon it you decode that, you're onto a winner
On topic:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User Name: HereComesTheWife
Name: Helen
Mileage: 28K
Power Mods: SP240 kit with ECUMaster EMU Black standalone mapped by RRR
Expected Power: 240 bhp
Actual Power: 230 bhp
Expected Torque: 225 ft/lb
Actual Torque: ?? (awaiting dyno plot) ft/lb
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:08
What I want to know is how the TTE piggyback interfaces with it.
I reckon it you decode that, you're onto a winner
Not possible. Toyota hires actual wizards to do their electricery.
Aaaaaaand I may have made a idiotic error. 188lb/ft at the wheels.
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:04
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 16:02
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:00
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 13:33
Those are some huge torque figures :o. Mines only 188lb/ft
And it runs on stock ECU :)
.. And there you are with your fancy standalone
How's that even possible.
And I think there's some Engine management envy here ;).
I keep saying this... The Toyota ecu really is something else. It's got cleverness hidden in it well beyond our understanding. It is immensely flexible and intelligent.
Much to our detriment,or if you can harness it, much to our benefit
@shnazzle (https://www.mr2roc.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=18356) Do you think the standard ECU works against NA tuning but actually helps (up to a point obviously) forced induction?
Quote from: lamcote on July 29, 2018, 16:26
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:04
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 16:02
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:00
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 13:33
Those are some huge torque figures :o. Mines only 188lb/ft
And it runs on stock ECU :)
.. And there you are with your fancy standalone
How's that even possible.
And I think there's some Engine management envy here ;).
I keep saying this... The Toyota ecu really is something else. It's got cleverness hidden in it well beyond our understanding. It is immensely flexible and intelligent.
Much to our detriment,or if you can harness it, much to our benefit
@shnazzle (https://www.mr2roc.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=18356) Do you think the standard ECU works against NA tuning but actually helps (up to a point obviously) forced induction?
I think it's fantastic at both. If you let the sensors do their thing, it's as flexible as an ecu could be. Start feeding it crap (maf/intake changes, o2 sensor changes, etc) and it loses it's ability to adjust correctly.
Doesn't the PE kit just use the stock ECU?
Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:33
Quote from: lamcote on July 29, 2018, 16:26
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:04
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 16:02
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:00
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 13:33
Those are some huge torque figures :o. Mines only 188lb/ft
And it runs on stock ECU :)
.. And there you are with your fancy standalone
How's that even possible.
And I think there's some Engine management envy here ;).
I keep saying this... The Toyota ecu really is something else. It's got cleverness hidden in it well beyond our understanding. It is immensely flexible and intelligent.
Much to our detriment,or if you can harness it, much to our benefit
@shnazzle (https://www.mr2roc.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=18356) Do you think the standard ECU works against NA tuning but actually helps (up to a point obviously) forced induction?
I think it's fantastic at both. If you let the sensors do their thing, it's as flexible as an ecu could be. Start feeding it crap (maf/intake changes, o2 sensor changes, etc) and it loses it's ability to adjust correctly.
What about with a piggyback though? Would you still run one now?
Quote from: lamcote on July 29, 2018, 16:26
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:04
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 16:02
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:00
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 13:33
Those are some huge torque figures :o. Mines only 188lb/ft
And it runs on stock ECU :)
.. And there you are with your fancy standalone
How's that even possible.
And I think there's some Engine management envy here ;).
I keep saying this... The Toyota ecu really is something else. It's got cleverness hidden in it well beyond our understanding. It is immensely flexible and intelligent.
Much to our detriment,or if you can harness it, much to our benefit
@shnazzle (https://www.mr2roc.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=18356) Do you think the standard ECU works against NA tuning but actually helps (up to a point obviously) forced induction?
No
Correct me if I am wrong but Helens injector duty is way less with standalone than it was with unichip. That's the stock ECU getting involved right there.
And i am having a mare with the 1mz ECU and the det3.
Quote from: lamcote on July 29, 2018, 17:13
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:33
Quote from: lamcote on July 29, 2018, 16:26
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:04
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 16:02
Quote from: shnazzle on July 29, 2018, 16:00
Quote from: dan944 on July 29, 2018, 13:33
Those are some huge torque figures :o. Mines only 188lb/ft
And it runs on stock ECU :)
.. And there you are with your fancy standalone
How's that even possible.
And I think there's some Engine management envy here ;).
I keep saying this... The Toyota ecu really is something else. It's got cleverness hidden in it well beyond our understanding. It is immensely flexible and intelligent.
Much to our detriment,or if you can harness it, much to our benefit
@shnazzle (https://www.mr2roc.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=18356) Do you think the standard ECU works against NA tuning but actually helps (up to a point obviously) forced induction?
I think it's fantastic at both. If you let the sensors do their thing, it's as flexible as an ecu could be. Start feeding it crap (maf/intake changes, o2 sensor changes, etc) and it loses it's ability to adjust correctly.
What about with a piggyback though? Would you still run one now?
Yes. I still run one. But it adds a layer of complexity.
Worth discussing in another thread instead of messing up this one
It's the torque that makes the TTE setup tick most of the boxes for me, just shame power runs out top end
The hass setup is very raw and powerful
It's good keeping the thread alive for reference
Good to see this thread again. Nostalgic!
Apologies for backtracking a little. Haven't been on for a few days.
I've nothing to add about the dyno day really, except that it was really good fun :D
Quote from: 1979scotte on July 28, 2018, 14:41
Quote from: jvanzyl on July 28, 2018, 14:33
What on earth was the c2 setup made out of??
Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk
Bigger turbo.
Have seen spits at ding day.
Nothing special about the turbo unit. Same as the Hass. GT28R.
Gaspar's approach to piggyback mapping was always a little maverick though. He cut his C2 kit teeth on Celicas and then discovered the '2. Here he is having a quiet day out:
https://youtu.be/fTh9Dpy-hWw
Unlike the Hass and others, he didn't bother with ignition adjustment - the EMBlue just juggles the air and fuel maps. Seems to work.
The logic he relayed to me is that the stock ECU is still in play and has plenty of versatility. My map has never been quite right from the off since I started drifting from the original wastegate settings (6psi) with a turbosmart MBC - it runs way too rich after an ECU reset. A couple of bimbles up and down the road and it holds stoich beautifully when pootling and dips to about 11 under boost.
Standalones are great if they're set up well and nothing is touched once they're mapped. As an old fud, I'm comforted by the fact that the ECU is sitting there fine-tuning a crude map and watching knock etc.
I'm similarly fuddy about boost control. A manual valve and decent gauges sits better with me than a sensor & solenoid. EBC is great when it works but absolutely disastrous when it doesn't.