Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 42
  1. #1
    Site Admin Green Hulk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Morgan City, LA
    Posts
    36,398
    +1
    2,524

    RIVA ECU test results with B kit

    This ECU performs exactly as Riva claims. It automatically compensates for boost with the B kit without the need for a piggy back fuel controller. They definately hit a home run with this ECU

    It performed well with excellent holeshot and extreme acceleration throughout the midrange. My RPM's topped out at 8400 with an occasional flash of 8450 which is the operating range recommended by Riva. These RPM's were achieved with an 81mm nozzle and an out the box Riva 15/19 3 blade.

    The RPM's were lower than what i got the previous weekend with the RR ECU (8500) so i decided to go back to the landing and switch back to the RR ECU and fuel controller. RPM's now were against the rev limiter at 8600 and i had to feather the throttle to maintain 8500-8550. (was much cooler out today than the last time i was out) So basically i gained about 150 RPM's over the Riva with the RR ECU.

    The only explanation i can offer is that typically mapping that is boost dependant will drop off timing as boost increases. This prevents detonation and melting down your engine and is a very safe way of doing things. With the RR ECU the mapping is set and doesn't adjust with boost so no matter how much boost you make timing remains the same. This is where the extra top end power comes from with the RR ECU.

    It might be argued that the RR ECU may not be safe with the B kit at these higher RPM's due to no reduction in timing, but there are many of us out there, including me that are running this configuration with no issues whatsoever. Now, if we were to increase boost even further that what a B kit provides we might start running into some detonation issues, but as it stands right now i think those running the RR ECU, fuel controller and B kit are fine.


  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Taylor, MI 48180
    Posts
    321
    +1
    7
    Jerry, Did you get any numbers to go with the difference in RPM?

  3. #3
    GTXX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NW, GA
    Posts
    1,776
    sounds like the Riva ECU set up is more of a no brainer that might be better for folks that don't want to live on the edge and have to monitor everything as closely.

  4. #4
    Site Admin Green Hulk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Morgan City, LA
    Posts
    36,398
    +1
    2,524
    TCR, today with the Riva ECU 80.2 at 8400 and 81.5 with the RR all over the rev limiter. With some pitch work on the impeller it should have gone 82+ with the RR ECU.

  5. #5
    captain obvious Lurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Visalia, Ca
    Posts
    2,316
    What about acceleration between the two ECUs?

  6. #6
    Site Admin Green Hulk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Morgan City, LA
    Posts
    36,398
    +1
    2,524
    Hard to tell without running on an accelerometer. Low's and mids felt close. RR pulls harder on top.

    It's worth noting that these results were with a B kit. The added boost could have dropped it to a way lower timing map.

    Back to back ECU tests with a lower boost SC such as the Riva stage 3 SC could have yielded different results.

  7. #7
    After these tests my RR ECU might go up in price But not taking anything away fro Riva I still think their ECU is safer though.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    ocean nj
    Posts
    781
    +1
    15

    Riva ECU with B kit

    Jerry,Great info ive been thinking about this set up for a while and now we have the answer.Great site keep up the good work.

  9. #9
    shhr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Springfield,TN
    Posts
    2,546
    +1
    311
    no fuel controller and 999 I like the Riva ECU plus you keep some of the stock features with the Riva. It will be on my winter time list

  10. #10
    EZ Dock of Long Island Shibby1485's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    9,464
    +1
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by rab1 View Post
    Jerry,Great info ive been thinking about this set up for a while and now we have the answer.Great site keep up the good work.
    well i suppose that depends on how you are determining his results. It's closure to the wondering minds, but the decision of which is better i think is still going to be subjective. hmmm

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Test results with issues
    By 01xp in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-25-2016, 10:17 PM
  2. Riva engine internal upgrade kit test result,anyone?
    By tysonfzr in forum Yamaha PWC Performance (4-stroke)
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 10-04-2010, 09:26 PM
  3. Riva ECU for B-kit A/F #s (my results)
    By idizzy in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 08-12-2008, 06:59 PM
  4. Test results gas mileage with 42# injectors
    By Mark S in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-21-2006, 07:54 PM
  5. Test results: Modified stock grate VS Riva grate
    By Green Hulk in forum 4-Tec Performance
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 09-23-2005, 10:39 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •