For Sale: JUBU Performance ECU for Lotus Emira (440 Power Upgrade)

[sbproducer]

The last thing I'm looking for is a "show me your nads" contest.

 

[RoryBellows]

I got you SB

The last thing I'm looking for is a "show me your nads" contest.

 

[NJemira85]

The last thing I'm looking for is a "show me your nads" contest.

I mean, I see you saying that, but, just to be clear, it’s a safe space here.

Balls do keep coming up… kitkats balls, your balls, monoballs, unibals. It’s basically all balls.

If what you’re interested in is balls, be your authentic self dude. Don’t let self censorship hold you down.

 

[sbproducer]

Just to provide an update. I do NOT have anything against anyone or any vendor on this forum, including the guy that eats kitkats all day. He has contributed quite a bit to this forum and I personally have used his tutorials. There is nothing personal... even though things can seem to be heated sometimes. I appreciate your concerns and I am reconsidering some things.

 

[sbproducer]

Price: $2,500 OBO

This is a JUBU Performance ECU for the Lotus Emira V6, purchased in June 2024 and configured for a 440 hp upgrade, 91 octane fuel, 7,000 RPM rev limit, and 3rd catalytic converter delete. The unit is in good physical condition with no visible damage. It was removed from my vehicle following an engine failure and has not been used since. JUBU is an Austrian company specializing in performance parts for Lotus vehicles, and this ECU is based on Syvecs technology. It was shipped to me in July 2024 and installed in August 2024.

Important Disclaimer:
This ECU is sold AS-IS, with NO WARRANTY, NO RETURNS, and NO REFUNDS. By purchasing, you acknowledge that you have read and understand the full details of my experience below, including all documented issues and the potential risks associated with aftermarket tuning. Installation and use of this ECU may void your vehicle's factory warranty, bypass stock safety features, and lead to performance inconsistencies or mechanical failures. I strongly recommend professional installation and tuning by a qualified technician familiar with Lotus Emira and Syvecs systems. Buyer assumes all responsibility for compatibility, performance, and any resulting damage to their vehicle. I am providing this full disclosure to ensure transparency and avoid any disputes. Please conduct your own research and contact JUBU directly (info@jubu-performance.com) for any firmware updates or support before making a purchase.

My Experience (Factual Summary Based on Documented Communications):
I installed this ECU in my US-spec Lotus Emira in August 2024 and used it for approximately eight months (until May 2025), alternating with the stock ECU for comparison. During this time, it functioned as intended only a handful of times (about 5 out of 50-100 drives). All issues below were absent with the stock ECU and these issues were reported to JUBU via email and WhatsApp, leading to five remote tuning sessions (September 2024, December 2024, April 2025) and one in-person tuning visit (October 2024). Despite these efforts, problems persisted. Here's a chronological summary of the key issues I encountered:

- August/September 2024 (Initial Installation and First Tuning):
- Power cut/interruption when shifting from 1st to 2nd gear after hitting the rev limiter (reported 8/29/24).
- Audible beeping noise from speakers at >70% throttle (intermittent; reported 8/29/24, resolved temporarily after tuning).
- Frequent stalling in Touring mode when coming to a stop (revs dropping too low; reported 8/29/24 and 9/4/24).
- Inconsistent air conditioning (worked briefly then failed to cool; reported 8/29/24).
- Throttle mapping delay in Touring mode at low revs or from standstill (reported 8/29/24).
- Power felt flat around 4,000-4,500 RPM (reported 9/4/24).
- Stalling while idling (reported 9/4/24).
- Drop in torque/power between 3,500-4,000 RPM after tuning (reported 9/13/24).

- October 2024 (In-Person Tuning in California):
- JUBU team visited for on-site adjustments. Temporary fixes were applied, but issues like stalling and power loss recurred shortly after. JUBU programmed a launch control mode for my car, which they suggested I test immediately after the on-site adjustment visit in October 2024, with a JUBU representative present in the passenger seat. During this test, the engine bay and cabin filled with thick black smoke. JUBU attributed this incident to a factory clutch issue rather than a problem with the JUBU ECU.

- November/December 2024 (Subsequent Tuning):
- Beeping returned during full throttle (reported 11/20/24).
- Power drop/loss between 6,000-7,000 RPM (timing/knock issue; reported 11/20/24 and 12/1/24).
- Limp mode after revving to redline (revs limited to 4,500 RPM, check engine light on; reported 12/1/24).
- Power loss above 6,000 RPM persisted after tuning (reported 12/4/24, temporarily fixed but returned on second drive).

- April 2025 (Final Tuning Sessions):
- Periodic stalling in Touring/Sport modes when stopping or engaging clutch (reported 4/3/25 and 4/24/25).
- Timing issue/power loss between 6,000-7,000 RPM (reported 4/3/25).
- Low RPM instability (revs dropping to ~500 RPM when stopping, sometimes recovering; reported 4/24/25).
- Limp mode during drive (revs limited to 4,500 RPM, stalled afterward; reported 4/21/25).
- Uneven idling and rough starts (ongoing).
- Pops and bangs reduced, but idle issues in Touring mode remained (reported 4/24/25).

- May 2025 (Engine Failure):
- After ongoing knock and timing issues (persistent between 6,000-7,000 RPM), the engine failed catastrophically. Lotus technicians found metal shavings in the oil, indicating severe internal damage. A full engine replacement, supercharger, and clutch components were required (clutch showed hot spots and damage).

JUBU suggested firmware updates for non-EU cars to address CAN bus bugs (e.g., auto-hold, park brake), but these did not resolve my core performance issues. They also denied the ECU could cause engine or clutch failures, attributing them to Lotus defects or user error (e.g., oil issues, track use), none of which applied to my vehicle (regular oil changes with recommended grade, no track use).

Contact: PM me, Serious inquiries only, happy to answer questions based on my experience.

Again, wish you the best moving forward and thanks for sharing.

After looking at the AI summary posted by @PatrickJS, it looks like:

1) Robust knock/fueling margins: Caused engine failure. This is the result of bad tuning?

2) US‑spec CAN issues: Caused some of the problems like, A/C issues, Stalls, Limiter-adjacent torque cuts. Did you actually update the firmware for the CAN issues and did they fix those problems, not including the engine fail?

 

[PatrickJS]

Just keep in mind ai is hit or miss and largely depends on the info you give it (vague questions gives vague responses) so it’s usually 60% correct most of the time. The best way to judge is asking it questions on a field you understand (keep in mind how you ask it) then judge for yourself

 

[sbproducer]

Just keep in mind ai is hit or miss and largely depends on the info you give it (vague questions gives vague responses) so it’s usually 60% correct most of the time. The best way to judge is asking it questions on a field you understand (keep in mind how you ask it) then judge for yourself

Yea Patrick, but it seems to kind of narrow things down or organize things in a way that I can better understand. If I'm reading correctly, it seems to suggest that there is a possibility that it wasn't just CAN discrepancy issues. Which is a concern.

He was a part of the first batch of people, so things may be worked out. Since, there are success stories coming out lately. But I understand the frustrations with the engine failure. Either the tuning wasn't right or there were octane issues or something.

 

[jp129]

Yea Patrick, but it seems to kind of narrow things down or organize things in a way that I can better understand. If I'm reading correctly, it seems to suggest that there is a possibility that it wasn't just CAN discrepancy issues. Which is a concern.

He was a part of the first batch of people, so things may be worked out. Since, there are success stories coming out lately. But I understand the frustrations with the engine failure. Either the tuning wasn't right or there were octane issues or something.

100% the issue is both poor tuning, poor CAN understanding/programming, and highly likely, poor understanding of the HW/SW and its capabilities. Such significant deltas in people's outcomes cannot provide confidence.

One recount from the op that we should focus on, is that the OP had team JUBU fly in and do an in person tuning session. If they were competent in both tuning ability and understanding of the HW/software interface, they would be able to tune out the issues.

I can sympathize that there are significantly more challenges while remote tuning, but they were in person, they have direct access to everything. Either there's bigger problems with the whole setup, which they would bring up or they can figure it out if it's purely tuning (given they have a competent understanding of the SW interface).

Everything that wasn't right about OP's situation is STANDARD practice for a competent tuner to calibrate.

While this is a gross oversimplification, any competent tuner starts with making sure all sensors are properly calibrated and reading accurately, ensure crank/cam triggers are sync'd and set base timing. Calibrate DBW duty cycles, ranges, and pedal positions. Start with a conservative fuel and igntion map to get started and assess functionality.

Begin to tune fueling for cold cranking and idle, then hot cranking and idle. Assess driveability /part throttle responses, assess power delivery/AFRs, THEN they move to WOT and power. Optimize Ignition timing and VVT along the way. Rinse and repeat until desired behaviors/outcomes are acheived. Litereally EFI tuning 101.

Naturally, I can only make an educated guess about the situation, but clearly the math isn't mathing - something about JUBU's process or understanding isn't right.

1) Either JUBU has limited understanding of the Syvecs capabilities and/or how to execute certain stratgies and could only make due with bandaid solutions - that's acceptable if the owners are made aware that they would be part of the development/testing program, but was that the case?

2) Or something about the OPs setup wasn't right, being the propreitors of the HW, how come they couldn't pin point the issue? Let's put the blown engine aside for a second, just talking about the OP's driveability woes, like the laundry list of them?

Everything leads back to incompetence, IMO.

Adding to other contextual feedback from other JUBU customers that have reported engine failures, while correaltion does not equal casuation, it looks a hell of a lot like a trend to me.

I'm egonostic to the company and have zero to gain/lose. I WANT every company that develops Lotus products to be successful. That gives us, the end users, the most flexibility and options. Competition breeds innovation and can drive economics more favorable to the consumer. But we as a community, need to call things for what they are.

To the point about octane. While octane is of significant importance, a competent tuner would not push a tune to the ragged edge where 'reasonable' fuel variations would dictate survival of the motor, unless otherwise told by the owner to go HAM. Should fuel quality be of concern, best practice of starting with a conservative fuel/ign map would allow the tuner to gently assess knock before optimizing for power.

Then you have fail safes (which Syvecs has the capabilities), like utilizing the knock sensor and building a knock table with thresholds (ie, detect X amount of knock count, reduce igntion timing, add fuel, etc) to help reduce or atleast alert the driver of knock/detonation so they can back off the load. Any experienced, competent, tuner would approach it this way.

 

[sbproducer]

100% the issue is both poor tuning, poor CAN understanding/programming, and highly likely, poor understanding of the HW/SW and its capabilities. Such significant deltas in people's outcomes cannot provide confidence.

One recount from the op that we should focus on, is that the OP had team JUBU fly in and do an in person tuning session. If they were competent in both tuning ability and understanding of the HW/software interface, they would be able to tune out the issues.

I can sympathize that there are significantly more challenges while remote tuning, but they were in person, they have direct access to everything. Either there's bigger problems with the whole setup, which they would bring up or they can figure it out if it's purely tuning (given they have a competent understanding of the SW interface).

Everything that wasn't right about OP's situation is STANDARD practice for a competent tuner to calibrate.

While this is a gross oversimplification, any competent tuner starts with making sure all sensors are properly calibrated and reading accurately, ensure crank/cam triggers are sync'd and set base timing. Calibrate DBW duty cycles, ranges, and pedal positions. Start with a conservative fuel and igntion map to get started and assess functionality.

Begin to tune fueling for cold cranking and idle, then hot cranking and idle. Assess driveability /part throttle responses, assess power delivery/AFRs, THEN they move to WOT and power. Optimize Ignition timing and VVT along the way. Rinse and repeat until desired behaviors/outcomes are acheived. Litereally EFI tuning 101.

Naturally, I can only make an educated guess about the situation, but clearly the math isn't mathing - something about JUBU's process or understanding isn't right.

1) Either JUBU has limited understanding of the Syvecs capabilities and/or how to execute certain stratgies and could only make due with bandaid solutions - that's acceptable if the owners are made aware that they would be part of the development/testing program, but was that the case?

2) Or something about the OPs setup wasn't right, being the propreitors of the HW, how come they couldn't pin point the issue? Let's put the blown engine aside for a second, just talking about the OP's driveability woes, like the laundry list of them?

Everything leads back to incompetence, IMO.

Adding to other contextual feedback from other JUBU customers that have reported engine failures, while correaltion does not equal casuation, it looks a hell of a lot like a trend to me.

I'm egonostic to the company and have zero to gain/lose. I WANT every company that develops Lotus products to be successful. That gives us, the end users, the most flexibility and options. Competition breeds innovation and can drive economics more favorable to the consumer. But we as a community, need to call things for what they are.

To the point about octane. While octane is of significant importance, a competent tuner would not push a tune to the ragged edge where 'reasonable' fuel variations would dictate survival of the motor, unless otherwise told by the owner to go HAM. Should fuel quality be of concern, best practice of starting with a conservative fuel/ign map would allow the tuner to gently assess knock before optimizing for power.

Then you have fail safes (which Syvecs has the capabilities), like utilizing the knock sensor and building a knock table with thresholds (ie, detect X amount of knock count, reduce igntion timing, add fuel, etc) to help reduce or atleast alert the driver of knock/detonation so they can back off the load. Any experienced, competent, tuner would approach it this way.

Damn bro.. I didn't know you had Thor's Hammer in your back pocket.. hmmm...

I'm definitely gonna have to reconsider... what to do? Does JUBU have it together now? Have these things been worked out? I have to admit I'm a little surprised.

 

[nimbus]

@Nba19002

Sorry to hear about your car.

Did Lotus give you any more details on what failed ? Is there any cylinder/rod damage, what do the spark plugs looks like etc?

 

[sbproducer]

Hmm.. there are some thoughts that come to mind.

1) Dealing with a vendor/tuner outside the U.S. does lead to a situation where accountability can be significantly compromised because there really is no recourse unless you're trying to be the main character in a Hollywood revenge script. I do give credit to the JUBU team for flying out to location and trying to fix things. This doesn't necessarily speak to competency but it does say something about a desire to make things right.

2) Is remote tuning significantly handicapped? Maybe by the time JUBU got in-person access, the engine was already in the middle of taking a ... from previous remote tuning sessions and driving it around... and by then.. there was no way to stop it from failure. I'm not diverting. It's a serious question. Could remote-tuning be the serious weakness in the overall JUBU package?

3) I just find it hard to believe with all that JUBU has going on and what it's doing in Austria that the end-results could be this way. Was it all smoke and mirrors? I doubt that. However, there probably was a little bit of "development phase without disclosure to customer" going on... this actually happens a lot more than we like to believe and there are endless amounts of lawsuits because of it. Not saying it's justified just more prevalent than you think.

4) And finally, does JUBU have it together now? Do I give it a shot or take a $2600 loss on the kit. All the other parts I can justify easily as they are upgrades I wanted anyway. Something to think about...