E90Post
 


 
BMW 3-Series (E90 E92) Forum > E90 / E92 / E93 3-series Powertrain and Drivetrain Discussions > N54 Turbo Engine / Drivetrain / Exhaust Modifications - 335i > Vishnu Technical: Ignition timing control facts



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      07-15-2009, 07:11 PM   #1
shiv@vishnu
Tuner
United_States
702
Rep
17,616
Posts

 
Drives: X1, 335i
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SF Bay, CA

iTrader: (0)

Lightbulb Vishnu Technical: Ignition timing control facts

In this post, I'm going to explain how the factory Timing/knock control system works. It's no different, in concept, to any modern engine control system (Mitsu, Porsche, Subaru, etc,.) Most of the differences between the different ECU types has to do with response times, adaption logic, etc,. All of which is beyond the scope of this post.

Also note that these User Adjustable settings (Ign Correction %) are not suggested at this point. They are just for the purpose of this technical discussion. Documentation will be released shortly explaining how to achieve the desired results safely. This post isn't about custom tuning. Its sole purpose is to put to rest some mistruths about ignition timing control through the process of CAS offsetting.

The test vehicle/conditions:
2007 335i
50k miles
Stg 3 (FMIC, catless exhaust, catless dps and twin intakes)
PROcede Rev.II CANbus running Stg 3 map
91oct fuel
85-90F ambient tests

How to read a PROcede datalog (Important):
There are 5 parameters shown in the datalogs
From top to bottom:
RPM: Engine speed
Boost: As measured by the factory TMAP sensor in the upper IC tube
Ignition Correction: This is induced by the PROcede through CAS signal offsetting
CAN DME Ignition Advance: What the factory DME believes the ignition timing to be. This can be read by any OBD logger as well as the BavTech software.
CAN Actual Ignition Advance: The actual ignition timing. I.e., what you would see if you read timing with a timing light tool. This is essentially DME Ignition Advance+Ignition Correction

Note:
All the datalogs were recorded after several (4-5) adaptation runs. All datalogs were of a 3rd gear 4000 to 7000rpm full throttle run.

Test 1: Stock Tune!
Well, actually it's at the minimum user torque setting (10%) since CANbus functionality is disabled in valet mode.

Comments:
Note that boost is at a stock-like 6-10psi. There is no Ignition Correction. Hence, DME timing equals Actual Timing. Notice how the timing curve is nice and linear. Reaching 9.5 degrees by 6000rpm and 13.5 deg by 7000rpm. This represents the maximum timing values the factory DME will target for this IAT, oil temp, water temp, etc. conditions. In other words, even on 100oct race fuel, the logged timing values will not increase.

Test 2: Standard Stg 3 map at 100% Ignition Correction (default value)


Comments:
Now the PROcede is active and boost is at 14-16psi depending on RPM. As one would expect, the PROcede responds by actively inducing 2-3.5 degrees of ignition retard (negative correction). Now Actual Timing is 2-3.5 degrees lower than it was in Test 1 (stock tune). However, DME Timing is still the same (9.5 degrees by 6000rpm, 13.5 deg by 7000rpm) and still its its maximum limit. And as far as the DME can see, the engine is running normally with the expected amount of ignition advance.

Test 3: Standard Stg 3 map at 50% Ignition Correction setting

Comments:
Just as above but with 1/2 of the PROcede's active Ignition Correction (1-1.8 degrees of retard instead of 2-3.5 degrees). Because the PROcede is inducing less proactive timing retard, the engine begins to knock. As a result, the DME intervenes reactively and retards timing (reduced the timing target). Now, the DME ignition advance is slightly lower than it was in Test 2.
Compared to Test 2 (which had full ignition retard), the engine in Test 3 makes more power (runs more Actual timing). However, since DME timing has reached is maximum limit, the DME will regularly attempt to raise timing back to its normal target. All things being equal, it is often the case that it will fail this test and find itself unable to run the desired timing curve. During these failures, minor knock is induced (needless to say). In this case, the maximum timing target is only ~1deg greater than the Actual Timing (allowable timing) so the amount of potential over-advance (and knock severity) is relatively minimal.

Test 4: Standard Stg 3 map at 200% Ignition Correction (twice default value)


Comments:
In this test, we asked the PROcede to induce excessive ignition retard. More than is necessary to guard against knock. In this case, the PROcede is inducing 3-7 degrees of ignition retard! As you can imagine, knock is no where in sight. As a result, the DME is happy to run at the maximum advance limit (as with Test 2). However, notice that the Actual timing is a few degrees lower than it was in the previous examples due to the extra PROcede-induced timing retard. And since the DME has reached its maximum advance limit, the Actual Ignition Advance will go no higher over time. This is a long term approach to preventing knock. That is, the DME will not (and cannot) "learn" around the PROcede's correction. This is myth. All the DME knows is that it is able to run what it believes to be desired/maximum timing curve. And it is happy.

What about Power??
Compared to the Test 2 and 3, the tune in Test 4 making the lowest power since Actual Timing is the lowest overall. Next stronger tune is Test 3 with a higher Actual Timing curve. And stronger than that is Test 1 with slightly more Actual Timing (albeit with more risk of knock and inconsistency due to the Maximum Timing target not being reached by the DME).

And now... just For Fun...
Test 5: Standard Stg 3 map at 50% Ignition Correction (twice default value) but with a big negative timing correction spike at 6500rpm


Comments:
This tune in this test is very similar to what was run in Test 3. Except I went into the actually timing map and induced a short-term 7 deg ignition retard (negative correction) at 6500rpm. The idea behind this test is to see if the DME tries to "learn" or "adapt" to this quick but big timing correction. Looking at the Ignition Correction log, you can see the timing correction behaving just like it did in Test 3. But as soon as engine speed approaches 6500rpm, the PROcede induces several more degrees of ignition retard. But by 6700rpm, it's back to normal levels.
Not surprisingly (based upon what we learned in the previous tests), the DME doesn't even notice it. As such, it cannot compensate for it and what we are left with is a deep but narrow hole in the ignition timing curve, centered at 6500rpm (see Actual Ignition Timing). As far as the DME is concerned (see DME Ign Timing curve), everything is just as it were in Test 3.

And lastly... what about No Ignition Control?
Test 6a: Standard Stg 3 map at 0% Ignition Correction setting

Comments:
In this case, the PROcede is behaving like some other tunes. Basically raising boost, adjusting fuel targets (not shown in log) and letting the DME reactively adjust for timing/knock. Ignition Correction is zero which explains why DME Ignition Adv and Actual Ign Advance are identical. In this case, the DME is not able to reach its desired ignition advance targets due to minor knock activity. It is 1-3 degrees away from its target at higher engine speeds (6000-6700rpm). This means that the DME will routinely attempt to bump timing upwards over the course of driving. All things equal, it will fail these tests, drop timing back down, and continue the cycle.

But since there is absolutely no active ignition correction, there are times when the engine can be 3-4 degrees over-advanced before the knock control system intervenes. When this happens, a large timing correction can occur which results in discernible run-to-run inconsistency. For instance, after this log was conducted, I conducted another one with no changes to the tune/settings/test conditions:

Test 6B: Same as above


In this case, the DME is many degrees off of its Ign Adv target. And, as a result, the DME will induce a situation where the actual ign advance curve "floats" within a 3-4 degree window. When conditions are exceptionally good, the Actual Timing will be high and power will be strong. When conditions aren't so good, there is a much greater chance that power will be rather soft.

So where do all these tunes stack up in terms of power and consistency??

The Test which made the most power is Test 6a (Standard Stg 3 map with 0% Ing Correction). You can see this because Actual Timing is the greatest. The downside of this No Ignition Correction tune is that it is also the least consistent (as seen in Test 6B) as it operates on both sides of the knock threshold. And by a rather large margin, at that. Which brings long-term safety into question due to the fact that it responds to knock reactively.

Nearly as strong, but far more consistent/stable is Test 3 (Stage 3 with 50% Correction). Actual Ign Advance is virtually identical to Test 6a up to 6700rpm. But since DME Ign Advance is only ~1 degree away from the DME's Maximum/Ideal Ing Adv target, this tune doesn't over-step the knock threshold too often or too badly. While it may not be as ideal if long term durability/safety is the first and only priority, it is a far better compromise than the "hit or miss" approach with Test 6a and 6b.

Slightly less strong is Test 2 (Stg 3 map with the default value of 100% Ign Correction). While Actual Ignition advance is slightly lower than what we see in Test 3, DME Ign Advance is at its Max/Ideal Ign Adv target. This suggests that this tune is even less likely to over-step the knock threshold. Which means that this tune will be very consistent and very safe. It sacrifices only a bit of power for extra consistency and long-term safety.

Less strong, obviously, is Test 4 (Stg 3 with 200% Ign Correction) which is over-retarded/under-advanced. While the DME Ign Adv is maxed out (which means great stability/consistency), the Actual Ign Adv is low which means low power. Consistently low power. Not a great tradeoff.

Test 5 isn't worth talking about as it was just a test to prove that the PROcede's timing control not only adjusts the level of the Actual Ign Adv curve, but also the shape.

And Test 1 is the stock tune we all know and love. That is, until we got the taste for more power. And now, it just wont do

Best Regards,
Shiv

Last edited by shiv@vishnu; 07-15-2009 at 07:44 PM.
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 07:14 PM   #2
shiv@vishnu
Tuner
United_States
702
Rep
17,616
Posts

 
Drives: X1, 335i
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SF Bay, CA

iTrader: (0)

And for those who aren't familiar with this subject and don't quite follow yet, please read the post a few times. The concepts are really quite simple. It would do you a great injustice to read it once, throw your hands up in the air and just say "I don't get it".

And for those partisan few who don't like what I have illustrated, sorry. These are the facts. If you choose to debate them, please present evidence you have taken the time to gather yourself. I've also asked the mods/admin to watch this thread closely for intentional derailing.

Shiv

Last edited by shiv@vishnu; 07-15-2009 at 07:37 PM.
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 07:35 PM   #3
dmurray14
The Stig
dmurray14's Avatar
United_States
18
Rep
1,232
Posts

 
Drives: Quickly
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: US

iTrader: (1)

Nice, Shiv. Thanks for the clear explanation and data to go with it. Hopefully this thread stays civil!
__________________
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 07:40 PM   #4
RiXst3r
RiXst3r's Avatar
153
Rep
6,509
Posts

 
Drives: M235i
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ohio

iTrader: (14)

Send a message via AIM to RiXst3r
The PROcede is doing exactly what it is advertised to do... directly and actively controlling timing. This post also shows how important that actually is! Very informative post... thanks shiv!
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 07:43 PM   #5
KWY91
Major
KWY91's Avatar
Singapore
22
Rep
1,299
Posts

 
Drives: 2015 BMW M3 (on order), 458
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Exeter, Devon

iTrader: (3)

Wow, that's very educational! great job shiv!
__________________
Wanna know my mods for my 335i? It's here! http://www.e90post.com/forums/showth...ght=blue+water

Lamborghini's Mica Orange E93 M3
Akrapovic Exhaust //Challenge Rear CF diffuser//ESS VT-575 Supercharger
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 07:47 PM   #6
Zeph
Major
United_States
16
Rep
1,410
Posts

 
Drives: 2008 E92 335i 6MT SGM CR/BD
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Southeast USA

iTrader: (0)

Send a message via AIM to Zeph Send a message via Yahoo to Zeph
As suspected... nice review! Good example of the difference between a solid tune and a dyno-queen tune

As a bonus you get a learning curve, top speed delimiter, and the ability to clear codes and I honestly don't think there is another more complete tune out there.

Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 08:22 PM   #7
WhiteSled
Banned
1
Rep
142
Posts

 
Drives: 2009 BMW 135i
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: East Coast

iTrader: (0)

So let me get this straight, before i present my case.

stage 3 100 percent yada yada with 0 timing control made the most power right but was least stable ect and prone to knock. Obviously.

If your able to control boost by rpm you will not run into ignition issues once the tune is adapted. By subtracting your 2-3 degrees of timing on your stage 3 maps all your doing is giving the ecu a lil more cusion before it tunes it out anyway. Run into a hot day going up hill, it will knock and change the curve. Also can we see the fuel corrections on these graphs?

So this entire timing control thing with the n54 argument is based on the fact that your giving the car a lil more cusion initially but losing power. Its obvious your targeting this at the juicebox and i honesly am no juicebox fanboi, but i did run one and it did get me a 420plus dyno with only a couple of mods. Like i said, ive done extensive dyno/track datalogging and recorded actual vs intended timing. The juicebox has zero control(despite what terry claims), the standback, ive added as much as 7 degrees of timing and was running into the low 20s total advance at 16psi, it worked for a couple runs, and then dialed itself back out. Same thing with retarded timing.

So you ask yourself. Is making a post about controlling 2-3 degrees of timing that will lose power worth the power lose when the stock ecu rides the knock sensor anyway? I guess that up to the user, for me, its not, as long as your responsible and dont do anythign stupid liek run 18psi on 87 octane.
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 08:28 PM   #8
shiv@vishnu
Tuner
United_States
702
Rep
17,616
Posts

 
Drives: X1, 335i
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SF Bay, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSled View Post
So let me get this straight, before i present my case.

stage 3 100 percent yada yada with 0 timing control made the most power right but was least stable ect and prone to knock. Obviously.

If your able to control boost by rpm you will not run into ignition issues once the tune is adapted. By subtracting your 2-3 degrees of timing on your stage 3 maps all your doing is giving the ecu a lil more cusion before it tunes it out anyway. Run into a hot day going up hill, it will knock and change the curve. Also can we see the fuel corrections on these graphs?

So this entire timing control thing with the n54 argument is based on the fact that your giving the car a lil more cusion initially but losing power. Its obvious your targeting this at the juicebox and i honesly am no juicebox fanboi, but i did run one and it did get me a 420plus dyno with only a couple of mods. Like i said, ive done extensive dyno/track datalogging and recorded actual vs intended timing. The juicebox has zero control(despite what terry claims), the standback, ive added as much as 7 degrees of timing and was running into the low 20s total advance at 16psi, it worked for a couple runs, and then dialed itself back out. Same thing with retarded timing.

So you ask yourself. Is making a post about controlling 2-3 degrees of timing that will lose power worth the power lose when the stock ecu rides the knock sensor anyway? I guess that up to the user, for me, its not, as long as your responsible and dont do anythign stupid liek run 18psi on 87 octane.
Please re-read my post and put understanding the data I presented a higher priority than trying to defend your dated opinion on this subject. The facts are now presented. There is no place or need for misinformed opinions any longer. For example, with regards to ign. retard, the ECU does not "tune it out" or "ride the knock sensor" like you claim. Please understand the post. Many of your other statements are also illogical/wrong.

Shiv
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 08:34 PM   #9
WhiteSled
Banned
1
Rep
142
Posts

 
Drives: 2009 BMW 135i
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: East Coast

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu View Post
Please re-read my post and put understanding the data I presented a higher priority than trying to defend your dated opinion on this subject. The facts are now presented. There is no place or need for misinformed opinions any longer. For example, with regards to ign. retard, he ECU does not "tune it out" or "ride the knock sensor" like you claim. Please understand the post. Many of your other statements are also illogical/wrong.

Shiv
it doesnt? Then how come the last two tests which were repeated the curve looks different with less jagged slopes? To me that looks like the ecu tuning out the ignition, run it a couple more time and it will be butter smooth. My statements are not illogical or wrong, maybe they are to you, but afterall you are trying to sell something here, im not.
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 08:36 PM   #10
cincy335i
Lieutenant
cincy335i's Avatar
9
Rep
418
Posts

 
Drives: '08 Black Saph 335i coupe 6mt
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

iTrader: (0)

Great info...thanks for clarifying and taking the time, money and energy to conduct these tests and explain to us in laymens's terms. Looking forward to the next batch of maps, firmware and custon tune documentation.

So do you think that with running the midwest best 94 octane that we could actually lower the timing advance % to say around 50-70% and avoid knock (making more power)? it is just a question to if you think that would work, knowing that it would be best to leave it at 100%, please don't roast me over it. LOL Anyways thanks again...great work!

__________________
Performance |PROcede V5|Stett CAI|UUC/Corsa Exhaust|AA Intercooler|RPI Scoops|Stett Charge Pipe w/Forge DV's|UUC Evo3 SSK/DSSR|Mod CDV Style |Aero Lip|Aero rear|Aero Spoiler|M-Tech Side Skirts|Black Calipers|Black Grille|Black Shadow emblem|Black Vinyl Wrapped Window Trim|35%Tint|Tinted Tails|Style 230 19"rims|Lux H8'sTech |Nav|Cold Weather|Premium|Comfort Access|Sport|
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 08:36 PM   #11
shiv@vishnu
Tuner
United_States
702
Rep
17,616
Posts

 
Drives: X1, 335i
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SF Bay, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSled View Post
it doesnt? Then how come the last two tests which were repeated the curve looks different with less jagged slopes? To me that looks like the ecu tuning out the ignition, run it a couple more time and it will be butter smooth.
Nope and nope. Did you even read the post?

Shiv
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 08:37 PM   #12
MFKN3
Colonel
MFKN3's Avatar
Australia
40
Rep
2,043
Posts

 
Drives: 4.5L stroker s/c E92 M3
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Australia

iTrader: (2)

Thanks Shiv, you're an asset to this community. Makes perfect sense and was very useful, thanks
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 08:39 PM   #13
lawdude
Colonel
lawdude's Avatar
United_States
34
Rep
2,259
Posts

 
Drives: 335i ZPP ZSP TiAg MT
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Georgia

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSled View Post
So let me get this straight,
At no time in my life have I ever read or heard anything unbiased follow those words.
__________________
What do I know? I'm insane.
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 08:41 PM   #14
WhiteSled
Banned
1
Rep
142
Posts

 
Drives: 2009 BMW 135i
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: East Coast

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu View Post
Nope and nope. Did you even read the post?

Shiv
Yes i read the post. Did you read my reply? We are saying the same thing in two different ways.

0 timing control the ecu will have good runs and bad runs based on conditions despite being on the same map right? Now what are these runs based on if conditions vary? The ability for the ecu to run max timing that its programed to run on a stockish car right? aka knock... ok so whats the problem. Im lost why your not following here.
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 08:49 PM   #15
shiv@vishnu
Tuner
United_States
702
Rep
17,616
Posts

 
Drives: X1, 335i
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SF Bay, CA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by got psi View Post
shiv, can you share the knock count for Test 3? Was it a consistant knock, or did it fade out as the DME pulled timing?

maybe a screenie of the run with knock included in the log?

Thanks.
Unfortunately, the "knock status" parameter isn't a very usefull determinator of actual knock activity. It often doesn't register obvious knock while often picking up other noise. And I've seen the DME ignore it which suggests that it is what we all thought it was. Fortunately, there are better alternatives available to us.

Cheers
shiv
iPhone
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 08:54 PM   #16
Malek@MRF
Brigadier General
Malek@MRF's Avatar
United_States
62
Rep
3,404
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3, E46 M3, F30, E30
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Irvine, California

iTrader: (5)

Send a message via AIM to Malek@MRF
Good post Shiv. Be proud homie.

I wish you were local though, we could have some fun talks, haha.
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 08:54 PM   #17
WhiteSled
Banned
1
Rep
142
Posts

 
Drives: 2009 BMW 135i
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: East Coast

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu View Post
Unfortunately, the "knock status" parameter isn't a very usefull determinator of actual knock activity. It often doesn't register obvious knock while often picking up other noise. And I've seen the DME ignore it which suggests that it is what we all thought it was. Fortunately, there are better alternatives available to us.

Cheers
shiv
iPhone
yea, like tapping into the knock wires and then running the signal out of your aux port on your radio. Speaking of which, try that and please report your finding about running advanced timing during partial throttle, light curise conditions. Im serious about this, so check it out yourself, you might change your mind about adding timing there.
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 09:02 PM   #18
Malek@MRF
Brigadier General
Malek@MRF's Avatar
United_States
62
Rep
3,404
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3, E46 M3, F30, E30
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Irvine, California

iTrader: (5)

Send a message via AIM to Malek@MRF
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSled View Post
yea, like tapping into the knock wires and then running the signal out of your aux port on your radio. Speaking of which, try that and please report your finding about running advanced timing during partial throttle, light curise conditions. Im serious about this, so check it out yourself, you might change your mind about adding timing there.
Close, but not exactly.

Knock sensors often time pick up noise that is just induced by the engine itself but it's not necessarily engine knock.

Yes there is a slight amount of electrical noise, but car manufacturers, especially higher end cars are becoming better and better with their wiring systems and computer systems to minimize noise.

Increasing timing advance in partial throttle or cruising conditions by a small amount is not going to cause damage to the motor as long as it's done diligently. The reason most car companies cannot just add more timing is because of emissions and NOx increase. When timing is increased NOx is increased and make the car perform poorly from an emission standpoint.

Increasing timing by a few degrees in cruising conditions will improve fuel economy and also lower the EGT's.
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 09:08 PM   #19
WhiteSled
Banned
1
Rep
142
Posts

 
Drives: 2009 BMW 135i
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: East Coast

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malekreza11 View Post
Close, but not exactly.

Knock sensors often time pick up noise that is just induced by the engine itself but it's not necessarily engine knock.

Yes there is a slight amount of electrical noise, but car manufacturers, especially higher end cars are becoming better and better with their wiring systems and computer systems to minimize noise.

Increasing timing advance in partial throttle or cruising conditions by a small amount is not going to cause damage to the motor as long as it's done diligently. The reason most car companies cannot just add more timing is because of emissions and NOx increase. When timing is increased NOx is increased and make the car perform poorly from an emission standpoint.

Increasing timing by a few degrees in cruising conditions will improve fuel economy and also lower the EGT's.
you are correct, thats why the electrical noise has to be properly filtered out. Ive personally heard knock via the knock sensors which are nothing but stethoscopes. All you hear is inectors firing and mechanical noise, and the abrupt knock event cannot be confused with engine noise as it is clear as day. As for knocking a lil here and there at partial thottle, it is just as important as wot imo....especial when you change the air flow characteristics of a car and run it on the stock tune plus some timing. I am not saying Shivs tune is knocking partial throttle all the time. I am say the stock tune knocks here and there, adding timing to that is not something i would personally do, hence the reason i asked him to check it out in his spare time.
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 09:10 PM   #20
bren335i
Banned
4
Rep
203
Posts

 
Drives: E60 M5
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: BOSTON

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSled View Post
This is a discusion about timing control, not a tune, isnt that what shiv wanted. I dont care about the proceed/juicebox/standback/whatever else. Ive tried 2 of the 3 and my car is now stock....go figure.
2nd try - are you laloosh from n54tech or what?

420whp 135i/certified shit starter since the ClubRSX in your MS3 days?
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 09:13 PM   #21
Malek@MRF
Brigadier General
Malek@MRF's Avatar
United_States
62
Rep
3,404
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3, E46 M3, F30, E30
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Irvine, California

iTrader: (5)

Send a message via AIM to Malek@MRF
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSled View Post
you are correct, thats why the electrical noise has to be properly filtered out. Ive personally heard knock via the knock sensors which are nothing but stethoscopes. All you hear is inectors firing and mechanical noise, and the abrupt knock event cannot be confused with engine noise as it is clear as day. As for knocking a lil here and there at partial thottle, it is just as important as wot imo....especial when you change the air flow characteristics of a car and run it on the stock tune plus some timing. I am not saying Shivs tune is knocking partial throttle all the time. I am say the stock tune knocks here and there, adding timing to that is not something i would personally do, hence the reason i asked him to check it out in his spare time.
Yes the engine COULD knock a very small rate even in partial throttle. But it depends on how severely that knock is per EF.

Every engine is different in regards to what is considered "safe" knock. For example, on a given motor, 60 ms of knock per EF is unsafe. Where as the engine could have knock a few times at around 15-25 ms per EF in part throttle.

However, this is Shiv's thread and I think you wanted the response from him, not me, so I will let him answer you if he chooses to.
Appreciate 0
      07-15-2009, 09:14 PM   #22
Jason
Administrator
Jason's Avatar
United_States
6712
Rep
16,676
Posts

 
Drives: E90 M3
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bren335i View Post
2nd try - are you laloosh from n54tech or what?
In fact, yes.
Appreciate 0
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:31 PM.




e90post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST