[pits200]

Notice the drop in fueling, thanks for the help. Wasnt happy with the results I had at the strip today.

[scottro]

Your timing is not very good. I would try reducing boost until it stops going to 0 deg during boost conditions.

[pits200]

Originally Posted by scottro

Your timing is not very good. I would try reducing boost until it stops going to 0 deg during boost conditions.

Then obviously stage 3 aggressive maps with fbo on the 3/17 maps aren't running that great on my car.

Thanks for the help. Any reason for this, it was on race gas.

[themyst]

Procede rev 2.5 or rev 2? Assuming that's an auto.

[pits200]

Originally Posted by themyst

Procede rev 2.5 or rev 2? Assuming that's an auto.

Rev 2.5, stage 3, fbo and correct I'm auto. I tried going back to the 7/29 maps and the shifting seemed "snappier" but the car didn't seem to run as smooth.

I'm just surprised, last fall I ran a 12.4 at the track without my dps. Today, I ran a best of 12.6 with catless dps installed now and similar conditions outside, I also lost 3mph on my trap.

My car throws no codes and runs fine under 75% throttle. But the car seems to lose power for half a second sometimes from 2nd to 3rd. It just seems I'm losing power and need some insight into these logs.

[scottro]

Originally Posted by pits200

Then obviously stage 3 aggressive maps with fbo on the 3/17 maps aren't running that great on my car.

Thanks for the help. Any reason for this, it was on race gas.

Your fuel trim drop looks to be because your AFR is at 9.x , which is pretty rich (Too much fuel). Its trying to correct itself.

Did you accidentely mess up the map by trying to make custom adjustments?

[pits200]

Originally Posted by scottro

Your fuel trim drop looks to be because your AFR is at 9.x , which is pretty rich (Too much fuel). Its trying to correct itself.

Did you accidentely mess up the map by trying to make custom adjustments?

Noooo, definitely didn't do any of that. I've read some of the things but never changed any of the values. That would make sense about the fuel trims dropping because the car was running so rich. Good spot on that. But what would make my car run so rich, I didn't make any custom changes. Just running stage 3, map 1 with upgraded OL limits to 95 because I was hitting the 34% limit.

[scottro]

Originally Posted by pits200

Noooo, definitely didn't do any of that. I've read some of the things but never changed any of the values. That would make sense about the fuel trims dropping because the car was running so rich. Good spot on that. But what would make my car run so rich, I didn't make any custom changes. Just running stage 3, map 1 with upgraded OL limits to 95 because I was hitting the 34% limit.

Hrmm, I'm not really sure what would cause it to do that... just before it looked like it was almost maxed out in the other direction.

[scottro]

I also find it interesting that as your boost tapers downwards, your fuel trims increase. Mine is opposite. As boost decreases, I would expect fuel trims to decrease as well. Referring to time 113-118.

[pits200]

Originally Posted by scottro

Hrmm, I'm not really sure what would cause it to do that... just before it looked like it was almost maxed out in the other direction.

I mean, it's right at the shift point, so that obviously is probably playing a factor or I could be wrong.

Also, as for boost, the problems lies in 3rd gear where fueling gets maxed out it seems like.

[pits200]

Here's another one from today

[themyst]

Looks like you're flatlining timing as well. No real fix unfortunately.

[pits200]

Originally Posted by themyst

Looks like you're flatlining timing as well. No real fix unfortunately.

Why would my car be doing that?

It's odd, I just looked at the second log and it doesn't look like the timing is flatlining like the first one/.

[themyst]

Originally Posted by pits200

Why would my car be doing that?

It's odd, I just looked at the second log and it doesn't look like the timing is flatlining like the first one/.

Your first log is scaled differently and is longer than the second. You'll lose a ton of power dropping that much timing... which is why its such an aggravating thing to see.

Here is what Vishnu says it is. http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=670421

However, I believe he's wrong since he's comparing a manual car to an auto car. Auto cars flatline timing on every tune. Cobb for me does not flatline north of 6500 RPM though which is why I continue to run it. It's not boost or fuel related, as I've stacked a JB4 for increased boost on top of the Cobb and it still does not flatline while maintaining 12.0 - 12.2 AFR target straight through.

[pits200]

Originally Posted by themyst

Your first log is scaled differently and is longer than the second. You'll lose a ton of power dropping that much timing... which is why its such an aggravating thing to see.

Here is what Vishnu says it is. http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=670421

However, I believe he's wrong since he's comparing a manual car to an auto car. Auto cars flatline timing on every tune. Cobb for me does not flatline north of 6500 RPM though which is why I continue to run it. It's not boost or fuel related, as I've stacked a JB4 for increased boost on top of the Cobb and it still does not flatline while maintaining 12.0 - 12.2 AFR target straight through.

Hmm, I've been running a Procede for over a year and run a lot of logs. I don't think I've ever noticed my timing flatlining like it did in that first run.

These 3/17 maps may be safer but I feel I am losing significant power.

[pits200]

Anyone else have any suggestions, thanks.

[Ilma]

Originally Posted by themyst

Your first log is scaled differently and is longer than the second. You'll lose a ton of power dropping that much timing... which is why its such an aggravating thing to see.

Here is what Vishnu says it is. http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=670421

However, I believe he's wrong since he's comparing a manual car to an auto car. Auto cars flatline timing on every tune. Cobb for me does not flatline north of 6500 RPM though which is why I continue to run it. It's not boost or fuel related, as I've stacked a JB4 for increased boost on top of the Cobb and it still does not flatline while maintaining 12.0 - 12.2 AFR target straight through.

+1 to losing power with 7 to 10 degrees less timing.

I still think it may be fueling related.

Cobb maintains a very consistent A/F ratio even post-shift whereas the piggies not so much.

They seem to play catch up and can spike rich and then lean immediately post-shift by a couple of points.....a little bit of instability.

This is evident in the OP's AF ratio reading of 9.85 just after the shift.

(OP you need to rescale your AF graph since your y-axis values are out of range and we can't even see the line. Just press "p" after clicking on that particular part of your datalog and fill in the values for the pop-up menu to scale properly)

From personal experimentation - I can reduce the amount of flatlining I experience by running a lower Open Loop fueling number.

When I run an open loop number = 100, I flatline just about every time.

I currently run open loop at 85 and get better results with post-shift timing. It's not always perfect......but when it dumps post-shift, it only drops to3 degrees or so and climbs upwards immediately.

That is why I think it is fuel-related somehow.

Also.....didn't you state somewhere in another post that Cobb indicated a code for the fuel mode changed when the timing flatlined?

Here is an example of the timing drop using OL = 85: Not so bad!
.
.
.
.

[Ilma]

.
.
Here is a run using Open Loop Fuel at 100%
.
.
.

[pits200]

Originally Posted by Ilma

.
.
Here is a run using Open Loop Fuel at 100%
.
.
.

Thanks for the help so far guys. So this seems to be tune related and not something wrong with my vehicle. It runs strong but obviously not strong enough. I don't get misfires and haven't thrown any codes for awhile.

I bumped OL up to close to 100%, I never knew it might have a direct relationship to the flatline on timing.

So whats better if I can't have the best of both worlds, to hit the 34% limit for fueling or to flatline timing like that.

[Ilma]

Originally Posted by pits200

Thanks for the help so far guys. So this seems to be tune related and not something wrong with my vehicle. It runs strong but obviously not strong enough. I don't get misfires and haven't thrown any codes for awhile.

I bumped OL up to close to 100%, I never knew it might have a direct relationship to the flatline on timing.

So whats better if I can't have the best of both worlds, to hit the 34% limit for fueling or to flatline timing like that.

I am not suggesting maxing out your fuel trims for any extended period

I am running meth, whereas I don't think you are.

What you have to do is log your fuel trims and AF ratio and see if you can still hit the AF targets without maxing out your fuel trims.

Your logs seem to show that you already are hitting your fuel trim maximums at high rpm......but I can't see your AF ratio.

If your AF ratio is leaning out as well at high rpms along with the fuel trims maxing out, then DO NOT REDUCE YOUR OPEN LOOP NUMBER.

In my case, I am still hitting a desirable AF ratio and although my trims are on the high side......they are not maxing out and peaking for only a brief period post-shift and then recovering.

You can't really compare meth to non-meth since the fueling is being supplemented by the meth.

In my case, this particular adjustment seems to help with post-shift timing.

In your case......there really doesn't seem to be a solution other than trying to run iess boost and see what happens.

But have tried that in the past and could still generate the same pattern.

No real solution.

Checking injectors and seals is what Shiv suggests may be a factor in this equation.

[themyst]

Originally Posted by Ilma

+1 to losing power with 7 to 10 degrees less timing.

I still think it may be fueling related.

Cobb maintains a very consistent A/F ratio even post-shift whereas the piggies not so much.

They seem to play catch up and can spike rich and then lean immediately post-shift by a couple of points.....a little bit of instability.

This is evident in the OP's AF ratio reading of 9.85 just after the shift.

(OP you need to rescale your AF graph since your y-axis values are out of range and we can't even see the line. Just press "p" after clicking on that particular part of your datalog and fill in the values for the pop-up menu to scale properly)

From personal experimentation - I can reduce the amount of flatlining I experience by running a lower Open Loop fueling number.

When I run an open loop number = 100, I flatline just about every time.

I currently run open loop at 85 and get better results with post-shift timing. It's not always perfect......but when it dumps post-shift, it only drops to3 degrees or so and climbs upwards immediately.

That is why I think it is fuel-related somehow.

Also.....didn't you state somewhere in another post that Cobb indicated a code for the fuel mode changed when the timing flatlined?

Here is an example of the timing drop using OL = 85: Not so bad!
.
.
.
.

Rob@Cobb had a theory that Fuel Mode 6 was causing flatlining behavior, but it wasn't the case.

[pits200]

I just don't understand why running 100OL fueling that would cause flatlining. I'm almost guaranteeing it's not my injectors or seals. Those issues were prevalent on 07s and 08s with the prior injectors.

I'm trying to remember back to late last year when I changed my spark plugs and if the issues started then.

I just don't understand why I had an af of 9.85 at one point after shift, overall my afs look pretty consistent between 11.8 and 12.3.