[dzenno]

Awesome logs mithiral...

As for boost creep, I'd sneeze at that, that's nothing

What's more important is look at that AFR and timing "post shift"...try to pull that off with "any" piggy and a wideband, not calculated AFRs...I'll tell you right now very hard if not impossible period

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by vasillalov

So Shiv,

Do you see any "presumed" knock events with an FBO car at high heat and 16+ psi on the Cobb S1?

First of all. Relax. This isn't a competition here. The FBO logs certainly don't suggest knock. But it does run low/negative timing-high boost. Which I think has become the main subject of this discussion.

Timtech, I think you will find that upgrading your exhaust will help a bit with respect to your logs.

[vasillalov]

Originally Posted by Jeff@topgearsolutions

You want to use the least amount of boost as possible to make your power. <---- this is primary goal from a tuning standpoint regardless of platform.

We are not arguing against that. We all want to make power, just some of us prefer this power to be made safely!

Adding ignition advance in high heat conditions combined with crap fuel is just a recipe for disaster.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by vasillalov

We are not arguing against that. We all want to make power, just some of us prefer this power to be made safely!

Adding ignition advance in high heat conditions combined with crap fuel is just a recipe for disaster.

There would be no reason for high heat if the tune wasnt running astronomical boost levels.

From a tuning background its simply too much heat caused by too much boost.

Take away the boost, add the ignition, you will have more efficient power.

^ That is the safest way, the most efficient way, and the right way.


Tuning is an art and science but some things cant be ignored. Less boost and more ignition is the ideal way.

For the record themyst was arguing more ignition would be bad, it wouldnt be bad if the boost wasnt so high thats why I quoted him.

[PlutoniumTans]

I like cobb, stage 2 is out ?

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by vasillalov

We are not arguing against that. We all want to make power, just some of us prefer this power to be made safely!

Adding ignition advance in high heat conditions combined with crap fuel is just a recipe for disaster.

You aren't following. So I suggest you read more and ask questions instead of trying to debate something that you clearly have no experience with. No one is saying "just add timing". What we are suggesting is that you should lower boost, which will allow for more timing, which will make the engine run more safely and with greater efficiency. This is a BASIC tuning fundamental. I don't expect a non-tuner to know this. But I would expect them to understand why this is desirable once explained.

[vasillalov]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

You aren't following. So I suggest you read more and ask questions instead of trying to debate something that you clearly have no experience with. No one is saying "just add timing". What we are suggesting is that you should lower boost, which will allow for more timing, which will make the engine run more safely and with greater efficiency. This is a BASIC tuning fundamental. I don't expect a non-tuner to know this. But I would expect them to understand why this is desirable once explained.

Agreed. I understand very well what you are saying. And I am not arguing that it is not true!

However, what I am saying is that by increasing the timing while the intake temps are so high, you are more likely to be approaching knock threshold, especially if you have crap fuel.

Let me make sure I get this straight:

Procede with Autotuning will run 15.5 maybe 15.1 psi of boost and higher timing.
Cobb will run max 16.3 psi and lower timing.

All given the same conditions.

So what you are saying is that there is that Procede will run cooler with just 0.8 lower psi and higher ignition advance than Cobb? Is that correct? I am just asking...

I highly doubt that 0.8 psi and a few degrees of extra timing advance will run that much more efficient. If anything, it will be much closer to the knock threshold.

[Zasquatch]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

You aren't following. So I suggest you read more and ask questions instead of trying to debate something that you clearly have no experience with. No one is saying "just add timing". What we are suggesting is that you should lower boost, which will allow for more timing, which will make the engine run more safely and with greater efficiency. This is a BASIC tuning fundamental. I don't expect a non-tuner to know this. But I would expect them to understand why this is desirable once explained.

Shiv, I appreciate your input and follow the logic/theory behind it. What I would love to see is a response from Cobb... It is their tune afterall, and some input from them would be the best thing for this thread.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Vasillov without taking sides on tunes understand this simple tuning concept:

"The most efficient way of making power is using the least amount of boost to make the same power".

So if your saying whats better 16 PSI lower ignition or 15 psi higher ignition. The latter is better.

I sell more Cobb's then any other tune, I'm not against any tune. I'm just forwarding my tuning background and practices to the community.

[vasillalov]

Originally Posted by Jeff@topgearsolutions

Vasillov without taking sides on tunes understand this simple tuning concept:

"The most efficient way of making power is using the least amount of boost to make the same power"

Jeff,

I understand this. I am not arguing against it! And I am all for it.

What I am saying here is that I am not willing to sacrifice the safety of my engine for a few extra hp which I will get from a slightly higher timing and little less boost. That's all.

[timtech]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Timtech, I think you will find that upgrading your exhaust will help a bit with respect to your logs.

With this being a stage 1 map, and I'm running an intercooler, are you suggesting it's still running too hot? Would moving to the 91 octane calibration help (running 93 now) and make sure the gas is good?

I know it's not your product but I have always valued your input.

I miss being able to view in Autotune on a fill up how the system reacts so I know the gas was at least as good as the last.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by vasillalov

Jeff,

I understand this. I am not arguing against it! And I am all for it.

What I am saying here is that I am not willing to sacrifice the safety of my engine for a few extra hp which I will get from a slightly higher timing and little less boost. That's all.

What your confusing is thinking that its less safe, its more safe. Its more efficient. Its less heat. A tuned ignition timing and less boost is the safest approach. More boost is far more unstable to tune cause of the exponential heat that can incur.

[135i]

If we are to have a real discussion of the "facts'" then that necessitates both sides to be represented. One tuner can't propagate the "facts" unchecked when economic interests are involved. When/If Cobb deceides to comment, then let people deceide based on the merit of the arguments being made.

[dzenno]

Timing isn't "low" on those runs timing is "set" to 4 degrees below the stock timing curve so even at redline you'll see a max of 10.5..that's A LOT safer than running a piggy without any ignition retard at the same boost level

Nothing to worry about here, logs look really great on FBO cars, no issues whatsoever...the tune is doing exactly what its "set up" to do

[XJS]

When seeing these high IATs and this high boost, what are your main reasons for not upgrading your intercooler?

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by 135i

If we are to have a real discussion of the "facts'" then that necessitates both sides to be represented. One tuner can't propagate the "facts" unchecked when economic interests are involved. When/If Cobb deceides to comment, then let people deceide based on the merit of the arguments being made.

Nobody is taking sides here. IT is simple tuning fundamentals being spoken here.

[JB335]

Looking at the logs above and have a quick question. What's ideal regarding ignition numbers. Like a perfectly healthy and happy motor.

[135i]

Originally Posted by Jeff@topgearsolutions

Nobody is taking sides here. IT is simple tuning fundamentals being spoken here.

And all I'm stating is let's hear the explanation from the people who know their product better than anybody else. Cobb.

There are other factors/information that may be at play here.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by 135i

And all I'm stating is let's hear the explanation from the people who know their product better than anybody else. Cobb.

There are other factors/information that may be at play here.

My statements arent about Cobb. They are basic tuning fundamentals. No pointing fingers at anyones tune. My statements can be applied to any tuning platform on any car platform.

What can Cobb possibly say here?

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by dzenno

Timing isn't "low" on those runs timing is "set" to 4 degrees below the stock timing curve so even at redline you'll see a max of 10.5..that's A LOT safer than running a piggy without any ignition retard at the same boost level

Nothing to worry about here, logs look really great on FBO cars, no issues whatsoever...the tune is doing exactly what its "set up" to do

Unless i'm reading the log incorrectly, in the higher gears, timing doesn't even get positive until 5500-6000rpm.

[dzenno]

It's not on mithiral's car...and it sucks you're pointing out that single example when this same issue happens sometimes on 6ATs with both procede and jb should we post those up too maybe? On the procede it just recently happened with Ilma's car and you seem to have solved it by running leaner?

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by dzenno

Which one are you talking about? Can you post it again?

I was referring to mithiral's logs in post #75. I'm assuming the vertical axis on the right is ignition advance.