[OpenFlash]

I just gave our beta group this update. Might as well share it with the rest of the forum. Here are today's dyno results of v2.1 on 91oct pump gas. Not a race gas mixture. Just straight Shell 91oct.

Complete Set-up
2007 335 6MT
~30k miles
PROcede v2.1 beta (with built-in o2 simulators)
Riss catless dp
Vishnu cat-back
Dual cone filter intake

Stock bypass valves, stock intercooler, etc,.

User TQ set to 90% across the board. Peak boost of 15psi. Also attached is a data log of two of the runs superimposed on each other. Very consistent.

It's worth noting that this map intentionally limits peak torque to 400lbft at the wheels by running 12-13psi in the low end/midrange and gradually ramping up to 15psi by 5000rpm. Not only does this map the car a lot more drivable and easier on the drivetrain, it also lets us get away with plain old 91oct.

We will make a 95-96oct map as well for those who absolutely love mixing race fuels in their garage Expect 410-420whp with the same torque (intentionally limited).

Here's another v2.1 dyno result from another forum member who lives in South Africa: http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...&postcount=161
Cheers,
shiv

[jpsimon]

great numbers!! I can't wait to get downpipes and the 2.1 map!!!!

[cn555ic]

That is one of the sexiest curves and numbers I have seen in a long time...I hope finally the issues are all over and people who sold their Procedes will regret not waiting!!!! Thanks Shiv

[Kbueno]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

User TQ set to 90% across the board. Peak boost of 15psi. Also attached is a data log of two of the runs superimposed on each other. Very consistent.

It's worth noting that this map intentionally limits peak torque to 400lbft at the wheels by running 12-13psi in the low end/midrange and gradually ramping up to 15psi by 5000rpm. Not only does this map the car a lot more drivable and easier on the drivetrain, it also lets us get away with plain old 91oct.



shiv

So limiting the torque is within the map tune and not by the user adjustable settings. I assume there will be a race gas version or just up the setting across the board?...please clarify.

Edit= I see...same torque but more power with race gas.

[evorobert]

what was the car making before? any comparison dynos?

[M&M]

Shiv, stop messing around & crank it to 100%.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by evorobert

what was the car making before? any comparison dynos?

The car was making the same 380-390whp before with v2.02. But it required custom adjustment of the User Tq table in order to hold the required boost levels above 5500rpm. The new closed loop/PID feature in v2.1 does 90% of that work for you so all you have to do is run a few datalogs to make sure you are seeing the max suggested boost pressure. We have also mapped it so that you should run the same User Torque value across the board.

There are some new features/functions in v2.1 that make the car more knock resistant. This has to do with transient ignition retard triggers as well as a more deliberate boost onset above 5000rpm. This is why we can reliably support this consistent power level on 91oct fuel. More features to come...

cheers,
shiv

[down4it]

Why are both graphs corrected and uncorrected showing almost the same exact numbers?

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by down4it

Why are both graphs corrected and uncorrected showing almost the same exact numbers?

Because testing conditions were moderate (70F, 15% Humidity, etc,.) The point of posting uncorrected numbers was just to show how much the car was actually making with no positive or negative corrections.

shiv

[cn555ic]

The ones that have lost out is the one that have sold out looking into the window with their empty pockets looking to get back in!!!

[Jason]

Thread cleaned up. Ridiculous that some members can derail a thread by criticizing the resolution of charts posted. If I see this kind of crap again there will be infractions imposed.

If the charts are too big for your monitor, simply scroll your browser to the right to see the entire thing. Simple.

[sflgator]

Shiv,

Just curious...are those of us with PROcede v2 and a stock air intake still limited (with v2.1) to ~ 350WHP running on 93 octane?

[Bushi_Bia]

So with stock parts I'm assuming the "accepted" amount of torque is 400? So anymore than this and its too stressful?

[jpsimon]

so shiv... with 93 octane + upgraded FMIC, what kind of numbers are we looking at? a little over 400whp?

[slubu]

What happens on a car that is fully stock, and we just want to add in the v2.1?

[retrodrive]

interesting. My paper weight is getting more of my interest by the day lol

Great numbers. I would love to see some dyno graphs from the beta testers.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by sflgator

Shiv,

Just curious...are those of us with PROcede v2 and a stock air intake still limited (with v2.1) to ~ 350WHP running on 93 octane?

I'll be doing some v2.1 testing on cars with stock airboxes later this week. We'll still be limited by intake restriction with v2.1. I know others have used a dremel to grind away some of the internal airbox baffling that causes much of the restriction. But I tend to shy away from that approach

Shiv

[jpsimon]

Originally Posted by retrodrive

interesting. My paper weight is getting more of my interest by the day lol

Great numbers. I would love to see some dyno graphs from the beta testers.

from the other thread:

91 octane equivalent, catless exhaust, intake, spearco fmic:

[Malek@MRF]

Originally Posted by down4it

Why are both graphs corrected and uncorrected showing almost the same exact numbers?

Shouldn't you know since you designed and fabricated the Mars Rover1?

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Nice numbers Shiv! Did you get my email by any chance?

[M&M]

Originally Posted by retrodrive

Great numbers. I would love to see some dyno graphs from the beta testers.

Ok stock (256hp) vs 2.1 + hardware, one year later. Same dyno, same fuel.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Jason

Thread cleaned up. Ridiculous that some members can derail a thread by criticizing the resolution of charts posted. If I see this kind of crap again there will be infractions imposed.

If the charts are too big for your monitor, simply scroll your browser to the right to see the entire thing. Simple.

Thanks for jumping in Jason.

Bushi_Bia-- The jury is still out on max "safe" torque output. But I certainly don't suggest going much above 400lbft. Especially if you have an automatic transmission or run on straight pump gas. Your transmission and engine will thank you for it in the long run. Mind you, different dynos will generate torque curves of different shape. This is because they all load the engine differently. The 400lbft limit I'm referring to has to do with Dynojet dynos.

jpsimon-- We are close to the fuel system limits with 390whp and 91oct. I really don't see an FMIC being worth too much when you are already limited by fuel supply. Might make it easier/less stressful to make 390whp, however. Especially in adverse conditions (high temp, high altitude, etc,.)

slubu-- I'll be doing some stock car testing later this week. Shouldn't be much of an issue.

Shiv

[e.n335]

The dyno graphs look really good. Congratulations. Let's see how the cars behave in the field after the roll-out of the map.

Ciao,
Eugen.