E90Post
 


 
BMW 3-Series (E90 E92) Forum > E90 / E92 / E93 3-series Powertrain and Drivetrain Discussions > N54 Turbo Engine / Drivetrain / Exhaust Modifications - 335i > JB4 CPS offset dyno testing and logs



Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      03-22-2011, 12:04 PM   #23
GeorgiaTech335coupe
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: Black BMW 335i coupe
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USA

Posts: 1,884
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com View Post
LOL why don't you break it down for me then. If 4 degrees didn't eliminate the drops, and 6 degrees didn't eliminate the drops, and even 10 degrees didn't eliminate the drops, your big plan is what? 2 degrees? The big fly in the ointment here is the drop with 10 degrees offset at 6500rpm.

Also the runs with the most "knock" according to "e90post pro tuners" proved to be the smoothest and most powerful on the dyno. Hmmm.

Mike
Too much timing early will ruin the run up top. Take it away earlier and the engine will perform better up top.
__________________
Legal Disclaimer: Anything I or anyone else says about my vehicle on this website(e90post.com or any affiliated or nonaffiliated sites), pertaining to modifications, is only to gain acceptance from my/our peers, and does not actually represent anything actually existing on my car, and thus, cannot be held against me in any issues, i.e. warranty claims, that may arise.
GeorgiaTech335coupe is offline  
0
      03-22-2011, 12:05 PM   #24
Jeff@TopGearSolutions
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Jeff@TopGearSolutions's Avatar
 
Drives: C6 Z06, GSXR-750, 09 335i
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: TopGearSolutions.com

Posts: 17,294
iTrader: (32)

Send a message via AIM to Jeff@TopGearSolutions
Mike...

Please stop trying to sell this as the nail in the coffin when its hardly a true representation of the final product nor the ideal use of the product.

Many things need to be changed and learned.

First and foremost.. CPS offsetting is not the IDEAL way of tuning, Period. Its another band-aid, but a band-aid many would rather see then leaving an open wound.

2nd- Reading 1 cylinder of ignition doesnt tell the whole story. This car has the ability to drop timing or raise on a individual cylinder to basis so 1/6 of the ignition timing is not a full representation. (yes other tunes do follow the same practice and yes its not ideal).

3rd- Tuning for max power is not the ideal practice of a street tuned vehicle, especially a tune that is used around the world for many octane levels, elevations, ambients ETC So if a tune is going to be "generic" then it needs to be conservative.

There is a large misconception that more power is better. Power is great, but so is safety and consistency day to day, pull after pull.

4th- The sarcasm is not all helpful to the discussion or the point of this whole business. If you think adding quotations and talking against the people "of e90 post" is smart, just remember where the majority of all your business comes from and which forum that is.

5th- You know as well anyone else Cobb came out with stellar dyno graphs. Take a look at their AFR and Ignition tables. You will notice they are are applying ignition directly opposite of the CPS offset Terry was using. I.e. Ideally CPS offseting more ignition early and ramping ignition back up by redline would be the ideal choice.

Keep the ignition lower from the get -go and it should keep any timing drop outs later from occurring.

I look forward to a more mature discussion and hope you realize this is LARGELY in its infancy.
Jeff@TopGearSolutions is offline   United_States
0
      03-22-2011, 12:07 PM   #25
Clap135
Brigadier General
 
Clap135's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 N54
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Sticky's Mom House

Posts: 3,464
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dzenno View Post
Clap are you saying that this is in some way a more crude application of CPS offset than what procede did in v5 prior to dynamic ignition timing release (current)? Personally wouldn't think so as procede would apply a static CPS offset prior to DIC, no?
Weather they are limited by hardware or knowledge their way of applying the offset is ass backwards.
Clap135 is offline  
0
      03-22-2011, 12:16 PM   #26
dzenno
Banned
 
Drives:
Join Date: Feb 2006

Posts: 5,883
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clap135 View Post
Weather they are limited by hardware or knowledge their way of applying the offset is ass backwards.
I know what you're trying to say but then I don't understand how procede's pre-DIC ign correction worked...i thought when you specified 100% ign correction it'd apply a 3-3.5 deg retard across the board...it sounds like you're saying this isn't the case, just looking for a real explanation
dzenno is offline   Canada
0
      03-22-2011, 12:19 PM   #27
Clap135
Brigadier General
 
Clap135's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 N54
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Sticky's Mom House

Posts: 3,464
iTrader: (1)

No clue as I never ran offsets but I remember Shiv pulling 3-4 degrees dropping to 1-2 towards redline. This was simply mapped out based on rpm and boost. I might be wrong but I remember seeing that in some people logs. As for dic....that's kind of a.joke anyway but that's for another thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dzenno View Post
I know what you're trying to say but then I don't understand how procede's pre-DIC ign correction worked...i thought when you specified 100% ign correction it'd apply a 3-3.5 deg retard across the board...it sounds like you're saying this isn't the case, just looking for a real explanation
Clap135 is offline  
0
      03-22-2011, 12:24 PM   #28
dzenno
Banned
 
Drives:
Join Date: Feb 2006

Posts: 5,883
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clap135 View Post
No clue as I never ran offsets but I remember Shiv pulling 3-4 degrees dropping to 1-2 towards redline. This was simply mapped out based on rpm and boost. I might be wrong but I remember seeing that in some people logs.
I actually think you're right on that one...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clap135 View Post
As for dic....that's kind of a.joke anyway but that's for another thread
So where's the new thread then?
dzenno is offline   Canada
0
      03-22-2011, 12:26 PM   #29
Joshboody
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: pickemuptruck
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Posts: 1,708
iTrader: (7)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clap135 View Post
Don't worry once I get home I will educate you and terry. It's simply too much to type using my phone. Hates a hint though. If you drop timing in the low rpm range you will knot knock up top where as before you did. Do you actually understand how that works? Elimination of timing at exact drop outs is not the solution. Also pick up a book and understand what happens to egts as you drop timing....
good point, reduced timing will take some heat out of the cylinder and create a better combustion environment.
Joshboody is offline  
0
      03-22-2011, 12:30 PM   #30
enrita
Major General
 
enrita's Avatar
 
Drives: 335i - Big turbos
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Italian in Sweden

Posts: 7,323
iTrader: (0)

here in this log i run a max of - 3.3 timing down low and - 2.5 up top. pump 94 14.5-16 psi .
Why is BMS pulling so much timing ? 6-10 degrees? no wonder it does not look good. i have seen MAX -4 on Procede.
Attached Images
 
__________________
07 335i AT - TD St.2 Turbos - COBB (Custom Cobb mapping by http://www.protuningfreaks.com/) - JB4G5 ISO - Okada Coils - NGK 5992 Plugs - E85 Walbro - Injen Intake - Helix IC - Snow Stg. 3 - Stett CP - AR DPs - midpipes 100 HJS Cats - Bastuck Quad - PSS10 - QUAIFE LSD - BMS OCC - Forge DVs - AR OC - ALCON BBK - M3 Chassi - Dinan CP - Velocity M rear Toe arms - Advan RZ-DF - Level 10 AT upgrade - Alpina AT Flash
enrita is offline   Sweden
0
      03-22-2011, 12:31 PM   #31
Joshboody
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: pickemuptruck
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Posts: 1,708
iTrader: (7)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dzenno View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clap135 View Post
As for dic....that's kind of a.joke anyway but that's for another thread.
So where's the new thread then?
This new thread looks exciting... i'm curious.
Joshboody is offline  
0
      03-22-2011, 12:45 PM   #32
usc335
First Lieutenant
 
Drives: '08 E92 335
Join Date: May 2008
Location: so cal

Posts: 316
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dzenno View Post
I know what you're trying to say but then I don't understand how procede's pre-DIC ign correction worked...i thought when you specified 100% ign correction it'd apply a 3-3.5 deg retard across the board...it sounds like you're saying this isn't the case, just looking for a real explanation
That's not how the PROcede did it. If you log the pre-DIC maps, you'll see that the timing offset is variable across the rev range (not a constant retard value -- that would be silly). I'm sure Shiv must have had some algorithms to vary it based on conditions -- just not to the extent that the DIC maps do (which are, no doubt, using more sophisticated algorithms).
__________________
6MT | OpenFlash Tablet | PROcede Rev 2.5 | HKS Exhaust | AFE DCI | AMS Intercooler | ER Charge Pipe w/HKS BOV | 91 Octane | HKS Coilovers | 19" Enkreuz H8R on 235/35 & 275/30 | AR Design OCC
usc335 is offline   United_States
0
      03-22-2011, 12:58 PM   #33
Mike@N54Tuning.com
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Drives: 07335i
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Earth

Posts: 14,631
iTrader: (86)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgiaTech335coupe View Post
Too much timing early will ruin the run up top. Take it away earlier and the engine will perform better up top.
I don't see how reducing timing at 3000rpm is going to do much to help knock at 6000rpm. Especially when reducing advance 10 degrees at 6000rpm didn't help. But I like the approach BMS is taking with this which is to setup the interface for users to be able to adjust their own offset curves. This is just early testing and definitely won't be the last test done. BMS developed this module to empower their customers to tune their cars however they'd like.

Mike
Mike@N54Tuning.com is offline   Canada
0
      03-22-2011, 01:00 PM   #34
Mike@N54Tuning.com
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Drives: 07335i
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Earth

Posts: 14,631
iTrader: (86)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshboody View Post
good point, reduced timing will take some heat out of the cylinder and create a better combustion environment.
The data doesn't show it though. Look at the 75% CPS run. Effective timing down low was 2-3 degrees at peak torque. How much lower do you want to go? Going negative produced a pretty funny result...

Mike
Mike@N54Tuning.com is offline   Canada
0
      03-22-2011, 01:01 PM   #35
Mike@N54Tuning.com
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Drives: 07335i
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Earth

Posts: 14,631
iTrader: (86)

Quote:
Originally Posted by enrita View Post
here in this log i run a max of - 3.3 timing down low and - 2.5 up top. pump 94 14.5-16 psi .
Why is BMS pulling so much timing ? 6-10 degrees? no wonder it does not look good. i have seen MAX -4 on Procede.
Which run are you talking about? They tested a variety of offsets which are posted in my first post. The lower offsets didn't effect the drops and the higher offsets reduced but didn't eliminate drops and nerfed power output. No one is disputing that 93/94 octane will hold timing better at higher boost levels with or without a CPS offset. This is about 91 octane testing at 14.5psi.

Mike
Mike@N54Tuning.com is offline   Canada
0
      03-22-2011, 01:03 PM   #36
Sniz
Lieutenant General
 
Sniz's Avatar
 
Drives: e92 335 - gone // e36 M3 turbo
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Ellicott City, MD

Posts: 10,569
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com View Post
I don't see how reducing timing at 3000rpm is going to do much to help knock at 6000rpm. Especially when reducing advance 10 degrees at 6000rpm didn't help. But I like the approach BMS is taking with this which is to setup the interface for users to be able to adjust their own offset curves. This is just early testing and definitely won't be the last test done. BMS developed this module to empower their customers to tune their cars however they'd like.

Mike
I dont like that at all, you guys have a hard enough time keeping you users running the correct map, now you expect them to learn how to control timing?

no no no....tune it right from the get go please.
__________________
Sniz is offline  
0
      03-22-2011, 01:29 PM   #37
Joshboody
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: pickemuptruck
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Posts: 1,708
iTrader: (7)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com View Post
The data doesn't show it though. Look at the 75% CPS run. Effective timing down low was 2-3 degrees at peak torque. How much lower do you want to go? Going negative produced a pretty funny result...

Mike
There needs to be more tuning and testing overall. I think boost is too high in this case. flipping the cps curve is something to consider, but cps has to change in relation to other factors like actual versus fake load.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sniz View Post
I dont like that at all, you guys have a hard enough time keeping you users running the correct map, now you expect them to learn how to control timing?

no no no....tune it right from the get go please.
Agreed. At this point the cps is global or a simple curve. The percentage should not apply to a defined value, but change in relation to other factors... rpm, load, vanos, acceleration, etc. it's NOT as simple as offset on or off. continue the testing.
Joshboody is offline  
0
      03-22-2011, 02:04 PM   #38
Clap135
Brigadier General
 
Clap135's Avatar
 
Drives: 2009 N54
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Sticky's Mom House

Posts: 3,464
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com View Post
The data doesn't show it though. Look at the 75% CPS run. Effective timing down low was 2-3 degrees at peak torque. How much lower do you want to go? Going negative produced a pretty funny result...

Mike
I suggest maybe rereading the thread? Dropping timing roughly 6 degree downlow and through out peak tq and gradually bringing it back up will allow you to run more timing up top. If you can't understand this, then I can't help you. Like I said pick up a book about engine tuning.

As far as dropping timing as much as you did, realize that you are raising EGTS by doing this, being that its done with offsetting and not actually rewritting timing tables, you are also changing fueling injection points.
Clap135 is offline  
0
      03-22-2011, 02:23 PM   #39
Jeff@TopGearSolutions
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Jeff@TopGearSolutions's Avatar
 
Drives: C6 Z06, GSXR-750, 09 335i
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: TopGearSolutions.com

Posts: 17,294
iTrader: (32)

Send a message via AIM to Jeff@TopGearSolutions
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com View Post
Which run are you talking about? They tested a variety of offsets which are posted in my first post. The lower offsets didn't effect the drops and the higher offsets reduced but didn't eliminate drops and nerfed power output. No one is disputing that 93/94 octane will hold timing better at higher boost levels with or without a CPS offset. This is about 91 octane testing at 14.5psi.

Mike
Love how you just skip right over my post.

Might I add 14.5 PSI is what my car tunes to on 93 octane, so its a little aggressive to say the least on 91 octane but that is neither here nor their. You are just being stubborn at this point.

RE-read everything I said as well as Clap and a few other guys.

Its spot on through and through.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clap135 View Post
I suggest maybe rereading the thread? Dropping timing roughly 6 degree downlow and through out peak tq and gradually bringing it back up will allow you to run more timing up top. If you can't understand this, then I can't help you. Like I said pick up a book about engine tuning.

As far as dropping timing as much as you did, realize that you are raising EGTS by doing this, being that its done with offsetting and not actually rewritting timing tables, you are also changing fueling injection points.
Jeff@TopGearSolutions is offline   United_States
0
      03-22-2011, 09:08 PM   #40
usc335
First Lieutenant
 
Drives: '08 E92 335
Join Date: May 2008
Location: so cal

Posts: 316
iTrader: (1)

Hmmm. BMS went quiet. It looks like they figured out how amateur this thread made them look. What was meant to make CPS offsetting look bad totally backfired and made them look clueless. Very poor marketing decision.
__________________
6MT | OpenFlash Tablet | PROcede Rev 2.5 | HKS Exhaust | AFE DCI | AMS Intercooler | ER Charge Pipe w/HKS BOV | 91 Octane | HKS Coilovers | 19" Enkreuz H8R on 235/35 & 275/30 | AR Design OCC
usc335 is offline   United_States
0
      03-22-2011, 09:30 PM   #41
Mike@N54Tuning.com
BimmerPost Supporting Vendor

 
Drives: 07335i
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Earth

Posts: 14,631
iTrader: (86)

Quote:
Originally Posted by usc335 View Post
Hmmm. BMS went quiet. It looks like they figured out how amateur this thread made them look. What was meant to make CPS offsetting look bad totally backfired and made them look clueless. Very poor marketing decision.
No idea what you're talking about but the data is all in the first post for everyone to analyze and benefit from and is being discussed in more detail elsewhere.

The next step for this module is programming it to allow user definable offsets by RPM, boost, and gear, and then it will be easier for all of us to test various curves. The suggestion that offsetting more down low where there have not been problems with timing drops and offsetting less up top where there are drops is pretty counter intuitive. Especially given the data posted showing drops even with extreme offsets both down low and up top. During a 1/4 mile run the RPMs will never drop much below 5000rpm anyway. But the dyno will tell all and I'll certainly post the results here. Actually clap if you want to put together an RPM by RPM offset curve given the map 2 boost curve above I'll arrange to get that tested for you ASAP so we can all see the results.

Mike
Mike@N54Tuning.com is offline   Canada
0
      03-22-2011, 09:31 PM   #42
Ilma
Colonel
 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: hometown

Posts: 2,546
iTrader: (0)

Actually, I'm still having a tough time understanding why they are pulling so much timing up top

I thought that as rpms increase, piston speed increases and there is less time for a detonation event to form.

So you want to add timing back in at higher rpms and take more out at lower rpms. How is that counter-intuitive?

Clap is right......BMS seems to have it backwards.
__________________
Sticky is an idiot
Ilma is offline  
0
      03-22-2011, 09:44 PM   #43
Forcefed3
Banned
 
Drives: 2008 335i
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South

Posts: 4,742
iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2008 335i  [0.50]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilma View Post
Actually, I'm still having a tough time understanding why they are pulling so much timing up top

I thought that as rpms increase, piston speed increases and there is less time for a detonation event to form.

So you want to add timing back in at higher rpms and take more out at lower rpms. How is that counter-intuitive?

Clap is right......BMS seems to have it backwards.
Well more load = faster burn rate. I know the JB4 tapers boost up top so with less load and higher RPM it seems like there should be more advance. I personally dont even plan on purchasing the CPS offset. My logs look great so I dont see any point in changing anything, plus I will be installing a meth kit very soon.
Forcefed3 is offline   No_Country
0
      03-22-2011, 10:07 PM   #44
Ilma
Colonel
 
Drives: BMW
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: hometown

Posts: 2,546
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clap135 View Post
No clue as I never ran offsets but I remember Shiv pulling 3-4 degrees dropping to 1-2 towards redline. This was simply mapped out based on rpm and boost. I might be wrong but I remember seeing that in some people logs. .
Yup.....that's what I saw in my pre-dic datalogs.

Timing was added back in as rpms increased.

Fundamental physics?

The faster the piston is travelling the less time detonation has to form.

But then how does one explain the occasional dip at 6K?

14.5 psi is probably too much boost for 91 octane.
__________________
Sticky is an idiot
Ilma is offline  
0
Closed Thread

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 07:32 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