[shifterboy45]

Originally Posted by enrita

it doesnt matter if it is a complete failure or just 1 ringland . The cost at the end are the same.

one thing that would help to clarify all of this...

Look for a detailed explanation of "detonation" -- beware its not just simply knocking/pinging in the engine.

when you have a grip on how detonation affects cylinder pressures (or rather disrupts), you will see why its not an engine hp output problem --

managing detonation is every engine builder/tuners concern when putting together a forced induction engine package.

btw: enrita is basically correct -- a rework of the engine is required if damage of this magnitude has been sustained

speculation can prevail here, but basic engine technology MUST be understood to make a educated analysis. --

[R1000K3]

Originally Posted by enrita

When you are faced to a rebuild you have 3 choices:
- You get a complete rebuilt engine which from what i have heard BMW offer for about 5000-6000 USD (could be more) plus 3000 USD to uninstall and install. You could also find one from a wracked car which might be easier in the US than EU.
- You open the engine and change the entire motorblock and pistons 3500 USD plus the usual 3000 to uninstall and install new pieces etc fix the head 1500 USD and count another 1000 USD for different parts, cleaning etc. (what i did)
- You open the engine and fix the OEM motorblock (if possible depending on the failure) get new pistons (all 6, you dont want to get only one) that has to fit after boring/honing etc (how much this cost i have no idea) , at this point you get maybe CPE pistons with lower compression (1200 USD?) since you are at it and put it back together.
In the last case you have an issue. You have NO idea how the engine will run afterwards. You risk the engine to consume oil etc. I did not want to take this risk. I wanted the car to run perfectly as before, so the third option might be a bit cheaper but with lots of unknown results. It also depends on the type of failure to do the third one.
Also how long do you want to be without a car? this has to be taken into consideration as well.
Is quite easy to say yeah do this do that but when you are actually facing such a failure i can assure you think a lot about the best solution for your needs.

There are more choices such as this which is the first alternative on any fresh racing engine. Don't change a lost of parts unless the general engine wear calls for a complete engine rebuild. Just change the faulty parts only. In a case like a cracked piston you only replace the piston. In case the bore is scored you put in a new sleeve etc. This will, apart from labor cost, be less than 10% vs. replacing the whole engine or a complete lower end. There is no reason to replace the whole engine if everything is in good order except one piston.

[techlogik]

But do the codes really matter or mean anything at this point?

I thought it was posted that it was a cold start, and it just went kaputz?

So whatever damage was done, happened over a period of time previous to that cold start likely.

We need the engine torn down, gone over and investigated/documented what exactly is wrong. Which ever way it gets repaired, I see upwards of a 10K repair bill.

[RambleJ]

Damn that sucks for the OP..

But come on really Calvin and Shiv.. We have seen 2 failures from JB3 owners, who have been pushing 19+ psi and you use this to take a dump all over your competition.. Lets say there are only 1000 JB3's running around out there.. That's a .002% failure rate... I mean your record isn't squeaky clean either.

[MisterSkiMask]

Originally Posted by RambleJ

Damn that sucks for the OP..

But come on really Calvin and Shiv.. We have seen 2 failures from JB3 owners, who have been pushing 19+ psi and you use this to take a dump all over your competition.. Lets say there are only 1000 JB3's running around out there.. That's a .002% failure rate... I mean your record isn't squeaky clean either.

and from what I understand, with a user modified piggy, and safety features defeated.

[Calvin@Vishnu]

Originally Posted by RambleJ

Damn that sucks for the OP..

But come on really Calvin and Shiv.. We have seen 2 failures from JB3 owners, who have been pushing 19+ psi and you use this to take a dump all over your competition.. Lets say there are only 1000 JB3's running around out there.. That's a .002% failure rate... I mean your record isn't squeaky clean either.

The point is that detonation is caused by excessive timing for the given conditions. And with a "tune" targets a stock (5-8psi appropriate) timing curve REGARDLESS OF CONDITIONS, you are playing with fire. It doesn't take an expert tuner to figure this out. If you went on ANY other tuning forum (evo, suby, camaro, porsche, corvette, buick, mazda, etc,.) and told them that you increased boost by 10psi with no changes to your timing maps, they would sell shorts on your engine. Yet it's only in this forum where there are people that think this approach to tuning is ok. And they are misinformed.

And just because there have only been 2 public engine failures in the last couple of months, does not mean that there have not been more behind the scenes. Nor does it mean that there aren't many people out there who have not experienced catastrophic failure but rather the far more likely scenario of excessive engine wear and tear from the additive effects of mild/moderate detonation.

The basics of engine tuning theory can't be ignored. It's convenient for the developer of what is essentially a boost controller to say that this DME is "different" and that you don't have to tune it correctly. But that, quite clearly, is not true. And I think that everyone, deep down inside, knows that.

[klipseracer]

Hey, I'll just play it safe. Don't run a JB3 and don't run a CMGS. I'm not saying its JB3/CM's fault, but hey. If you're getting on a flight and one of the pilots has crashed before, which plane are you getting in regardless of what the reasons were? You'll take the one with the overall better track record.

EDIT: There is no, 'But but but!' when you deal with this stuff. I've seen two failures with the JB3 and have heard of one with the procede. I strongly feel that it will become even more distinct as things progress. If the JB3 didnt' aquire these so called useless progressive features of the procede then it certainly would. You can argue who came out with it first but thats not what I'm saying. I'm saying, as it stands without those features one tune is less cautious and have been adamant saying that its not necessary to be SAFE! Now here they go saying taper it back because its not safe... Well then as soon as they get these 'progressive' 'autotuning' features I promise you they'll tell you its so great you can ramp it back up to 18-19psi. Suddenly its not cmgs or the engine's fault now is it? PERSONALLY I feel that if all tunes were equal, I'd statistically be a tard to try the jb3. Again, thats only my opinion. Bash me if you want but its simply my outlook on this. I'm not forcing anyone to think the same way as me so really there is no reason to reply.

[MisterSkiMask]

Originally Posted by klipseracer

Hey, I'll just play it safe. Don't run a JB3 and don't run a CMGS. I'm not saying its JB3/CM's fault, but hey. If you're getting on a flight and one of the pilots has crashed before, which plane are you getting in regardless of what the reasons were?

EDIT: There is no, 'But but but!' when you deal with this stuff. I've seen two failures with the JB3. PERSONALLY I feel that if all tunes were equal, I'd statistically be a tard to try the jb3. Again, thats only my opinion. Bash me if you want but its simply my outlook on this.

I'd fly with Captain Sully.....just sayin'

maybe not the best analogy.

[Calvin@Vishnu]

Originally Posted by klipseracer

Hey, lets just play it safe. Don't run a JB3 and don't run a CMGS. I'm not saying its JB3/CM's fault, but hey. If you're getting on a flight and one of the pilots has crashed before, which plane are you getting in regardless of what the reasons were?

well.. i think that's a bit extreme. But the point is that people need to be realistic with what each tune can do and do SAFELY.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by Calvin@Vishnu

The point is that detonation is caused by excessive timing for the given conditions. And with a "tune" targets a stock (5-8psi appropriate) timing curve REGARDLESS OF CONDITIONS, you are playing with fire. It doesn't take an expert tuner to figure this out. If you went on ANY other tuning forum (evo, suby, camaro, porsche, corvette, buick, mazda, etc,.) and told them that you increased boost by 10psi with no changes to your timing maps, they would sell shorts on your engine. Yet it's only in this forum where there are people that think this approach to tuning is ok. And they are misinformed.

And just because there have only been 2 public engine failures in the last couple of months, does not mean that there have not been more behind the scenes. Nor does it mean that there aren't many people out there who have not experienced catastrophic failure but rather the far more likely scenario of excessive engine wear and tear from the additive effects of mild/moderate detonation.

The basics of engine tuning theory can't be ignored. It's convenient for the developer of what is essentially a boost controller to say that this DME is "different" and that you don't have to tune it correctly. But that, quite clearly, is not true. And I think that everyone, deep down inside, knows that.

Unfortunately understanding how ignition works and understanding how ignition maps work is not common practice here...

Maybe I can explain it in more lamens terms so people understand using ARBITRARY numbers.

Common rules of tuning
1) As boost increases, GENERALLY, you will decrease ignition.
2) As boost increases, Fuel needs will increase

3) Depending on Engine Load and RPM, Ignition "maps" and "fuel maps" determine STARTING Points for fuel and ignition.

So arbitrarily a car with 8-10 PSI, wants 15 degree ignition at 5000 RPM.

Now, in fairytale world if you want 20 psi at 5000 RPM, you would generally reduce ignition maybe to 10 degree ignition for a starting point.

Where SOME TUNES (not naming tunes) they rely on the STOCK MAPS (of ignition) in this case as a starting point which are too high for starting points. Luckily our car unlike others adapts rather quickly.

What happens is everytime you go out, the car assumes 20 degrees ignition is good at 5000 RPM. The beauty behind this car is it adapts, and very quickly which is not traditional in your basic car.

(Most cars run extremely conservative ignition and rich fuel and dont adjust or barely adjust (especially at WOT). AKA open loop at WOT. Now im getting beyond the scope of things.)

Back on topic...

So now you are running 20 PSI but your "starting" ignition is at 15 degrees whereas if you "tuned" your maps accordingly (follow the basic rules) you would make your starting point say 10 degrees.

So the car is constantly adapting and riding the knock sensor.

Literally its saying "Whoa 15 degrees ignition was too much, lets lower it" and it does this at a rate im not sure, but it does it often nonetheless.



Viewing the screen image of a car I tuned in the past...
If you look at the top Left (redish graph)... you will see as you move to the right (increase load/boost), Ignition is reduced. These are the so called starting points of ignition I speak of.

In this vehicles case, the stock ecu can only adapt the first 6 columns (IIRC) to reduce ignition as needed, after that you are left with the choice of the tuner as to if that ignition is good enough thereafter. This specific vehicle will not adapt ignition like our trusty BMW Ecu.

However, point being, and this is ONLY A THEORY and NOT CALLING OUT ANY TUNES, with heavy abuse, its very possible that sitting on these high ignition values as starting points, and having the ECU constantly adjust ignition values up and down, it may be abusive long term.... MAY <--- Keyword.

I hope this post simply teaches people how ignition works, and nothing more.

PS. if your a viewing the large horizontal graph on the right, your "boost columns ignition" would be towards the bottom. As you can see, they are "smooth as silk". The columns above are "stock ignition values" for N/A applications. Those were not tuned in this image.

[Calvin@Vishnu]

Originally Posted by JPSlick

Unfortunately understanding how ignition works and understanding how ignition maps work is not common practice here...

Maybe I can explain it in more lamens terms so people understand using ARBITRARY numbers.

Common rules of tuning
1) As boost increases, GENERALLY, you will decrease ignition.
2) As boost increases, Fuel needs will increase

3) Depending on Engine Load and RPM, Ignition "maps" and "fuel maps" determine STARTING Points for fuel and ignition.

So arbitrarily a car with 8-10 PSI, wants 15 degree ignition at 5000 RPM.

Now, in fairytale world if you want 20 psi at 5000 RPM, you would generally reduce ignition maybe to 10 degree ignition for a starting point.

Where SOME TUNES (not naming tunes) they rely on the STOCK MAPS (of ignition) in this case as a starting point which are too high for starting points. Luckily our car unlike others adapts rather quickly.

What happens is everytime you go out, the car assumes 20 degrees ignition is good at 5000 RPM. The beauty behind this car is it adapts, and very quickly which is not traditional in your basic car.

(Most cars run extremely conservative ignition and rich fuel and dont adjust or barely adjust (especially at WOT). AKA open loop at WOT. Now im getting beyond the scope of things.)

Back on topic...

So now you are running 20 PSI but your "starting" ignition is at 15 degrees whereas if you "tuned" your maps accordingly (follow the basic rules) you would make your starting point say 10 degrees.

So the car is constantly adapting and riding the knock sensor.

Literally its saying "Whoa 15 degrees ignition was too much, lets lower it" and it does this at a rate im not sure, but it does it often nonetheless.



Viewing the screen image of a car I tuned in the past...
If you look at the top Left (redish graph)... you will see as you move to the right (increase load/boost), Ignition is reduced. These are the so called starting points of ignition I speak ok.

In this vehicles case, the stock ecu can only adapt the first 6 columns (IIRC) to reduce ignition as needed, after that you are left with the choice of the tuner as to if that ignition is good enough thereafter. This specific vehicle will not adapt ignition like our trusty BMW Ecu.

However, point being, and this is ONLY A THEORY and NOT CALLING OUT ANY TUNES, with heavy abuse, its very possible that sitting on these high ignition values as starting points, and having the ECU constantly adjust ignition values up and down, it may be abusive long term.... MAY <--- Keyword.

I hope this post simply teaches people how ignition works, and nothing more.

+10

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by Calvin@Vishnu

The point is that detonation is caused by excessive timing for the given conditions. And with a "tune" targets a stock (5-8psi appropriate) timing curve REGARDLESS OF CONDITIONS, you are playing with fire. It doesn't take an expert tuner to figure this out. If you went on ANY other tuning forum (evo, suby, camaro, porsche, corvette, buick, mazda, etc,.) and told them that you increased boost by 10psi with no changes to your timing maps, they would sell shorts on your engine. Yet it's only in this forum where there are people that think this approach to tuning is ok. And they are misinformed.

And just because there have only been 2 public engine failures in the last couple of months, does not mean that there have not been more behind the scenes. Nor does it mean that there aren't many people out there who have not experienced catastrophic failure but rather the far more likely scenario of excessive engine wear and tear from the additive effects of mild/moderate detonation.

The basics of engine tuning theory can't be ignored. It's convenient for the developer of what is essentially a boost controller to say that this DME is "different" and that you don't have to tune it correctly. But that, quite clearly, is not true. And I think that everyone, deep down inside, knows that.

You continually miss the point and try to paint yourself in to a marketing position but this point is not lost on readers. MANY OF YOUR METH CUSTOMERS ARE RUNNING SIMILARLY WITH 18+PSI AND NO "IGNITION
CORRECTION". If one were to connect a meth kit to your tuning and not enable a failsafe system it would "autotune" itself to a similar condition of high boost and full advance. And if the meth took longer to spool up or stopped during a run one would expect similar results.

One need only look at a pump gas PROcede datalog showing the huge knock/timing drops at 4000rpm to know that all of these systems are riding the factory knock system....

Mike

[Calvin@Vishnu]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

You continually miss the point and try to paint yourself in to a marketing position but this point is not lost on readers. MANY OF YOUR METH CUSTOMERS ARE RUNNING SIMILARLY WITH 18+PSI AND NO "IGNITION
CORRECTION". If one were to connect a meth kit to your tuning and not enable a failsafe system it would "autotune" itself to a similar condition of high boost and full advance. And if the meth took longer to spool up or stopped during a run one would expect similar results.

One need only look at a pump gas PROcede datalog showing the huge knock/timing drops at 4000rpm to know that all of these systems are riding the factory knock system....

Mike

Incorrect on all accounts. Remember the bit about ignition timing corrections that aren't represented in logs. And if there is this "huge" knock event at 4000rpm with 2-4 degrees of ignition retard, imagine how bad you have it with no ignition regard and variable boost control. I encourage you to be honest with the people on this forum. And by "you" I mean Terry. No offense Mike.

[Clap135]

+100 JPSLICK
You and me have been preaching this for months now. However the jb crowd seems to believe in the hotrod style of tuning.

Shove a meth line through the interior, run it through your cheeks, if it vibrates your ass while floored, the car is gonna run 11s.

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by Calvin@Vishnu

Incorrect on all accounts. Remember the bit about ignition timing corrections that aren't represented in logs. And if there is this "huge" knock event at 4000rpm with 2-4 degrees of ignition retard, imagine how bad you have it with no ignition regard and variable boost control. I encourage you to be honest with the people on this forum. And by "you" I mean Terry. No offense Mike.

LOL at these "hidden timing corrections". If you're riding the knock sensor 2-4 degrees it's not much different than riding it 4-6 degrees. The end result is still the same. Timing is so high the ECU has to intervene and drop it. As another said we've seen plenty of trashed pistons with your CPS in place, at much lower boost levels than these. MaxBoost and VK just to name two.

Mike

[vasillalov]

Originally Posted by Clap135

Shove a meth line through the interior, run it through your cheeks, if it vibrates your ass while floored, the car is gonna run 11s.

Hahahaha!

That made my day...

[Calvin@Vishnu]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

LOL at these "hidden timing corrections". If you're riding the knock sensor 2-4 degrees it's not much different than riding it 4-6 degrees. The end result is still the same. Timing is so high the ECU has to intervene and drop it. As another said we've seen plenty of trashed pistons with your CPS in place, at much lower boost levels than these. MaxBoost and VK just to name two.

Mike

Maxboost popped a headgasket when one of this friends filled up with pump gas and ran a no-timing-retard race gas only map. And VK also swapped back and forth between the procede your jb3. Funny to say that the Procede caused the failure. You're arguments typically degrade when you're this far out of your element. So it's probably best to just agree with the rest of the tuning community (and every engine calibrator in the world) that mapped timing retard is necessary when running higher-than-stock boost pressures on pump gas.

As for hidden timing corrections, go ahead and scope it and see for yourself. For months, we've been amused that you (Terry) haven't noticed this during your reverse engineering sessions.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by vasillalov

Hahahaha!

That made my day...

He stole that from me....

[Clap135]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

LOL at these "hidden timing corrections". If you're riding the knock sensor 2-4 degrees it's not much different than riding it 4-6 degrees. The end result is still the same. Timing is so high the ECU has to intervene and drop it. As another said we've seen plenty of trashed pistons with your CPS in place, at much lower boost levels than these. MaxBoost and VK just to name two.

Mike

The end result is still the same? Cmon man, now you just sound stupid. You keep speaking about timing as if this was a NA engine runing 25 plus degrees. This engine usually peaks at 13-14 in PERFECT condtions. Droping ONLY 6 degrees of timing LMAO is dropping almost 50 percent of the engines timing. Thats a shit ton.

[Clap135]

Originally Posted by JPSlick

He stole that from me....

Did not

[cn555ic]

Originally Posted by Calvin@Vishnu

Incorrect on all accounts. Remember the bit about ignition timing corrections that aren't represented in logs. And if there is this "huge" knock event at 4000rpm with 2-4 degrees of ignition retard, imagine how bad you have it with no ignition regard and variable boost control. I encourage you to be honest with the people on this forum. And by "you" I mean Terry. No offense Mike.

I honestly think what BMS is trying to do is learn what you guys are doing in this thread...It seems awkwardly similar back in the days when Terry was searching for info on how to tune the car...If I was Vishnu I would hold back on what you guys are doing!

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by Clap135

The end result is still the same? Cmon man, now you just sound stupid. You keep speaking about timing as if this was a NA engine runing 25 plus degrees. This engine usually peaks at 13-14 in PERFECT condtions. Droping ONLY 6 degrees of timing LMAO is dropping almost 50 percent of the engines timing. Thats a shit ton.

If you're dropping 2-4 degrees off the knock threshold it's not much different than dropping 4-6 degrees. It knocked, the ECU heard it, the ECU pulled back timing. This whole argument on PROcede timing control is completely disingenuous and intellectually dishonest because it ignores the simple fact that it's also riding the knock threshold system.

And this thread has nothing at all to do with knock threshold system anyway because as evidenced by your own and JPs logs the V4 runs 0% CPS on meth. No different than the JB3.

Mike