Close

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 171
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,213
    Rep Points
    31,316.5
    Mentioned
    2056 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno Click here to enlarge
    Where?
    You are in it...
    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,460
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno Click here to enlarge
    Where?
    Here! IBTL! oh, that doesnt happen here? Click here to enlarge

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    878
    Rep Points
    891.7
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    4 out of 6 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    I think this is where Terry tries to bait Shiv into giving up the good info why he picked 4.7k by cornering him on the inadequacy of it to the point Shiv gives in.

    Been watching this tactic for years on E90post, it is like watching a bad episode of CSi. Click here to enlarge

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,460
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    2 out of 5 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    doubt it..

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    7,980
    Rep Points
    8,872.8
    Mentioned
    627 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    89



    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BrenM3 Click here to enlarge
    I think this is where Terry tries to bait Shiv into giving up the good info why he picked 4.7k by cornering him on the inadequacy of it to the point Shiv gives in.

    Been watching this tactic for years on E90post, it is like watching a bad episode of CSi. Click here to enlarge
    Nah he just picked 4.7 for the same reason we picked 5.1. It was good enough for the air/fuel ratios he wanted at the time. His mistake was just not making his fueling resistors user changeable so now he feels the need to defend the choice. He'll change them sooner or later. Click here to enlarge

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,213
    Rep Points
    31,316.5
    Mentioned
    2056 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Nah he just picked 4.7 for the same reason we picked 5.1. It was good enough for the air/fuel ratios he wanted at the time. His mistake was just not making his fueling resistors user changeable so now he feels the need to defend the choice. He'll change them sooner or later. Click here to enlarge
    If this is correct then the resistors will have to change especially to allow it to handle a greater variety of modifications like nitrous and upgraded turbos. However, he is handling nitrous and upgraded turbos now, right? If the resistors do change that would be strong evidence of what you are saying.
    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    7,980
    Rep Points
    8,872.8
    Mentioned
    627 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    89



    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    If this is correct then the resistors will have to change especially to allow it to handle a greater variety of modifications like nitrous and upgraded turbos. However, he is handling nitrous and upgraded turbos now, right? If the resistors do change that would be strong evidence of what you are saying.
    On the nitrous last I heard he was drowning the car in meth giving a short term rich bump. But even with that the air/fuel ratios are still leaner than you'd want (see the customer dyno I posted above). He'll change them sooner or later. And of course our next generation will have 1k from the start.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,213
    Rep Points
    31,316.5
    Mentioned
    2056 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    On the nitrous last I heard he was drowning the car in meth giving a short term rich bump. But even with that the air/fuel ratios are still leaner than you'd want (see the customer dyno I posted above). He'll change them sooner or later. And of course our next generation will have 1k from the start.
    Interesting, I'll certainly be following the fueling side much more closely now.

    I kind of find the timing talk not as compelling as it was especially considering dousing the car in meth to handle nitrous hardly makes up for proper fueling and pulling timing can only do so much to compensate for lack of fuel. That would be using meth a bandaid, wouldn't it?
    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    878
    Rep Points
    891.7
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Nah he just picked 4.7 for the same reason we picked 5.1. It was good enough for the air/fuel ratios he wanted at the time. His mistake was just not making his fueling resistors user changeable so now he feels the need to defend the choice. He'll change them sooner or later. Click here to enlarge
    We all know tuning is a large balancing act of fuel / advance / and boost pressure. When one tuner wants to run higher timing targets, a method of handling this safely is to increase fuel enrichment to the point where EGT's go down and pre-ignition is less likely (most call this the fuel funnel method) . Some tuners take the approach of running lower advance (as their hardware supports it) and running less fuel, and actually coming to the point of the same egt's and cylinder pressure as the first method - with just a different strategy.

    Devil's advocate:

    What testing of BMS's, with post-able supporting data, can support that those levels of power NEED to be that rich to sustain reliability? Do you have a 6 channel egt gauge hooked up, etc? Or are these theories by shooting blindly? (other then Enrico's motor fiasco)

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    7,980
    Rep Points
    8,872.8
    Mentioned
    627 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    89



    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    My suggestions are always based on data and first hand observations. I will say over the past few weeks I've personally spent around 10 hours on the dyno testing various curves and countless hours tooling around comparing flash tuned air/fuel ratios with JB3 tuned air/fuel ratios on both the factory wideband/EGT sensors, knock sensors, and our LM1.

    If you feel more comfortable pushing the limits at 13.5:1 than 11.5:1 then you have that option to stick with ~5k fueling resistors. But I personally would not suggest it.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,913
    Rep Points
    1,353.4
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BrenM3 Click here to enlarge
    We all know tuning is a large balancing act of fuel / advance / and boost pressure. When one tuner wants to run higher timing targets, a method of handling this safely is to increase fuel enrichment to the point where EGT's go down and pre-ignition is less likely (most call this the fuel funnel method) . Some tuners take the approach of running lower advance (as their hardware supports it) and running less fuel, and actually coming to the point of the same egt's and cylinder pressure as the first method - with just a different strategy.
    At the high power levels this is not true. If you are suggesting Procede running less advance and more boost, in the reality the ignition correction will be zeroed to the same as JB3 and both keep the boost below the level the MAP can read. Vishnu says they run rich for safety reasons, but the data does not support it.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    1,716
    Rep Points
    826.2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    878
    Rep Points
    891.7
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    My suggestions are always based on data and first hand observations. I will say over the past few weeks I've personally spent around 10 hours on the dyno testing various curves and countless hours tooling around comparing flash tuned air/fuel ratios with JB3 tuned air/fuel ratios on both the factory wideband/EGT sensors, knock sensors, and our LM1.

    If you feel more comfortable pushing the limits at 13.5:1 than 11.5:1 then you have that option to stick with ~5k fueling resistors. But I personally would not suggest it.
    As posted above, I would be interested in your data and conclusions. That would drive your point home with Shiv, if indeed true, versus telling him what to do.

    Thanks LostMarine for the neg rep, you are a champ.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Stockholm
    Posts
    1,527
    Rep Points
    1,175.6
    Mentioned
    61 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I was running the 5k as well on very high power levels.I did not know till now that i could have run into lean afr levels.
    Good discussion.
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    My suggestions are always based on data and first hand observations. I will say over the past few weeks I've personally spent around 10 hours on the dyno testing various curves and countless hours tooling around comparing flash tuned air/fuel ratios with JB3 tuned air/fuel ratios on both the factory wideband/EGT sensors, knock sensors, and our LM1.

    If you feel more comfortable pushing the limits at 13.5:1 than 11.5:1 then you have that option to stick with ~5k fueling resistors. But I personally would not suggest it.
    07 335i AT - MOTIV 750 - MHD BMS E85 - BMS PI - JB4G5 - Okada Coils - NGK 5992 Plugs - Helix IC - Stett CP - Custom midpipes with 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 - LUX H8 - Level 10 AT upgrade
    Click here to enlarge

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Ellicott City, MD
    Posts
    305
    Rep Points
    106.6
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by enrita Click here to enlarge
    I was running the 5k as well on very high power levels.I did not know till now that i could have run into lean afr levels.
    Good discussion.

    sorry u found out the way you did
    Click here to enlarge

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,460
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BrenM3 Click here to enlarge
    As posted above, I would be interested in your data and conclusions. That would drive your point home with Shiv, if indeed true, versus telling him what to do.

    Thanks LostMarine for the neg rep, you are a champ.
    Thats what its there for Click here to enlarge post somthing ridiculous and it gets negged, post worthy and it gets repped. (I get negs all the time man, its keeps us in checkClick here to enlarge )

    Like i said before, his act of NOT attacking the JB says more than anything else. Open forum, post it up!

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    7,980
    Rep Points
    8,872.8
    Mentioned
    627 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    89



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by enrita Click here to enlarge
    I was running the 5k as well on very high power levels.I did not know till now that i could have run into lean afr levels.
    Good discussion.
    Yes that was probably a contributory factor. 18ohm is supposed to be 3.3k but older ones were 5k. For future we'll always require dyno tuning to do anything custom or pushing the edge so we can spot problems like that straight away.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    878
    Rep Points
    891.7
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 3 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Since you have 0 rep power, keep repping away LM.

    I've tuned plenty of big power setups, and I would have to say lowering the total ignition advance is key here. Much more so then a point of fuel on a DI motor. Riding the (reactive not proactive) knock sensor is alot less forgiving at 20psi then 8psi.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    638
    Rep Points
    47.6
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 2 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    I think if someone else were to actually measure EGT and see what effects over-fueling a DI engine has, they would go back to the drawing board. Again.

    Shiv

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    7,980
    Rep Points
    8,872.8
    Mentioned
    627 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    89



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BrenM3 Click here to enlarge
    Since you have 0 rep power, keep repping away LM.

    I've tuned plenty of big power setups, and I would have to say lowering the total ignition advance is key here. Much more so then a point of fuel on a DI motor. Riding the (reactive not proactive) knock sensor is alot less forgiving at 20psi then 8psi.
    So then tell me what do knock sensors have to do with preignition? No amount of instant timing retard is going to prevent it. What is required is more octane, more fuel, less boost, less overall advance, colder plugs, etc.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    181
    Rep Points
    176.8
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    I need to understand this in laymen's term.

    By running a lower resistor (1k) than a (4.7k), you are able to reach better AFR targets at boost greater +16psi?
    If both tunes are targeting 19 psi, one with 1k & the other with 4.7k, will the 4.7k save more fuel and still achieve the same boost level?
    To run nitrous, is the 4.7k not good enough to run safely?
    If having a 1k resistor in there and the advantage of it's running richer AFR and then have it run leaner for less boost, why not then have it adjustable through the user menu on the desire boost target selected?
    Are JB3 cars making more power because they run richer lambda?

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    7,980
    Rep Points
    8,872.8
    Mentioned
    627 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    89



    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by AltecBX Click here to enlarge
    I need to understand this in laymen's term.

    By running a lower resistor (1k) than a (4.7k), you are able to reach better AFR targets at boost greater +16psi?
    If both tunes are targeting 19 psi, one with 1k & the other with 4.7k, will the 4.7k save more fuel and still achieve the same boost level?
    To run nitrous, is the 4.7k not good enough to run safely?
    If having a 1k resistor in there and the advantage of it's running richer AFR and then have it run leaner for less boost, why not then have it adjustable through the user menu on the desire boost target selected?
    Are JB3 cars making more power because they run richer lambda?
    A few comments:

    1) Using the 1k resistors instead of 4.7k gives you the ability to target richer air/fuel ratios which you can then tune in on the software side. We've configured the JB3 to allow users to dial in these ratios to their liking, along with some suggestions for use.

    2) Safety is not an absolute term it's a relative term. The ability to target much richer air/fuel ratios improves safety with certain things (e.g. super high EGTs, preignition, etc) that can become an issue at higher power levels. You can also protect against these things by lowering boost and/or timing and just making less power. and/or you can run a lot more octane to help protect against preignition. and/or you can run a higher water mix to reduce combustion temps. and/or you can use a higher volume of meth/water to increase octane. and/or you can find plugs that carry more heat out of the combustion chamber. Generally you would do a combination of everything. But if the objective is maximum power then having more flexibility over the air/fuel ratio is preferred to not having it.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    638
    Rep Points
    47.6
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    So not having any ability to limit ignition advance is OK. But not running nonDI AFR targets on a DI engine is not OK.

    Terry-- Have you even measured the effects of AFR on N54 knock resistance? Or pre-turbo EGT? Where is your data showing that running a 11.x:1 AFR at peak torque does anything but consume more fuel?

    -shiv

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    7,980
    Rep Points
    8,872.8
    Mentioned
    627 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    89



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu Click here to enlarge
    So not having any ability to limit ignition advance is OK. But not running nonDI AFR targets on a DI engine is not OK.

    Terry-- Have you even measured the effects of AFR on N54 knock resistance? Or pre-turbo EGT? Where is your data showing that running a 11.x:1 AFR at peak torque does anything but consume more fuel?

    -shiv
    For the purposes of controlling EGT there is a benefit to advance limiting but you get the same benefit by boost limiting. Both at the expense of power. And of course advance limiting is a dicey business to start with as the ECU which sets the upper boundary based on internal mapping has a wide range. If you're calling for -2 degrees/CPS you could wind up with anywhere from 9 to 14 degrees of total advance depending on many other factors outside of your control. The better solution from a power perspective is octane, meth, and fuel.

    I haven't performed pre-turbo EGT measuring in some time (we no longer have the 335i, only the 135i) but have recently done a lot of post turbo measuring and have drawn some clear conclusions from it. On pump gas there are obvious knock resistance benefits observed. On meth it gets muddied and we don't have large enough turbos to push to the boundaries there yet. But soon.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    638
    Rep Points
    47.6
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    3 out of 3 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry
    For the purposes of controlling EGT there is a benefit to advance limiting but you get the same benefit by boost limiting. Both at the expense of power. And of course advance limiting is a dicey business to start with as the ECU which sets the upper boundary based on internal mapping has a wide range. If you're calling for -2 degrees/CPS you could wind up with anywhere from 9 to 14 degrees of total advance depending on many other factors outside of your control. The better solution from a power perspective is octane, meth, and fuel.
    Incorrect. And it doesn't look like you even understand the relationship between EGT and ignition advance. The less advance, the higher the EGT due to decrease in combustion efficiency. Not the other way around. What I was getting at is that running a 11:1 AFR at peak torque has no EGT-reduction effect compared to running 13:1. Nor does it have any effect on knock resistance. It's only until you enlean AFR above 15:5 at, or around, peak torque, does knock resistance take a measurable turn for the worse. No surprise that BMW tunes for a Lambda of ~1.1 (16.2:1 AFR) at peak torque, albeit at lower boost pressures.

    At higher engine speed, requirements change a bit in that the DI effects are diminished. I suspect this has to do with combustion events having less time between them, which doesn't allow for proper air/fuel stratification. Which means excess fuel must be introduced into the cylinder to ensure a complete burn while maximum charge expansion at the time in the combustion cycle.

    I haven't performed pre-turbo EGT measuring in some time (we no longer have the 335i, only the 135i) but have recently done a lot of post turbo measuring and have drawn some clear conclusions from it. On pump gas there are obvious knock resistance benefits observed. On meth it gets muddied and we don't have large enough turbos to push to the boundaries there yet. But soon.
    I'd be interested to know why your findings, if they do in fact exist, deviate from mine. As wel as basic engine theory with regards to Direct Injection and it's effects/benefits.

    Shiv

    PS. I'm looking forward to Lost Marine given me a negative Rep again.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •