Close

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 112
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    937
    Rep Points
    562.7
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
    I'm sure in your case anyone but Shiv and Procede would be inappropriate. Think out of the box Josh. Don't always be so negative dude
    Actually I'd love to tackle it myself, but this isn't going to happen. I think Terry would do a fine job. I was thinking you would do well also with some of your earlier comments about stacking, but then this thread popped up. Hell Tony could do it himself, with the help of the community.

    If you want speed in getting the car on the road with HP, then yes Shiv would be best... but he may insist on his flash, and if so I wouldn't want this.

    Tony, my experience is very limited with other platforms … DZ and I are actually very similar in our experiences. I do know this platform well and can help point you in the right direction. No matter what happens, keeping everything open and public is the best. This is the high HP option that is open in tuning. Right away with PTF, the tuning will be locked… you have the leverage to keep it open, which will be necessary if help is needed, especially in stacking. Plus others purchasing the kit, aren’t starting from scratch tuning themselves this way.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    3,309
    Rep Points
    1,439.3
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
    This discussion only pertains to tuning large than stock frame turbos. It does not apply to stock turbos, or hybrid turbos such as RB, Vargas Stage 1 or 2, ASR or TD so let's leave those out of this thread.
    why doesn't the 21psi limit apply to hybrid's?

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,920
    Rep Points
    3,985.4
    Mentioned
    324 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Flinchy Click here to enlarge
    why doesn't the 21psi limit apply to hybrid's?
    Because you have to taper the boost on all of them towards redline to keep them alive. 21 psi+ on hyrbrids isn't feasible with the back pressure issues they have. D step in, if that is not the only reason, but I know that the major one.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    884
    Rep Points
    1,435.3
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Yes Reputation No
    Are you are already running 21lbs of boost on acn 91 or are you just preparing for e85/race gas/meth?

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,684
    Rep Points
    3,343.8
    Mentioned
    226 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    Actually I'd love to tackle it myself, but this isn't going to happen. I think Terry would do a fine job. I was thinking you would do well also with some of your earlier comments about stacking, but then this thread popped up. Hell Tony could do it himself, with the help of the community.

    If you want speed in getting the car on the road with HP, then yes Shiv would be best... but he may insist on his flash, and if so I wouldn't want this.

    Tony, my experience is very limited with other platforms … DZ and I are actually very similar in our experiences. I do know this platform well and can help point you in the right direction. No matter what happens, keeping everything open and public is the best. This is the high HP option that is open in tuning. Right away with PTF, the tuning will be locked… you have the leverage to keep it open, which will be necessary if help is needed, especially in stacking. Plus others purchasing the kit, aren’t starting from scratch tuning themselves this way.
    Your experience is just limited, end of sentence full stop Click here to enlarge

    You're pushing it to be honest. Kit is/will not be locked to our tuning in any way, the heck are you talking about? Yes, we get the first crack at tuning it first as we've spent considerable time discussing and providing general guidance in such a setup. But that can/could've been both bad and good. So far everything has been nothing but great and good progress.

    We all learn from each other especially when exploring the unexplored. I don't believe in hiding any information nor do I have any means of locking away what we do with tuning. Its all right there in the datalogs. Every single parameter of the tune can be seen and dissected. This isn't something new to you Josh as I know you've reviewed our customer's logs in the past to provide "helpful" advice Click here to enlarge

    Valuable contributions, thinking outside the box and SOME results would be really nice to see from your end for a change instead of the usual. I'm simply a data guy so throw up some data and let's discuss.
    Click here to enlarge

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,920
    Rep Points
    3,985.4
    Mentioned
    324 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    Actually I'd love to tackle it myself, but this isn't going to happen. I think Terry would do a fine job. I was thinking you would do well also with some of your earlier comments about stacking, but then this thread popped up. Hell Tony could do it himself, with the help of the community.

    If you want speed in getting the car on the road with HP, then yes Shiv would be best... but he may insist on his flash, and if so I wouldn't want this.

    Tony, my experience is very limited with other platforms … DZ and I are actually very similar in our experiences. I do know this platform well and can help point you in the right direction. No matter what happens, keeping everything open and public is the best. This is the high HP option that is open in tuning. Right away with PTF, the tuning will be locked… you have the leverage to keep it open, which will be necessary if help is needed, especially in stacking. Plus others purchasing the kit, aren’t starting from scratch tuning themselves this way.
    Tuning locked to PTF...Click here to enlargeClick here to enlarge Tuning is locked to no one. Part of the reason we built the kit the way we did is so anyone can choose the tuner of their choice and they should be good to go. My choice of using Cobb is making my life a little tougher cause of the boost limit now, but it is what it is and once its gone it will be a distant memory. I honestly love using the the AP its so nice. Since I am working with PTF we will prob offer these maps we are developing as add-ons with the kit if you want to use Cobb or just buy the kit and have Terry or Shiv or anyone for that matter tune it.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    937
    Rep Points
    562.7
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
    Your experience is just limited, end of sentence full stop Click here to enlarge

    You're pushing it to be honest. Kit is/will not be locked to our tuning in any way, the heck are you talking about? Yes, we get the first crack at tuning it first as we've spent considerable time discussing and providing general guidance in such a setup. But that can/could've been both bad and good. So far everything has been nothing but great and good progress.

    We all learn from each other especially when exploring the unexplored. I don't believe in hiding any information nor do I have any means of locking away what we do with tuning. Its all right there in the datalogs. Every single parameter of the tune can be seen and dissected. This isn't something new to you Josh as I know you've reviewed our customer's logs in the past to provide "helpful" advice Click here to enlarge

    Valuable contributions, thinking outside the box and SOME results would be really nice to see from your end for a change instead of the usual. I'm simply a data guy so throw up some data and let's discuss.
    i was referring to locked pro maps... If these are kept open, then great.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,187
    Rep Points
    1,456.7
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Carl Morris Click here to enlarge
    @dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks, what is preventing you from using a different MAP sensor and doing it all in the AP? Is there still a limit in the code that Cobb hasn't found that prevents it from happily processing higher boost while using the new MAP sensor?
    This is a good point. Is there something that prevents you from fooling the DME? This was a common method when matching MAF units with injector sizes.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,684
    Rep Points
    3,343.8
    Mentioned
    226 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    i was referring to locked pro maps... If these are kept open, then great.
    Our maps are never provided open. Every tuner with ATP has their maps locked, including BMS. There is simply nothing we could to to lock our tuning approach away. Nothing can be hidden on this platform and everything becomes public domain once released. Part of the reason why I enjoy it so much is the fact its so transparent in the first place and everyone learns from everyone else.

    I do find it funny though that you're asking that while on the other hand you're perfectly fine with running entirely locked away procede firmware and 100% vin-locked hardware on your own car where you have no visibility into the approaches taken. How about opening that can of worms? You do realize in the past there's been some questionable AFR logging at the least and it comes out of that IP protected firmware you have no problem supporting/running.

    You're polluting this thread with nonsense at this point to be honest. This is meant to be a technical thread/discussion. I may have to remove you LOL
    Click here to enlarge

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,920
    Rep Points
    3,985.4
    Mentioned
    324 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sered Click here to enlarge
    This is a good point. Is there something that prevents you from fooling the DME? This was a common method when matching MAF units with injector sizes.
    We have the 3.5 map on the car. I guess it is an internal limit with the Cobb. I really don't know much more about it.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,126
    Rep Points
    9,106.0
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    My $.02 is D should either use the JB4 isolated without cylinders 2-6 logging, or run a modified JB+ approach to add another 4-5psi headway in the otherwise flash only approach.
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, N63s, S55s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please see http://www.burgertuning.com/emissions_info.html for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Roanoke VA
    Posts
    1,632
    Rep Points
    2,248.3
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    23


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by VargasTurboTech Click here to enlarge
    We have the 3.5 map on the cat. I guess it is an internal limit with the Cobb. I really don't know much more about it.
    Tony, can either you or Dz provide the values for the MAP scalar table in ATR? I just can't seem to find anyone that is either able or willing to provide this information...
    Click here to enlarge
    MOTIV750, MOTIV P-1000 PI, MOTIV/FUEL-IT! low pressure fuel system, AEM EMS/COBB AP, Aquamist HFS-3, ETS FMIC, SPEC stage 3+ clutch/SS flywheel, BC Racing coilovers and VMR wheels wrapped in Hankook RS3s.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,684
    Rep Points
    3,343.8
    Mentioned
    226 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    My $.02 is D should either use the JB4 isolated without cylinders 2-6 logging, or run a modified JB+ approach to add another 4-5psi headway in the otherwise flash only approach.
    What is preventing you from adding timing corrections logging? This would be the best feature of any N54 piggyback on the market. Is it a current hardware limitation? Why not just put this in? Its time! Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,089
    Rep Points
    999.1
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
    What is preventing you from adding timing corrections logging? This would be the best feature of any N54 piggyback on the market. Is it a current hardware limitation? Why not just put this in? Its time! Click here to enlarge
    See post #3, quoted from Terry

    It would be nice to get cyl 2-6 logging in the JB4 but I don't quite have all the information I'd need to do that currently. The JB4 can log the knock sensors directly but that data is a bit harder to interpret.

    I bet if you asked Terry nicely, he could write you a firmware that disables CAN access. And remember how Shiv had cylinder 1-6 logging and teased it as he always does... but never actually publicly released it?

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,089
    Rep Points
    999.1
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    i was referring to locked pro maps... If these are kept open, then great.
    To be fair, the only way you can share maps made in ATP is to create a new map for each and every person's unique serial that wants it. I doubt anyone will bother with that.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Hayward, CA
    Posts
    7,920
    Rep Points
    3,985.4
    Mentioned
    324 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by themyst Click here to enlarge
    See post #3, quoted from Terry

    It would be nice to get cyl 2-6 logging in the JB4 but I don't quite have all the information I'd need to do that currently. The JB4 can log the knock sensors directly but that data is a bit harder to interpret.

    I bet if you asked Terry nicely, he could write you a firmware that disables CAN access. And remember how Shiv had cylinder 1-6 logging and teased it as he always does... but never actually publicly released it?
    I am asking as nicely as possible...Click here to enlargeClick here to enlargeClick here to enlarge Even promising first crack at production stage 3. I can see his stance on both though. I just think it would be a win win for the platform as we can move forward at the higher boost levels and get the kit started on production faster.

    Tony

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,126
    Rep Points
    9,106.0
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by themyst Click here to enlarge
    See post #3, quoted from Terry

    It would be nice to get cyl 2-6 logging in the JB4 but I don't quite have all the information I'd need to do that currently. The JB4 can log the knock sensors directly but that data is a bit harder to interpret.

    I bet if you asked Terry nicely, he could write you a firmware that disables CAN access. And remember how Shiv had cylinder 1-6 logging and teased it as he always does... but never actually publicly released it?
    CAN access is needed for the JB4 boost control to work. He could do a JB3 style setup but that would be uglier than the JB+ option. Click here to enlarge

    Best bet to move forward is the G5 ISO IMHO.
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, N63s, S55s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please see http://www.burgertuning.com/emissions_info.html for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Houston under a book
    Posts
    1,403
    Rep Points
    2,675.4
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    27


    Yes Reputation No
    Cobb cracked individual cylinder logging so it follows the jb could... but at Cobb you are talking about major development teams with lots of resources. Maybe a Cobb software engineer could shine some light, but I don't think we have any here.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,218
    Rep Points
    2,201.9
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    23


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
    Our maps are never provided open. Every tuner with ATP has their maps locked, including BMS.

    I do find it funny though that you're asking that while on the other hand you're perfectly fine with running entirely locked away procede firmware and 100% vin-locked hardware on your own car where you have no visibility into the approaches taken. How about opening that can of worms?
    Not taking sides, but his comment was clearly about the maps. The procede maps are not locked and you can fully tune and see what the exact tune is doing (not talking the mechanics of HOW it fools the ECU in the firmware, as that is irrelevant to his original claim).

    Your maps will be locked (reasonably so). A comparison to the Procede flash which is also locked would have been the fair analogy.
    Change is constant

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    919
    Rep Points
    780.4
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    The JB4 requires at least 10hz.

    Terry, I apologize if I am diverting things a bit off topic. An engine spinning at 7,000 rpms equates to roughly 116 revs per second. This means 116Hz

    Please, excuse my utter ignorance on this matter, but how is it that a 10Hz sample rate allows you to do reliable tuning of an engine that spins 10 TIMES faster?
    From all the things I've lost,
    I miss my mind the most!
    Click here to enlarge

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Houston under a book
    Posts
    1,403
    Rep Points
    2,675.4
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    27


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by vasillalov Click here to enlarge
    Terry, I apologize if I am diverting things a bit off topic. An engine spinning at 7,000 rpms equates to roughly 116 revs per second. This means 116Hz

    Please, excuse my utter ignorance on this matter, but how is it that a 10Hz sample rate allows you to do reliable tuning of an engine that spins 10 TIMES faster?
    I also have complete ignorance in this matter... but following your train of thought, wouldn't it be 116 rps / 4 since you only have one spark event per 4 rotations (4 stroke engine)? So, 29Hz?

    I have a feeling that's not how it works, but any data on the canbus is good to me. Ever since CANbus networks in cars, I haven't paid much attention. I have enough issues sifting through wireshark data on a tcp/ip network as is...

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,684
    Rep Points
    3,343.8
    Mentioned
    226 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by V8Bait Click here to enlarge
    I also have complete ignorance in this matter... but following your train of thought, wouldn't it be 116 rps / 4 since you only have one spark event per 4 rotations (4 stroke engine)? So, 29Hz?

    I have a feeling that's not how it works, but any data on the canbus is good to me. Ever since CANbus networks in cars, I haven't paid much attention. I have enough issues sifting through wireshark data on a tcp/ip network as is...
    There's really no issues with logging resolution and here's why:

    Take a look at any Cobb datalog that logs timing corrections. You'll see that within 1 second it is capable of recording anywhere from 10 to 16 unique records so 10-16Hz. Even at 10Hz in case of knock the DME corrects timing across more than one row (revolution or spark event) always. All issues with "resolution" are baseless really given how they're being recorded. The exact spark event at which knock occurs is well known by the DME and it ends up thrown out in the log. In terms of tuning it ends up being an "area" of the tune that ends up needing further attention.

    In the end both JB4 and Procede use the CANBus to control most of their key tuning parameters and they entirely depend on the 10Hz based system. This isn't the case for direct sensor inputs at least on the Procede as it has up to 30Hz of logging resolution it seems from its logs (~25-30 samples per second). DME on the other hand does not use a CANBus to see requested boost or target or actual timing. This data is available to it through direct access memory reads and sensor signal inputs which is far superior to any externally stacked device.
    Last edited by dzenno@PTF; 03-09-2013 at 01:03 AM.
    Click here to enlarge

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Houston under a book
    Posts
    1,403
    Rep Points
    2,675.4
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    27


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
    There's really no issues with logging resolution and here's why:

    Take a look at any Cobb datalog that logs timing corrections. You'll see that within 1 second it is capable of recording anywhere from 10 to 16 unique records so 10-16Hz...In case of knock the DME corrects timing across more than one row (revolution or spark event) always. All issues with "resolution" are baseless really given how they're being recorded. The exact spark event at which knock occurs is well known by the DME and it ends up thrown out in the log. In terms of tuning it ends up being an "area" of the tune that ends up needing further attention.
    I agree with that, although I'm not convinced that every event gets thrown out into the CANbus log, I feel it would become saturated at high rpm. Although, at high rpm I think there will be the least amount of issues timing wise. I base that on no data, just my good understanding on computer networks, and general trends I've seen with how BMW does things (not always the most elegant solutions). Although I think that's splitting hairs and not important, because as you said, it's a way to identify area's that need to be addressed. Could timing correction on a cylinder to cylinder resolution lead to cylinder imbalance at high power levels? Most cars I have tuned and race cars I've played with tend to have set timing.

    More on topic, what is the issue you have specifically with using something like a JB+ to get the boost to the targets you would like, at least for tuning purposes until the limit is removed? Other than the scale in the tune will have to be adjusted for the levels the DME "sees" with the JB+ type modifier, and the elegance (or lack thereof), it seems like you are adamant against it. I have a feeling it has to do with the way the DME targets loads and them already being sky high, but I thought you can disable that.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,126
    Rep Points
    9,106.0
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by vasillalov Click here to enlarge
    Terry, I apologize if I am diverting things a bit off topic. An engine spinning at 7,000 rpms equates to roughly 116 revs per second. This means 116Hz

    Please, excuse my utter ignorance on this matter, but how is it that a 10Hz sample rate allows you to do reliable tuning of an engine that spins 10 TIMES faster?
    Certain things like crank position are sampled thousands of times per second. Boost and other analog inputs hundreds. But the stuff we read from the CAN data are things that don't change much within 1/10th of a second. Like DME boost set point, throttle position, oil & water temperature, fuel trims, etc. But if the DME drops some of those down to say 5hz because it's splitting bandwidth with another logging device we may run in to various issues. Remember the JB4 is basically just one of ~20 nodes on the car pulling data from the DME. And gets the lowest priority.
    Burger Motorsports
    Home of the Worlds fastest N20s, N54s, N55s, N63s, S55s, and S63s!

    It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser and installer of any BMS part to employ the correct installation techniques required to ensure the proper operation of BMS parts, and BMS disclaims any and all liability for any part failure due to improper installation or use. It is the sole responsibility of the customer to verify that the use of their vehicle and items purchased comply with federal, state and local regulations. BMS claims no legal federal, state or local certification concerning pollution controlled motor vehicles or mandated emissions requirements. BMS products labeled for use only in competition racing vehicles may only be used on competition racing vehicles operated exclusively on a closed course in conjunction with a sanctioned racing event, in accordance with all federal and state laws, and may never be operated on public roads/highways. Please see http://www.burgertuning.com/emissions_info.html for more information on legal requirements related to use of BMS parts.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,684
    Rep Points
    3,343.8
    Mentioned
    226 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by V8Bait Click here to enlarge
    More on topic, what is the issue you have specifically with using something like a JB+ to get the boost to the targets you would like, at least for tuning purposes until the limit is removed? Other than the scale in the tune will have to be adjusted for the levels the DME "sees" with the JB+ type modifier, and the elegance (or lack thereof), it seems like you are adamant against it. I have a feeling it has to do with the way the DME targets loads and them already being sky high, but I thought you can disable that.
    I'm simply uncomfortable with the JB+ having had experience with it on my car and RBs. Its simply too much to handle for my taste especially pushing limits. I'd much rather use the JB4 ISO at the end of the day and at least have proper boost control. Doing away with timing correction datalogging just makes me wary. This isn't the case just on this kit where I'd be the most wary doing it that way. Its also on stock and hybrid type turbos. I'm not the one to easily throw away such valuable data for extra 3-4psi of boost especially when pushing limits.

    I still don't understand why the community isn't pressing the piggyback vendors, especially those with single turbos out there, for exposing this critical data when its available. It'd make for much better overall tunes down the road and make them evolve too in the way that it'd eliminate some of the guesswork there. Is it because CPS wouldn't be able to pull out enough timing where required and would cause misfires? I know that was the case from my own testing. When trying to pull significant amounts of timing with CPS the car would misfire. This was apparent on a number of cars. In fact about 3-4deg of CPS offset was about a safe limit of what it could do without issues.

    But none of that matters. Who cares about CPS, its bogus and outdated. Today everyone running a stacked setup has the ability to flash for timing as well as fuel, vanos and any other required tables. Thanks to the community's efforts we can also use the Alpina flash to flash the TCU and get more out of the previously suffering high powered 6AT cars.

    Taking shortcuts gets us nowhere the right way. Back 2 years ago it was thought N54 had about 450whp worth of fuel in it and it was deemed pointless building a big turbo setup on it without upgrading the car's perfectly capable hardware.

    I want to simply keep on pushing the envelope while doing it through the DME where/whenever possible. I want to use all the kickass data and capabilities available to push the platform further. I don't want to just be done with it stacking a JB+.

    Terry, I know you can pull it off on the JB4 and make it not use the canbus to do ISO boost control. There must be a way Click here to enlarge Or, if it indeed is too difficult, let's just get the timing correction data logging in some form added on the JB4.
    Last edited by dzenno@PTF; 03-09-2013 at 02:00 AM.
    Click here to enlarge

Page 2 of 5 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
  •