Close

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 147
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,447
    Rep Points
    32,147.3
    Mentioned
    2108 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    In general we have tens of millions (likely hundreds of millions by now) of customer miles by which to evaluate the JB3s great reliability. The only question left is how does nitrous change the equation. It's definitely not for the faint of heart and I fully expect to see motor and drivetrain failures from those who don't take caution and ignore the guidelines we set forth. But normally people shooting for 10 second time-slips already understand the risks involved, know how to datalog, and know what to look for in those logs.
    As far as I am concerned, there are no questions regarding the JB3's reliability there are tons of miles as you say.

    The questions are strictly nitrous related and timing is an important part of the equation. If someone is trying to set records or go for all out performance, I don't think reliability and longevity should be prime concerns.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,129
    Rep Points
    9,106.3
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    As far as I am concerned, there are no questions regarding the JB3's reliability there are tons of miles as you say.

    The questions are strictly nitrous related and timing is an important part of the equation. If someone is trying to set records or go for all out performance, I don't think reliability and longevity should be prime concerns.
    Well, you do need to get down the track at least once. Click here to enlarge

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    642
    Rep Points
    97.0
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Go ahead and set things straight, whatever it is that you consider straight is. Everyone is open to contribute technically here.

    Maybe I do not understand, but from what I have read, piggybacks do not adjust timing, correct? So, therefore, with the tuning solutions being piggybacks no one can adjust timing with a piggyback, is that correct?
    Just about every high end piggyback (procede, xede, aem piggy, cpe standback, etc,) adjust timing advance offsetting the crank position sensor waveform with repsect to TDC. This is not a trivial task as it involves reading the high frequency square wave, recreating it and offsetting in either direction. As a result, this task the most processor intensive job of a piggyback. Unless the piggyback in mention is a jb1, jb2 or jb3. They cannot/do not do this.

    By offsetting the CPS waveform in either direction, you can effectively advance or retard the DME's timing target. By offsetting it a positive 3-4 degrees at idle, I'm able to run an additional 3-4 degrees of timing in order to stabilize idle due to my super light flywheel. Likewise, by offsetting it in the other direction by up to 6 degrees, I'm able to make the DME target an ignition value that is up to 6 degrees lower than it would without the Procede. Which means that the knock sensor doesn't need to get involved reactive (in reaction to knock/over-advance). This is normal. This isn't voodoo. It works. And different tuning devices have been doing this for over a decade. But it takes a good deal of programming and hardware to make it work since the DME is very sensitive to abberations like missing teeth, max/min voltage values, rate of change limits, etc,. The JB3 runs a PIC that was originally designed to control robotic arms. As a result, its outputs are generally of PWM nature. It offers no signal filtering or even a crystal oscillator for accurating timing stamps. So it is no surprise that it cannot do this.

    If Terry wants to play semantics game and define timing control as "must have the ability to set absolute timing advance output" then the DME doesn't even qualify since it is also subject to knock control system trims/adjustments.

    shiv

    ps. I added more info to my previous post. A little backstory.
    Last edited by shiv@vishnu; 03-30-2010 at 08:39 PM.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    MIAMI
    Posts
    462
    Rep Points
    199.0
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Shiv & Terry,

    We're glad to have you both here. Consider Bimmerboost as a "level playing field" where both of you have equal opportunity and freedom for discussions without any negative reciprocation from admins and mods.

    As always, great information from both your parts. This will definitely help the end users better understand the inner workings of both tunes and their methods.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    MIAMI
    Posts
    462
    Rep Points
    199.0
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    CP-E,

    Since we're on the subject of timing and CPS offsetting, We would love to hear your thoughts and reasoning behind this. Does the standback incorporate this? why and how ?

    Thanks.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    642
    Rep Points
    97.0
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    0 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Got PSI Click here to enlarge
    Shiv & Terry,

    We're glad to have you both here. Consider Bimmerboost as a "level playing field" where both of you have equal opportunity and freedom for discussions without any negative reciprocation from admins and mods.

    As always, great information from both your parts. This will definitely help the end users better understand the inner workings of both tunes and their methods.
    That's great and all. But unfortunately, readers will have to do a little bit of research if they aren't familiar with the topics at hand. Nothing beats understanding things yourself instead of listening to someone with something to sell. Unfortunately, we have gotten to the point where bold faced lies are told with the hope that it will be accepted by those who don't know any better. And I'm not going to spend my whole day trying to clear up misinformation that should not be so easily accpected in the first place. Sometimes i feel that all people want its a good e-fight. I dont mind a good technical debate myself. But it becomes monotonious when it's the same pony show over and over gain.

    Shiv

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,129
    Rep Points
    9,106.3
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu Click here to enlarge
    You are being purposely misled. Just like when BMS stated that the JB3 offered timing control/CPS offsetting only to be proven, by 3rd party testing, that it didn't exist. BMS responded by saying that they forgot to remove it from the promotional material and that they recently opted for a "better" method of timing control which they refused to reveal, suggesting that it was a secret approached that they developed. This was soon revealed to be no approach whatsoever, instead letting the DME trim ignition timing based upon normal knock control feedback. That's even more surprising is that post release, Terry was even caught posting on his forum about different maps having more or less CPS/timing offset. Kinda funny considering that, by their own admission, it was never released.

    And the reason it was never released is because the PIC they use in the JB3 doesn't have that capability. And the challenge for them to prove otherwise is now over 1 year old and forgotten.

    Sticky-- There is a long history of Terry's behavior. Most of which got him banned from both e90post and 1addicts. He's continuting this nonsense here and on his forum, hoping that readers accept his word over reality.

    Shiv
    That's quite a bit of nonsense. I'm not sure where I'd even start. But here is a simple question for you. How many instructions per second does it take to run an interrupt based CPS system? And how many instructions per second does a simple $.90 12F629 processor (something much less sophisticated than what we use for the JB3) support @ 4mhz? And how about @ 20mhz?

    Our very first prototype incorporated a CPS offset. In fact the very first JB3 prototype WAS a PIC "build it yourself" timing retard kit. Back then we assumed that CPS was the only method for timing management (to our discredit) greatly based on your marketing. It wasn't until we really dug in to it that we realized it was largely a sham. What people observed as knock was mainly about boost management.

    As for JB3 maps having a CPS and the marketing materials, also a bunch of nonsense. The one document that mentioned a CPS, our "intention to develop" announcement, was modified months before release. A few lazy vendors copied and ran with that document but they were provided updated materials.

    As far as being banned. It's true Jason Liu banned me from his forums for engaging with you in threads like this. Back when we were so small that he thought that might kill us. But history tells us you are not without your forum bannings as well. If you really want to get in to credibility according to the state of California your business license is suspended. Click here to enlarge

    Click here to enlarge

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Whales Vag
    Posts
    1,214
    Rep Points
    1.0
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu Click here to enlarge
    Sticky-- There is a long history of Terry's behavior. Most of which got him banned from both e90post and 1addicts. He's continuting this nonsense here and on his forum, hoping that readers accept his word over reality.

    Shiv
    its not hard to be banned on bimmerpost.
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by tag824 Click here to enlarge
    guess i lost all my rep's... later bro's

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    642
    Rep Points
    97.0
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    That's quite a bit of nonsense. I'm not sure where I'd even start. But here is a simple question for you. How many instructions per second does it take to run an interrupt based CPS system? And how many instructions per second does a simple $.90 12F629 processor (something much less sophisticated than what we use for the JB3) support @ 4mhz? And how about @ 20mhz?

    Our very first prototype incorporated a CPS offset. In fact the very first JB3 prototype WAS a PIC "build it yourself" timing retard kit. Back then we assumed that CPS was the only method for timing management (to our discredit) greatly based on your marketing. It wasn't until we really dug in to it that we realized it was largely a sham. What people observed as knock was mainly about boost management.

    As for JB3 maps having a CPS and the marketing materials, also a bunch of nonsense. The one document that mentioned a CPS, our "intention to develop" announcement, was modified months before release. A few lazy vendors copied and ran with that document but they were provided updated materials.

    As far as being banned. It's true Jason Liu banned me from his forums for engaging with you in threads like this. Back when we were so small that he thought that might kill us. But history tells us you are not without your forum bannings as well. If you really want to get in to credibility according to the state of California your business license is suspended. Click here to enlarge

    Click here to enlarge
    Is that your idea of throwing the gauntlet Terry?

    Vishnu has been a been a Sole Prop. for 11 years. Our laywer filed incorportation papers a few years ago for an entity called Vishnu Per. System INC. But that company never existed. So there ya go.

    So let's get to the nitty gritty. Over a year ago, we challenged you to prove that the Jb3 can retard timing through CPS offsetting. Something that is CLEARLY beneficial for nitrous applications. Are you going to offer it? Or are you going to rely on the factory knock control system?

    Yes, I pissed off an admin 6 years ago of a small local CA evo forum. And as a result, i was banned. Along with a few other vendors who didn't agree with an unfair sponsorship fee. This is very different from what you did (fake accounts, fake reviews, misinformation spreading, lying, etc,.) This is all on record. If you'd like, I can dig it up. Or we can just get back on topic and you can can explain what you define as "timing control". I'm all ears. And I'm sure others are as well.

    Shiv

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,462
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    I feel like im back in Iraq with all this bullet dodging!

    (Good thing i know how to pick the winning side Click here to enlarge )

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,447
    Rep Points
    32,147.3
    Mentioned
    2108 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu Click here to enlarge
    Is that your idea of throwing the gauntlet Terry?

    Vishnu has been a been a Sole Prop. for 11 years. Our laywer filed incorportation papers a few years ago for an entity called Vishnu Per. System INC. But that company never existed. So there ya go.
    This makes sense and is likely the correct explanation. If it has remained a sole proprietorship for 11 years why attempt incorporation relatively early into the life of Vishnu? Why was it just let go?

    So let's get to the nitty gritty. Over a year ago, we challenged you to prove that the Jb3 can retard timing through CPS offsetting. Something that is CLEARLY beneficial for nitrous applications. Are you going to offer it? Or are you going to rely on the factory knock control system?

    Yes, I pissed off an admin 6 years ago of a small local CA evo forum. And as a result, i was banned. Along with a few other vendors who didn't agree with an unfair sponsorship fee. This is very different from what you did (fake accounts, fake reviews, misinformation spreading, lying, etc,.) This is all on record. If you'd like, I can dig it up. Or we can just get back on topic and you can can explain what you define as "timing control". I'm all ears. And I'm sure others are as well.
    So the CPS settings can influence timing? Do they directly control timing however? I am not familiar with these CPS settings at all.

    Bimmerpost has a history of unreasonable moves and bannings, a ban from that site certainly does not equate to any wrongdoing nor should it be portrayed as a negative. One can be banned from there for sneezing in the wrong direction and that site is not a bastion of credibility.

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    642
    Rep Points
    97.0
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    This makes sense and is likely the correct explanation. If it has remained a sole proprietorship for 11 years why attempt incorporation relatively early into the life of Vishnu? Why was it just let go?
    Just some bad advice. It's beyond the scope of this thread to debate the relative benefits of an Inc vs. SP vs. LLC. The only point i was making was that we never operated out of the Inc. And what is funny is that this was disclosed years ago. But as long as it entertains someone, i'm happy.


    So the CPS settings can influence timing? Do they directly control timing however? I am not familiar with these CPS settings at all.
    The don't just influence timing. The apply a discrete and perfectly predicatable timing advance offset, in either direction (advance or retard). And this amount of offset is mappable, in a 3d table, as a function of engine load and RPM. I would definitely consider this timing control. The only thing more "controlling" would be to install a stand alone ECU and map a fixed ignition timing table. But that would be a step in the wrong direction.

    Bimmerpost has a history of unreasonable moves and bannings, a ban from that site certainly does not equate to any wrongdoing nor should it be portrayed as a negative. One can be banned from there for sneezing in the wrong direction and that site is not a bastion of credibility.
    Again, I don't want to engage in what forum is better than the other. All I know is that I spent the last 6hrs debating with Terry and Lostmarine about things that shouldn't even be debateable. And this is something that I can't continue indefinitely due to time constraints. As such, it would be nice to get other tuners to contribute here. The way it is going, however, I fear any Procede-related threads will become a sideshow/off-topic chat. Some degree of moderation is necessary I think.

    Shiv

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,129
    Rep Points
    9,106.3
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu Click here to enlarge
    Is that your idea of throwing the gauntlet Terry?

    Vishnu has been a been a Sole Prop. for 11 years. Our laywer filed incorportation papers a few years ago for an entity called Vishnu Per. System INC. But that company never existed. So there ya go.

    So let's get to the nitty gritty. Over a year ago, we challenged you to prove that the Jb3 can retard timing through CPS offsetting. Something that is CLEARLY beneficial for nitrous applications. Are you going to offer it? Or are you going to rely on the factory knock control system?

    Yes, I pissed off an admin 6 years ago of a small local CA evo forum. And as a result, i was banned. Along with a few other vendors who didn't agree with an unfair sponsorship fee. This is very different from what you did (fake accounts, fake reviews, misinformation spreading, lying, etc,.) This is all on record. If you'd like, I can dig it up. Or we can just get back on topic and you can can explain what you define as "timing control". I'm all ears. And I'm sure others are as well.

    Shiv
    Fake accounts and misinformation like this? http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6620

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    642
    Rep Points
    97.0
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Fake accounts and misinformation like this? http://www.n54tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6620
    Are you referring to Robert Kao's account (nikekao)? He's one of our sales guys. Last I checked, he is a real person. But I'll readily admit that I've posted under his account to clear up the misinformation that runs rampant on your forum. I would have done it under my own account but you banned it for some reason.

    shiv

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    MIAMI
    Posts
    462
    Rep Points
    199.0
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    are there any "tests" that can be done to prove the concept of CPS offsetting and it's function in real life performance? I understand that there seems to be a difference of opinion from both tuners. Something that can be done to SHOW in black and white. Maybe some BT logs? some dynos? i'm sure both parties have supporting information to support their claim.

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    642
    Rep Points
    97.0
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Got PSI Click here to enlarge
    are there any "tests" that can be done to prove the concept of CPS offsetting and it's function in real life performance? I understand that there seems to be a difference of opinion from both tuners. Something that can be done to SHOW in black and white. Maybe some BT logs? some dynos? i'm sure both parties have supporting information to support their claim.
    lol.. here and here again.

    It's all very straight-forward.

    Shiv

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,447
    Rep Points
    32,147.3
    Mentioned
    2108 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu Click here to enlarge
    Just some bad advice. It's beyond the scope of this thread to debate the relative benefits of an Inc vs. SP vs. LLC. The only point i was making was that we never operated out of the Inc. And what is funny is that this was disclosed years ago. But as long as it entertains someone, i'm happy.
    It is beyond the scope of the thread as you suggested and your explanation makes sense. I thought you might like the opportunity to address it once and for all so it can not continue to be used against you.

    The don't just influence timing. The apply a discrete and perfectly predicatable timing advance offset, in either direction (advance or retard). And this amount of offset is mappable, in a 3d table, as a function of engine load and RPM. I would definitely consider this timing control. The only thing more "controlling" would be to install a stand alone ECU and map a fixed ignition timing table. But that would be a step in the wrong direction.
    I see, you can influence the timing in a predictable range but not directly as one can with a flash? So, what I am gathering is that the ProCEDE has more control for nitrous applications than the JB3, correct?


    Again, I don't want to engage in what forum is better than the other. All I know is that I spent the last 6hrs debating with Terry and Lostmarine about things that shouldn't even be debateable. And this is something that I can't continue indefinitely due to time constraints. As such, it would be nice to get other tuners to contribute here. The way it is going, however, I fear any Procede-related threads will become a sideshow/off-topic chat. Some degree of moderation is necessary I think.
    No need to engage in debate over what forum is better than the other, that debate is over as far as I am concerned. We are all here for a reason and we are just waiting for everyone else to realize it and catch on. You have been given no restriction in your responses. More technical knowledge here is certainly wanted and definitely would be appreciated. However, keep in mind, this is basically your first major interaction here. Terry has been here from day 1 and has offered support from day 1, that does come with certain entitlements. I get the feeling that you are concerned about being ganged up on and I assure you your threads will not be allowed to be taken off topic concerning Procede products but people will be allowed to voice their opinions. It is a difficult balance but mods will not be used here to bail anyone out nor prematurely interfere in someone's favor. Everyone participates in moderation here.

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,129
    Rep Points
    9,106.3
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu Click here to enlarge
    Are you referring to Robert Kao's account (nikekao)? He's one of our sales guys. Last I checked, he is a real person. But I'll readily admit that I've posted under his account to clear up the misinformation that runs rampant on your forum. I would have done it under my own account but you banned it for some reason.

    shiv
    Convenient that nothing in his account indicates he is from Vishnu, nor did he sign his inflammatory posts with your name or any indication he was related to Vishnu. Only when we caught his IP address at the same hotel you happened to be visiting in New York did we put 2+2 together. That wasn't the first fake account of yours we caught either.

    Interestingly the two fake accounts that Jason Liu cited us as making on bimmerpost years ago were actually our employees Russ & Jon. Both of whom had BMS in their signature.
    Last edited by Terry@BMS; 03-30-2010 at 10:41 PM.

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Beltsville, MD
    Posts
    238
    Rep Points
    285.1
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    Got PSI

    I'd love to just not in this thread. We do things a bit different than both of these tuners. Both seem to work. Maybe one better than the other. I won't get into this issue though.

    As for bimmerpost. Jason Liu banned us as well for someone posting about cp-e who has never been affiliated with the company. Its obvious there is a relationship between Shiv and Jason Liu and whether or not they admit it - it is kind of obvious. What's even funnier is we get threatened with Slander - spoken word - by an attorney (Jason) when the comments made by a non-affiliated individual to cp-e were written online - therefor libel - and clearly assessing the right of free speech. I personally found it amusing. But hey. Im just a measly neuropsychologist. What do I know. - but hey - if any of you guys blow your motor i can help you cope with the loss. Did bereavement therapy for a bit. Click here to enlarge

    Anyway - its obvious that both Shiv and Terry are smart guys. This thread is kind of amusing to me. Definately a fun thread to read.
    Custom Performance Engineering
    www.cp-e.com
    BMW N54/N55 | Forced Induction | Direct Injection Specialists

    Supporting BMW 1M | 135i | 335i | 535i and more

    Facebook: www.facebook.com/gocpe
    Twitter: http://twitter.com/gocpe
    youtube: http://www.youtube.com/CustomPerformanceEng

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,129
    Rep Points
    9,106.3
    Mentioned
    644 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    92


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Got PSI Click here to enlarge
    are there any "tests" that can be done to prove the concept of CPS offsetting and it's function in real life performance? I understand that there seems to be a difference of opinion from both tuners. Something that can be done to SHOW in black and white. Maybe some BT logs? some dynos? i'm sure both parties have supporting information to support their claim.
    We see it every day when we have JB3 customers hitting 400rw on pump gas, and others posting how trouble free their JB3 cars have been for the last 10k, 30k, 50k, and 70k miles. But but forums are about entertainment:



    Also to Shiv's point I can't say that bickering on here is a great use of time. Although I'm happy to do it to clear up any mistruths or help fellow enthusiasts out.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    642
    Rep Points
    97.0
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    0 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    It is beyond the scope of the thread as you suggested and your explanation makes sense. I thought you might like the opportunity to address it once and for all so it can not continue to be used against you.
    I've already explained it before. And it's still on terry's bookmark list. So it doesn't matter Click here to enlarge

    I see, you can influence the timing in a predictable range but not directly as one can with a flash? So, what I am gathering is that the ProCEDE has more control for nitrous applications than the JB3, correct?
    I think we are getting into a discussion that requires a bit more clarity. Can you (or even Terry) please define what is deemed by "timing control". If it's the ability to adjust the timing curve to anything you want within a given adjustment range (+/- 10 deg) in a 16x16 3d table as a function of load and RPM then yes, the Procede controls timing. If it's defined as the ability to dictate that the DME runs X degrees of timing at xRPM and xLoad, then no, it does not meet this requirement. And neither does a flash. The only thing that would meet this requirement is a stand alone ECU with no active knock control. Which no one would ever consider runnning on a street driven n54.

    No need to engage in debate over what forum is better than the other, that debate is over as far as I am concerned. We are all here for a reason and we are just waiting for everyone else to realize it and catch on. You have been given no restriction in your responses. More technical knowledge here is certainly wanted and definitely would be appreciated. However, keep in mind, this is basically your first major interaction here. Terry has been here from day 1 and has offered support from day 1, that does come with certain entitlements. I get the feeling that you are concerned about being ganged up on and I assure you your threads will not be allowed to be taken off topic concerning Procede products but people will be allowed to voice their opinions. It is a difficult balance but mods will not be used here to bail anyone out nor prematurely interfere in someone's favor. Everyone participates in moderation here.
    Not so much being ganged up upon. But just rather time just wasted trying to discuss something with someone who can basically say anything they want and attempt to pass it off as the truth. This timing control debate is a fine example. To those who are familiar with tuning (AA, AMS, CPE, etc,.), there is no question that ignition timing control is a reality. That's the ball park i'm most used to playing in. I can only provide info and leave it up to the reader to attempt to understand it. Once I see that they are more into partisan debates and tuner following and less into indepedant thought/technical understanding, it's time to move on.

    Shiv

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,447
    Rep Points
    32,147.3
    Mentioned
    2108 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu Click here to enlarge
    I've already explained it before. And it's still on terry's bookmark list. So it doesn't matter Click here to enlarge



    I think we are getting into a discussion that requires a bit more clarity. Can you (or even Terry) please define what is deemed by "timing control". If it's the ability to adjust the timing curve to anything you want within a given adjustment range (+/- 10 deg) in a 16x16 3d table as a function of load and RPM then yes, the Procede controls timing. If it's defined as the ability to dictate that the DME runs X degrees of timing at xRPM and xLoad, then no, it does not meet this requirement. And neither does a flash. The only thing that would meet this requirement is a stand alone ECU with no active knock control. Which no one would ever consider runnning on a street driven n54.



    Not so much being ganged up upon. But just rather time just wasted trying to discuss something with someone who can basically say anything they want and attempt to pass it off as the truth. This timing control debate is a fine example. To those who are familiar with tuning (AA, AMS, CPE, etc,.), there is no question that ignition timing control is a reality. That's the ball park i'm most used to playing in. I can only provide info and leave it up to the reader to attempt to understand it. Once I see that they are more into partisan debates and tuner following and less into indepedant thought/technical understanding, it's time to move on.

    Shiv
    Ok, then the definition seems to depend on who is applying it and is open to interpretation. My definition would be the ability to dictate directly what the DME runs at X degrees at X rpm at X load. My definition may not be the same as others but that is what I would qualify as direct control. Now, I am impressed the ProCEDE can influence timing in a given range which yes, is an adjustment. However, it is limited to that range and I honestly have no idea what that range is. A flash would certanily have greater range I would think but definitely not the control of a standalone which is not limited by the factory DME?

    I don't consider your time wasted here. If you do, I'm sorry to hear that as I have learned a lot thus far. I think this timing control debate may lead to a greater understanding of both approaches and ultimately alllow the user to decide. I'm no tuner, I don't claim to be, nor will I be. The information is there for me to come to my own conclusion as you stated. I think the vast majority of people are not tuners as well and need the information presented in a way they can digest. This effort is not a waste of time, it is the essence of conveying information, especially here and with this topic.

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    119,447
    Rep Points
    32,147.3
    Mentioned
    2108 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    322


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    We see it every day when we have JB3 customers hitting 400rw on pump gas, and others posting how trouble free their JB3 cars have been for the last 10k, 30k, 50k, and 70k miles. But but forums are about entertainment:

    Also to Shiv's point I can't say that bickering on here is a great use of time. Although I'm happy to do it to clear up any mistruths or help fellow enthusiasts out.
    Terry, let's keep this focused to the Nitrous application at hand.

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Miami Beach
    Posts
    1,094
    Rep Points
    513.1
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    lol something went wrong here because I for one have never had this kind of an outcome; not even close and is making me wonder if these cars had the mods they say they did and if they did then what happened to the procede car? the driver of that car must have done something wrong.......probably left the DTC on or didn't put the car in sport mode.

    I'll like to see a JB3 car pull something like this on me on the highway.
    Click here to enlarge

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    642
    Rep Points
    97.0
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Ok, then the definition seems to depend on who is applying it and is open to interpretation. My definition would be the ability to dictate directly what the DME runs at X degrees at X rpm at X load. My definition may not be the same as others but that is what I would qualify as direct control.
    By this definition, the procede can control timing. The only limitation is that the final output must be below the knock threshold. Because the knock control system will retad timing if the dictated advance target will result in knock. It should also be noted that the Procede is the only piggyback (ever, as far as I know) that can actually read end-result ignition timing, not just apply discrete offsets.

    Now, I am impressed the ProCEDE can influence timing in a given range which yes, is an adjustment. However, it is limited to that range and I honestly have no idea what that range is. A flash would certanily have greater range I would think but definitely not the control of a standalone which is not limited by the factory DME?
    Actually, the adjustment range of the procede is -/+ 16 degrees which is probably 3-4 times as much as you would ever need. Especially consider that this engine, stock, only runs 10-14 deg of timing at WOT. So there is really no real-world timing adjustment limitation.

    I don't consider your time wasted here. If you do, I'm sorry to hear that as I have learned a lot thus far. I think this timing control debate may lead to a greater understanding of both approaches and ultimately alllow the user to decide. I'm no tuner, I don't claim to be, nor will I be. The information is there for me to come to my own conclusion as you stated. I think the vast majority of people are not tuners as well and need the information presented in a way they can digest. This effort is not a waste of time, it is the essence of conveying information, especially here and with this topic.
    Fair enough. Let's see how it goes.

    shiv

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •