Close

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 71
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,322
    Rep Points
    1,955.5
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    This has been discussed many times. I am with Terry's opinion. The DME has been designed to react as a failsafe for a at most 11psi event. If the octane reaction was so instant BMW wouldn't have had a Octane Adaption reset option as it would do this on the fly and instantly. The car can handle detonation well but nobody knows how the damage created on the piston affects timing in the long run by creating hotspots.
    Since there are cost affective safety solutions to stack on top of your flash its a no brainer.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Roanoke VA
    Posts
    1,632
    Rep Points
    2,248.3
    Mentioned
    54 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    23


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    IMO the DME is just another defense against a catastrophic failure. Use quality meth kit, a meth fail safe, constantly monitor how it is all performing and if all else fails hope the DME can save your ass. I'd never rely on it as as a first and only means of keeping the pin in the grenade, so to speak.
    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.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,677
    Rep Points
    3,327.5
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by George Smooth Click here to enlarge
    The DME has been designed to react as a failsafe for a at most 11psi event.
    @George Smooth , that sounds like a factual statement. What proof do you have of this? If the the DME is told it is running higher load levels does that statement still apply?

    Just seeking out clarification to your 11psi comment and trying to avoid claims and assumptions/hearsay.
    Click here to enlarge

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,322
    Rep Points
    1,955.5
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno Click here to enlarge
    @George Smooth , that sounds like a factual statement. What proof do you have of this? If the the DME is told it is running higher load levels does that statement still apply?

    Just seeking out clarification to your 11psi comment and trying to avoid claims and assumptions/hearsay.
    Since the DME is designed to run on a stock car the rest is pretty obvious without requiring proof. Higher load above what is calculated in day to day driving will be the result of a overboost which has its own failsafe. When the load maps are altered nothing is changed in most cases in terms of timing triming relations hence you still see changes as Terry mentioned in 3 degree incraments which might be suitable for events happening at 11psi or stock load but not at the load levels you will see at 17psi and up.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,677
    Rep Points
    3,327.5
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by George Smooth Click here to enlarge
    Since the DME is designed to run on a stock car the rest is pretty obvious without requiring proof. Higher load above what is calculated in day to day driving will be the result of a overboost which has its own failsafe. When the load maps are altered nothing is changed in most cases in terms of timing triming relations hence you still see changes as Terry mentioned in 3 degree incraments which might be suitable for events happening at 11psi or stock load but not at the load levels you will see at 17psi and up.
    I'm actually glad I asked that question as I suspected you wouldn't have the full picture of what the DME is doing as you probably haven't had the chance to mull over and test with individual timing cylinder corrections on your car. With Cobb we can log timing corrections across the entire engine, not just a single cylinder. I've seen datalogs where the DME is correcting a LOT more than in 3deg increments. In fact at times I've seen 10.x deg in timing correction being pulled on certain cylinders in certain situations, all depending on HOW it calculates the required timing corrections on a per cylinder level. This is why I earlier said that I'd like to dig in a bit to see what it is that the DME is using in its timing correction calculations to reactively as well as proactively respond to knock.

    In addition to that, as someone else mentioned, there will be learned octane adaptations where the DME will automatically correct based on learned values over time, but that is a separate topic at this time...
    Click here to enlarge

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    253
    Rep Points
    328.2
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Although I haven't had a 10 degree timing correction since I went to dual 1.2mm nozzles......I used to see them regularly shifting from 3rd into 4th.

    Post- shift flatline.......so Dzenno is quite right.

    And it did not happen in 3 degree increments, so I always suspected it was not necessarily knock related but some other adjustment the DME was making because it didn't like something.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,322
    Rep Points
    1,955.5
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    You might be seeing more than one DME correction. Have you tried to alter a stock map and see what happens since you are basing what you saying on the Cobb provided map without knowing the full changes they have made.
    If you got time try calculate the duration of the timing changes you seeing in milliseconds iif the Cobb interphase allows this. It will be interesting to calculate the piston movement over this time.


    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno Click here to enlarge
    I'm actually glad I asked that question as I suspected you wouldn't have the full picture of what the DME is doing as you probably haven't had the chance to mull over and test with individual timing cylinder corrections on your car. With Cobb we can log timing corrections across the entire engine, not just a single cylinder. I've seen datalogs where the DME is correcting a LOT more than in 3deg increments. In fact at times I've seen 10.x deg in timing correction being pulled on certain cylinders in certain situations, all depending on HOW it calculates the required timing corrections on a per cylinder level. This is why I earlier said that I'd like to dig in a bit to see what it is that the DME is using in its timing correction calculations to reactively as well as proactively respond to knock.

    In addition to that, as someone else mentioned, there will be learned octane adaptations where the DME will automatically correct based on learned values over time, but that is a separate topic at this time...

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    178
    Rep Points
    180.5
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by George Smooth Click here to enlarge
    The DME has been designed to react as a failsafe for a at most 11psi event.
    Going by this claim then, is it safe to assume that the GIAC flash is doing a good job since they customize each file by zeroing in on timing control according to the over stock target boost.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    253
    Rep Points
    328.2
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    Reputation: Yes | No
    So does Cobb and piggy cps offset - no?

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,322
    Rep Points
    1,955.5
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by orange Click here to enlarge
    Going by this claim then, is it safe to assume that the GIAC flash is doing a good job since they customize each file by zeroing in on timing control according to the over stock target boost.
    They might be adjusting timing for the boost but this is different to the failsafe discussion.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    253
    Rep Points
    328.2
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Yes.....let's not turn this into a timing control debate.

    It's been flogged to death for years already.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,677
    Rep Points
    3,327.5
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by George Smooth Click here to enlarge
    Have you tried to alter a stock map and see what happens since you are basing what you saying on the Cobb provided map without knowing the full changes they have made.
    @George Smooth , I don't know what the point of the second part of this sentence was really and how would I even answer that. To continue the conversation let's stick to facts we know and/or can possibly quantify/measure.

    In terms of the first part of your sentence to do with altering a stock map instead of Cobb's map, that isn't necessary and here's why: If you log ignition advance from cylinder 1 on any popular piggyback (procede, jb) and run an aggressive boost curve with STOCK timing and use inadequate octane you'd see that the timing curve will at times retard a lot more than 3deg at a time. @themyst can actually tell you all about this from his timing flatline saga that's plagued him for a while. He'll have full timing through WOT and then post shift, most of the time, his timing is expected to hit 10deg and go up towards 14-ish (stock timing). However, in his case and many many others, you'll see the timing curve dip post shift very low from where it was expected to be, in many cases 4-8deg below targeted timing, and then ramp back up again towards redline. In this case, its the stock dme without any flash doing the corrections reactively (and possibly proactively based on learned octane adaptations but this part is still a grey area).

    Having said all that, your comment about the DME reacting in increments of Xdeg to knock seems to suggest there is some logic or tables where such configuration would be possible and that is also what I was referring to earlier. Logging resolution we have over the CANbus/OBD is what it is, that can't be improved on. We also do know the DME has direct and realtime sensor feedback which is not using a message bus (CANbus) and has the ability to react to those inputs at a much finer resolution than what the CANBus allows us to log. This is why I'm saying we should try to find out how/what it takes for the DME to calculate a given amount of timing correction at any given point in time.

    Let's throw assumptions and hearsay out of this thread guys. Not much point going further otherwise IMHO
    Last edited by dzenno@PTF; 07-15-2012 at 06:52 PM.
    Click here to enlarge

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,322
    Rep Points
    1,955.5
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Every time I read your posts recently it sounds like you are marketing yourself and your superior logic. What you are doing is talking in circle. If you are seeing corrections but cannot calculate the time they where done over how do u know it a single correction. Then using your factual data comment the instance you mention is not a fact as you cannot prove it is a single event.
    The only fact I know is that the timing is corrected in X increments over time. I will not go further into this to prove it. If you want to find out where these tables are you can pay me.
    From a discussion we turning this into a debate and I do not debate with tuners.
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno Click here to enlarge
    @George Smooth , I don't know what the point of the second part of this sentence was really and how would I even answer that. To continue the conversation let's stick to facts we know and/or can possibly quantify/measure.

    In terms of the first part of your sentence to do with altering a stock map instead of Cobb's map, that isn't necessary and here's why: If you log ignition advance from cylinder 1 on any popular piggyback (procede, jb) and run an aggressive boost curve with STOCK timing and use inadequate octane you'd see that the timing curve will at times retard a lot more than 3deg at a time. @themyst can actually tell you all about this from his timing flatline saga that's plagued him for a while. He'll have full timing through WOT and then post shift, most of the time, his timing is expected to hit 10deg and go up towards 14-ish (stock timing). However, in his case and many many others, you'll see the timing curve dip post shift very low from where it was expected to be, in many cases 4-8deg below targeted timing, and then ramp back up again towards redline. In this case, its the stock dme without any flash doing the corrections reactively (and possibly proactively based on learned octane adaptations but this part is still a grey area).

    Having said all that, your comment about the DME reacting in increments of Xdeg to knock seems to suggest there is some logic or tables where such configuration would be possible and that is also what I was referring to earlier. Logging resolution we have over the CANbus/OBD is what it is, that can't be improved on. We also do know the DME has direct and realtime sensor feedback which is not using a message bus (CANbus) and has the ability to react to those inputs at a much finer resolution than what the CANBus allows us to log. This is why I'm saying we should try to find out how/what it takes for the DME to calculate a given amount of timing correction at any given point in time.

    Let's throw assumptions and hearsay out of this thread guys. Not much point going further otherwise IMHO

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,677
    Rep Points
    3,327.5
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by George Smooth Click here to enlarge
    Every time I read your posts recently it sounds like you are marketing yourself and your superior logic. What you are doing is talking in circle. If you are seeing corrections but cannot calculate the time they where done over how do u know it a single correction. Then using your factual data comment the instance you mention is not a fact as you cannot prove it is a single event.
    The only fact I know is that the timing is corrected in X increments over time. I will not go further into this to prove it. If you want to find out where these tables are you can pay me.
    From a discussion we turning this into a debate and I do not debate with tuners.
    I asked you to back up your claims with facts if you could to bring value to the discussion. I "marketed myself and my superior logic" by asking you to look at some datalogs of a piggyback on a stock DME in response to your question about calibrating off a stock non-Cobb map and also agreed with you that timing increments are possible. George, I'm sorry if I offended you in any way. I don't understand the sudden hostility seriously.
    Click here to enlarge

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,322
    Rep Points
    1,955.5
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno Click here to enlarge
    I asked you to back up your claims with facts if you could to bring value to the discussion. I "marketed myself and my superior logic" by asking you to look at some datalogs of a piggyback on a stock DME in response to your question about calibrating off a stock non-Cobb map and also agreed with you that timing increments are possible. George, I'm sorry if I offended you in any way. I don't understand the sudden hostility seriously.
    Firstly I am sorry if I came across that way.
    The reason I asked about the non Cobb map is to see if you noticed a trend. There is a chance that Cobb has found the timing knock correction tables and it works differently. The reason I asked if you can time the timing drop which you cannot do on a piggy back interphase succesfully is to see if this timing correction occurs within one engine cycle. If this is unchanged the DME corrects ever so slightly per cycle. You will have a knock cycle and possibley a second knock cycle prior to knocking stopping as the timing will be adjusted. With a meth failure this might be more extreme as there is a larger change in octane than a car will see from a bad tank of fuel or the wrong octane used which is basically what the BMW system was designed for.
    I have read this in a document and I have seen someone change this single knock correction by demand to various timing corrections per single cycle. The piggy back will adjust the boost virtually instantly or on the next cycle was well a offset the timing.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,006
    Rep Points
    8,957.3
    Mentioned
    633 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    90


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Advance is mapped so it can be difficult to determine sometimes whether changes are knock sensor induced or a mapped change. But the DME knock response is fairly easy to spot and has always been consistent. When knock sensor noise goes over some level (based on RPM and load) It drops 3 degrees. If that noise is still above some threshold after a few more engine revolutions then it drops 3 degrees more, and repeats, until noise has dropped below its threshold. Depending on the knock sensor's response to these drops the DME may decide you have a preignition problem (e.g. no amount of short term retard is going to resolve it) and simply shut down boost all together.

    It's effective response is well proven up to 15-16psi on pump and race gas IMHO. But meth is another animal all together due to cylinder to cylinder variation, possible delays in meth flow, and the possible quick stoppage or reduction of flow. Not to mention we're typically dealing with the highest normal cylinder pressures here. The DME algorithm is not properly set to deal with a meth failure IMHO. Perhaps it could be programmed to deal with it but then there would be trade offs (it would be hyper sensitive on pump, etc), and nothing I've seen has indicated any of the flash tuners have access to the knock response algorithms. Long story short just setup meth progressively (increase boost/advance after meth is flowing, and reduce it before meth stops flowing), and you'll be fairly safe. If GIAC wants to suggest otherwise and are willing to warranty their customers motors in case damage occurs I don't see any reason to bicker with them over it. It's their problem. Click here to enlarge
    Last edited by Terry@BMS; 07-15-2012 at 08:09 PM.
    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.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    253
    Rep Points
    328.2
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Long story short just setup meth progressively (increase boost/advance after meth is flowing, and reduce it before meth stops flowing), and you'll be fairly safe. If GIAC wants to suggest otherwise and are willing to warranty their customers motors in case damage occurs I don't see any reason to bicker with them over it. It's their problem. Click here to enlarge

    Click here to enlarge

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    937
    Rep Points
    562.7
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Tuners... hmmm, a new tuner?... Oh tuners and a tooner are discussing stuff in this thread. Jk, don't neg me... not again Click here to enlarge

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,677
    Rep Points
    3,327.5
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by George Smooth Click here to enlarge
    Firstly I am sorry if I came across that way.
    The reason I asked about the non Cobb map is to see if you noticed a trend. There is a chance that Cobb has found the timing knock correction tables and it works differently. The reason I asked if you can time the timing drop which you cannot do on a piggy back interphase succesfully is to see if this timing correction occurs within one engine cycle. If this is unchanged the DME corrects ever so slightly per cycle. You will have a knock cycle and possibley a second knock cycle prior to knocking stopping as the timing will be adjusted. With a meth failure this might be more extreme as there is a larger change in octane than a car will see from a bad tank of fuel or the wrong octane used which is basically what the BMW system was designed for.
    I have read this in a document and I have seen someone change this single knock correction by demand to various timing corrections per single cycle. The piggy back will adjust the boost virtually instantly or on the next cycle was well a offset the timing.
    Thanks for sharing. I'd still love to see at least an official excerpt/page from that document you keep mentioning. How/why I should take your word for it on reading it in a document somewhere I don't know but fine if that's what it is.

    Have you actually seen this incremental timing correction in action and how did you measure it?

    EDIT: I actually found a log so we can refer to a real life scenario, see attached. You'll see on cylinder 5 a correction starts out with 3.38deg and then 6.75deg which would seem to agree with your incremental timing correction statement. BUT, look at the correction right after it goes from -6.75 to -7.12, in other words not a multiple of 3.38deg. Care to explain the non-fixed fixed increment nature in this case?

    Paying closer attention to the numbers though it seems there is a fixed "ramp up" value from a given timing correction of 0.38deg where timing rises towards target value again slowly.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Advance is mapped so it can be difficult to determine sometimes whether changes are knock sensor induced or a mapped change. But the DME knock response is fairly easy to spot and has always been consistent. When knock sensor noise goes over some level (based on RPM and load) It drops 3 degrees. If that noise is still above some threshold after a few more engine revolutions then it drops 3 degrees more, and repeats, until noise has dropped below its threshold. Depending on the knock sensor's response to these drops the DME may decide you have a preignition problem (e.g. no amount of short term retard is going to resolve it) and simply shut down boost all together.
    Given the resolution coming off the canbus I don't think you'd be able to spot what George is referring to with incremental 3.x corrections over time. Any chance you could expand on how you came to the conclusion above and possibly refer to the log attached.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    It's effective response is well proven up to 15-16psi on pump and race gas IMHO. But meth is another animal all together due to cylinder to cylinder variation, possible delays in meth flow, and the possible quick stoppage or reduction of flow. Not to mention we're typically dealing with the highest normal cylinder pressures here. The DME algorithm is not properly set to deal with a meth failure IMHO. Perhaps it could be programmed to deal with it but then there would be trade offs (it would be hyper sensitive on pump, etc), and nothing I've seen has indicated any of the flash tuners have access to the knock response algorithms. Long story short just setup meth progressively (increase boost/advance after meth is flowing, and reduce it before meth stops flowing), and you'll be fairly safe. If GIAC wants to suggest otherwise and are willing to warranty their customers motors in case damage occurs I don't see any reason to bicker with them over it. It's their problem. Click here to enlarge
    Agree. The only problem I have with the external "failsafes" is really with the nomenclature. There is no proof that it really is a failsafe in the sense that it actually is able to save something in case of a failure. But it does have the peace-of-mind factor going for it that's for sure.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by dzenno@PTF; 07-16-2012 at 12:12 AM.
    Click here to enlarge

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,006
    Rep Points
    8,957.3
    Mentioned
    633 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    90


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I'm too lazy to convert a CSV log to chart to view. I have enough JB4 customer logs to look at as it is. Click here to enlarge But if you post the chart I'd be happy to give you my analysis of it. The timing data we read is sampled at 10hz. Normally, I can easily identify distinct 3 degree drops in logs, so it's actually quite a few engine revolutions before it makes a subsequent change. And when it gets really bad, back to back to back drops, you see where it goes limp with the "ignition glow" (preignition) codes.

    The methanol failsafe protects you against full boost and advance assuming methanol present, when none or less than is required is there. So in that regard it's a failsafe. It's true the engine can knock and if you have big forged pistons in there maybe they won't break. Or maybe the DME will respond fast enough even at 18psi full advance to avoid breaking parts most of the time. But I've seen enough broken pistons to understand everything has its limits. The best way to avoid damaging parts is by considering and accounting for the systems involved. In this case it's fairly clear to most independent observers that the DME response to knock when extreme cylinder pressures are involved is not ideal. If you were to recode it to drop 6 degrees per occurrence at a lower threshold that might be good enough but as I said before everything has tradeoffs.

    From GIAC's perspective if they run a conservative meth advance curve then while they will not make as much power as a piggyback setup I would agree it would at least be relatively safe.
    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.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,677
    Rep Points
    3,327.5
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Reputation: Yes | No
    From what I've seen in their logs for the stage 2 race map its a 16 to 13 psi tune on stockish timing hotting 10deg midrange 14 up top
    Click here to enlarge

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Stockholm
    Posts
    1,527
    Rep Points
    1,177.6
    Mentioned
    61 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    12


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno Click here to enlarge
    From what I've seen in their logs for the stage 2 race map its a 16 to 13 psi tune on stockish timing hotting 10deg midrange 14 up top
    yeah, i run that for a short period of time. GIAC is more aggressive with timings and more conservative with boost. I actually prefer less timings and more boost. Feels safer or?
    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

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    61
    Rep Points
    72.5
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    The best solution would be to stack a JB4 on top of cobb/giac and have it pull timing using the CPS module (This would be even faster reacting than the HFS-4's solution of dumping boost) and output a higher than true boost signal to the DME if meth flow starts to drop off or iat rises too quickly.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,089
    Rep Points
    999.1
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by mike335i Click here to enlarge
    The best solution would be to stack a JB4 on top of cobb/giac and have it pull timing using the CPS module (This would be even faster reacting than the HFS-4's solution of dumping boost) and output a higher than true boost signal to the DME if meth flow starts to drop off or iat rises too quickly.
    Or how about running a proper advance curve to begin with so we don't have to play with CPS or any of that external nonsense.

    Imo the only thing that a piggy can do that a proper Cobb map can't do is methanol safety and CAN hijacking for gauges, etc.

    For stock turbos though, piggybacks work great. For bigger power folks like RBs or single, may want the proper fueling to avoid drama and headaches.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,006
    Rep Points
    8,957.3
    Mentioned
    633 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    90


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by themyst Click here to enlarge
    Or how about running a proper advance curve to begin with so we don't have to play with CPS or any of that external nonsense.
    Drop the static compression down to 9:1 and get the pressure ratio down under 1.5:1 and we wouldn't need to run much meth at all! Click here to enlarge
    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.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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
  •