Close

Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 325 of 388
  1. #301
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    1 out of 2 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    I'm not saying the sky is going to fall with the way your failsafe is setup. Just pointing out as Josh did that it's not exactly the "bees knees". On the FSB system I think you just don't fully understand how it all works. The FSB is just a device that allows us to send a high current PWM signal to the pump and solenoid, and returns information on load for a given PWM. The software is what provides the "failsafe" using that data long with timing, fuel trims, etc, to create a layered failsafe and autotuning strategy. Without the JB4 software the FSB won't do anything for you. And with the JB4 in place no custom tuning is really needed. So I can understand why you would pass on that business.
    Terry, FSB is simply flawed and simply an easy sell on your end. The reason you have the WW kits is because they're easy to install not because they're the right kits to run. Why would you be selling a "non-integrated" kit for "flash tunes" that doesn't have a single failsafe in it when, given your argument on the HFS4, a user could put in water and toast their motor. Now read that again and see who is suggesting inadequate hardware and tuning.

    I do understand how the FSB works and you do know this. I've been around far too long around the N54 to remember how/why this came about Click here to enlarge Aquamist turbine based flow sensors are expensive to manufacture and they wouldn't fit very well into your low cost of entry to hp sales pitch. Just because you have certain low cost solutions for those on a budget that work fairly well it is really not fair to be pushing ideas around here that the most advanced direct injection methanol injection kit does a poor job here at failsafing the motor.

    The mistake you keep making is saying that this configuration doesn't do progressive boost based on meth flow (which it doesn't and it shouldn't) while it is completely another to say the failsafe is flawed which is simply false. Given your argument is "someone can fill up 100% water, what then?", well, is that an honest argument here? What if someone fills up diesel instead of gas in their tank at the pump?

    Agree to disagree or will we keep going? Click here to enlarge
    Last edited by dzenno@PTF; 03-01-2013 at 10:01 PM.
    Click here to enlarge

  2. #302
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    The world...
    Posts
    1,331
    Rep Points
    1,202.2
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13



    Yes Reputation No
    lolololol... i am going vishnu pwm setup (waiting for shiv to provide proof of his setup being best) lolol
    2007 335i (100% stock with mods)

    N54 is not a German 2JZ lol

  3. #303
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    LOL Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge

  4. #304
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,485
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    its like watching a child challenge his father for the first time.. or is it the 2nd..? its been a while Click here to enlarge

  5. #305
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,059
    Rep Points
    9,036.4
    Mentioned
    637 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    91


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
    Terry, FSB is simply flawed and simply an easy sell on your end. The reason you have the WW kits is because they're easy to install not because they're the right kits to run. Why would you be selling a "non-integrated" kit for "flash tunes" that doesn't have a single failsafe in it when, given your argument on the HFS4, a user could put in water and toast their motor. Now read that again and see who is suggesting inadequate hardware and tuning.

    I do understand how the FSB works and you do know this. I've been around far too long around the N54 to remember how/why this came about Click here to enlarge Aquamist turbine based flow sensors are expensive to manufacture and they wouldn't fit very well into your low cost of entry to hp sales pitch. Just because you have certain low cost solutions for those on a budget that work fairly well it is really not fair to be pushing ideas around here that the most advanced direct injection methanol injection kit does a poor job here at failsafing the motor.

    The mistake you keep making is saying that this configuration doesn't do progressive boost based on meth flow (which it doesn't and it shouldn't) while it is completely another to say the failsafe is flawed which is simply false. Given your argument is "someone can fill up 100% water, what then?", well, is that an honest argument here? What if someone fills up diesel instead of gas in their tank at the pump?

    Agree to disagree or will we keep going? Click here to enlarge
    The non-integrated WW kit is intended for those running off the shelf Cobb or Dinan maps who want to use it for IAT suppression using WW fluid. If the tuning is mild enough the meth is used for temperature management only and no real failsafe is needed for that.

    I think the AM turbine flow sensor is a great way to spend $200 if someone wants to spend it, and the JB4 fully supports it. Many run it. So let's just talk about the flow sensor if you don't like talking about the FSB. The piggyback can use that flow sensor to progressively control the tuning at all times without user intervention. It can learn that X amount of flow of a given fluid will support Y psi with Z degrees of advance. It can wait until it sees X amount of flow before targeting Y psi. Now when you install it with your stand stand alone setup what is it doing again exactly other than moving a gauge in the ash tray no one will ever see?

    Anyway, this conversation is all over the place and not really relevant to Vishnu's Xi car (lol), so I'm happy to leave it at agreeing to disagree at the moment. But I would encourage you to keep at it with meth development. The first thing I'd do if I were in your shoes (selling flash tunes and standalone meth kits) would be to find a way to mate them together to offer at least a minimal integration beyond just a solenoid failsafe. There are a few ways to do it using external sensors and simple electronics, etc, that would move things in the right direction.
    Last edited by Terry@BMS; 03-01-2013 at 10:54 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.

  6. #306
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,485
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    The non-integrated WW kit is intended for those running off the shelf Cobb or Dinan maps who want to use it for IAT suppression using WW fluid. If the tuning is mild enough the meth is used for temperature management only and no real failsafe is needed for that.

    I think the AM turbine flow sensor is a great way to spend $200 if someone wants to spend it, and the JB4 fully supports it. Many run it. So let's just talk about the flow sensor if you don't like talking about the FSB. The piggyback can use that flow sensor to progressively control the tuning at all times without user intervention. It can learn that X amount of flow of a given fluid will support Y psi with Z degrees of advance. It can wait until it sees X amount of flow before targeting Y psi. Now when you install it with your stand stand alone setup what is it doing again exactly other than moving a gauge in the ash tray no one will ever see?
    lol

  7. #307
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    The non-integrated WW kit is intended for those running off the shelf Cobb or Dinan maps who want to use it for IAT suppression using WW fluid. If the tuning is mild enough the meth is used for temperature management only and no real failsafe is needed for that.
    Sure but people buy those kits and run aggressive tunes and that's a fact. You know that. I realize what you're trying to say but that's why I brought up these kits in the first place. Moving on..

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    I think the AM turbine flow sensor is a great way to spend $200 if someone wants to spend it, and the JB4 fully supports it. Many run it. So let's just talk about the flow sensor if you don't like talking about the FSB. The piggyback can use that flow sensor to progressively control the tuning at all times without user intervention. It can learn that X amount of flow of a given fluid will support Y psi with Z degrees of advance. It can wait until it sees X amount of flow before targeting Y psi. Now when you install it with your stand stand alone setup what is it doing again exactly other than moving a gauge in the ash tray no one will ever see?
    LOL Click here to enlarge No one has advised anyone to buy just an Aquamist flow sensor, spend $200, and be done with it. That'd indeed be sort of throwing it away although its still better if hooked into the JB4 than the FSB style of flow monitoring IMHO. Aquamist flow sensor supports 100% methanol and sits right in the path of flow. In fact, one way you could address flow metering on the on the JB4 is by indeed wiring in this type of a sensor and make the FSB history. FSB works but nowhere nearly as well. At least spending $200 on a state of the art flow sensor you're getting something that works as good as it can than spending $150 on an FSB that works ok and the user is vendor-locked to the JB4. They also can't use the FSB on any other platform.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Anyway, this conversation is all over the place and not really relevant to Vishnu's Xi car (lol), so I'm happy to leave it at agreeing to disagree at the moment. But I would encourage you to keep at it with meth development. The first thing I'd do if I were in your shoes (selling flash tunes and standalone meth kits) would be to find a way to mate them together to offer at least a minimal integration beyond just a solenoid failsafe. There are a few ways to do it using external sensors and simple electronics, etc, that would move things in the right direction.
    Its definitely all over the place Click here to enlarge That advice is something we discussed a long while back when Cobb just came on the scene as far as I remember. It wouldn't be really hard to wire it to one of the signal wires coming into the DME and do a mapping as you please. I don't feel that is necessary though but if someone is up for it I'm sure it can be done. That doesn't mean I'd suggest running progressive boost based on meth flow. To me that approach has just become a bit backwards.
    Last edited by dzenno@PTF; 03-01-2013 at 11:21 PM.
    Click here to enlarge

  8. #308
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Naples, FL
    Posts
    2,086
    Rep Points
    2,146.2
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    22


    Yes Reputation No
    As a user of meth, and the HFS4 system, I would say the failsafe, works extremely well, I have two occasions running on e85+meth map, that for whatever reason I had meth problems, both times it worked flawlessly, opening the WG's, cobb showing the loss of boost, not even seconds later the DME through a p30FF boost leak code, showing on the idrive.




  9. #309
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Houston under a book
    Posts
    1,358
    Rep Points
    2,594.9
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    26


    Yes Reputation No
    FSB is good, flow is better. Namely in the event of a nozzle or line clog. A piggy back tied in provides extra safety. Nothing provides much safety from a nozzle not correctly atomizing, poor meth dispersion between cylinders, and a few other small things. This is why meth is and always was best for temp suppression, EGT control, etc. Also, this motor has psychic knock sensing abilities compared to most cars plus a stout bottom end, I see little issue riding those capabilities for anything the stock turbos can put out. Anything else there's no way a fancy boost controller and fancy dme, no matter how fancy, should be trusted alone without a remap and other precautions. It's simple guys, neither of you has the entire cake. You're both supporting mods to each other at some point imo. Life's a $#@! but luckily you're both great at your jobs.

    back on topic- nah got nothing for a Vishnu thread.

  10. #310
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    937
    Rep Points
    562.7
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    There's multiple methods in tuning with meth, failsafes, hardware. I think it would be great if Terry utilized the AM FAV and DZ may need to reconsider a piggyback type setup with meth at higher HPs, otherwise he will be further testing the DMEs abilities at some point... so far it has performed great. I know what setup I think is best... don't know all the details/options of the JB though. Not promoting it specifically, but parts of the implementation can be copied to enhance other control methods.


    DZ, pertaining to knock. I have seen logs with multiple DME corrections on meth and you confirming its ok... you have touted this as acceptable due to the DME's abilities... that's fine, but I guess you have changed your tune? If I was in your shoes this would be my approach also... otherwise once many run logs they will be coming back for a retune. Your first summer time as a tuner is coming up.

  11. #311
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    There's multiple methods in tuning with meth, failsafes, hardware. I think it would be great if Terry utilized the AM FAV and DZ may need to reconsider a piggyback type setup with meth at higher HPs, otherwise he will be further testing the DMEs abilities at some point... so far it has performed great. I know what setup I think is best... don't know all the details/options of the JB though. Not promoting it specifically, but parts of the implementation can be copied to enhance other control methods.

    DZ, pertaining to knock. I have seen logs with multiple DME corrections on meth and you confirming its ok... you have touted this as acceptable due to the DME's abilities... that's fine, but I guess you have changed your tune? If I was in your shoes this would be my approach also... otherwise once many run logs they will be coming back for a retune. Your first summer time as a tuner is coming up.
    @JoshBoody , yes, there are times when we say some corrections are just inevitable as the car simply is prone to timing corrections no matter what the octane or timing. Running ACN91 octane timing curves on those cars even on E85 and race gas wouldn't clean them up. Those that experienced them (some on this forum) can attest to that.

    In certain situations, fairly rare, the car will simply timing correct no matter what. This is more specifically so post shift and more pronounced on the 6ATs. You simply don't get a chance to see the wide variety of setups running out there to be able to appreciate these entirely same as I couldn't before I was exposed to N54s running across multiple continents, climates, weather conditions, barometric variations and octane qualities.

    Given your meth tuning approach is procede based I'm not sure how you'd be the one to argue on timing corrections at all. You get to see 1 out of 6 cylinders and more often than not cylinder 1 is the quietest one of the bunch. On top of that its auto-tuning logic and "failsafety" is based on that lonely 1st cylinder too. Not great Josh...

    Tuning is something that can always see improvements. What we have at the moment is just something that works really well right now given what is available. With time more advanced and refined solutions will inevitably come to the market and we'll always adopt the ones that we find work best. It really helps to not be "making" the hardware as we end up having nothing to defend there. We simply choose what works best and advance/refine the tuning based on whatever is latest and greatest.

    In terms of the coming summer, can't wait Click here to enlarge
    Last edited by dzenno@PTF; 03-02-2013 at 11:46 AM.
    Click here to enlarge

  12. #312
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    937
    Rep Points
    562.7
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge

    Given your meth tuning approach is procede based I'm not sure how you'd be the one to argue on timing corrections at all. You get to see 1 out of 6 cylinders and more often than not cylinder 1 is the quietest one of the bunch. On top of that its auto-tuning logic and "failsafety" is based on that lonely 1st cylinder too. Not great Josh...
    I'll just reply to this part. I personally don't like autotuning and don't use it... I use parts of ATR and procede which works best for my hardware and which IMO would work best at higher HPs... not to say other approaches wouldn't be adequate. There's not 1 best tune at this time and you have to decide what's better per your goals.

    Failsafety or progressive tuning is based on meth flow (Terry does the same thing, but with some differences)... Best approach if you are using meth. And contrary to what you have stated, can be very simple and great peace of mind without the need to log.

  13. #313
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by JoshBoody Click here to enlarge
    I'll just reply to this part. I personally don't like autotuning and don't use it... I use parts of ATR and procede which works best for my hardware and which IMO would work best at higher HPs... not to say other approaches wouldn't be adequate. There's not 1 best tune at this time and you have to decide what's better per your goals.

    Failsafety or progressive tuning is based on meth flow (Terry does the same thing, but with some differences)... Best approach if you are using meth. And contrary to what you have stated, can be very simple and great peace of mind without the need to log.
    It may very well be true with an Aquamist type kit (which the procede kit is based on), trunk mounted tank, auto tuning turned off and a failsafe that is setup to alert the user properly to under/over flow problems that doesn't end up running the car at 76.343% of its potential. Just limp the darn thing and have them solve it if meth flow is off. What's the point of detuning when meth flow is off for any reason?? Its just wrong. Great you have it disabled. It makes no sense to detune the car partially when the nature of the flow issue (e.g. is it a clog at the nozzles, one or both nozzles, big or the small nozzle, leaky line, etc etc etc) is unknown until traced. Its just inherently unsafe to run the car if anything is remotely off with meth flow in my books. For me its either flowing 100% or go and fix/make it right. Not saying my approach is right but for us it does give us a comfort level tuning with meth than guessing on autotuning and guessing on whats happening with flow when its not where it should be and furthermore basing boost auto-detuning on questionable flow and solely cyl1 timing curves.

    When in doubt on meth flow, don't guess on it and try to make best out of the situation, LIMP! Click here to enlarge
    Last edited by dzenno@PTF; 03-02-2013 at 02:37 PM.
    Click here to enlarge

  14. #314
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,104
    Rep Points
    1,398.3
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14


    3 out of 3 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by V8Bait Click here to enlarge
    FSB is good, flow is better. Namely in the event of a nozzle or line clog. A piggy back tied in provides extra safety. Nothing provides much safety from a nozzle not correctly atomizing, poor meth dispersion between cylinders, and a few other small things. This is why meth is and always was best for temp suppression, EGT control, etc. Also, this motor has psychic knock sensing abilities compared to most cars plus a stout bottom end, I see little issue riding those capabilities for anything the stock turbos can put out. Anything else there's no way a fancy boost controller and fancy dme, no matter how fancy, should be trusted alone without a remap and other precautions. It's simple guys, neither of you has the entire cake. You're both supporting mods to each other at some point imo. Life's a $#@! but luckily you're both great at your jobs.

    back on topic- nah got nothing for a Vishnu thread.
    I think it is obvious why DZ is a strong Aquamist supporter, he needs a system that has some kind of failsafe since he sells COBB units and tuning. It is as obvious why Terry is pushing the advantages he has with the piggyback. And the FSB works amazingly well, it detects clogged nozzles, leaks etc or even broken pumps. But one can still use a piggy with a flow sensor.

    On the fail safe side of things the piggy can choose to open the WG's as well as the aquamist kit, but it also has other options ie running boost based of flow to start with, which surely seems much more proactive than the reactive way of the AM kit.

    My point is DZ has chosen COBB as his platform and business model, and its a great one with the e-tune's etc but adding features to the stock ECU is hard with this approach.

    Terry makes his living off a piggyback, a great one and is of course marketing and focusing on the "unfair" advantage he has being able to add features missing in the stock ECU. He is also using the flash advantages for customers pushing things (fuel etc).

    This post got longer than intended but, the JB4 could easily implement the flow sensor/wastegate failsafe approach of the aquamist kit, but has more options and has chosen a few more (IMO) elegant ones.

    DZ has made a business decision to push the "pure" flash solution and dont want to admit to the strengths of the more ghetto piggy approach.

    I always preferred flash only solutions, but on the n54 the jb with can integration adds so much value for so little $$$. If I get a n54 again I will run both since that seems to be the most pragmatic way, and if it works that's it for me...
    Click here to enlarge
    997.1 tt
    Kline 200cell exhaust
    997.2/GT2RS IC's
    Cobb E85 custom stage3 tune by Mitch
    ID1000 injectors
    Sachs stage 2.5 clutch

  15. #315
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    I disagree. I went with both Cobb and Aquamist way before starting PTF. Also, 95% of our tunes don't involve meth. Vast majority are pump then E85 blends then race gas and meth sort of sharing the last spot.

    In any case as tuners we're simply not tied to any particular hardware as we don't build it. Our thing is tuning and whenever better hardware or software comes along we'll start using it. That is the key difference here.

    Why we chose Cobb? Flash tuning gives you direct control of all engine parameters which, such as fueling, has large advantages on this platform. We chose Aquamist hfs-4 (note that we dont recommend either hfs2 or hfs3) for its injection metering and control abilities, its failsafe and top of the line hardware. Customers that don't run it and wish to use other less capable kits we simply don't/can't tune with a high enough comfort level. HFS4 is also the only DI fuel injection sensing kit on the market "right now", 100% meth compatible with leak free hardware due to their fittings. Its not about who sells what at all. Its about what we found worked the best meth wise given flash tuning turns out to provide the most tuning control at the moment. If you want in-dash gauges sure get a BMS can tool and hook it up or reuse your jb4. If BMS makes a meth kit similar to an hfs4 that doesn't vendor lock a customer to a JB4 (which also causes us to lose a large amount of visibility into what the car is doing tuning wise) or platform lock them to the N54 or BMW we'll be happy to support it as well. At the moment we simply cant just like we cant support other less capable Aquamist kits.
    Last edited by dzenno@PTF; 03-03-2013 at 12:59 PM.
    Click here to enlarge

  16. #316
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,089
    Rep Points
    999.1
    Mentioned
    104 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Wow, this thread makes me feel like I traveled 2 years back in time. Same arguments different players.

    You can take a basic ww kit, buy a 0-5v flow sensor and then rig up a bypass solenoid to the 5v trigger on the sensor to vent vacuum in the event of a meth failure will trigger 30FF.

    I still have a bypass solenoid sitting in my house, but since I stack tunes I have no use for it right now.

  17. #317
    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
    Sure but people buy those kits and run aggressive tunes and that's a fact. You know that. I realize what you're trying to say but that's why I brought up these kits in the first place. Moving on..



    LOL Click here to enlarge No one has advised anyone to buy just an Aquamist flow sensor, spend $200, and be done with it. That'd indeed be sort of throwing it away although its still better if hooked into the JB4 than the FSB style of flow monitoring IMHO. Aquamist flow sensor supports 100% methanol and sits right in the path of flow. In fact, one way you could address flow metering on the on the JB4 is by indeed wiring in this type of a sensor and make the FSB history. FSB works but nowhere nearly as well. At least spending $200 on a state of the art flow sensor you're getting something that works as good as it can than spending $150 on an FSB that works ok and the user is vendor-locked to the JB4. They also can't use the FSB on any other platform.



    Its definitely all over the place Click here to enlarge That advice is something we discussed a long while back when Cobb just came on the scene as far as I remember. It wouldn't be really hard to wire it to one of the signal wires coming into the DME and do a mapping as you please. I don't feel that is necessary though but if someone is up for it I'm sure it can be done. That doesn't mean I'd suggest running progressive boost based on meth flow. To me that approach has just become a bit backwards.
    Nothing is stopping people from using the AM flow sensor with a JB4. I run a similar setup with a SP flow sensor. And FWIW, there are reported failures of the AM sensor as well.

  18. #318
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Houston under a book
    Posts
    1,358
    Rep Points
    2,594.9
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    26


    1 out of 2 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Dzenno as usual you are spot on. Probably the most knowledgeable tuner I've seen in a forum or otherwise. I agree with most of what you are saying, and I agree that due to how the piggyback systems detune it can potentially be difficult to notice problems with the system. That is possibly something that should be adressed, maybe a algorithm that tracks average meth flow and drops the JB into map 0 when it deviates too far from average, rather than just backing power down. But that's not really what most of us are talking about here.

    Flow sensors > FSB
    Integrated failsafes > afterthefact failsafes

    Say the wastegate failsafe reacts immediately, but due to mechanical delay it takes half a second for the boost pressure to lower. In that time the engine could have made over 50 revolutions, that's a good amount of time spent with a hot, lean mixture when your tune is set to incorporate the meth for power, not just safety to begin with. Now- is that enough time to actually do anything bad? Doubtful, especially with this engines advanced anti-knock systems. It can detect predetination and reduce timing per cylinder on the next spark event, that's crazy fast. But that is definitely more risky than a piggyback integrated failsafe, which as soon as it sees a decrease in meth flow (be it FSB or a better flow sensor, both are available), it can utilize the aquamist failsafe AND dump fuel, before the lean charge ever reaches the cylinder. The DME can react to fueling and timing changes multiple orders of magnitude faster than the air charge is moving, it's quite astounding. Also, the integrated failsafes can still fall back on the DME, just as yours can.

    You can't expect anybody to believe that the aquamist failsafes alone are better than the aquamist failsafes in addition to integration with a piggyback. And saying that FSB+integrated is worse than flow sensor without integration doesn't even make sense, they are completely different approaches. You know this. Saying that one is "harder to feel" before failure and basing your argument on that isn't valid at all man, as long as the motor is protected it's an invalid argument IMO. And it's something that could be changed for the piggybacks if they felt it was necessary, which it isn't.

  19. #319
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    LOL well, WW setups are prone to fires. Push-lock fittings leak and let air in causing flow issues and constant headaches. Most turbine based flow sensors out there don't support 100% and have very flaky reliability in different ambient temps. They also don't inject based on fuel injector duty cycle as well as boost, only boost. It also doesn't come with appropriate filtering everywhere either. Change all those out, make a kit and we'll support it. I'd also like to be able to run the pump at constant pressure and only vary injector duty cycle to meter flow since many use meth on this platform for fueling and not just IAT control. Sure your suggested setup will work but to position it at the same level makes no sense.
    Click here to enlarge

  20. #320
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Houston under a book
    Posts
    1,358
    Rep Points
    2,594.9
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    26


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@ProTUNING Freaks Click here to enlarge
    LOL well, WW setups are prone to fires. Push-lock fittings leak and let air in causing flow issues and constant headaches. Most turbine based flow sensors out there don't support 100% and have very flaky reliability in different ambient temps. They also don't inject based on fuel injector duty cycle as well as boost, only boost. It also doesn't come with appropriate filtering everywhere either. Change all those out, make a kit and we'll support it. I'd also like to be able to run the pump at constant pressure and only vary injector duty cycle to meter flow since many use meth on this platform for fueling and not just IAT control. Sure your suggested setup will work but to position it at the same level makes no sense.
    Lol, a bunch of us had a nice rant about those damn fittings on n54tech recently. As for the rest... that would be a step in the right direction for sure! Although I'd rather have the meth than the normal gasoline, but it could definitely help to reduce wasting the meth so the system could last longer on track events (safer). Add to that nozzles in each intake runner for even distribution, that would be a pimp setup.

    Always comes down to $$ and complexity

  21. #321
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by V8Bait Click here to enlarge
    Dzenno as usual you are spot on. Probably the most knowledgeable tuner I've seen in a forum or otherwise. I agree with most of what you are saying, and I agree that due to how the piggyback systems detune it can potentially be difficult to notice problems with the system. That is possibly something that should be adressed, maybe a algorithm that tracks average meth flow and drops the JB into map 0 when it deviates too far from average, rather than just backing power down. But that's not really what most of us are talking about here.

    Flow sensors > FSB
    Integrated failsafes > afterthefact failsafes

    Say the wastegate failsafe reacts immediately, but due to mechanical delay it takes half a second for the boost pressure to lower. In that time the engine could have made over 50 revolutions, that's a good amount of time spent with a hot, lean mixture when your tune is set to incorporate the meth for power, not just safety to begin with. Now- is that enough time to actually do anything bad? Doubtful, especially with this engines advanced anti-knock systems. It can detect predetination and reduce timing per cylinder on the next spark event, that's crazy fast. But that is definitely more risky than a piggyback integrated failsafe, which as soon as it sees a decrease in meth flow (be it FSB or a better flow sensor, both are available), it can utilize the aquamist failsafe AND dump fuel, before the lean charge ever reaches the cylinder. The DME can react to fueling and timing changes multiple orders of magnitude faster than the air charge is moving, it's quite astounding. Also, the integrated failsafes can still fall back on the DME, just as yours can.

    You can't expect anybody to believe that the aquamist failsafes alone are better than the aquamist failsafes in addition to integration with a piggyback. And saying that FSB+integrated is worse than flow sensor without integration doesn't even make sense, they are completely different approaches. You know this. Saying that one is "harder to feel" before failure and basing your argument on that isn't valid at all man, as long as the motor is protected it's an invalid argument IMO. And it's something that could be changed for the piggybacks if they felt it was necessary, which it isn't.
    You hit the nail on the head on multiple things here. It'd be nice to see further improvements/refinements on both sides. On the piggy "algorithm" end that's what I've been saying, change the strategy and drop them to the passthrough map like they do when boost over target happens longer than X ms. Terry mentioned they were doing something with the fittings to make the kits less prone to leaks and air going in the lines, that's great and will make the kit less headache prone. WW based kit should just be dropped altogether. Yes its the easiest to install on the car but it brings so many issues with priming and safety over a trunk mounted tank setup that it just shouldn't be offered by a reputable tuner shop that is also aware of these potential issues. Why expose yourself to this risk at all, then deal with all the support related and possible liabilities when they have better setups available. I don't subscribe to the FSB-type flow monitoring camp. My preference sits with a turbine based flow sensor that sees actual flow and doesn't interpret it. FSB works well but since we're talking ultimate in control on an all out setup that'd need to go in my world.

    In terms of HFS-4's integrated failsafe I also agree there too. I'd like to see further work on its failsafe when it pertains to pushing the edge with meth being used as a FUEL on this platform, but maybe its already there and we could already use it. What they have right now (dump boost) works very well. However, what you're talking about is being tuned to the very EDGE with meth as a fuel with port injection where each runner is supplying meth as a fuel to each of the cylinders. In this case the current wg-solenoid-signal-grounding failsafe wouldn't give me the ultimate in comfort level to push the car.

    A while back when I started running around with a Cobb flash on the car, way before PTF, there was a bunch of discussion on the failsafes for flash tunes as well and their "appropriateness" in various failure mode scenarios. I remember bringing up tapping into either an unused input on the DME and possibly having Cobb ADD a NEW table for its mapping which was difficult at the time. The other option that was brought up was wiring in the HFS-4's failsafe wires to the DME, page 18:

    http://howertonengineering.com/wp-co...4/HFS4w-v1.pdf

    We're currently using only one of the failsafe options, namely the one that grounds the wg solenoid signal which opens the wastegates and dumps boost. It was discussed to tap an existing signal wire that is already mappable on the flash side and either have the signal go high (5v) (e.g. IAT goes to 5V) or ground. This would cause an instant limp and most importantly TIMING would be pulled HEAVILY at the same time. Not sure if this is sort of signal output configuration is already available in the AM failsafe setup, I'll double check with them. Regardless, this sort of thing is very possible and fairly easy to pull off to pull both boost and timing on setups pushing meth heavily for fueling needs. I'll get back to you on this though soon.
    Last edited by dzenno@PTF; 03-03-2013 at 02:22 PM.
    Click here to enlarge

  22. #322
    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
    LOL well, WW setups are prone to fires. Push-lock fittings leak and let air in causing flow issues and constant headaches. Most turbine based flow sensors out there don't support 100% and have very flaky reliability in different ambient temps. They also don't inject based on fuel injector duty cycle as well as boost, only boost. It also doesn't come with appropriate filtering everywhere either. Change all those out, make a kit and we'll support it. I'd also like to be able to run the pump at constant pressure and only vary injector duty cycle to meter flow since many use meth on this platform for fueling and not just IAT control. Sure your suggested setup will work but to position it at the same level makes no sense.
    Agreed

  23. #323
    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 V8Bait Click here to enlarge
    Lol, a bunch of us had a nice rant about those damn fittings on n54tech recently. As for the rest... that would be a step in the right direction for sure! Although I'd rather have the meth than the normal gasoline, but it could definitely help to reduce wasting the meth so the system could last longer on track events (safer). Add to that nozzles in each intake runner for even distribution, that would be a pimp setup.

    Always comes down to $$ and complexity
    Nothing ever stopped someone with a basic kit from raising the boost level the switch activates if you want to save meth. Also, they have progressive meth controllers for these same basic kits if you do not want full spray.

  24. #324
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Houston under a book
    Posts
    1,358
    Rep Points
    2,594.9
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    26


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by themyst Click here to enlarge
    Nothing ever stopped someone with a basic kit from raising the boost level the switch activates if you want to save meth. Also, they have progressive meth controllers for these same basic kits if you do not want full spray.
    Indeed. I don't think many people are very concerned with saving meth, just a nice bonus from a theoretical system that isn't very relevant to anything anybody uses anyway.

    A WW kit can also be upgraded to a trunk kit easily as well with a few parts and lines. I can't fault a company for providing options and flexibility, it's part of why they are reputable to me. With low concentrations and used for some octane and IAT supression the system is fine, albeit not ideal (far, far from). No system is ideal. If somebody wants more they should upgrade it, but to each their own. You can't fix stupid with a fancy meth kit, you can only limit its impact on the innocent car it's hooked up to.

  25. #325
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    657
    Rep Points
    260.8
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 654 Click here to enlarge
    Yes, you arre correct. That applies not only to stock 335i, but to the typical tuned ones that you mentioned as well.

    His 4.22s 60-130MPH would imply though, that adding awd would not cause his car to fall on it's face in 4th Click here to enlarge The awd traction is most likely needed for getting into 3's.
    I am building an AWD E46 M3 where AWD will be OFF, M3 will be RWD when I want. The AWD will be OFF when the difference between front and rear wheels is less than X %. So it will be electronically controlled, and if there is no need for AWD, it will be OFF. This will eliminate the loss of torque transfer if it is not needed. My goal is to go sub 3.0 seconds 60-130 mph with the AWD system.
    E36 M3 Euro TT 60-130 mph 4.49 s
    E46 M3 3.6L TT 60-130 mph 4.22 s
    All Wheel drive M3 Twin Turbo
    997 TT



Page 13 of 16 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... 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
  •