Close

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 32
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,062
    Rep Points
    9,036.7
    Mentioned
    637 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    91


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No

    Customer JB3 1.4 - JB3 2.0 - PROcede V4 dyno charts

    Same car, same mods, same fuel. Basically every bolt on with 93 octane.

    Click here to enlarge
    Click here to enlarge

    Click here to enlarge

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,485
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    0 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    BANG! Exactly what we knew already. More power, and over the whole RPM band, not just up top. Im glad someone finally did a b-b test.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,062
    Rep Points
    9,036.7
    Mentioned
    637 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    91



    Yes Reputation No
    I'm sure the V4 could get there with enough tweaking.. but this was a customer test. Shiv and I were both 3000 miles away during the runs. Anyway map 7 is no slouch!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,804
    Rep Points
    31,798.7
    Mentioned
    2085 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    318


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LostMarine Click here to enlarge
    BANG! Exactly what we knew already. More power, and over the whole RPM band, not just up top. Im glad someone finally did a b-b test.
    Hold on man... tweaked JB3 maps vs. out of the box V4 maps...

    Where are the out of the box numbers for both?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,062
    Rep Points
    9,036.7
    Mentioned
    637 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    91



    Yes Reputation No
    Both maps were tweaked by user. But the "map 7" numbers on the JB3 are out of the box.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,804
    Rep Points
    31,798.7
    Mentioned
    2085 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    318


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Terry@BMS Click here to enlarge
    Both maps were tweaked by user. But the "map 7" numbers on the JB3 are out of the box.
    I see... what are the settings or should I say changes made for each?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,062
    Rep Points
    9,036.7
    Mentioned
    637 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    91



    Yes Reputation No
    I'm not exactly sure. I think he tweaked the ignition correction for the V4 and the user torque for the JB3. Nothing major on either side. Chart 3 is the default JB3 map and his changes.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    612
    Rep Points
    410.1
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Nice comparison Click here to enlarge

    Mike

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,738
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    So in summary, he reduced timing retard on the v4 to try to make more power without knocking
    And increased the boost on the jb3 to make more over all power?

    Is this really a win for any side? lol Sort of pointless. Tweak out both maps so they run the same boost, same timing and guess what you will get the same results. To get the 400 jb3 number all he would have to do is raise boost or up timing to equal it to the jb3 log. Once again, I fail to see the advantage here lol.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,062
    Rep Points
    9,036.7
    Mentioned
    637 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    91



    Yes Reputation No
    You can probably custom tune a ham sandwich to make 400rw too but it was interesting that he was able to coax so much more power and torque out of the JB3. Maybe its just our super easy to use tuning interface. Click here to enlarge

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,738
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Are you impling its easier to the competition? Cause all he had to do to run more boost was go a map higher and reduce the user tq. Sound just as "super easy" me

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,062
    Rep Points
    9,036.7
    Mentioned
    637 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    91



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Laloosh Click here to enlarge
    Are you impling its easier to the competition? Cause all he had to do to run more boost was go a map higher and reduce the user tq. Sound just as "super easy" me
    I was joking with the ham sandwich but on the charts those were his results. Why his V4 results were worse isn't my department. One thing I've noticed is that while you can up the V4 for addl boost no one can ever raise the low end boost on it or change the shape of the curve. Seems worthy of fixing IMHO.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,738
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    I disagree, downlow tq is the most over rated thing when it comes to performance. Maybe its the way i drive, but If i floor a car, its at low rpm in either first or 2nd, or its on the dyno. Other than that, 4.5k and up, or grandma style. Whats the point of all this downlow tq? So you can load up the motor in 6th going up a hill? No thx

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,804
    Rep Points
    31,798.7
    Mentioned
    2085 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    318


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Laloosh Click here to enlarge
    I disagree, downlow tq is the most over rated thing when it comes to performance. Maybe its the way i drive, but If i floor a car, its at low rpm in either first or 2nd, or its on the dyno. Other than that, 4.5k and up, or grandma style. Whats the point of all this downlow tq? So you can load up the motor in 6th going up a hill? No thx
    Interesting... someone with an N54 stating that power up top is what is important in performance, heh.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,062
    Rep Points
    9,036.7
    Mentioned
    637 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    91



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Laloosh Click here to enlarge
    I disagree, downlow tq is the most over rated thing when it comes to performance. Maybe its the way i drive, but If i floor a car, its at low rpm in either first or 2nd, or its on the dyno. Other than that, 4.5k and up, or grandma style. Whats the point of all this downlow tq? So you can load up the motor in 6th going up a hill? No thx
    Just depends how you drive. I personally prefer driving a flat torque curve which is how all of our default maps are setup, but customers have the option to reshape things based on their own needs. If you spend more time at lower RPM it comes in very handy.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,738
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Both curves are flat lol, one is simply higher cause of more boost.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,738
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Interesting... someone with an N54 stating that power up top is what is important in performance, heh.
    I personally hate down low tq. IMO its good for loss of traction and throwing rods.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    8,062
    Rep Points
    9,036.7
    Mentioned
    637 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    91



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Laloosh Click here to enlarge
    I personally hate down low tq. IMO its good for loss of traction and throwing rods.
    Comes in handy for launching autos too. Click here to enlarge

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,804
    Rep Points
    31,798.7
    Mentioned
    2085 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    318


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Laloosh Click here to enlarge
    I personally hate down low tq. IMO its good for loss of traction and throwing rods.
    Wow Click here to enlarge almost sounds like my argument for modifying the M3 as you make huge power with low torque due to the rev multiplication and flat curve.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    641
    Rep Points
    76.9
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Peak torque numbers at 2500-3000rpm is a good number to pleasure yourself. And to impress your friends on the internet. But it does little for performance. And often, in fact, works against you. Making big torque down low is simple as running more boost. And that's a game that not everyone plays.

    Shiv

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,738
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Wow Click here to enlarge almost sounds like my argument for modifying the M3 as you make huge power with low torque due to the rev multiplication and flat curve.
    I love you tq curve. Like I said I'm not a big fan of "mid range" motors, however Ive had them for the past 4 years. Next car is going to have something that makes peak power stock near redline

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    MIAMI
    Posts
    462
    Rep Points
    199.0
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    2


    Yes Reputation No
    Look at the smoothness Click here to enlarge
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,485
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Laloosh Click here to enlarge
    I disagree, downlow tq is the most over rated thing when it comes to performance. Maybe its the way i drive, but If i floor a car, its at low rpm in either first or 2nd, or its on the dyno. Other than that, 4.5k and up, or grandma style. Whats the point of all this downlow tq? So you can load up the motor in 6th going up a hill? No thx

    I personally love having the most power available as early as i can. That way it is up to me on how to use it. I see no point in tuning for more power, and then not wanting it. If i don't want to use all 400+, then i don't apply 100%. But i guess thats just me

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,804
    Rep Points
    31,798.7
    Mentioned
    2085 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    318


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LostMarine Click here to enlarge
    I personally love having the most power available as early as i can. That way it is up to me on how to use it. I see no point in tuning for more power, and then not wanting it. If i don't want to use all 400+, then i don't apply 100%. But i guess thats just me
    Well, the thing is, with where the revs drop down to on shifts what is the point other than for an abusive launch? You can just rev higher to get to a higher torque peak with a manual... not with an auto though but the brake boosting compensates in this case.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Downey, Ca
    Posts
    2,063
    Rep Points
    2,784.8
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    28


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LostMarine Click here to enlarge
    I personally love having the most power available as early as i can. That way it is up to me on how to use it. I see no point in tuning for more power, and then not wanting it. If i don't want to use all 400+, then i don't apply 100%. But i guess thats just me
    +1

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •