New Logs - These Seem Better Except One
Oct 5, 2006, 07:20 PM
#16
Originally Posted by Warrtalon
This is completely untrue, and I have told you this before, but for some reason you do not listen.
The stock tune is QUITE LEAN at peak torque/boost. Have you not seen dynos showing this over and over on multiple Evos? It starts out in the 12s, then crosses into the high 11s AFTER peak torque/boost, then it falls to 11.0 or so around 5200rpm, and after that, it goes rich as hell. The stock tune is not rich through the entire powerband - it's only extremely rich at the higher rpms. So, the tune does not go leaner AND increase timing at peak torque. It just increases timing. You guys act like this is some amazingly evil thing while ignoring the tons and tons of fast cars with this tuning style and the incredibly minute cases of failures. In fact, there has been no reported engine failure confirmed to be directly attirbuted to this tuning style, and there are far more cars tuned like this than by anyone else in the Evo market.
The stock tune is QUITE LEAN at peak torque/boost. Have you not seen dynos showing this over and over on multiple Evos? It starts out in the 12s, then crosses into the high 11s AFTER peak torque/boost, then it falls to 11.0 or so around 5200rpm, and after that, it goes rich as hell. The stock tune is not rich through the entire powerband - it's only extremely rich at the higher rpms. So, the tune does not go leaner AND increase timing at peak torque. It just increases timing. You guys act like this is some amazingly evil thing while ignoring the tons and tons of fast cars with this tuning style and the incredibly minute cases of failures. In fact, there has been no reported engine failure confirmed to be directly attirbuted to this tuning style, and there are far more cars tuned like this than by anyone else in the Evo market.
There can be many reasons for the absence of failures. For one the 4g63 is a very stout engine and can take a beating and keep on making power. Another reason is the stock ECU's impressive ability to protect the engine by pulling timing to protect the engine.
Oct 5, 2006, 07:22 PM
#17
I was going to say, knock isn't always because of conditions at that particular rpm and load.
What happens before often begets knock later. In the bad log you get on the load just after 2600 rpm, I suggest all the knock that follows started right there or before. It continues on because the cylinder is f up.
So I am with Mad VIII check out your situation at low rpm & load. Maybe you also just finished a log so things were ripe for trouble during this log.
I'm not used to this log tool. Is it possible to get more information or are you limited?
What happens before often begets knock later. In the bad log you get on the load just after 2600 rpm, I suggest all the knock that follows started right there or before. It continues on because the cylinder is f up.
So I am with Mad VIII check out your situation at low rpm & load. Maybe you also just finished a log so things were ripe for trouble during this log.
I'm not used to this log tool. Is it possible to get more information or are you limited?
Oct 5, 2006, 07:30 PM
#18
Originally Posted by Warrtalon
This is completely untrue, and I have told you this before, but for some reason you do not listen.
The stock tune is QUITE LEAN at peak torque/boost. Have you not seen dynos showing this over and over on multiple Evos? It starts out in the 12s, then crosses into the high 11s AFTER peak torque/boost, then it falls to 11.0 or so around 5200rpm, and after that, it goes rich as hell. The stock tune is not rich through the entire powerband - it's only extremely rich at the higher rpms. So, the tune does not go leaner AND increase timing at peak torque. It just increases timing. You guys act like this is some amazingly evil thing while ignoring the tons and tons of fast cars with this tuning style and the incredibly minute cases of failures. In fact, there has been no reported engine failure confirmed to be directly attirbuted to this tuning style, and there are far more cars tuned like this than by anyone else in the Evo market.
The stock tune is QUITE LEAN at peak torque/boost. Have you not seen dynos showing this over and over on multiple Evos? It starts out in the 12s, then crosses into the high 11s AFTER peak torque/boost, then it falls to 11.0 or so around 5200rpm, and after that, it goes rich as hell. The stock tune is not rich through the entire powerband - it's only extremely rich at the higher rpms. So, the tune does not go leaner AND increase timing at peak torque. It just increases timing. You guys act like this is some amazingly evil thing while ignoring the tons and tons of fast cars with this tuning style and the incredibly minute cases of failures. In fact, there has been no reported engine failure confirmed to be directly attirbuted to this tuning style, and there are far more cars tuned like this than by anyone else in the Evo market.
Oct 6, 2006, 06:29 AM
#19
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TTP Engineering
In most cases 8* of timing at 3000 and 3500rpms with TBE is too much.
Even after sorting out my issues there is no way I could run 8* in that region at WOT load cells, maybee at 140 160 load maximum.
Oct 6, 2006, 07:02 AM
#21
kapolani, how much boost are you running? 8* does seem like a lot, but im sure you can get away with 8* if your boost is not spiking to high at peak torque. For the run were you saw knock, did you notice if your boost spiked/peaked higher then usual?
Oct 7, 2006, 08:15 AM
#25
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Birmingham, Al
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the stock turbo running 22 psi through the midrange tapering to 19 or so, my car would run 8 deg ALL DAY LONG at peak tq with AFRs right around 11.0 and zero knock counts. The only time it would ever give me some knock counts would be when I was in fifth gear, loading the hell out of the motor with full boost on 90+ deg days. Did I change it? Hell no, the ecu is doing its job and that situation is about as textbook for generating knock as one can create.
Obviously you are getting some decent knock counts, but one behavior that I've noted about the stock ECU is that if you generate significant KS before or around peak tq, it likes to "carry" the counts along with it throughout the pull. I personally think your problem is in the 2-3k rpm range. Fix the problems there and you'll go a long way in taking care of the inconsistancy.
Obviously you are getting some decent knock counts, but one behavior that I've noted about the stock ECU is that if you generate significant KS before or around peak tq, it likes to "carry" the counts along with it throughout the pull. I personally think your problem is in the 2-3k rpm range. Fix the problems there and you'll go a long way in taking care of the inconsistancy.
Last edited by A418t81; Oct 7, 2006 at 08:58 AM.
Oct 7, 2006, 08:29 AM
#26
Originally Posted by kapolani
I'm spiking to about 21psi - peak.
It has been verified through a MAP sensor.
The second run was on a slight decline.
It has been verified through a MAP sensor.
The second run was on a slight decline.
Oct 7, 2006, 09:42 AM
#27
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by A418t81
....
Obviously you are getting some decent knock counts, but one behavior that I've noted about the stock ECU is that if you generate significant KS before or around peak tq, it likes to "carry" the counts along with it throughout the pull. I personally think your problem is in the 2-3k rpm range. Fix the problems there and you'll go a long way in taking care of the inconsistancy.
Obviously you are getting some decent knock counts, but one behavior that I've noted about the stock ECU is that if you generate significant KS before or around peak tq, it likes to "carry" the counts along with it throughout the pull. I personally think your problem is in the 2-3k rpm range. Fix the problems there and you'll go a long way in taking care of the inconsistancy.
Yeah, that is what i was recommendng as well, as I have seen the same behaviour. In addition I have also seen additional knock on downhill runs, I would assume as someone else mentioned, that it slows the load progression. Perhapse not though.
Oct 7, 2006, 03:27 PM
#28
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did four pulls.
The first and third were with a slight INCLINE.
The second and fourth would be with a slight DECLINE.
So, the second/fourth pull occured when I was on the decline. On these pulls the knock exists.
I would think that having more load on the engine would present knock - not the other way around.
The first and third were with a slight INCLINE.
The second and fourth would be with a slight DECLINE.
So, the second/fourth pull occured when I was on the decline. On these pulls the knock exists.
I would think that having more load on the engine would present knock - not the other way around.
Last edited by kapolani; Oct 7, 2006 at 06:30 PM.
Oct 7, 2006, 04:13 PM
#29
Originally Posted by C6C6CH3vo
Honestly, I believe WTQ is more stressful on the stock bottom than 2 more degrees of timing at 3500RPM. I'm not an expert so if anyone can convince me otherwise I would be glad to hear the facts...
Extra timing tends to produces cylinder pressure spikes and a disproportionate amount of stress on the engine for a modest increase in BMEP (read torque).
Extra boost increases BMEP from an increase in area under the cylinder pressure curve and a relatively modest increase in peak cylinder pressure if you have the timing sensible.
The above is based on Corky Bell (Maximum Boost), and supported by personal practical experience on high specific output turbocharged engine tuning. I'm sure Dynoflash has his own views as well supported by experience, but with recent improvements in understanding of how the Evo ECUs work from disassembly and other techniques, I've not been tempted to change a thing about my tuning methodology and see lots of things I don't like in the sea of 8s and 9s or whatever at peak torque on Evos on pump fuel.
Oct 7, 2006, 04:15 PM
#30
I richen my Evo up at spool up and lean it off at the top end by the way 
And I run rather more boost than is fashionable on pump fuel even though some of you think our Euro fuel is like liquid gold 
And I run rather more boost than is fashionable on pump fuel even though some of you think our Euro fuel is like liquid gold