MalibuJack

iTrader: (5)

I have found our current load calc is not quite accurate once you start playing "Creatively" with the Injector scale and Voltage Latency.

But much of the innacuracy is likely because you have to interpolate for battery voltage.. the greater the difference in the 11v and 14v and 16v values, the more inaccurate the value is if you don't do it, and your voltage at the RPM range your logging is below 14v For instance, my car is always at 13.9v and its generally accurate until the voltage shifts.

We really need to rework the calculation so it uses the 11v, 14v, Battery, IPW, AFRMAP, Injector Scale, and Injector Voltage Latency

This is going to happen on all the loggers if your battery voltage is not 14v

Now, on my car, I've used some creative adjustment to get my fuel curve to work right, and my load is definitely reading 10-20% off (I turned my boost down so the ECULoad stays under the clipping value of about 160) and logged the two, and they are definitely reading different, therefore the calculation for Load is different.

I have purposely not posted my timing values that I use.. Simply because you guys would think I was nuts if you saw how conservative my timing is, and the level of gains I had been making... But I have been working through "phantom knock" which is my downpipe, I have an engine damper and some heat wrap going on the car in the next few days.

chmodlf

iTrader: (19)

Yea MJ I have wondered why you haven't "shown us yours". LMAO

But seriously folks, you do run more boost rather than push the timing side of the equasion IIRC.

On another note it seems that my load peak (240s) seems low compared to people that are running my level of boost, timing and have similar mods (no cams, etc).

MalibuJack

iTrader: (5)

From your point, "It depends" I've noticed an aftermarket intake and filter "lowered" the load value.. I am starting to theorize that intake modifications (in my case the blowthroug MAF) seems to skew the calculated Load values a bit compared to the ECU's load.. Not sure why since there's no mathematical reason for it.

On my car, Everything that can be optimized, has or will be.. Which means things that contribute to typical losses do not exist for the most part on my car..

I still have to put a ported head, throttlebody, SM Intake, and upgrade my pipes/intercooler to 3" (even though the outlet of the turbo is 2.5", my theory is the pressure differential will draw air out of the compressor)

Ultimately I can run moderate boost (around 23psi) on pump gas, with at the moment very low timing values while I'm addressing the phantom knock.. And I'm still producing roughly 450 whp or so, but take that number with a grain of salt since its a "Road dyno" calculated value based on DLL Logs and backed up with a Beltronix timing computer.. Figure thats about 50-60whp off..

If I get a set of cam gears on there, I can pick up about 50whp if I dial in the gears, unfortunately that may cause me to sacrifice a bit of low-end torque..

I find that most "tuners" with the exception of guys like Buschur, really do neglect the Entire package.. The less work you can make all the components do, the more efficient they are, and the more power you ultimately make.. I'm not talking about overkill and over-the-top type of mods, but looking at the entire picture of what makes an air pump and compressor work efficiently, simple things like valve pockets and design and diameter of the valves, and sharp edges, tight bends, even indexing your spark plugs, all have an impact on the type of power you make.. Large pipes look great, but the design and diameter can contribute to turbulence and low pressure areas in bends that can actually impede flow.. Same with poorly designed parts..

Tuning is really the final process of making these parts work.. I've spent 2 years doing everything else so the tuning can do what it does best.

cij911

iTrader: (14)

I am @ ~ 296 - 300 around 3500 RPM and timing is ~5*

I am seeing ~15 degrees at 7000 rpm and load is 220....