When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Yeah .... have to admit that I've never really paid much attention to that chart . Lately , I just use the rpm vs time chart of one vs another to see where differences are ............. I actually think that gives a much better indication than the above chart or the power charts..
Agreed. Acceleration is novel, but not all that useful across logs. VDs are nice, but a challenge to consistently generate quality logs / graphs. Rpm vs time is both useful and easy.
Well, I've taken the plunge, i.e. initial foray into tuning. Brettt's done a great job, and I've zero complaints, but the nature of flash tuning is iterative. So, I wanted to pick-up this aspect of customizing my car as well. After considerable reading..., discussion w/ Brett..., and reviewing previous tunes...; I've waded into the tuning deep end.
To date I've attempted to:
.
optimized warm-up curve and raised idle (smoother operation)
Improved mpg in cruise regions (still need to quantify mpg gain)
optimized fan initiation temps for improved management of southern summer ambient temps
adjusted SSV opening curve per ECT
adjusted VE for improved LIM DAIS operation
working toward optimizing AFRs across rpm range.
Note: Managing the APV opening transition AFR spike, evident ~ 1/2 way thru the below pull, is quite the puzzle.
.
She's driving very well: OEM smooth and powerful thru the low, mid, and high rpm.
First VD below is from this morning ...on my latest tune...spinning like a top. Second VD is a comparison of my previous best pull to date (Pull 1) from Feb 28, see post #729, vs today's (Pull 2).
.
Pull 1 was ~13.5 psi and at ~50*F amb. temp.
Pull 2 was ~13.0 psi and at ~70*F amb. temp.
1. Pull 1 generates ~30 more HP down low, comparatively driving torque up early in the rev range.
2. However, the rate of HP "acceleration" (slope), of Pull 2 overtakes the rate of HP "acceleration" of Pull 1 from ~5k rpm, ...causing Pull 2's torque to overtake Pull 1's prior to redline.
- APV opens ~ 6100 rpm, transition turbulence clears, and HP/Trq take off ~ 6300 rpm....causing good upper range torque/ pull.
- Excited about this result... on a hotter day...atless boost ...which is at least indicative that recent tuning optimizations are moving system performance in a positive direction.
All other things being equal... HP generation is inversely related to amb temp. Earlier investigation approximated a 2% loss per 10*F rise in amb temp. Applying that...today's pull w/h generated ~ 430 wHP, 300 ftlb pull @ 50*F amb.
Of course, ...understanding there w/b a margin of error associated w/ the M/E VDs, and process, e.g. equally flat road, etc. Yet, interesting to muse...
. 6-26-20 Pull, ~13 psi, ~70*F amb.
. VD Comparison: 6-26-20 Pull, ~13 psi, ~70*F amb.......vs.........2-28-20 Pull, ~13.5 psi, ~50*F amb.
I want to proactively address any negativity which may arise...concerning Brett's tuning ability given my preliminary perceived gains. I've said before, and say again Brett's tuning services and knowledge / experience based guidance h/b invaluable to the system performance I've achieved to date. Again, today's results are preliminary...need more logs.
Fact is flash tuning is a slow..., meticulous... iterative process, [tune1 - log - eval] - [tune2 - log - eval] - [tune3 - log - eval...oop, boost leak...those logs are trash...], etc., etc. Each of these cycles done remotely takes on the order of "days", ...when done in person ...mins. / hrs. Additionally, any quality tuner will ensure ample "safety margin" is built into all tunes. A person tuning their "own vehicle" m/b comfortable thoughtfully narrowing that margin a bit...as I have done, ...and backed down some ...based on his advice Lol. It is simply unreasonable to expect the level of tune optimization done remotely...as c/b achieved locally.
Nothing but respect for my tuner. So, don't go there.
Would be curious to see a dyno to compare to VD; yes I know that in itself has many factors but would be interesting to compare. Great looking numbers!
Would be curious to see a dyno to compare to VD; yes I know that in itself has many factors but would be interesting to compare. Great looking numbers!
Thanks! Agreed: M/E VDs are valid for comparison...which h/b sufficient for system optimization..., but are "relative" until validated via dyno.
Data was indicating a leak... Found this...first place I looked: compressor outlet. Lot of force on that little guy.
Fortunately, I was able to flip, and re-install it for a temp repair until the new reinforced elbow delivers. Rolling again...
.
Well, replaced the above elbow coupler, but still fighting a slight boost leak at the compressor outlet. Data doesn't lie. Smh She still pulls strong, but...there's more spool response and reliability to be had.
In the past I've been able to achieve a tighter seal by putting a few turns on clamps of problem couplers when everything's hot ...after a good drive. So, about to do that, and suspect it will reduce the leak some. But tbh it seems the design asks a lot of a 2" 90* elbow coupler directly off the compressor outlet....note my torn coupler above. So, I'm open to suggestions, but atm believe any remedy involving this coupler will only improve / resolve the leak temporarily.
I believe the permanent solution w/b transitioning to a 2" 90* aluminum elbow welded onto the charge section, w/ a straight coupler connection to the comp outlet.
.
Note: This is an old pic the larger engine mount rubber h/b swapped to the bottom.
.
I've mentioned this on numerous occasions but it seems hard to accept because people like the look of them ...............normal quality hose clamps work better than T bolt clamps . T bolts have an inherent design flaw in the way they clamp in the area close to the bolt itself plus they are too wide in many situations.
I've mentioned this on numerous occasions but it seems hard to accept because people like the look of them ...............normal quality hose clamps work better than T bolt clamps . T bolts have an inherent design flaw in the way they clamp in the area close to the bolt itself plus they are too wide in many situations. ...
Thanks. worth a try. I have some..., but was concerned they'd "pop". I'll throw her on stands again, and fit them either side of this coupler.
With a hose clamp ...it's worth noting that they don't need to be as tight either ...because they concentrate the clamp force over a narrower area
Originally Posted by jcbrx8
Thanks. worth a try. I have some..., but was concerned they'd "pop". I'll throw her on stands again, and fit them either side of this coupler.
Happened to me only once in 12 years and 100,000 turbo miles with numerous track days.... and that was on the throttle body.......... because there isn't a bead there .
Installed the standard worm drive clamps and initial test drive results still indicate a small leak. I likely need to roll thru and check all the clamps ...as it's been a while since doing so. Data is indicating that I also m/h a sm leak pre-compressor as well. Tired or messing w/ the car today. So that w/b for another day.
Below are two typical profiles:
- the first is a good pull...(sometimes it doesn't leak... ???). Constant slope on the leading edge, and solid AFRs.
- the second for a leaky pull...rise to peak boost is delayed ~1.5 sec - see concave leading edge, and elevated, erratic AFRs.
maybe an aluminum elbow with two straight couplers, while you could argue it doubles the potential for leak joints it has benefits too.
or go whole hog with all aluminum and wiggins clamp seals instead
Thanks for the suggestion. Had to look up Wiggins clamps. Top shelf... I like the mechanical clamp & hold design. I'll keep them in mind.
I considered a 6061 90* elbow, but if I went that route would weld it to the charge section to eliminate one coupler/ clamp set. I also have reservations about trying to seal a coupler to a 90* elbow. Recall that was problematic at my throttle body connection. I ultimately had to weld a 90* w/ 2.0" straight section to facilitate a good coupler seal. But at the comp outlet space is tight, and it m/b difficult fitting an elbow w/ a straight section.
Atm I dbl clamped both sides of the comp. outlet coupler w/ standard worm clamps, and after heat soaking the night they're holding like a champ. So, ...hopefully...I won't need to do anything more.
Correct sized pipe with a proper bead, quality silicone coupler and enough parallel section to get a worm clamp sitting flat and .............. zero issues. It really is that simple. That fancy stuff Team is talking about might work well for high boost situations ...waste of money on our sub 14psi systems.
Correct sized pipe with a proper bead, quality silicone coupler and enough parallel section to get a worm clamp sitting flat and .............. zero issues. It really is that simple. That fancy stuff Team is talking about might work well for high boost situations ...waste of money on our sub 14psi systems.
Well, it's holding atm. So, hopefully, good to go.
Pleased w/ cooling system performance in ~90*F summer ambient temps w/ the alu undertray installed and sealed tight. Typical ECT (middle gauge) runs ~ 180*F while moving, and rises to ~190 - 200*F at lights.
Well, moving to the next phase of my build... I'm considering installing coilovers. My objectives are improved handling performance, ride quality, and to implement a modest drop to say ~ 0.5" - 75" gap from tire to fender. I want height and rate adjust-ability, therefore am not interested in going the lowering spring route. I've done some research into make & models... and to date am leaning toward the BC Racing BR Series which run ~$1k. My car is a semi-DD ...as I work from home, and may see some track use.
Before pulling the trigger I'd like to garner feedback from anyone w/ knowledge or experience with BC Racing products generally, the BR Series specifically, or strong general suspension experience. Are there other make / models in the (edit) $1k - $1.5k price range I should consider? Why?
I went with the Bilsteins with eibach springs. I think it’s a perfect compromise of performance, comfort, and aesthetics. They’re not adjustable, so that’s a downside. But also an upside if you’re lazy (like me). I’ll post closeup pics for reference
(Previous owner did that to the wheels lol)
I went with the Bilsteins with eibach springs. I think it’s a perfect compromise of performance, comfort, and aesthetics. They’re not adjustable, so that’s a downside. But also an upside if you’re lazy (like me). I’ll post closeup pics for reference
(Previous owner did that to the wheels lol)
Jake, Thanks..., but I definitely want the adjust-ability of coilovers.
06-12-2020, 06:10 PM
...and only now discovered that M/E produces a graph of speed & acceleration vs rpm.
...hopefully...I won't need to do anything more.
