Quote:
Originally Posted by jpsimon
Technically speaking... was your/terry's theory about it being "learned out" part of the "effectiveness" argument? Or did you decide that smear campaign was "learned out"?
|
The debate on whether or not they are learned out has come down to whether or not the CPS offset applied is capable of maxing out the stock timing values. If it can't, then the timing values will float based on knock feedback as designed. Meaning your car will experience "knock" (not exactly but when in Rome do as the Romans) as the ECU attempts to raise its timing values. If the CPS applied can max out the factory values, then the ECU has no room to raise them further and you can make the case that the CPS offset reduced effective timing.
That is why these logs are so critical. They show CPS tuned timing values no where near being maxed out, as do all customer logs I've seen posted.
Taking your logs as an example, your charts did not reflect maxed out (stock like) timing values, therefore your CPS offset was learned out. Actually your logs with less offset resulted in lower (and equally smooth) timing values which is totally bizarre. While we're on the topic, you made the claim that your logs proved CPS offsetting was not learned out. Could you walk me through your analysis of that?
Mike