[NM_BMW]

I'm sure they could add it if AMS requests this feature.

[Alpina_B3_Lux]

Originally Posted by Humtek

I'm sure they could add it if AMS requests this feature.

I'm not so sure - as written earlier on, this requires a flashing tool (i.e. modifying the DME), which would then be something a piggyback cannot do.

Alpina_B3_Lux

[jpsimon]

Procede removes the speed limiter, you don't need a flashing tool

[Alpina_B3_Lux]

Originally Posted by jpsimon

Procede removes the speed limiter, you don't need a flashing tool

Then why does AMS write that this is needed?

[jpsimon]

Not sure

[scheherazade]

I believe the speed delimiter in procede is actually just "lying to the computer about how fast you are going".

Flashes can actually remove the limiter. So you can tell the computer how fast you really go and still go faster.

-scheherazade

[jpsimon]

It's removed, that's all that matters. Piggybacks are always "lying" to the computer anyways... What's one more white lie that works?

[OpenFlash]

To be fair, speed limiter removal wasn't the easiest thing to do as the DME is very sensitive to manipulation/clamping artifact that will cause all sorts of plausibility errors. It took some time to work out with the PROcede.

Shiv

[Eric@AMS]

Thank you Shiv,

I will talk to CP-E and see if they can work on getting around this. I know I plan on taking my car to the Texas Mile so this is pretty crucial for me as well. Otherwise going faster than 155 isn't really that necessary for us. I mean going that fast on a public road is pretty insane.

Edit: CP-E Is working their way around it right now guys. I love their dedication to giving the end users what they want. I wish every vendor we dealt with was this open to suggestions and this diligent about getting them done

Eric

[BavarianBullet]

Originally Posted by Eric@AMS

The procedure for finding optimal timing advance (also known as minimum best timing, or MBT) is simple, however most cars can't run minimum best timing because the fuel typically auto-ignites before they can advance the timing enough to reach MBT.

I think you're referring to "Maximum Brake Torque" ignition timing. There is no acronym for "min best timing" that I'm aware of.

Originally Posted by Eric@AMS

We filled up the car with some ethanol, which increases the octane rating of the fuel, as well as enhances the evaporative cooling effect that the direct injection system already offers. Our aim is to see if increasing the octane of the fuel has any effect on power, and if so how much?

I might be missing something here but you said you ran E40 in the car. How exactly did you deliver it? You must be aware that running more than 10% ethanol in a car's OEM fuel system is generally a bad idea if not designed for it (e.g. N54). BMW in particular is quite vocal about ethanol causing the HP fuel pump failures.

Eric, thanks for all the charts and graphs, being very civil and open to dialog re the (CPE) standback and other items from AMS. It feels like a breath of fresh air in this particular forum IMO.

[Alpina_B3_Lux]

Originally Posted by Eric@AMS

Otherwise going faster than 155 isn't really that necessary for us. I mean going that fast on a public road is pretty insane.

Not all your potential clients live in the US...

And as for insane - just come over to Germany and we'll have a ball going insane for long stretches of Autobahn!

Alpina_B3_Lux

[Eric@AMS]

Originally Posted by midlife

my point is that how will these flashes adapt to higher elevations and /or low octane ?

note i am at 8000 feet with loooowest octane.
i can run custom maps on my JB3 and i spray methanol (you should too if at high altitude).

Hmm, I'm not sure if you and I are on the same page? I'll try to explain a different way if I can.

Originally Posted by midlife

that is great... i am not criticizing but want to learn more:

1/ in your colorrado example - the flash does not auto adjust for altitude

The Standback doesn't adjust for things like altitude or fuel octane because the factory computer already does. The Standback doesn't prevent the factory computer from retarding timing or adjusting fuel trimming when necessary.

Originally Posted by midlife

2/ the customer sends you the file and you make adjustments ... great.

but this process can be time consuming for you:
are you guys gonna be setup for this kind of customer support ?
i have no problem paying a fair price for any adjustments needed due to unique situations of altitude etc...
but will this service be free or maybe a one time flat fee ??

These sorts of adjustments shouldn't be required, and I believe remote adjustments will not be a common requirement. I simply posted that example to illustrate how easy adjustments can be made should the need arise. The fact of the matter is we'll be providing folks like yourself with a custom map that's tailored to your specific conditions. This is why we have to offer a variety of canned maps, and not just a single one-size-fits all. This way the computer can intervene if necessary, but we won't be just relying on the computer's ability to prevent excessive knock.

So for instance, a high altitude and low octane map will have a modest boost increase over stock, and will likely have some timing pulled depending on what octane you have available to you. That way the fueling and ignition timing will be appropriate for your conditions, and there shouldn't be any need for considerable factory DME intervention.

Is that clear or am I still missing your question?

Originally Posted by midlife

lastly, are you gonna tune your turbo upgrade with this unit??
rough eta please
thanks

Yes of course! We're waiting for our turbos to arrive so we can get started.

Originally Posted by BavarianBullet

I think you're referring to "Maximum Brake Torque" ignition timing. There is no acronym for "min best timing" that I'm aware of.

As far as I'm aware both interpretations of the acronym are acceptable.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="minimum+best+timing"+mbt&aq=f&oq=& aqi=

A lot of the literature that I read refers to your optimal ignition timing as minimum best timing, and the phrase also makes more sense to me than minimum best torque, so that's what I use. I'm apologize if my wording is unconventional

Originally Posted by BavarianBullet

I might be missing something here but you said you ran E40 in the car. How exactly did you deliver it? You must be aware that running more than 10% ethanol in a car's OEM fuel system is generally a bad idea if not designed for it (e.g. N54). BMW in particular is quite vocal about ethanol causing the HP fuel pump failures.

Eric, thanks for all the charts and graphs, being very civil and open to dialog re the (CPE) standback and other items from AMS. It feels like a breath of fresh air in this particular forum IMO.

I'm really glad to hear that you appreciate the open dialog in regards to tuning these vehicles! As I said before, I'm excited to get more of these in people's hands so we can get some more third-party feedback, as well as some more dyno numbers as well.

In regards to the ethanol the choice to run E40 was more for experimental purposes than it was a permanent solution. We don't recommend that anyone run ethanol in their non-flex fuel vehicles, and doing so may absolutely cause damage to engine components over time.

Originally Posted by Alpina_B3_Lux

Not all your potential clients live in the US...

And as for insane - just come over to Germany and we'll have a ball going insane for long stretches of Autobahn!

Alpina_B3_Lux

I'll see if we can't make that happen

[Mooreski]

This thread makes me curious as to how exactly the computer pulls timing. Across the board, or just where specific knock events occur. I see some potential problems in this whole idea. Keep in mind I'm pretty new at this so I'm probably wrong. Eric and Boosted_IS, you may have already addressed this, I just missed it. Let me know if I did...

The following is an example using made up numbers. Just an example. I'm assuming retarding timing results in less power and is generally a bad thing for the tuner.

So I'm using standback and playing with some custom maps. I have the timing advanced perfectly, right on the ragged edge of knock all the way across the map, except for one tiny spot where it's too advanced. I take a short trip to Knocksville while I'm out playing with my new map. The computer senses it and doesn't like it so it adapts and pulls timing. Would the DME retard the timing across the board or just at the specific little point where I'm getting knock?

The big question the example is leading me to: Will having one piece of your timing map a little too hot cause the entire map to be pulled back by the DME thereby ruining the rest of the timing map? Would you be able to tell you're not running right on the edge like you want to be? Once you corrected your timing and got your map perfect across the board, would the DME timing retard eventually calibrate itself out putting you back to what you want your map to be?

[Eric@AMS]

Originally Posted by Mooreski

This thread makes me curious as to how exactly the computer pulls timing. Across the board, or just where specific knock events occur. I see some potential problems in this whole idea. Keep in mind I'm pretty new at this so I'm probably wrong. Eric and Boosted_IS, you may have already addressed this, I just missed it. Let me know if I did...

The following is an example using made up numbers. Just an example. I'm assuming retarding timing results in less power and is generally a bad thing for the tuner.

So I'm using standback and playing with some custom maps. I have the timing advanced perfectly, right on the ragged edge of knock all the way across the map, except for one tiny spot where it's too advanced. I take a short trip to Knocksville while I'm out playing with my new map. The computer senses it and doesn't like it so it adapts and pulls timing. Would the DME retard the timing across the board or just at the specific little point where I'm getting knock?

The big question the example is leading me to: Will having one piece of your timing map a little too hot cause the entire map to be pulled back by the DME thereby ruining the rest of the timing map? Would you be able to tell you're not running right on the edge like you want to be? Once you corrected your timing and got your map perfect across the board, would the DME timing retard eventually calibrate itself out putting you back to what you want your map to be?

This is an excellent question. I can tell you what we've seen from our experience, but maybe some others can chime in If they have some logs they want to share.

From what we've seen on the dyno, the computer pulls timing during a knock event (typically about 2-6° depending on the severity of the event) and slowly restores the ignition advance unless more knock is registered. That means if you've dialed your tune in right at the knock threshold and the car does register some knock, then it'll pull timing in that one discrete region and nowhere else.

I've posted this graph elsewhere before (sorry), but this does illustrate my point. Below are consecutive runs at 12psi with no Standback timing adjustments. That means we're running the factory computer timing map, and we're basically relying on the computer's ability to pull timing in order to mitigate knock.



What's interesting is that although each and every run shown has a knock event recorded, you can see that they all try and reach what looks like a 8° ignition advance target. This more or less shows that during a knock event not only is timing not dropped across the board, but it also attempts to run the same amount of timing on the subsequent run (again, roughly 8-9° under load). If timing were dropped everywhere during a knock event then you'd expect subsequent runs to have identical timing curves, only with less ignition advance (and maybe even less knock) on the latest run.

Now the question folks have brought up is if the computer will correct for these knock events over time by bringing the whole curve down. Some people believe that the computer will adjust for the knock and pull timing across the board. Others believe that the reduction in ignition advance is temporary, and that the ECU will constantly try to add timing back in over time. It isn't yet clear which theory is correct, but no one can argue that preventing the knock by pulling some timing is a good thing.

So to answer your question, it looks as if the computer pulls timing in discrete regions when knock is registered at least immediately. How the ignition timing curve changes over the long term is probably going to require a little more involved (and maybe most importantly consistent) investigation. My guess is that if you were to tune right at the knock threshold and you registered inconsistent knock (as all engines do) the curve won't change appreciably from run to run. If the knock gets back enough I think the computer will drop the entire curve down, and then try to restore the timing over a period of time.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Eric@AMS

Now the question folks have brought up is if the computer will correct for these knock events over time by bringing the whole curve down. Some people believe that the computer will adjust for the knock and pull timing across the board. Others believe that the reduction in ignition advance is temporary, and that the ECU will constantly try to add timing back in over time. It isn't yet clear which theory is correct, but no one can argue that preventing the knock by pulling some timing is a good thing.

oh.. some will. I think you know who I'm talking about

Shiv

[Zeph]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

oh.. some will. I think you know who I'm talking about

Shiv

LOL so TRUE, there aren't enough posts of proven data possible to change that either. That same theory that the best possible mod is ALWAYS the one you sell and/or have in your car.

[Eric@AMS]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

oh.. some will. I think you know who I'm talking about

Shiv

hahahahaha play nice

Eric

[GeorgeSmooth]

Eric in the picture you posted there is a switch. Will you be able to switch from map to map using that switch?

[Eric@AMS]

Yes, There is a toggle switch for two maps and I believe P3cars.com is working on making their gauge friendly with map switching as well.

Eric