[Lane]

Originally Posted by munters

No, what he means is the eficciency of the TPS. (No more oscillations)

TPS is Throttle Position Sensor. How do you measure the efficiency of the sensor? In any case, the sensor and its efficiency is untouched.

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by Lane

There is always a trade off due to the heat generated at low revs which reduces high end power.

What do you mean by saying "using boost more effectively"? When you think of a tune and the parameters, boost, timing and fuel, are you saying that the combination of the parameters in Procede tunes has been unoptimal? Keeping timing, fuel and boost parameters the same in an otherwise fixed testing environment, it would seem to me that it is close to impossible to get more torque as an output.

Similar to what munters intended. Granted, there are absolute tradeoffs; but it can be lessened. If a boost target is hit and not over under shooting, there will be less heat infused into the charge air.

[scalbert]

Originally Posted by Lane

do you measure the efficiency of the sensor?.

Get a NIST traceable reference position sensor and compare the linearity of the TPS to the reference. Then also calculate the current draw in relation to position since it is most likely a linear or rotary potentiometer. But I know that is not what you meant.

[Lane]

Originally Posted by scalbert

Get a NIST traceable reference position sensor and compare the linearity of the TPS to the reference. Then also calculate the current draw in relation to position since it is most likely a linear or rotary potentiometer. But I know that is not what you meant.

Exactly I think nobody was really about to measure the efficiency of the sensor...

Regarding the boost sstability, my subjective eye looking at the boost graphs across the different versions of V3 maps has not noticed the boost to be more unstable in the early map versions compared to the later versions.

The boost variation would cause more heat than a straight line type of boost log.

[scalbert]

In the upcoming weeks I will be tapping the TMAP signal as well as others (throttle pedal, throttle plate, RPM, etc.) and amd do high speed logging of each. I'll do this with the a few iterations of the V3 software as well as with the JB3 V1.2F and see what, if any, differences there are.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Lane

There is always a trade off due to the heat generated at low revs which reduces high end power.

What do you mean by saying "using boost more effectively"? When you think of a tune and the parameters, boost, timing and fuel, are you saying that the combination of the parameters in Procede tunes has been unoptimal? Keeping timing, fuel and boost parameters the same in an otherwise fixed testing environment, it would seem to me that it is close to impossible to get more torque as an output.

The new maps aren't running appreciably more boost down low than before. Still about 9-10psi up to 3k and 11-12psi from 3-4k. It ramps up to full boost by approx 5.5k.

Shiv