[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by dzenno

well if we'll pick/choose logs just for arguments sake then we really can't discuss these things openly without bias...do 5 runs back to back, save the logs and post them...

hellblazer, try to do the same on your car...

Also, for a proper AFR graph, scale your AFR from 10 to 16 instead of 10 to 30 which is default...i wonder why shiv never changed this scaling default because 30 doesn't make sense for AFR...he was happy to change these defaults before to have clearer logs...

Even procede captured AFR logs are fine but external wideband logs hooked into the procede would show a more "exact" picture without any wideband bias cleanup calculations that in the past were very wrong

If you guys are talking about lean midrange air/fuel ratios then you'd only be interested in runs without meth. With methanol you can run much leaner safely in the midrange and you won't max out the fuel trims so can target any air/fuel curve you want anyway.

Mike

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

If you guys are talking about lean midrange air/fuel ratios then you'd only be interested in runs without meth. With methanol you can run much leaner safely in the midrange and you won't max out the fuel trims so can target any air/fuel curve you want anyway.

Mike

What's being talked about are the following:

1) Post shift AFR instability/wobble
2) Onset of WOT AFR instability/wobble
3) Appropriate AFR for low/midrang given boost/timing

You bring up a good point but the issue I have with it is we currently have no idea what the appropriate meth mixes and volumes that need to be injected are. No one has taken the actual fuel volume at X rail pressure and calculated for a given mass of fuel what the appropriate meth mix/volume is and provided any factual insight into why/how they've arrived at those numbers...at best everyone, myself included, is just using a nozzle/nozzles with a higher meth mix and checking timing to make sure its not dropping...even those that have PWM meth kits, Shiv included, have never presented this data although I'm sure he can come up with something in no time to prove how little knowledge I have on the subject as we all know the way we're running meth is not a really scientifically driven way of introducing extra fueling but it works for what we're looking out of it (lower IATs, suppress knock retard events)...but to go from there and say you can "safely" run leaner is a stretch given we have no empirical evidence to support either claim (safe/not safe) unless we resort to saying no engines blew up so far

[Skydive]

LOL @ Dzenno.

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by Skydive

LOL @ Dzenno.

So now that I posted a log you requested seeing that's all you got? i guess I'll know better next time you ask for a log

[cn555ic]

Lol. That's so true about how much to inject! I now run a small shot of nitrous (fit for a RC!! Lol) and inject over 1400+ml/min of 90/10 meth just to be on the safe side! There is no science to it but I rather never run lean on the onslaught of nitrous being sprayed. Now that fueling is being addressed thanks to Dzenno bringing it to light I feel more comfortable using nitrous

[themyst]

Originally Posted by dzenno

What's being talked about are the following:

1) Post shift AFR instability/wobble
2) Onset of WOT AFR instability/wobble
3) Appropriate AFR for low/midrang given boost/timing

You bring up a good point but the issue I have with it is we currently have no idea what the appropriate meth mixes and volumes that need to be injected are. No one has taken the actual fuel volume at X rail pressure and calculated for a given mass of fuel what the appropriate meth mix/volume is and provided any factual insight into why/how they've arrived at those numbers...at best everyone, myself included, is just using a nozzle/nozzles with a higher meth mix and checking timing to make sure its not dropping...even those that have PWM meth kits, Shiv included, have never presented this data although I'm sure he can come up with something in no time to prove how little knowledge I have on the subject as we all know the way we're running meth is not a really scientifically driven way of introducing extra fueling but it works...but to go from there and say you can "safely" run leaner is a stretch given we have no empirical evidence to support either claim (safe/not safe) unless we resort to saying no engines blew up so far

You do realize there are recommended nozzle sizes for pps kits dating back to god knows when. I remember when meth injection was relatively new on this platform we mostly stuck with M5 and M7 nozzles. I know DO has a nozzle size calculator which states for the 400-450 whp range would need an M7 nozzle, consistent with the default nozzle included in Vishnu original meth kit. Why we all decided to go with M10 nozzles and larger on stock turbos is merely because we can. Closed loop fueling under WOT ftmfw!

[dzenno]

Skydive, here's another log, 15AFR spike at the onset of WOT, 12.5psi boost, fuel pressure is there so what's up? lol...i'm sure its fine if you just close your eyes to it a bit LOL

[Mike@N54Tuning.com]

Originally Posted by dzenno

What's being talked about are the following:

1) Post shift AFR instability/wobble
2) Onset of WOT AFR instability/wobble
3) Appropriate AFR for low/midrang given boost/timing

You bring up a good point but the issue I have with it is we currently have no idea what the appropriate meth mixes and volumes that need to be injected are. No one has taken the actual fuel volume at X rail pressure and calculated for a given mass of fuel what the appropriate meth mix/volume is and provided any factual insight into why/how they've arrived at those numbers...at best everyone, myself included, is just using a nozzle/nozzles with a higher meth mix and checking timing to make sure its not dropping...even those that have PWM meth kits, Shiv included, have never presented this data although I'm sure he can come up with something in no time to prove how little knowledge I have on the subject as we all know the way we're running meth is not a really scientifically driven way of introducing extra fueling but it works for what we're looking out of it (lower IATs, suppress knock retard events)...but to go from there and say you can "safely" run leaner is a stretch given we have no empirical evidence to support either claim (safe/not safe) unless we resort to saying no engines blew up so far

So install an external EGT probe and monitor all the various tunes, AFRs, and meth mixtures, and see what keeps EGTs the lowest. Then you can debate whether the EGT spread is enough to make a difference long term. It seems you want to have a flash vs. piggyback debate though and the heart of that argument is how rich can the piggybacks go in the midrange without meth?

Mike

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by themyst

You do realize there are recommended nozzle sizes for pps kits dating back to god knows when. I remember when meth injection was relatively new we mostly stuck with M5 and M7 nozzles. I know DO has a nozzle size calculator which states for the 400-450 whp range would need an M7 nozzle, consistent with the default nozzle included in Vishnu original meth kit. Why we all decided to go with M10 nozzles and larger on stock turbos is merely because we can. Closed loop fueling under WOT ftmfw!

Of course I know that but that's not what I'm saying...we're spraying a single nozzle to feed 6 direct injected cylinders...the proper way of doing it is to look at the fuel injectors and see their duty cycles and see what mass of fuel is being injected and then determine the appropriate meth volume/nozzles...450hp out of a port injected V8 isn't the same as 450hp out of an inline 6 with direct injection as i said, we have it easy as the dme is so awesome in dealing with fuel control, just thought I'd throw that out there as well into all this damn mess

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by Mike@N54Tuning.com

So install an external EGT probe and monitor all the various tunes, AFRs, and meth mixtures, and see what keeps EGTs the lowest. Then you can debate whether the EGT spread is enough to make a difference long term. It seems you want to have a flash vs. piggyback debate though and the heart of that argument is how rich can the piggybacks go in the midrange without meth?

Mike

I probably won't do that, I might, who knows lol

I don't care how rich can piggybacks go in midrange...they can go as rich as low 12s or even richer, off my external wideband when I checked with both JB4 and procede...that's not what I'm after, I'm actually not after anything...in this thread I told the poster that they'd just need to pay attention to their low/mid range AFRs and that I'd adjust them richer than what he posted which ended up spinning into God knows what at this point..

[themyst]

Originally Posted by dzenno

Of course I know that but that's not what I'm saying...we're spraying a single nozzle to feed 6 direct injected cylinders...the proper way of doing it is to look at the fuel injectors and see their duty cycles and see what mass of fuel is being injected and then determine the appropriate meth volume/nozzles...450hp out of a port injected V8 isn't the same as 450hp out of an inline 6 with direct injection as i said, we have it easy as the dme is so awesome in dealing with fuel control, just thought I'd throw that out there as well into all this damn mess

I believe when Sevak blew his motor last year there was a huge discussion on this topic. I don't remember the details, but pull it up if you're interested.

Btw when you run meth on your current setup, what does the timing look like as a whole? Lots of dropouts? Solid? I'd go test this myself but I don't have a jb4 Or those Cobb alpha maps.

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by themyst

I believe when Sevak blew his motor last year there was a huge discussion on this topic. I don't remember the details, but pull it up if you're interested.

Btw when you run meth on your current setup, what does the timing look like as a whole? Lots of dropouts? Solid? I'd go test this myself but I don't have a jb4 Or those Cobb alpha maps.

Timing on the lonely 1st cylinder is rock solid..least I can do LOL..i'm actually holding off more testing for a bit until I can either upgrade the JB4 to a 12ohm board to get more 1-2psi more boost to hold top of 3rd and all of 4th gear or get the Cobb race (meth only) map 20psi that they've been working on...should have something this week hopefully..

[Skydive]

Originally Posted by dzenno

So now that I posted a log you requested seeing that's all you got? i guess I'll know better next time you ask for a log

Your log isn't what made me chortle.

[Skydive]

Originally Posted by dzenno

Skydive, here's another log, 15AFR spike at the onset of WOT, 12.5psi boost, fuel pressure is there so what's up? lol...i'm sure its fine if you just close your eyes to it a bit LOL

You're right. That looks like questionable but your data is incomplete. What were the parameters and settings?

I've heard some things about the way your car ran then, though I'm a relative neophyte to the community so I don't recall any of that. I certainly don't have any similar data from my own car, so in the absense of information have to say either the Procede has vastly improved or the car was not right.

-Michael

[dzenno]

Sorry to say but you're now just full of sh*t! How did I know you were going to turn it around exactly like that once I posted some logs at your request? It's useless talking to you seriously

How's my car running 100% now, directly speaking about AFRs, now with no changes to any hardware and only having flashed fuel settings instead of running them through the procede...get off my back and provide some logs and we can discuss further... I won't entertain responding to your posts anymore without any data from your own car taken as described above...

[Ilma]

Does anyone know the sampling rate on the Cobb datalogs?

The AFR's do look really stable post shift - just wondering how much averaging between datapoints might be going on?

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by dzenno

Sorry to say but you're now just full of sh*t! How did I know you were going to turn it around exactly like that once I posted some logs at your request? It's useless talking to you seriously

How's my car running 100% now, directly speaking about AFRs, now with no changes to any hardware and only having flashed fuel settings instead of running them through the procede...get off my back and provide some logs and we can discuss further... I won't entertain responding to your posts anymore without any data from your own car taken as described above...

So what if you enable factory misfire detection? Will your car still run "100%" then?

Also, do Cobb logs still show inaccurate boost data? If so, have you asked yourself why that is the case?

Shiv

[Brey335i]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Also, do Cobb logs still show inaccurate boost data? If so, have you asked yourself why that is the case?

Shiv

If you're suggesting that this might be a cause for concern please share...

[themyst]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

So what if you enable factory misfire detection? Will your car still run "100%" then?

Also, do Cobb logs still show inaccurate boost data? If so, have you asked yourself why that is the case?

Shiv

Yes the Cobb logs still show inaccurate boost data <5000 RPM on stage 2. Will you ever allow for timing logging on all six cylinders? No one's logging is perfect.

It is quite amusing how you mentioned misfires. That gave me a chuckle

[themyst]

Originally Posted by Brey335i

If you're suggesting that this might be a cause for concern please share...

If you want to see the boost curve, there is a "req. boost" parameter that will show you what the curve SHOULD be.

edit- you can poke around for boost leaks monitoring WGDC% Personally, I don't find logging actual boost all that useful since we all know what it SHOULD look like.

[OpenFlash]

Themyst-- think Dzenno can answer for himself. While you are here, maybe you could give your take on why the boost logs are inaccurate?

[themyst]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Themyst-- think Dzenno can answer for himself. While you are here, maybe you could give your take on why the boost logs are inaccurate?

the MAP sensor output voltage needs to be rescaled or something along those lines. Sorry, I don't know exactly why.

Can you please answer for the sake of your Procede users when you will implement timing logging on all six cylinders?