[OpenFlash]

Hi guys,
Here's a follow-up thread to the previous thread posted last week showing how the PROcede adjusts/controls timing. It seems that just about everyone understood it and that the ill-fated debate was finally put to rest. Well, everyone except the Mike/Terry entity at BMS who presented a lot of misinformation and odd counterpoints with no supporting data.

But to be fair, they did bring up one semi-valid point. They noted that, when running the Stg 3 tune at 100% Ignition correction, the DME Ignition Advance at 5000rpm wasn't as high as it was when run in stock tune. This suggested, among other things (effects of IAT, rate of accel, etc,.) that there could be some degree (pardon the pun) of reactive knock retard at this RPM. This is certainly possible given that boost is at 15psi and that all testing was done on our miserable 91 octane.

So we went back to road testing earlier today. Still on 91oct. To refresh your collective memories, there is what a datalog looks like on a stock tune:

Test 1: Stock Tune!
Well, actually it's at the minimum user torque setting (10%) since CANbus functionality is disabled in valet mode.
Comments:
Pay special note to CAN DME Ignition advance which basically represents the ignition advance curve "target" of a stock tune. You'll notice that ignition advance is around 7.5 deg (give or take a degree) up until 5500rpm when it slowly ramps up to 10 deg by 6000rpm. And then up to 13.5 deg by 6700rpm. This is an example of a tune that doesn't rely on much (or any) reactive knock retard during a full throttle pull. Needless to say, this is how BMW wants the engine to run. And if this is the goal at just 6-9psi, you can bet that it would/should be the ideal goal at 14-16psi.

And now for the revised Stg 3 tune....

Test 2: Revised (7-23) Stg 3 map at 100% Ignition Correction (default value)

Comments:
You'll notice that the new Stg 3 tune follows the stock tune's DME Advance curve quite nicely with very minor deviation which suggests that reactive knock retard is minimal. Even at the 5000rpm region which previously showed ~2 degrees less advance than it did with the previous test.

So what did we change in the map? It was very minor. If you look at the PROcede's Ignition Correction (Ign Cor) logs, you'll see that it now retards ~3 degrees of timing at 5000rpm instead of ~2.5 deg as it did before with the previous map in the previous test. So yes, less than 1 degree of extra retard is enough to make a 2 deg difference in DME timing. Which is understandable given the fact that DMEs respond to knock aggressively. This is due to the basic engine tuning FACT that it takes more reactive ignition retard to eliminate knock (once it occurs) than the amount of proactive ignition retard needed to prevent knock in the first place.

So thanks to everyone for reading these tech threads. I hope it helps everyone distinguish between fact and competitor-driven fiction. And thanks, of course, to Mike/Terry for giving me another opportunity to show what the PROcede does compared to other tunes that don't even proactively control timing at all.

Cheers,
shiv

PS. The new revised map will be posted up (along with the new software/firmware) that I've been promising very soon. With the new stuff, users will be able to conduct testing and post results just like this.

[scalbert]

What I am sure will be asked is if Test 2 could be conducted ten times and what would the successive runs show.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by scalbert

What I am sure will be asked is if Test 2 could be conducted ten times and what would the successive runs show.

And with the intercooler taped up with cardboard

[enrita]

i still dont see any differences since a Stage 3 and a JB3 map 7 on the same boost level and mods run exactly the same ..... so what gives this timing control more ? does not make the car faster anyway.

[munters]

This is not about fastest or not.

[enrita]

so what is this about?

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by enrita

so what is this about?

Consistent performance and long term engine durability. And also proper tuning obviously.

To put this in perspective, with no active form of timing control, you are running an incomplete tune that relies heavily on the DME reactive knock control system to keep the pistons in one piece. While Big Tom's procede tune is complete and actually conserative (although it can be set more aggressively as illustrated by jpsimon in another thread).


Shiv

[enrita]

ah ok . get it now....

[enrita]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Consistent performance and long term engine durability. And also proper tuning obviously.

To put this in perspective, with no active form of timing control, you are running an incomplete tune that relies heavily on the DME reactive knock control system to keep the pistons in on piece. While Big Tom's procede tune is complete and actually conserative (although it can be set more aggressively).

Shiv


Shiv

[jpsimon]

Why the laughter? just curious

[Ramos]

Will 7-23 maps be different for Stages 1 and 2?

[enrita]

why? because there is absolutely no data to back the claims up .. so its just sales/marketing crap.

[jpsimon]

timing control is sales/marketing crap? gotcha......

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Ramos

Will 7-23 maps be different for Stages 1 and 2?

Yep... just the tiny change to the timing map that I mentioned. You probably won't feel any difference with the seat of your pants. But it is a tune improvement.

Shiv

[enrita]

Originally Posted by jpsimon

timing control is sales/marketing crap? gotcha......

since it does not make the car faster is totally marketing .... i have been driving 25000 km with jb3 with no limps at all and my turbos are fine.... so whats the difference and positive points with these claims?

[Mark313]

Originally Posted by enrita

since it does not make the car faster is totally marketing .... i have been driving 25000 km with jb3 with no limps at all and my turbos are fine.... so whats the difference and positive points with these claims?

wow you just don't get it, do you? it's not all just about fastest quarter mile times and dyno queens. timing control is about safety. it's still too early to tell what will happen to cars with tunes that do not control timing. but i would rather have a tune that does control timing then ride the dme's knock sensors.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by enrita

since it does not make the car faster is totally marketing .... i have been driving 25000 km with jb3 with no limps at all and my turbos are fine.... so whats the difference and positive points with these claims?

Before digging your heels in the sand, please understand what is going on in the engine. Having a reactive timing approach is VERY different than having a proactive timing approach. Both will often yield similar output numbers. Where they will differ is in consistency of the output AND in terms of internal engine stress.

Every time you react to knock and only then retard timing, you are allowing detonation to occur for a number of engine events. The severity of the knock and the duration of this over-advance condition is unknown. But it is, without a doubt, harmful to your engine in the long run. How long of a run? Who knows. These cars are young and no on has done a tear down of their engine to see the state of their pistons.

It's one thing to be happy with your tune (and I'm glad you are). But it's another thing to completely disregard other other issues that are far more important than actual power output.

Regards,
Shiv

[FotiosF90M5]

Enrita...what is the purpose of you even being in this thread???...besides making yourself look very ignorant. Are you saying that engine safety accounts for nothing? Get your head out of Terry's ass and just enjoy your tune.

[enrita]

[MisterSkiMask]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Every time you react to knock and only then retard timing, you are allowing detonation to occur for a number of engine events.

Regards,
Shiv

Is it known how long it takes this engine to "react" to a knock event?

[enrita]

Originally Posted by fotios335i

Enrita...what is the purpose of you even being in this thread???...besides making yourself look very ignorant. Are you saying that engine safety accounts for nothing? Get your head out of Terry's ass and just enjoy your tune.

Ignorant?? thanks a lot for that.... engine safety? dont you maybe know bmw has that in place? jeez...

[roozie2001]

Originally Posted by enrita

so what is this about?

Shiv the whole deal is your saying(and please correct me if im wrong) with the Vishnu procede CPS offsetting timing is changed in predictable boost, rpm, ait, etc environments and that it stops knock before knock happens.

What BMS is saying is that the DME predicts knock itself?? or are they saying that when knock actually happens the DME does a good enough job of controlling timing itself. Also BMS claims that the CPS offsetting is adapted to and learned by the ECU therefore rendering the CPS offsetting pointless?

Do i have any of this correct? and if im a complete retard on the subject please keep the bashing to a minimum cuz i am a sensetive soul and u wouldnt want any of this to happen.

P.S .... if the DME does an amazing job of correcting timing and keeps knock to a bare minimum would that be harmful? and are we talking about engine life would go from say 99% of how long it should last to say 96% or 99% to 75% ?