[Calvin@Vishnu]

No other form of testing puts a tune/engine through the ringer like road course evaluation. Drag racing only shows how your engine will stay together/make power for several seconds at a time. Even 1 mile airport runs don't tell the whole story. And the story is how the engine works in SUSTAINED loads and harsh environments. No cooldown between runs. No high octane race fuels. No one single throttle position.

With road course testing, you basically drive your car as hard as you can, as fast as you can, at every single throttle position for at twenty minutes of lap after lap after lap. Imagine running a quarter mile pass, threshold breaking to 40mph, accelerating up to 110mph and then doing this, over and over gain, 30 more times. That is the kind of stress an engine sees during just one run session of road course. Needless to say, many "tuner" cars will never be put to this test, let alone make it more than a few laps without limping into the paddock or detonating itself to expensive pieces.

This past weekend Shiv met up with zsapphire7 here:


It's a pretty big track at 3 miles long. Not quite like the N-ring but it's a few thousand miles closer to us! Here's a instructional video to give you an idea of what the course looks like from behind the wheel:

Test Car Details:
2007 335 coupe
Full suspension
AE exhaust
Catted DPs
DCI
Procede w/PWM Meth
91oct and 75/25% meth/water mix
14-15psi of boost
0% ignition correction (on meth map)

~95F (35C) track temp

Here's a small portion of one of the 20 minute long datalog. It is from the 4th or 5th session of the day. Around 2PM when track temps were the hottest.



A few notable things:

1) Intake air temps ranged from 29 to 44 deg C (84-111F). This is with a stock intercooler. The hottest temps were NOT under full boost/full meth flow. Instead, they were during the period of partial throttle/mild boost when meth was barely flowing (490-550 sec). During this time where meth was barely flowing, IAT was a victim of the stock FMIC and high ambient temps. Above 40C, the DME starts to aggressively reduce ignition advance setpoint. Fortunately, within 2 seconds of full boost/full meth, intake temps drop quickly to the low 30s. Which is BELOW ambient temp. Something even the best air-to-air intercoolers cannot do. And more importantly,at full boost/meth, IATs stay low in the 29-32 C range. They don't creep up with time. A perfectly balanced system.

2) During each ENTIRE 20 minute session running 15psi, the PWM meth kit only consumed ONLY 0.3 gallons. For a washer fluid bottle that holds nearly 1.5 gallons, that's a lot of track time! By comparison, our old PPS meth kit which used a single M7 nozzle (half of what the current PWM system uses), would consume a full 1 gallon during a 20 minute run session. And offer no measurable improvements to cooling or knock suppression.

3) Not only did the PWM kit kit consume less fuel, but so did the engine. By lunchtime (after 4 sessions), the fuel tank was only down to just under 1/2 full. Prior to running methanol, the owner of car reports that the tank was close to empty by this time of day. Keeping intake temps low and knock retard nonexistent prevented the DME from "fuel dumping" and knocking back timing advance as it would normally do when conditions take a turn for the worse.

Another close up...


1) In this log, you can see the onset of full boost/meth drop IATs from 39C (102F) to 30C (82F) almost immediately (within ~1.5 seconds). More interesting is the last portion of this log view that shows a period of sustained partial throttle (6-8psi) where Methanol DC% output (blue line plotted in bottom-most chart along with raw Methanol Flow) is only ~1/2 of what is seen at full boost. With actual flow cut approx in half, there is STILL enough flow to maintain a 30C, lower-than-ambient, IAT. Which is ideal for max performance once full throttle is applied since the DME wont see the 40+ deg C temps that would cause it to retard timing/fuel dump for those first 1-2 seconds under full boost. Being able to only inject 1/2 maximum flow under these prolonged periods of partial throttle (ie, in large diameter corners) also contributes to the exceptionally low overall methanol consumption. A conventional basic PPS meth system would be dumping meth unnecessarily during these periods. Which may be good enough for some. For most others, it's just poor tuning.

Another logged bit...


1) Here's an example of the typical timing log during these 20 minute racing sessions. No ignition retard. High timing values mean low fuel consumption and lower exhaust temps. Combined with the low 29-30C IAT temps, there was a ton of consistent, lap after lap power.

2) It's also interesting to notice that the Procede actually decreases DC% to the meth injector at high RPM as the VE of the engine rolls of. By ~7000rpm, it's nearly 1/2 of what it is in the meaty fat portion of the power band. Yet, even at this reduced flow, IATs are managed perfectly. As is ignition timing. In fact, for the entire day, Autotuning aggression level stayed between 0-1. And the times it climbed to 1 weren't even caused by knock retard (sudden ignition drop outs) but rather a DME reduced timing target caused by high 40-44C intake temps accumulated during periods of sustained partial boost/low (or no) meth flow.

It should be noted that we did NOT test a conventional PPS meth kit on the zsapphire7's car. It has only run with this PWM meth kit. So the 1 gallon per session meth consumption rate is based mainly upon feedback from other users who have run PPS meth kits on the roadcourse. This will vary from driver to driver and set-up to set-up. But it relates well with the results i've seen myself running our shop car at Thunderhill last year with our old PSS kit (running a single m7 jet). We didn't think to keep those logs at the time. But I can honestly say that they didn't look nearly as good as zsapphire7's logs. Despite running our car on a cooler day WITH an upgraded intercooler and a full catless exhaust system. And we had to cut each 25min session short for a meth filling pit stop

BIG THANKS to sapphire7 for letting us collect data from his car!

[Calvin@Vishnu]

Just in case no one has every seen a 20 minute datalog in racing conditions...




I wish sapphire7's laptop didn't crash at the end of the day when he was logging a session without meth But based upon other tests we've done in the past on cars with stock intercoolers and in racing conditions, we'd expect to see the highest IATs under WOT/full boost. Easily over 80C (175F) with very little power and on the verge of limping at the end of every straight

[pentaxis]

Fantastic data set. It would have been nice to do a side by side comparison, but cest la vie. The fact that the PWM system is so much more efficient at managing the volume of meth that is used is a huge plus. Less refills means less hassle, and less overall cost of ownership over time as you aren't paying for wasted meth.

The only disappointing thing about this kit is that it makes me regret having an intercooler.. (kidding of course)

[twinturbopg]

really good stuff guys...nice data-logging, especially the entire 20min session on the track. This might have been answered before or I might have missed it but did the car have a Oil Cooler? If so, stock?

In the meantime keep on plugging away guys and THANK YOU for doing the testing on the track with multiple 20min sessions, that really helps!

PROcede FTW!

[Calvin@Vishnu]

We forwarded our testing data to Richard Lamb, founder/owner of ERL (Aquamist). Not only is he considered THE pioneer of modern water/meth injection in racing engines applications, he's also British and quite bright when it comes to the effects of methanol injection on EFI systems Here's what he wrote in response to some of the misinformation being spread about on this forum:

Close loop fuel control

N54’s DME is capable of correcting air fuel ratio in real time by means of employing two wide band oxygen sensors. It is a giant step forward to the conventional narrow band sensor. They have also introduced a new generation of high pressure piezo-based fuel delivery system, allowing more precise control of air/fuel ratio. The DME can vary the duty cycle as well as the lift to enable wider dynamic range compared to conventional fuel injection systems.

It is a known fact that homogenizing the in-cylinder air/fuel distribution enables fast and uniform burn-rate. This allows the ignition timing to be mapped and optimised in advance leaving some minor trim to combat knock threshold due to octane variations. This close loop control algorithm works well within its designed limits.

A close loop system relies on feedback signals to correct the deviation from a target value. A large swing from target is often requires a larger correction. There is a finite delay however small between feedback and correction, larger swing increases the loop delay. It could be a few engine cycles to a few hundreds. During this time, AFR is not consistent resulting in irregular burn-rate. Any deviation from a predicted burn-rate requires ignition timing trim. Unfortunately this can only be achieved from receiving signal from the knock sensor.

Injecting a large amount of methanol at low boost and rely on the DME to make fuel and ignition trim is not ideal. You are in effect riding on knock due to unstable air/fuel ratio. This is when a PWM-valve system can make a real difference compared to an all on/all off system. Some may argue this is acceptable, so be it. There is also a possibility the large amount of methanol at low load can saturate the charge air and droplet will reform and produce larger droplets.

The next predicted sequence of events is compelling and not too acceptable. One can never guarantee each cylinder receives the same amount of methanol. The DME cannot read accurately which cylinder is lean or rich from two WBO sensor. Chances are it will take an average and trim fuel to each individual bank. This means air/fuel ratio one each 3 cylinder bank is a compromise. Injecting a metered amount of methanol based on load will minimise this effect because charge air contains a more uniform amount of methanol through out the load range.

How far does one want to go to achieving this? No nearly far enough on this platform. There are many methanol delivery systems out there but if one looks closer, only the PWM–valve based system can deliver a consistent amount of atomised methanol based on engine load. An on/off system with a dynamic range ratio (DRR) of 1 and non-linear PPS system of ~2 compare to a PWM-V system with a minimum DRR of 10:1. By all means the Vishnu/Aquamist system is not perfect but it is a giant step forward, enable a tuned engine to run higher power with less stress and more consistently. In the end you get what you pay for.

[Calvin@Vishnu]

Originally Posted by twinturbopg

really good stuff guys...nice data-logging, especially the entire 20min session on the track. This might have been answered before or I might have missed it but did the car have a Oil Cooler? If so, stock?

In the meantime keep on plugging away guys and THANK YOU for doing the testing on the track with multiple 20min sessions, that really helps!

PROcede FTW!

Thanks! The car does indeed have an oil cooler. In fact, it has two! And oil temps refused to budge above 260.

[Brey335i]

Originally Posted by Calvin@Vishnu

he's also British

Automatic smartness right there

Great results guys and I appreciate the logs even though I have no idea what's really going on

[kjrulz]

Originally Posted by Calvin@Vishnu

Thanks! The car does indeed have an oil cooler. In fact, it has two! And oil temps refused to budge above 260.

This thread is great and terrible at the same time. It's far more than just unfortunate that there wasn't a log for a non-meth run...you might have finally had a new customer with me.

[Joshboody]

Meth injection is primarily based on load, but rpm is more important if the goal is to meter per load. Of course the increased rpm the reduced meth/load. We sustain a fairly steady load for maybe 3,000rpms. I hope the user can customize this in the future.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by kjrulz

This thread is great and terrible at the same time. It's far more than just unfortunate that there wasn't a log for a non-meth run...you might have finally had a new customer with me.

The idea of a non meth run is nice. But the reality of it is that you would need to drop boost to 10psi or else it would feel miserable on the track. And even then, you would only get a few laps in before it started to obviously protest due to extremely high IATs. And even before that point, it would drive inconsistently. Those guys who frequent the racetrack and run pump gas with stock FMICs now what I mean.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Joshboody

Meth injection is primarily based on load, but rpm is more important if the goal is to meter per load. Of course the increased rpm the reduced meth/load. We sustain a fairly steady load for maybe 3,000rpms. I hope the user can customize this in the future.

Meth injection is metered by rpm and load primarily. And then corrected for by IAT, actual throttle blade angle, and a couple other input variables. It will be user mappable eventually for those who want to fiddle.

[kjrulz]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

The idea of a non meth run is nice. But the reality of it is that you would need to drop boost to 10psi or else it would feel miserable on the track. And even then, you would only get a few laps in before it started to obviously protest due to extremely high IATs. And even before that point, it would drive inconsistently. Those guys who frequent the racetrack and run pump gas with stock FMICs now what I mean.

I go to Lime Rock all the time... I know what you mean.

Anyways, it's not just nice. Zsapphire's car has some extra goodies that a typical car doesn't have and without some sort of control or baseline, I revert back to my original post.

[Brey335i]

Originally Posted by kjrulz

This thread is great and terrible at the same time. It's far more than just unfortunate that there wasn't a log for a non-meth run...you might have finally had a new customer with me.

Everyone knows about the benefits of meth. What probably would have been more beneficial to the doubters would be a log of a standard meth injection setup versus the PWM...

[kjrulz]

Originally Posted by Brey335i

Everyone knows about the benefits of meth. What probably would have been more beneficial to the doubters would be a log of a standard meth injection setup versus the PWM...

I agree that would have been great, but even in this case, it would have been just as important to see the differences between his car without meth and then with PWM. We could have atleast compared the differences to some of the other logs we have, as similar as we could have gotten. I say this because I highly doubt we'll EVER get a PPS vs. PWM test.

[zsapphire7]

Originally Posted by Calvin@Vishnu

I wish sapphire7's laptop didn't crash at the end of the day when he was logging a session without meth But based upon other tests we've done in the past on cars with stock intercoolers and in racing conditions, we'd expect to see the highest IATs under WOT/full boost. Easily over 80C (175F) with very little power and on the verge of limping at the end of every straight

I was really dissapointed too . I did about 4 laps without meth and switched maps on the fly to the meth map. Plus i was pushing the car those runs and got at 208 i believe that session. As soon as i got back into the pits, I tried to save and got the blue screen of death....

The difference between meth and no meth is night and day. The car felt sluggish and tired, especially the top end, and it actually chokes from time to time.... Ive been noticing on straights, inbetween quick gear changes the car seems to hesitate, pull timing, and then get back on. However once I switched back to the meth maps, the car would run smoothly. I think gas consumption is also a big difference. Typically on a 20 min session I run through about 5gal (given 4gal =~ 1/4 tank). I was seeing about 3gals/ 20 min session. Just by looking at my own logs and having run the PWM system for an entire trackday, I can say that im very impressed with mid throttle application and quick transitions on and off boost. The response is quick and allows for smooth rolling of power on as i power out of corners. One last thing i would like to point out is consistant power. One of the "penalties" of having a turbo car is going out with 350whp on lap 1 and 2, and then 300whp or less in laps 5-6 simply because of heatsoak. Imagine how hard it is to learn how to drive consistantly and push the limits of where you can get on the throttle in a car that can swing over 50whp over a couple of laps. Anyone who loves to drive on road courses knows how important it is to have consistant torque to the wheels that follow your throttle angle.

Originally Posted by Calvin@Vishnu

Thanks! The car does indeed have an oil cooler. In fact, it has two! And oil temps refused to budge above 260.

Actually near the end of the day, i was able to push the car up to 270F. I think I really need to make some air ducts for the oil coolers asap!

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by kjrulz

I agree that would have been great, but even in this case, it would have been just as important to see the differences between his car without meth and then with PWM. We could have atleast compared the differences to some of the other logs we have, as similar as we could have gotten. I say this because I highly doubt we'll EVER get a PPS vs. PWM test.

As mentioned before, zsapphire7's laptop suffered from a blue screen of death in the last session as he was saving the no-meth log. So all we have to go on is a driving impression of what it was like running meth vs. no meth. Obviously we know what to expect.

The point that Calvin was making in this thread had to do with how perfect the logs looked and how much less meth was consumed than with conventional PPS system. I think at this point, most reasonably informed people don't question that metering meth as you would fuel (which is what is) is better than simply dumping it as you would shotgun a beer.

[DaFish]

Originally Posted by kjrulz

This thread is great and terrible at the same time. It's far more than just unfortunate that there wasn't a log for a non-meth run...you might have finally had a new customer with me.

Given the amount of focus on this kit, and the "debate" on the facts and myths" of PWM kits... to NOT have a comparison between no meth and the PPS kit in the same session is disappointing to say the least. I think this "miss" will RAGE the debate.....

Team Vishnu, we get the benefits of PWM. We need some comparison data between your new and old kit. If you don't want to uninstall and reinstall... I am sure you can find 2 similar car with similar mods, new kit and old kit on the same track and race for 20 min and compare the consumption and logs with the new firmware in both. I am sure you would have lots of volunteers.

The comparison I would be interested in seeing is:

1) Track 20 min session
2) Spirited street driving

For meth consumption, smoothness of power delivery, dynos of the 2 with and without meth on. From what I read, the results speak for themselves.

[boom]

Originally Posted by Brey335i

Everyone knows about the benefits of meth. What probably would have been more beneficial to the doubters would be a log of a standard meth injection setup versus the PWM...

Write all the novels you want, the difference btw this and your basic boost activated kit would be negligible in terms of the ultimate metric, track times. At $800-$1200 more than a standard kit it'll take a ton of meth and gas to make up for the efficiency gains touted here. I'm puzzled that you didn't set up a simple kit and log it for a direct comparison. Z obviously had support form Vishnu. I'll bet the switch would have take minutes and the direct comParison would have been definitive.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by boom

Write all the novels you want, the difference btw this and your basic boost activated kit would be negligible in terms of the ultimate metric, track times. At $800-$1200 more than a standard kit it'll take a ton of meth and gas to make up for the efficiency gains touted here. I'm puzzled that you didn't set up a simple kit and log it for a direct comparison. Z obviously had support form Vishnu. I'll bet the switch would have take minutes and the direct comParison would have been definitive.

The price of our PWM meth kit itself is $795. So i'm not sure how a standard kit can be $800-1200 cheaper? So it would be great if you could stop spreading misinformation.

And if you believe a basic boost activated kit will drive as well in terms of the ultimate metric, your ultimate metric must only involve driving in 2 throttle positions, OFF or FULL throttle.

BTW, Z was signed up for this track day. It was the day prior to the event that I asked him if I could come by and collect some datalogs. If I had rented out the whole track for the purpose of methanol system testing, it's safe to say that I'd be swapping out different kits and testing different injection strategies. But this testing would have likely been on our shop car, not a customer car. And not with customer who just wants to spend a fun day driving a the track.

Shiv

[themyst]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

The price of our PWM meth kit itself is $795. So i'm not sure how a standard kit can be $800-1200 cheaper?

And if you believe a basic boost activated kit will drive as well in terms of the ultimate metric, your ultimate metric must only involve driving in 2 throttle positions, OFF or FULL throttle.

Shiv

I don't see why you can't just include the cost of the charge pipe in the total cost of your new meth kit. It's "required" per your website. If that's the case, the total cost is $795 + $320 = $1115.

The problem here is 95% of your prospects will never take their car on a road course, and will happily spend the great majority of their time in vacuum or WOT.

And even on a road course, the benefits are minimal at best. You're showing us logs and driving experiences of customers who never installed a meth kit on their cars before and the testimonial of a vendor with the same ulterior motives as yourself.

Bet a properly dialed in conventional meth kit with progressive controller will show the same benefits for a fraction of the cost as boom indicated.

Show us a road course datalog of a car running a conventional meth kit with progressive controller please, thanks.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by themyst

I don't see why you can't just include the cost of the charge pipe in the total cost of your new meth kit. It's "required" per your website. If that's the case, the total cost is $795 + $320.

It's only required if you want a well-fitting "plug and play" fully underhood solution. If you want to cobble something together yourself, you can drill holes in your factory charge pipe, buy a $100 elbow, or bend/bang on your aftermarket chargepipe. I suspect those in the market for a $250 meth kit would be okay with this

[zsapphire7]

curious... is it possible to lower the psi activation level for the meth? It would be nice if meth came on a bit earlier in some cases to prevent relative high(40C) IATs when not at WOT. Looking at the datalogs, a good majority of the course only has a few spurts of meth.