I just Run a MBC, spoolup is pretty much faster IMHO. I wonder if we would benefit from running the 18PSI actuator? That might make it spool some more.

 

Please dont condescend,

I made sure to mention it was 2 normal boost gauges and a Defi (that uses a MAP sensor). If there is no difference between restrictor pills in an MR and GSR (which coincidentally you cant prove either) why did I log so much extra boost? 23=23, I thought I had made that abundantly clear. As soon as I bought it, I noticed it would peg the stock gauge (which I knew to be less than accurate) so I went and tested it against all the aforementioned gauges. Making a statement like all Analog gauges is off is far worse than me saying my car boosted 23psi from the factory. Do you honestly believe that all companies that produce analog gauges are so incompetent that they cant calibrate an analog by a MAP sensor when the design and build them?

 

How accurate is the stock Gauge John?

 

I do not believe that the load target will have any effect if you have the error correction map zeroed out. I believe that the values in the error correction map are used to adjust the wastegate duty values; and what values are choosen in the error correction map are determined by the difference in the target load, and the current/actual load the engine is seeing. So if you had the error correction map zeroed out, that basically is going to make the target load useless.

 

The GSR, RS and MR HAVE the SAME BOOST system (pills, lines, solenoid, etc.). If you really want me to prove it I can.

Yes, its a fact that most analog gauges are off, to some degree. Even in the specs of most gauges, it says they can be off by +/- 1psi.

Please dont condescend,

 

Regardless a tolerance of +/- 1 psi is not 3 psi low as you asserted. The reason for this tolerance is due to atmospheric conditions where your initial pressure might be lower or higher (my old autometer I could see it vary on the 0 from time to time). Furthermore your the one that made the claim I incompetently checked my boost. Both of my gauges are verified by a MAP sensor equipped gauge, though I suspect next I will hear that the MAP sensor needs calibrated. If you have the time and cars to measure all the restrictor pills between the 3 models, I think that would honestly be a good piece of research.

I would honestly like to know what all the orifice measurements are on the restrictor pills so that I can track down why I have so much overboost capability from the factory. I could have a misadjusted actuator I suppose as far as that goes. In any event, my claim is substantiated by proof and witnesses. My car stock to stock was consistently 2 tenths faster than my friends GSR's. It wasnt until we tuned, added parts, and then retuned that things evened up.

High Psi- I couldnt tell you the exact amount that the stock gauge is off since it did in fact peg (1.5bar+). I havent used a MAP sensor to double check each of the cars I have been in to make sure that their gauges are correct as mine is, but I have seen a 1-2 pound (stock read higher) difference between the stock gauge and an aftermarket VDO that I tuned this weekend.

John

 

^^ kg/cm3 is what the stock MR gauge reads in...which while close to bar isn't exactly 1:1 (kg/cm3 is slightly higher)

 

Codgi, good point. I forgot that, as I recall its like 15 psi instead of 14.7 or something.

Edit- actually it looks like it was less:

http://mdmetric.com/tech/pressurecvt.htm

 

Yeah what I meant was that values in kg/cm3 are slightly less than the same value in bar so that 1.5kg/cm3 is less than 1.5bar but that chart there shows it nicely

 

Ok guys...I have an inline bleeder right before the BCS and need your help / advice. I basically did everything Evo_Kid said but was still not getting the boost I wanted, so I added a bleeder (w/ a #59 drilled hole) to let out more air and dialed the MWGDC way down -- starting at 20 until 4000rpm then scaling up to 35 at 7500. I have my boost offset at 130, desired engine load at 159.4, and corrections more or less like most (-13 to 13)....

I am now only hitting 24.3 psi peak in 3rd gear tapering to 18.8 @ 7K (zeitronix) , 5th gear is more like my signature.....

So my question is, should I increase my MWGDC numbers and use the offset + desired load to control boost curve or use MWGDC? The reason that I ask is that I would like to increase the boost a tad and improve the curve (I am actually considering going back to an MBC lol).

Also, a weird thing that happened lately was that my boost dropped a bit (1 psi) and the only thing that I did was put on snow rims and tires and put on the JCS type airlid (top and side cut) -- any idea why that would affect my peak boost? (I overcame this by changing the starting MWGDC point and offset -- previously 19 and 100 respectively.)

 

For my car I zeroed out the error correction, and just used the MWGDC to get the boost where I wanted it in 3rd gear. Then used the load values that I logged with evoscan to fill in the target load = offset + desired load; then filled the values back into the error correction map.

 

Thanks, I'll try that later today ....

 

Ok for folks with IXs that are recording real load (not calculated), what real loads are you seeing from 2500 - redline (and what is your boost peak and taper)? I would like to use this to tweak my max boost / load table. Right now I have it set at 280 and actually exceed in 4th + gears around 4K rpm....Thanks

 

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/at...9&d=1162839935

Mark from EMS Holland has pointed out that the dips we commonly see at 4500 often need an increase in duty cycle at that point. For those running a duty cycle that is flat through this area (or 100%) then this might explain this finding. It does fit with what I've seen on many logs.

Mark also put a scope on the solenoid output and found that the duty was at 100% just before the max duty was at 100 in the tables. This confirms that there is no benefit in going to 127. Additionally I thought I'd found a limit in the code but it seemed to be after a branch, however our SH2 CPUs process with delayed branching so they execute the instruction following the branch before the branch. So we have two bits of evidence to support not going over 100% on max duty cycle tables.

 

How do you log "real load". Is this done with Mitsulogger or can it be done with EvoScan. I have load checked but when I look at my Evoscan logs I see LoadMax 160 or Calc Load and thats all.

I found running the stock bcs that if I went WOT in 4th gear around 4000 rpms I would seriously overboost as well, my car had the stock boost pills in it and I would measure 24.5 psi on my AEM Truboost gauge / controller.