Here is a good example of taking the lean spool or 'IPW' step at 7,000 rpm off:



Notice how the base run power curve drops off suddenly up top and the test run (after tune) does not.

This one is even a bit more extreme:



These are both bone stock EVO 9's with a custom dyno tune and using ECU boost control.

 

It is a really good HFC @ a decent price. It flows really well.

 

Interesting....i'll have to log it with it pushed up now and see what that does on the road first though.

 

That MIVEC map is a good one nj1266, I put all the 28.8 to 30 (the max) and the 3500 island also to 30, but the obvious difference is the change from 14.4 to 28.8 during spool up and midrange

 

I like this method. I took the route of a full lean spool disable and re tuned the entire fuel map for it. This seems like a much better solution.

 

I ended up disabling lean spool also. I found that it reduces boost spiking on spool-up and makes for a more gentle spool-up which I prefer. The trade-off in my case is that it takes about 100-200 rpm longer in 3rd gear to reach full boost (but I still hit full boost by 3400 rpm).

 

Today, I decided to fix the knock that I was getting stock and w/tbe. Since we have **** poor 91 octane gas, I had a hunch that it was the timing causing the knock.

Here is the timing stock timing that I logged with a TBE. All the tables are 3 logs. The numbers in brackets are average numbers and the others are max numbers:



And here is the knock that I was getting. The knock happened in the 5000+ range and was about 6-7 counts.



I changed the #2 high octane ignition map and copied it into #1 and #3. I chose this method because no one is certain about which method to use.

Then I went logging and recorded the following timing numbers:



There was virtually no knock in the logs based on the above timing numbers:



Tomorrow I want to add the RS mivec map to the equation.

My question is this:

Are the new timing numbers too aggressive for the RS mivec map? Should I pull some more timing?

 

The nice thing is that even though I pulled timing, the car did not lose much power. Infact, in some areas in the mid range it gained power. As I always say, sometimes less is more

 

I wouldn't pull more timing. The ECU does excessively retard once you get knock sums over about 3 though, which is why you can gain performance by cooperating with the knock control system, often across the whole range. An early knock to knock sum 6 for example will keep the timing 2 degrees down across quite a wide RPM range as it decays on a counter even though knock has abated.

 

What happened to your plots?

 

I have no idea, but I fixed it nevertheless.

 

That is exactly what I did...I looked @ the knock sum and saw 6-7 counts. That told me that 2 degrees ought to be pulled in the knock prone areas. When I tune, I give the car the timing that IT WANTS and not what I WANT. My friend and I had almost identical 05 Evo 8s. Mine liked 15* timing by redline and his liked 13* by redline. Everytime I tried to give his car more timing in the mid-to-top end it would object by knocking.

 

I have found most of the IX's dont like a large amount of timing up top like VIII's or even older DSM's will. The cammed ones like even less it seems above 6K than stock cams. The funny thing about that is they will take a little more near peak torque but trade it at high rpm. I always thought it would accept more at both but I cant deny the logs I am getting.

I hate to preach the "I dont like lean spool" doctrine, but I turned it off and retuned it all manually a long time ago because of alot of what there are now posted logs showing. The having end user adjustablility is the whole reason we like ECUflash anyway right? Why hinder it because of factory protocols?

JB

p.s. sorry for the minor threadjack Nj...I like what you are doing with you car thus far.

 

timing looks good NJ, might have to take a degree out at 4k with JDM mivec but, like you said, every car is different.

 

Today, I tested the impact of the JDM RS mivec map on my tune. I drove the car a lot today since I went to the bank, the pharmacy and then to pick up the pills. After that I went logging. The first and third log were virtually knock free. The 2nd had knock. Since it was the 2nd log that had knock, I am not that concerned about it. If there was knock in the 3rd log then I would be concerned. I think the car was too warm. I noticed that by monitoring the IAT gauge and I was having a hard time keeping the IAT temps below 85* F.

The car felt great during the logs. The butt dyno told me that I gained power. But then I looked @ the DLL power curve and there was almost little to no gain. I was miffed. Then I remembered one variable that I did not account for: weight. Yesterday, I logged with the gas indicator light on. Today I had a FULL tank of gas. After I subtracted the gas weight from yesterday's power curve calculation, I saw a difference in power. From now on, I will begin adjusting the weight of gasoline in the car to get a more accurate dyno plot. Usually, I keep the number @ 3263 lbs. I found out how inaccurate that could be today.

Here is the chart: