Nice dude! Props from Dave...wow

Maybe should start buttering up now for a spot on the dyno at the shootout

 

It put down 472WHP/486WTQ on his dyno during that pull. If you look at the simulator you'll notice a bit of a bump at the end of the pull (could be from the datalog data being slighlty off or it could be from the effects of the smoothing). If the bump was tamed a bit more, he'd be closer to 475WHP/485WTQ on the simulator. Its not perfect, but 'perfectly' acceptable. Hopefully Bryan @ GST Motorsports and Dave Buschur will be able to supply us with some dyno pulls and THEN do a street pull on the same tune/same day to get a really good comparison between the actual dyno results vs. the simulator settings. They've both done so much thus far that I'm starting to feel really bad asking for anything else

We did a comparison with my friend Bill's Evo a few weeks ago on a Mustang Dyno and he did EXACTLY the same on the street as he did on the dyno. If I can get a few more A/B comparisons from Mustang shops I won't even bother with modifying the formulas. Must....have.....data! lol

 

Well i know i have had my car on AMS's Dyno Jet A LOT and my street pulls in DLL ON FLAT GROUND are always very close.. And when i use the 1.10 correction factor on this software you made it puts it right where my DLLs are. "maybe make the dyno jet a 1.10 correction??"

You are the man for making this Jack, much props goes out to you from me thats for sure! I was missing my DLL dyno data since i went to AEM but now i have them back! If only there was a way of transfering the data over faster then manually doing it every .1 seconds in my data logs..... it takes me about 5 or so minutes to make a graph doing it the way i have to enter the data... But hey it can be done now thanks to you

 

Well I had about 4-5 different dynojet datalogs from users from totally different dynojets and they were between 1.13-1.16 correction ratio so I just went with the middle of the road. If I can get MORE Dynojet data from users who have their evoscan datalog while strapped on the dyno AND the actual HP/TQ values recorded during that pull, I can try to get a better average. Thats why I added the USER corrections for now so people can tailor the simulator to match their local dyno cuz I knew it wouldnt be exact for everyone.


I'll work on a way to make it easier.

 

I think you made a very good decision leaving the values where u can adjust. As without it i wouldnt have been able to get a reliable reading that i was getting with my DLL Vs the dyno jet that I dyno my car on.

 

What are the gear ratios for a 2006 MR and any thoughts on which smoothing factor to use?

Currently my peak power goes from 370 whp (smoothing =1) to 340 whp (smoothing =4) ?

What is really interesting is that i can see that my tune needs a little attention in the 5000 - 6000 range.

Thanks!!!

 

there is nothing for you to change with the gear ratios, just the car selection and the gear selection. when you data doesn't jump all over the place on the graph, all wavy, that is where you need to set the smoothing.

 

Yeah, the gear ratios for every factory evo from '03-'06 are preset. Just choose your vehicle from the dropdown list and it enters your gear ratio's automatically. With the smoothing, just start at '1' and work your way up until it starts to be more linear. Don't over-smooth it or you'll hide your problem area's that need attention. Depending on the file size, most smoothing lands between 2-6, I haven't needed to smooth past 6 on any sample logs as of yet.

 

Jamie / Aryder -- Thanks for the guidance. So I noticed that I don't seem to be capturing nearly as much data as others (my laptop must be sloooooowwww), will that be impacting my hp data? Are there ways to improve the log rates (other than buying another laptop) ?

 

Go into Evoscan's 'LOGGING' tab at the top and:

Enable- Super Logging Speed
Disable- Multi-threading
Disable- Log to Screen

Those adjustments, along with minimal items being logged simultaneously with inprove the file resolution a great deal. As long as your pull is over 40 rows of data you will get roughly the same results as anyone else. Kind of why I tried to make the program so well-rounded

 

Thanks Jamie -- the log I was using was only 23 rows of data from 2875 to 7312 rpm....I guess that is why the curves may not be as smooth as expected ....

 

on several of my logs, i just checked rpm, tps, and wideband and i got over 200 rows of data and this was without changing super logging or any of that stuff. overall i think this is a great program. i entered one of my logs from january/february and man have i made an improvement on the tune once i got a better idea on how to tune compared to what i knew 6 months ago.

 

Generally keeping the data items being logged to less than 10 and having the SUPER LOGGING SPEED enabled and the MUTI-THREADING disabled is all you'd ever really need to do.

When I'm logging my 'tune' for knock and stuff I do everything possible to get the best resolution possible but for a simple hp/tq snapshot its not as critical with my simulator setup. As time goes by I'm sure I will figure out better ways to increase the resolution while still making it usable for the majority of file sizes (with the help of some of you smart people lol).

 

Colt4g63.....you sent me the same .stf file again instead of the .txt file lol. Also, if you wouldn't mind telling me the following info that would be cool so I can get an accurate reflection of your cars results:

• Tire diameter (or tire size, either works)
• Vehicle Weight
• Passengers weight
• Gear used during Pull in datalog

 

Well, some good news. The next revision will have increased resolution from 250 RPM increments to 100 RPM increments and display RPM ranges from 2500-10,000 RPM and the graph will autosize to fit the pull you loaded. I may add a tire diameter calculator to the program too so users can quickly estimate their tire diameter from their tire size. Just need some more time to convert all of the formula's. Maybe a day or two.

Before anyone asks, I was going to have it do it in 50 RPM increments but it makes the amount of smoothing required just way too involved with VERY little improvement to the results....very little. At 100 RPM the resolution is already two and a half times better than v5.2 is now.

The beauty of this new setup is that it should work with all file sizes still but you will benefit by doing things to increase the resolution of your datalog.