when i am looking at the graph i see 2 ign timing readings - iadv & iadvm.

i know one is the ecu and one is the modified. however i am not understanding which number was the actual plot of what the ACTUAL timing was during the pull.

example: 18 is the iadvm - 25.7 is the iadv. 18 is what my setting is for that rpm and load range.

if 25.7 is what is really running, why? if i have it set at 18 why is it running 25.7?

or is it running 18 and the ecu wants to run 25.7?

 

the iadvM is what ignition the UTEC is running on the car.. Since you didn't show your knock count, its hard to say.. However double check to make sure your actually hitting the load sites your expecting, under some circumstances, you may be different values because your falling into a different load site than you expect. the IADV is what the ECU is trying to tell the UTEC to do..


Its possible your pulling timing.. Are you running a wideband?? I don't see how you could even be attempting any of this without looking at knock and AFR's Its possible your running too lean to run that timing and getting detonation.. That also seems like quite a bit of timing advance..

 

Also remember that the advance is the actual advance.. not an offset.. but I think you made that connection already.

 

mj - i am looking at knock. i review that in the data log, before i draw the graph. it has always been 0. that is why i do not graph it, becuase it is just a straight line along the bottom.

i also cross reference the data log load site with the map load site to make sure that the timing is what the map is programmed to do at a particular site.

if i understand you correctly, the above graph shows that i am actually running less timing (the light blue line is actual. right?) than what the ecu would run (the dark blue line). if so, that makes sense. when i made this run, the power was significantly less than when the timing was controlled by the ecu.

being so new to this and to controlling timing thru a computer and not a distributor i f i understand this correctly when i lower the number i am retarding timing and when i raise it i am advancing it. when i made another pull using the same map above, but advancing the timing a point over what the ecu would have run in some load sites and rpm ranges, i produced the power graph posted on the other thread. it made more power than any other run so far.

thanks for all the help MJ. you accept donations?

 

Its always a negative value, so -27 is more advanced than -25.5 otherwise yeah, thats basically the deal..

BTW, I decided to switch over the compensation from using MAF frequency for load site to MAP since I have the MAP sensor installed.. I set it to my max MAP of 19psi.. There was one side effect, much more stable on the load sites (it doesnt jump forward than back)

Next step for me is closed loop boost and some other modifications, on humid days without the ABC (basically the stock boost solenoid with the lines) I get about 18.5-19psi max.. so I have to get the boost to go higher and control it with closed loop..

 

always negative? i hope you mean in application, because none of my numbers anywhere in the timing map are negative.

once i get a better handle on this, i am going to go MAP as well. I have the ur maf in mind.

 

If you look at your data logs, it always shows it as negative (BTDC).. However Its represented as a non-signed number in the UTEC map screen.. Simply because you likely would never put your timing After TDC.. LOL..

I quickly checked on my car to see if my timing and the set timing were being overridden in some way, but my IADVM seems to mirror the advance settings I've set closely (depending on where in the cell it is since it will smooth values between cells)

However I don't make alot of timing adjustments except at 5500-8000rpm

I am also using the MAP input instead of MAF input for my maps now.. It eliminates the anomolous hopping between load sites, it also allowed me to more easily tune for problems in the mid-range that are caused by my intake pipe and air filter

Since I upgraded my intercooler and intercooler pipes, I find my boost isn't as high as it once was.. so I'm going to experiment with the ABC, and start removing the restrictors in an attempt to get higher boost levels.. Once that works, I'll start tuning with closed loop boost control, My map was designed to work well with a spike to 22psi and taper to 20psi on my car.. right now I'm getting 19psi through redline on a warm day..

 

MalibuJack, Wizard_of_Evo,


What " .car " file are you using ? I've tried the one from the dataloglab site ( "Evo VIII 5 speed" ) and one I think i got from this forum "EVO.car". When I use the Evo.car file I get 30 hp higher graphs.

Main difference I can see in the car definitions are :

EVO.car
Evo relative loss

Gear 1 2 3 4 5 6

Loss % 22 20 18 8 10 10

Known set point hp : 112 Speed 115mph

Evo VIII 5 speed.car:
Gear 1 2 3 4 5 6

Loss % 15 10 7 0 3 6

Known set point hp : 110 Speed 115mph

I'm leaning towards believing the EVO.car definitions more because it doesn't have 0% loss for 4th gear the dataloglab one does.

Any ideas ?

 

i use the map from the data log site. the numbers are off anyway. just use the same one everytime.

 

Yeah, both of those are a little off.. I contributed the original Evo.CAR file based on the similar aerodynamics of the car with the JDM STi... As long as the gear ratios are correct for the transmission.. (doublecheck the one that your using has the same gearing as the USDM 5 speed car)

Your right, the 4th gear isn't quite 1:1 so it has a very small amount of loss 1%-3% which is the only real innacurracy in the CAR file.. Weight is something that will effect your performance numbers, same with tire size and the aerodynamics of the car.. None of us has tried to correlate the data to real-world numbers yet..

But third gear pulls on the 5 speed file, yield results "Close" to what you'd see on a dynojet (although it seems to read a little high from my experience)

The truth is, this information is valid as a tuning tool, so the numbers arent as important as the consistency of your results.. if you get very little variation in power and you make your runs consistently in the same gear, and you can run in similar conditions (or apply SAE Corrections) then any modifications you make, and tuning effort you make, will allow you to gauge a performance gain/loss that would ultimately tuning to be done on the street as well as it can be on a dyno (in fact in many cases better than on a dyno since your getting real results with real air and real roads)