Let's discuss spark advance - Page 4 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


MEGAsquirt A place to collectively sort out this megasquirt gizmo

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-27-2012, 04:18 PM   #61
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Leafy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NH
Posts: 9,037
Total Cats: 99
Default

Jason, thats pretty much what we're saying already I just dont think anyone said MBT. Its certainly what I was talking about, there should be no need for a plot of torque vs map. Mainly because thats a really damn hard plot to make since the dyno wont know the map and your ecu wont know what they dyno is reading, so you'll have to make the plot externally assuming you can even get the dyno to output the data in a format thats easy to manipulate. Its much easier to look at what cell you're in and look at the live dyno output and keep adding timing until torque stops increasing.
Leafy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 04:24 PM   #62
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,169
Total Cats: 1,875
Default

Yes, Jason enjoys cluttering up my threads by re-stating the obvious and attempting to divert them away from the principle topic.

Of course, getting onto a dyno and optimizing my ignition map would be fairly easy (if I could find a load-bearing dyno around here- this is DynoJet country apparently.) Doing so, however, would not answer my underlying question vis-a-vis why we all seem to be stuck in this habit of using grossly sub-optimal spark advance maps, and how the maps that we've all been passing back and forth all these years got to be so poorly shaped in the first place.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 04:32 PM   #63
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
 
hustler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,107
Total Cats: 351
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
Doing so, however, would not answer my underlying question vis-a-vis why we all seem to be stuck in this habit of using grossly sub-optimal spark advance maps, and how the maps that we've all been passing back and forth all these years got to be so poorly shaped in the first place.
At 14.7:1 I get detonation on my stock VVT engine at 35* advance and higher (stock-ish cam advance in that area) and saw an increase in fuel economy by dropping down to ~31* advance. I get what you're saying, but also remember that some of us are getting beyond 30mpg at 75mph+ (34mpg in my case), and that's better than stock.

I'm going to do some experimenting next weekend on the dyno and see what happens.
hustler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 04:39 PM   #64
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Leafy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NH
Posts: 9,037
Total Cats: 99
Default

But is your trigger latency correct?
Leafy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 04:46 PM   #65
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
 
hustler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,107
Total Cats: 351
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafy View Post
But is your trigger latency correct?
Is that a problem on the factory NB sensor? I thought the NB sensor meant I didn't have to jack with it.
hustler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 05:18 PM   #66
Murderator
iTrader: (76)
 
18psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 35,728
Total Cats: 2,481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
Mind sharing the ignition map?
.
Sure, here:



Keep in mind this was from a long time ago. Looking at it now, I plan to do a LOT of things differently with my current 01. Also considering the engine was built, I could have ran like 30% more timing just about everywhere, but it was "good enough" and I was lazy lol
Attached Thumbnails
Let's discuss spark advance-00-nb.png  
18psi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 05:34 PM   #67
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,169
Total Cats: 1,875
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hustler View Post
Is that a problem on the factory NB sensor? I thought the NB sensor meant I didn't have to jack with it.
It's not a "problem", it's just an adjustment. The total end-to-end latency (from the sensor to the spark plug) will be slightly different on every configuration, and this also includes the ECU itself.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 05:38 PM   #68
Senior Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lompoc, CA
Posts: 579
Total Cats: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafy View Post
...Mainly because thats a really damn hard plot to make since the dyno wont know the map ....
Find a new dyno if this is the case. Mustang dynos, at least the new-ish ones, have an internal map sensor with a hose to T into somewhere on the engine.
baron340 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 05:40 PM   #69
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,169
Total Cats: 1,875
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 18psi View Post
Just looked at all my maps from the 2000:

I ran 40* like a boss. So maybe I wasn't that retarded
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18psi View Post
Sure, here:

So, when you say "I ran 40 like a boss" what you actually mean is "I ran high 20s to low 30s in the midrange, just like the first crappy map that Joe posted originally."

Meaning you're retarded. (pun.)


I refuse to believe that my little shortnose 1.6 is somehow special or unique among all Miata engines in that it enjoys 10 more timing across the board than all the rest of them.

By the same token, I don't want to believe that everyone else is running around with crappy, sub-optimal spark advance maps that provide really poor cruise performance which is masked by the fact that they have access to boost when they want to accelerate.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 05:44 PM   #70
Murderator
iTrader: (76)
 
18psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 35,728
Total Cats: 2,481
Default

FML

QQ

(i)

I go back to my previous statement "it felt fine/good, and got 29mpg"

On another note, and just being devils advocate here, but what if you pop open your motor in a year and find severely fubard pistons cause it was knocking but you didn't feel/hear it? just sayin
18psi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 05:52 PM   #71
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,169
Total Cats: 1,875
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 18psi View Post
On another note, and just being devils advocate here, but what if you pop open your motor in a year and find severely fubard pistons cause it was knocking but you didn't feel/hear it?
Then I will know that the motor was knocking but I didn't hear it, and I will assume that this is because I had been running too much spark advance.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 07:03 PM   #72
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
 
hustler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,107
Total Cats: 351
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
So, when you say "I ran 40 like a boss" what you actually mean is "I ran high 20s to low 30s in the midrange, just like the first crappy map that Joe posted originally."

Meaning you're retarded. (pun.)


I refuse to believe that my little shortnose 1.6 is somehow special or unique among all Miata engines in that it enjoys 10 more timing across the board than all the rest of them.

By the same token, I don't want to believe that everyone else is running around with crappy, sub-optimal spark advance maps that provide really poor cruise performance which is masked by the fact that they have access to boost when they want to accelerate.
18psi and I both have 10:1 engines, you have 9.0 or less.
hustler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 07:08 PM   #73
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,169
Total Cats: 1,875
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hustler View Post
18psi and I both have 10:1 engines, you have 9.0 or less.
9.4:1, but your point is well taken. NB = slightly higher static CR and probably higher VE for a given MAP / TP. So your 80 kPa is probably closer to my 90 kPa in terms of cylinder fill and chamber pressure.

Still, does this account for 10- less advance?
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 09:23 PM   #74
Murderator
iTrader: (76)
 
18psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 35,728
Total Cats: 2,481
Default

I wouldn't be surprised if it did.
Obviously I'm just guessing though.

I'm keeping my eye on this thread and interested to see how your car holds up. Esp since its on 87 (if we call CA 91 "camel ****", then 87 must be "donkey diarrhea" )
18psi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 09:45 PM   #75
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
 
hustler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,107
Total Cats: 351
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
9.4:1, but your point is well taken. NB = slightly higher static CR and probably higher VE for a given MAP / TP. So your 80 kPa is probably closer to my 90 kPa in terms of cylinder fill and chamber pressure.

Still, does this account for 10- less advance?
In my extensive (lol) dyno experience, yes.
hustler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 09:56 PM   #76
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,169
Total Cats: 1,875
Default

It would appear that I may be approaching the point of diminishing returns, at least in this particular load zone.

Ran another set of logs tonight in the exact same spot as last night.

To start with, I ran the same spark map that was the "after" map from last night, just to re-verify it as a baseline.

The map:



And the log:



Pretty close to last night's results. A tad more fuel, but then conditions were slightly different.



The I loaded a more advanced map:



And logged it:



I didn't quite nail this one perfectly, as the RPM was slightly too high and I was also accelerating very slowly. You can see that I am very gradually letting off the throttle in this map. Comparatively, it's interesting. Very slightly more TPS and RPM, MAP is exactly the same at the point where the cursor is sitting (makes sense) and fuel PW is very slightly lower. So an improvement, but not nearly as dramatic as the last set.

The averages:

Run 1:

RPM: 3291
TPS: 17.9%
MAP: 76.7 kPa
Spark: 37.6
Fuel PW: 7.34 ms


Run 2:

RPM: 3336
TPS: 18.2%
MAP: 76.6 kPa
Spark: 43.5
Fuel PW: 7.29 ms

Actually, those two runs were closer than I though. All variables within 0.5% or less, average AFR was within 0.15 between the two runs as well (damn, I'm good.), and fuel decreased by an almost immeasurable amount. It's in the noise floor.

I think I have found the most optimum spark advance for 3,300 RPM at 76 kPa- I'm gonna call it ~ 38. Only a hundred and forty-three more cells to test.
Attached Thumbnails
Let's discuss spark advance-nov_27_adv_less.gif   Let's discuss spark advance-nov_27_adv_more.gif   Let's discuss spark advance-nov_27_less.gif   Let's discuss spark advance-nov_27_more.gif  
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 11:19 PM   #77
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,443
Total Cats: 80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
Yes, Jason enjoys cluttering up my threads by re-stating the obvious and attempting to divert them away from the principle topic.
I think it's important to lay down the concept, if only for others, that the spark map should be at MBT in all cells (barring knock).
JasonC SBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 11:21 PM   #78
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Leafy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NH
Posts: 9,037
Total Cats: 99
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB View Post
I think it's important to lay down the concept, if only for others, that the spark map should be at MBT in all cells (barring knock).
And this is actually quite a difficult concept to grasp for a lot of "tuners".
Leafy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 11:25 PM   #79
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,443
Total Cats: 80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafy View Post
Jason, thats pretty much what we're saying already I just dont think anyone said MBT. Its certainly what I was talking about, there should be no need for a plot of torque vs map. Mainly because thats a really damn hard plot to make since the dyno wont know the map and your ecu wont know what they dyno is reading, so you'll have to make the plot externally assuming you can even get the dyno to output the data in a format thats easy to manipulate.
Lots of load holding dynos have a hose that you plug into your IM in order for it to log MAP. They also log the engine RPM, and wheel torque. It's a matter of a quick and easy software routine to plot torque vs. MAP, or torque/MAP vs. MAP. To me its ******* obvious, and I'm surprised the tuning dyno cos haven't written it. I guess, and mt.net is a testament to it, "tuners" aren't interested in part-throttle optimization.

Quote:
Its much easier to look at what cell you're in and look at the live dyno output and keep adding timing until torque stops increasing.
Have you actually tried it? It's hard to hit and hold a fixed part-throttle MAP value with your right foot, the engine heats up, and it's hard to get consistency, enough to find 2% changes in torque with timing changes. It is frustratingly time consuming, compared to WOT tuning, while the dyno clock is ticking at $2 per minute.

When tuning WOT spark, most people will sweep RPM and plot torque vs. RPM. Then they advance the whole MAP row by 2* and repeat, and look for which RPMs where there were gains. They do this instead of tuning one cell at a time. The reason for doing this is you do one pull, and you get to look at multiple RPMs. It saves time. If a dyno could plot torque vs. MAP at a fixed RPM, then you could more quickly tune multiple MAP points for a given RPM, because you sweep an entire RPM row, at multiple MAP points.

And, my whole point in starting that other thread, was due to frustration with tuning part-throttle spark maps, on the street. Joe seems happy to tune 1 cell at a time on the street. I'm not happy even doing it on a dyno one cell at a time. Try doing that with 16 cells.

The "official" OE way to do it (read: lots of time and automated dynos), is indeed 1 cell at a time, but you generate a "spark hook" (IIRC), per cell. The "spark hook" curve is the most accurate (but time consuming) way of finding MBT. You plot torque vs. advance for a given cell (one combo of RPM and MAP), and you look at the resulting bell shaped "hook" curve. You can very accurately interpolate the highest torque point.
JasonC SBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 11:33 PM   #80
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Leafy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NH
Posts: 9,037
Total Cats: 99
Default

I've done it that way, and the car has a cvt which complicated things quite a bit. I basically had to do it backwards and side ways since the dyno could hold a certain wheel speed which would give me a range of RPM and load that I could work in with tps before moving to the next wheel speed. It feels really weird to be a 95kpa at 11k rpm and hitting a plateau at 48* of timing pushing past 50* to see if there's any more power up there then backing it back down... and being excited you improved from 20 ft-lb to 24 ft-lb.

But I havent had that kind of time on a dyno outside of those cars, since I havent had something really worthy of that level of dyno tune.
Leafy is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hey everyone another n00b here Big_gumby Meet and Greet 80 10-05-2015 04:06 PM
Back to Stock Part Out!! Turbo Parts, MS2 Enhanced 01-05, Suspension, and MOAR! StratoBlue1109 Miata parts for sale/trade 16 10-02-2015 09:39 AM
Time to start learning and play with tuning The Gleas MEGAsquirt 3 10-01-2015 09:30 AM
In need of base map for stock 1997 brandonbkd MEGAsquirt 0 09-28-2015 11:52 PM
Koni 1150 Coilover Kit drumman83 Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 2 09-25-2015 07:03 PM


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:04 AM.