Map for NA 1.6 ignition?
 

Running an MS2 v3.0. Does anyone have an ignition timing table using the bins for an NA application? I can only find turbo maps using up to 234kpa and i can get better resolution with something in the mindset of an NA 1.6 car. Searched google for a while but I couldn't find anything. Like just a screen shot of it would be perfect.

Thanks.

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...1&d=1364848823

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...1&d=1364848823

This is not dyno optimized, just the result of a bunch of fiddling around on the street. Seems to work quite well- power is excellent and mileage is decent.

I'll note that with CA87 fuel, I very occasionally get a hint of knock when I apply a large amount of throttle at extremely low RPM, as when starting out from a stop and not wanting to spin the clutch too much.

Thanks Joe.

Alex, I was just thinking about looking for the same thing. You have MS up and running in the rally FB?

Jesse

I'll also note that my map seems to be much more aggressive than what a lot of people are running on similar engines. I have found that, for the gasoline I have available, it is rather close to the detonation limit in the midrange. About a month ago I had a bit of an issue with the fueling leaning out slightly, and the engine responded by pinging quite a bit in the midrange at > 50% throttle or so.

On the plus side, the engine runs very well. It's extremely responsive and lively with this map, much more so than I typically expect a 1.6 to be.

yea that is about a good 8 to 10 more degrees than i am running now! and before it was only at like 20!!! Going to try that tomorrow then and give it whirl! im running 91 or higher only. Car is dedicated to racing use only so premium requirement is fine.

In for melt-down.

How is my engine like GLaDOS?

It's still alive.

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1364873016

Based on how conservative the maps are that I have seen all you pussies post, I keep thinking that I'm going to destroy this engine. But not only does it keep on living, it is astoundingly quick & responsive. I'm sure that my NOx emissions are probably through the roof, but damn it feels good.

One of these days I'll get off my ass and dyno it.

how does your AFR table compare?

I'm pretty much a huge pussy in general. That's why I have to be the "bad moderator" on here. :hustler:

I run about 3 degrees less than Joe everywhere on my 10:1 1.8. Been doin it for almost 4 years with trackdays and auto-x. +1 for pussies.

I'm 10-12* less advanced from Joe's tables on my VVT engines and I've heard knock on both from the dyno and from cruise. I also found MBT way earlier than you guys...and my dyno sheet backs it up. Weird. I'm not saying either party is wrong, but I know I'm doing it right.

I guess I should have said I'm at altitude so my compression is lower than 10:1 at sea level. Also the 99+ heads are way better so they need less timing. That's probably the biggest difference.

The na6 head is noway near as efficient so I guess cylinder filling is part of the reason for this.

Dann

This is a valid and crucial point. I am speaking specifically to stock 1.6 engines here. An NB engine, or an NA with significant headwork, will have a higher VE at WOT and therefore a different MAP scaling.

so with said aggressive map, could i get away with like a 13.3 afr at WOT?

I'm running in the mid 12s at WOT.

About a month ago, my fuel leaned out a tad for reasons I still haven't figure out. I don't have any logs of this, but my recollection from looking at the gauge is that it wasn't extremely lean- maybe in the high 13s or low 14s.

So I would say that, to be safe, you would want to proceed very cautiously if your desire is to run my spark map with AFRs any leaner than what I am running.

Also, bear in mind that my engine is almost 100% stock, including the exhaust. If your engine is breathing more freely than mine, you will have higher actual VE for a given MAP. So take that under advisement as well.