Warm restart and idle issues
 

I'm starting a new thread as a continuation of my questions from https://www.miataturbo.net/megasquir...s-79819/page3/ because it appears my issues are moving in a different direction and I don't want to derail that thread.

To summarize, I previously wrote:
Then Braineack wrote back:


And I wrote...
I poked around a bit today and have some more to share. I'll put that in the next post.

So I looked through my spark table first because of the feedback about the massive amount of advance. First, my tune is configured with a 6* offset, which I understand to mean that I should remove 6 from any of the timing numbers I see in the log and my spark isn't as advanced as it appears.

Also, the numbers in my ignition table are more advanced than in base maps I found online, but wouldn't I expect that if the table had been tuned on a dyno? My tuner told me previously that they played with the timing numbers until they faintly detected pre-ignition and then backed off from there. So how much advance is too much?

Next I worked on the mixture in the fuel map to verify it's correct at 1200-1400rpm as suggested. I checked AFRs in that area and hand tuned my Idle VE to be ~14.7.

Then I noticed in the previous log that the AFRs were way lean for a while after the EGO came online and then converged to ~14.7 after a few seconds. I poked around and found that EGO Delay After Start was set to about 30 seconds, which was way longer than it took for the O2 sensor to come online. I dropped it down to 5 seconds and specified elsewhere that any reading below 8.0 should be ignored, which covers me before the sensor comes online. I figured this would cause the MS to pay attention to the EGO input as soon as it was available. It looks like this has improved the situation.

I'm attaching the latest log file so you can take a look. Interestingly, the engine is good and hot now and it appears the injectors are handling it OK. If this all looks good to you then I've got another question to ask.

Incorrect. The 6* makes the log and timing tables correct for what your engine is actually getting.

Also your tuner is tuning WOT spark and we're discussing idle spark.

No offense but it's pretty clear you're new to MS and TS. Which is great! Everyone starts here. I'd read around as much as you can before making any assumptions or changes toyour setup.

Hmmm...so my timing really is way more advanced than in the base maps. I'll ask my tuner about that.

Still, shouldn't a dyno tune have dialed in the ignition properly? That's what I thought I was paying for.

I'm attaching my ignition table for your comments.

Yeah your timing table is a good bit higher then it should be. Just for reference timing at idle is generally between 10-17 degrees.

Yes a good tuner would have tuned the spark table all over. From the looks of it, I don't think your tuner is very good.

Well, thanks for the honest feedback. That's the only way for me to know whether things are running as they should be. Can you point me to an ignition table that's closer to what I'm looking for?

Also, I figure I can't just put in new values in the table, right? Wouldn't I need to retune all kinds of stuff, including the VE table and WUE?

quick test: go to the 3D view of your timing table. Your WOT cell (this is the 100kpa row with N/A engines), should have a similar shape as your dyno plot. So according to that timing table, you have a perfectly linear power curve, no loss in power until redline.

Most Miatas turbo or not don't do this. Unless you're supercharged.

Yeah don't touch your tune. Especially if someone else tuned it. If there's any difference and it blows up, you'd be liable. They did a very basic power tune my guess so hopefully you didn't pay more than ~$350. that should be ~$100/hr for the dyno, take 1-2 hours, and a little extra for their time.

I'm not saying it's bad or unsafe, but with your experience I wouldn't change it much before we or someone local helps out a little.

hey guys, i work at the shop that tuned the car, im the one that installed the setup, and then started fixing issues in the tune after it initially left, im here to help so any and all feedback is appreciated, it will help me learn as well, im not the actual tuner at the shop but i also have a megasquirt miata (n/a) and really want to help get Ace car running properly and make him happy

Oops and here we are all bashing you.

The timing tables just Raise a few eyebrows, especially that jump from 33 to 19, and why is it at 33 at all? I thought DIY's MSM base map was high at 25. I personally do 20. The stock 10 seems a little low the more I tune idle.

Thanks for the pointer. Yeah, I wasn't planning to play with the timing table unless I got specific direction.

My tuner spent a lot more than 3 hours on the tune, especially since I know they've run through it twice. I can't explain what we're seeing at this point but I appreciate everybody's help in getting to the bottom of it.

I'm attaching a 3D view of my ignition table for your review.

It's just a linear table, which is a bit of a novice move.

As you change timing, let's use advance for this example, you'll see some rpms gain power and others stay the same. Add 2* across the board and see only gains between 3 and 5000? 0-3 and 5-redline should probably revert back to the old timing numbers while 3-5 keeps the new timing.

Keep doing this over and over again and you'll get a fairly typical Miata dyno plot.

timing is something im not 100% with yet so im not surprised i made a novice move on that one, was trying to stay safe and get MPG out of it as Ace was already happy with the power output of the car. didnt want to do anything crazy. so looking at his map what advice would you give me for adjustments that will help with his warm restart issues?

clearly your tuner wants you to blow your motor. Or simply doesn't know what he's doing, is charging you for his "expertise", and will point the blame when your motor does finally melt.

at 100kPa you have about ~13° more advance than the stock ECU.

in boost, you've never retarded past the OE spark timing. A good rule of thumb is 1° retard for every 1-2psi in boost...

just do the math here...


I would literally reduce your entire timing map by 10°. It would still be aggressive, but it would be within reason.

when I add in 10° to the timing map I use, your current is still more aggressive:
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1455984501

I'm seriously shocked your motor hasnt blown yet.




please just post your entire MSQ.

Ooh yeah i follow that rule of thumb too. If you set your timing tables with 2 psi deltas (14ish kpa) you can get your timing curve at waste gate safely and then have a good idea for max curve.

I sent you an email with his MSQ. He sent it to me last night, but I have not had a chance to look at it yet.

First thing I would do though would be to upgrade to firmware 1.4, instead of staying on 1.3.4.

Thanks for the feedback, guys. Let's assume for the sake of argument that my tuner isn't trying to blow up my car and that we have a difference of understanding about what an ignition table should look like. I'm new to the Megasquirt so I'm clearly learning how it works. But I've got some background with the Link so I'm happy to share that I don't feel *totally* clueless with this stuff. As you can imagine, I feel stuck in the middle here and I'm looking for truth. I really appreciate everybody's help in getting there.

So I've gone ahead and uploaded my tune. I'm looking forward to your feedback.

Meanwhile, it preliminarily sounds like I should back off the timing across the board. Let's say we collectively decide that's the right thing to do as a first step. What other changes would we need to make to the tune? I figure I'd need to retune the VE table at least, right? How extensive would any other changes be?

Regarding shuiend's suggestion:
My understanding is that you can't just upgrade firmware on a Megasquirt like on an iPhone because the tune doesn't come over. You have to apply the new firmware version and then manually copy over the configuration. Is that correct? Would somebody please point me to a process for upgrading the firmware?

Nope it copies over with few errors. Back in the day it was stuff like "tune has 1.0, firmware has 1.00", but it's a little more complicated now. I think it works with just one round of I'm-freaking-out-bro warnings.

I'd load a base map timing table and double check sync, then retune for max power using a slightly different method than before.

I dont like this:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1455988683

you're basically adding 8°-5° of advance as your motor warms up. that's just odd, you should only be using this below say 60°F.


spark table 3 looks pretty good, one does not.

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1455988683

looks like they setup table switching and why you have fuel and spark tables 3 activated.


https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1455988683

do you even use this?




what type of injectors? i see you have larger ones, but what brand?

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1455988683

I dont like that deadtime curve compared to what I've seen from different manufacturers. seems very conservative and could lead to underfueling.



ASE and warmup enrichments are very very low:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1455988683

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1455988683

you can autotune warmup if youre lazy.


priming table is crazy long, ever notice how long your fuel pump runs when you put the key to ON?

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1455988683



your fueling algorithm includes AFR, I'm not the biggest fan of your AFR map

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1455988683

your VE table actually looks pretty standard, like it was never tuned for that AFR table correctly imho. goes with what i was saying before about not enough fuel in certain spots, that coupled with the piss-poor warmup and ase tables isnt helping.

you need to copy your spark 3 values into your spark 1 table PRONTO.

Wow.

Like wtf?

I don't like cold Advance and wue at standard operating temps, but that's just me.

I also put that 210 cold advance to -10 starting at 205-207, so if it starts to overheat it reduces power a bunch. I do that for wue fuel too.

But that's besides the point. Braineack brings up some good questions.

Just so everyone is clear. The table 3 stuff was already in and active from the guy that built the megasquirt. That is where the cold advance was at when we first powered up the megasquirt (I believe) also the wue was auto tuned to where you see it. The afr table was built for maximum mpg at the request of the owner. There has never been sounds of ping, knock or detonation the entire time we have tuned the car. So I'm just trying to understand why everyone thinks the car is going to blow. Our tuner initially did something to make the ignition table "hidden" so that people couldn't read it correctly but to my understanding we got rid of all that so that we would take that out as a possible issue. I already pulled back a lot of timing after I compared it to a base map table to help with the mpg issue we had in the beginning. You can see my novice mistake of making it linear but the car has always been running great outside of the warm restarts

Also the long fuel pump prime was me trying to test possible solutions for the lean restarts while warm. I have not yet pulled those back

Injectors in the car are force flow and were flow tested at 620cc @ 43.5psi iirc. But the rail pressure is stock around 32? So we have them scaled at around 530 I believe. The car would not run at the recommended 0.63 ms dead time so I moved that up until they ran correctly. This is also an issue I have heard from other megasquirt users with these injectors as well with stock rails/regulator

Oh hell, you poor bastard. I just tuned a set of FF and WTF. Rail pressure should be 60psi, but if you do the req_fuel for that it won't run until HUGE VE table values. Especially with the recommended dead time.

And you're semi close, if you wanna make the drive...

Warm restart is pretty simple, up the hot WUE percentages.

We tried that and it was still stumbling and running 17+ afr at warm restart idle until ego correction kicked on than it would settle out to stoich and 100% ego correction after about a minute

More WUE and WUE taper!!

I'll give that a shot and get a data log once we crank those up. Thanks for the help curly. You've been awesome so far!!!

Cool. This is a lot of great feedback. Let's jump in. My responses are inline.

I'm running off fuel and spark tables 1. Even if it's activated, I'm not switching tables. Maybe I should disable the Fuel Table Switching?





I'm using the Flow Force injectors people recommended on here. It's the kit at Flow Force 610cc Injectors with PNP Kit for Mazda Miata ? Flow Force Injectors



My tuner said he had to back off some settings because my fuel pressure at the rail was lower than the injectors were expecting. I'm using the OEM regulator on a Vishnu rail. I asked about getting a new regulator to bump up the pressure but heard that wouldn't be necessary. Does that help explain the dead times?




Do you have a suggestion for what they should be instead?



I've autotuned WUE a couple of times and this is what the system came up with.



It's hard for me to comment on this since I don't know what it's supposed to be. I thought the fuel pump was supposed to run when the key is turned to the ON position.




We leaned out the AFRs in an attempt to improve fuel consumption. This was based on a recommendation in a whole big thread about that at http://www.miataturbo.net/prefabbed-...-expect-87066/. Are you objecting to the cells that are leaner than 14.7? I'm open to modifying those?



I've autotuned VE myself so I know it reflects the AFRs in AFR Table 1.



I appreciate your feedback and don't feel I'm in a position to comment on this. I'd like my tuner to jump in on this point.

im completely open to using the spark table used in table 3, since im new to megasquirt i would like to understand this though, the crank trigger offset, would that change the way the ignition table looks? because i know on my miata im at 0* offset and Ace is at i believe 6* offset, will that change the required output of the ignition table and if so how?
i appreciate everyones help here, i know i could go to my shops tuner but between him being swamped and also kind of a hot head, bringing up this subject gets him going a bit so i have taken over to help get this situated

it depends on the physical rotation of the CAS. No two MS equipped miatas running off the CAS should have the same trigger angle.

the offset has to be tuned, once. All that number does is confirm to the MS that the spark angle it's demanding is the number you're actually getting.

the number means diddly-squat if it hasn't been tuned, you have know idea if 10° of timing actually means -10° or 32°.



the subject will get him really going when you tow a miata on fire into his garage and tell him to pay for the damages because he's a fucking moron.

ok, so no matter what that is the offset has nothing to do with the ignition table readout? would you recommend we have ace run spark table 3? he will be coming down to the shop tomorrow so i can send him a new tune file have him autotune the fuel table until then, get some feedback from him tomorrow than go through and clean up his fuel table after the autotune has run its course

And if we change to use the settings in Ignition Table 3, do we need to change anything other than retuning VE?

I realize there's a lot of other stuff like WUE and ASE that we should change, but I'd like to know if there's anything else we must change at the same time so we're safe.

did i just read this?

It's running the most aggressive timing map I've ever seen posted on this site in the last 10 years.

I'm only guessing that it hasn't blow yet because you numskulls have luckily never tuned the trigger angle correctly and it's not actually outputting 30° of timing at idle like the logs show.

your tuner is dumb.

Flow Force posts their deadtime values on their own website:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1456067804

using those values posted, and copying them into -/+ % values I get this:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1456067804

so I'd plug those numbers in my tune like this (i put them in bank 2 so we could see the difference):

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1456067804


this curve is a lot more typical. I think the .63ms deadtime is aggressive, but you can always scale that up if need be, but the curve should stay the same. This will probably change your fueling through your tune -- if anything it will probably lean it out since it reduced the deadtime value and reduces the pulse above 13v (car should be running around 14.2v).


I'd highly suggest running the deadtime values quoted from the company, copying spark table 3 values to spark table one, disabling tableswitching, zeroing out cold advance, and then actually getting a timing light and syncing the trigger angle properly.

as far as WUE and ASE is concerned, these are the values I typically see in installs:

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...6aee11bcbb.png


WUE really needs to be tuned once the fuel table is closer to perfect.

OK, folks I had a fun and interesting time playing around with my Miata yesterday. As always, I want to offer my thanks to Braineack for helping to fix my tune.

As suggested, I changed the injector dead time curve, started using the base spark table, turned off table switching, zeroed out cold advance, and then set the timing. The timing was way off, which likely makes it the root cause of all my issues. I don't know how far off it was because I had to physically adjust the CAS. Suffice it to say it was pretty far off.

I also set the AFR targets that were leaner than stoich closer to 14.7, figuring that we can lean out the mixture again if we need to. We'd leaned out the mixture based on suggestions received in my fuel economy thread. So it is reasonable to run leaner than stoich or should 14.7 be the upper limit for leanness? I'll be interested to see what my fuel consumption looks like now.

Of all of these changes, I was most surprised about the changes to the cold advance. Nate said those settings were came like that in Rev's base tune. Is timing advance not desired on cold start? I haven't had the chance to try, but I wonder how the engine will start with the current configuration when it’s dead cold.

As I was driving yesterday I noticed that the engine was going full lean when I let off the throttle. I don’t recall that it was doing that before. I also want to pay some attend to Accel Enrichment. I saw AFRs going lean when I hit the accelerator as I was driving to the shop today. I added a bit of AE and it seemed better on the drive back home but I need to check the logs on that.

Other than that, I think it’s a matter of retuning the spark table and then doing fuel. And then, of course, there are all the little driveability refinements. It’ll be very interesting to see what my fuel consumption looks like since we’ve rebaselined the tune.

How do things look to you all? I'm attaching the new tune file and a rather large log. The log was large enough that I had to upload it to Onedrive, where it can be downloaded from http://1drv.ms/1QWa1pc.

Here's a slightly updated tune after autotuning WUE. I'm still seeing a couple more issues and would appreciate your collective insight on a few more questions.

1. I'm still seeing a lean condition after warm startup. Last time that went away after enriching and lengthening ASE but I removed a lot of that based on suggestions here. Clearly I went too far. Would you be able to suggest something that would work better? I've uploaded a log file so you can see what's going on.

2. I'm still seeing engine speed drop pretty quickly off throttle, totally lean out, and then recover. Previously, the engine speed dropped reasonably slowly after I took my foot off the throttle. I figured there was some kind of dampening going on to make it drop so slowly. I looked for some settings in TunerStudio and searched the forum but couldn't find anything. Can you point me to some settings that will boost that dampening function again?

when i tried tuning those injectors to those dead times the car wouldnt run, it may be from before i calcualted for the difference in rail pressure compared to the test pressure, so hopefully that is working this time around, its def upsetting to see my tuner made that mistake with the physical timing, his reasoning was that he sets it in the megasquirt but personally i dont like that idea, so im glad we found that. Ace, the lean out issue, is it when you let off throttle like when you push the clutch in? i remember turning on progressive fuel cut, and turning the delay to 0.5s, if you look under fuel settings/over-run fuel cut, you will see those options in there, see if they are still set up. as for the AFR table, leave them at 14.7 for now, and we will see what the economy is, it should keep pretty close to 30mpg highway like before, if it is, we will leave it be, under low load driving such as highway cruising a more leaned out AFR is completely safe, i cruise at 16.0 AFR on mine (non F/I) and was able to see 29mpg highway, just make sure this is only in the cruising range, any where else it can be a dangerous idea. on the warm restart, maybe we have the idle valve open to much? im no expert with this but its one of the things i have not messed with yet for the warm start issue. hopefully braineak will have some helpful input on this as this was one of the last things i was trying to fix (before finding out the timing was way off)

Were your changes to the injector dead time values the way you adjusted for the lower fuel pressure? Or was that done somewhere else? I'm wondering if we need to revert back to the previous dead time values.

Regarding the lean out issue, yes that happens when I'm driving, I press in the clutch, and let off the throttle. And yes, we've got progressive fuel cut enabled and the delay was .5 sec. I increased that to 2 secs in an attempt to address this problem but it's not making a difference.

Regarding the idle valve and screw, that's one of the next things I want to try. I asked the tuner in your shop about setting the idle screw on the throttle body and he told me the same thing, namely that he'd configure that in the Megasquirt. But we know that on a Miata, if the idle screw is set improperly then the idle valve is working all the time and it messes up a bunch of stuff.

id leave the DT value as it was, but use the updated correction curve. .6xxx ms just seems WAY too fast, especailly when you compare to what FI stats for their injectors.

They way I adjusted for the fuel pressure was in the calculated fuel. I found a calculator online for difference in pressure and set injector size to the appropriated value I got which was somewhere around 530cc I believe

you mean like overrun settings?

I'd tune the idle valve some on a very cold day, with the idle valve set to the lowest PWM% (~25-30) you can still idle at around 600-700RPM or so.

where did you do this? this is not something you need to worry about.

use the injector sizing as rated at 43.5psi.

OK, I've got the correction curve set to what you suggested. Please see the thumbnail for details. So we're sticking with that, right?

Yes, this is set in the overrun menu.

2sec is pretty good, that way you dont cut fuel too fast.

this is normal, there's no need to inject fuel while the rear tires are spinning the motor for you.

OK, that's good to know. Still, I was hoping that setting would stop the behavior where the AFRs go way lean when I let off the throttle while I'm shifting gears. It didn't work out that way.

Maybe the next step is to play with the idle screw and recalibrate the idle valve. Then we can see how things are going.

I don't understand why you feel this is a problem. The only way I can think of not seeing lean values without throttle input would be in some sort of anti-lag system. I am amazed at all the help you have gotten, honestly.

it shouldnt between shifts really.

at least not that you'd notice.

could be aggressive (read: poorly tuned) launch control settings, and/or poorly tuned throttle enrichments.

Fwiw, I go lean between shifts with begi reflashed ecu + xede. Up to 16-17AFR. Any higher or if I'm getting on it bogs the car till more fuel comes in :dunno:

Probably not related as I'm a special snowflake.

Well, I'm sure grateful for the help. I realize that people, and especially Braineack, are helping with some basic mistakes. So I appreciate that I'm coming across as clueless, but that's largely because I'm having to learn everything that was done previously and figure out what's correct. I'll sure take responsibility for when I'm actually clueless. Meanwhile, I'm looking for somebody who can help me in detail with my tune. I'm talking with Curly about taking my car to his shop in Oregon but I'd like to stabilize things enough to get it down there.

Anyway, you're saying it's expected behavior for the AFRs to go full lean after I let off the throttle? I'm asking about that because that didn't happen before we made all the changes on Sunday. I'll let go of this if it's nothing to worry about.

FWIW, I put a fuel pressure gauge inline to test the pressure myself. I'm seeing bang on 43.5, which is expected by the Flow Force injectors. Figure I should change back the spot where Mentalbiker12 configured them for 556 because he saw low fuel pressure instead of the 610 they're intended to be. Does that sound right?

So I went back through my logs and I go pretty lean between shifts as well. On a WOT pull I go from high 9's/low 10's to high 13s/low 14s. This is within .9 of a second. There is even a slight lean spot at 100% TPS which I assume is the lag at which the O2 sensor picks up the change in Lamda. Once you start tuning Accel enrichment you will see changes in these areas of the graph.

If you are gettin 43.5 psi then yes. The injectors were flow tested to 43.5 at 620cc. So give that a shot

Cool. I went ahead with that change and everything is working much better combined with a bit of autotuning. Glad we figured that one out.

I also adjusted the idle screw and valve so both of those are improved too.

Finally, I increased fuel in the bottom row of the VE table and the AFRs aren't going lean like they were before. It appears this was happening through a combination of overrun fuel cut and that row being too lean.

Ok. I remember having no to make a change there on mine to but for the opposite reason. My shifts were dropping into the 9.0 afr range on minimum load and causing a lot of shuddering.

So Ace ended up bringing the car to me after some email discussions. I figured since this issue started with open sharing, I might as well continue it by sharing his current tune.

First off, I did NOT look at his original tune long enough. Too many things taken for granted, and wow were some of the tables messed up. Braineack covered most of those in this and the original thread, so I won't get into that too much.

Along with FF's updated dead time, the car starts and drives beautifully, I just need to double check cold cranking duty and cooler WUE.

Attached is the dyno (fuck you photobucket!!), the lower numbers were just autotuned and wastegate, higher numbers are what I finished at. His 5-speed sounds like it's supercharged, so along with that and the stock block I didn't want to push too far past 240ft/lbs.

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1457833341

Also I thought this was an interesting comparison. The lower numbers on this graph is a freshly built '96 M-edition with a older FM kit and a rebuilt (bigger compressor wheel) 2554. It has .25 overbore, EBC@12psi, no cat, MS2pnp and the same intercooler. The higher numbers is Ace's '95 M-edition with his newer FM kit, EBC@16psi and 2860.

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1457833341

Also attached is a log of the #25 dyno pull and his .msq. Feel free let me know if you see anything fishy, but like I said it seems, as of now, to drive quite well!

Only issue on the dyno was a little blowout from his Fab9 COP kit. We fixed that with a smaller gap (.026"). Dwell was also turned down from 3.5 to 3.0, not sure if that made any difference though. Looking at the rpm trace again there's some choppyness I'm not 100% happy with. Any bigger and I probably would of felt that on the dyno...

As always, a huge, HUGE thank you to Kris Osheim at KO Racing for his wonderful help and his wonderful DynoJet. This tune wouldn't be half of what it is without his input. If you're ever in the pacific NW area and need a car tuned, go to him. When he says how much it'll cost for a full tune, drop your jaw and say "that's it?!?!".

I'm glad everything worked out for you ace.

i dont know how changed the tune got since the last time i made any adjustments to it but it seems as if everything got sorted, what exactly was off with the timing tables? im hoping to learn from all this so that i may grow as a tuner

Here's a visual.

The following NOT an ignition table.

It is a subtraction of my table from your shop's table.

Now I did tweak a few of the lower RPM column values, (because you should usually have a column at your target idle and what the hell do I do with a 700rpm column?) but basically I tuned to MBT (or as close as you can without a knock sensor) by decreasing timing to make sure a significant loss in power was detected, and then increasing until power wasn't made. Keeping timing when it worked, returning to lower values where it didn't.

I could increase timing a few degrees without knock if I wanted a more aggressive tune, so lets say that, maximum, the "best" table should within ~5 degrees of mine. It's impossible to get in the upper left cells, and improbable that you'll ever be in the lower right cells, so they can be ignored.

THE MOST IMPORTANT CELLS are the upper mid to upper right cells. Those are the boost cells. Look at the numbers in the table below. Why are they so high??


https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1457849935

Unfortunately I can't give a complete answer. My boss who did the tune set timing through the megasquirt rather than physically or something to throw off anyone trying to look at the tune. I tuned the cruising cells and worked on cold start warm start type tables. Only thing I tuned for boost was boost control duty table. The timing table I brought down ~15* from what they were before. After that ace checked base timing and adjusted to set it correctly from that side. After that I had not done any tuning. So that may possibly have played a role to the drastic difference.