Captain Bondo

So use a 3.5" housing, or whatever you need. Not the end of the world. A slong as you can scale it in TT what's the problem? Sure you lose some resolution ,but idle and cruise should be running closed loop and the ECU should interpolate between load points. Still better than not being able to adjust fuel or timing at all for a large part of the operating range I'd think...

They should almost sell it as a package with a bigger maf that bolts in - that'd be sweet. The thing I like about Tuner Studio is it is faster on the dyno when I am paying $100/hr. I think you can kinda do it with some of the newer Megatune software, but the way Tuner Studio allows for the selection and mass-manipulation of multiple cells at once is a HUGE time saver. Agreed the knock setup is a bit limited, but it's not the end of the world since there are some really good turn-key per-cylinder knock retard units out there form places like J&S. Exactly my thoughts man, that is like the uning equivalent of playing Russian roulette and totally insane. You could potentially have more or less timing depending on your valve clearances or how stiff your engine mounts are. lol That's a big WTF. And TT, yes as Mark says by ghost knock events I mean knock events that are generated erroneously by engine noise rather than true knock and connot be avoided even when the engine is below the knock threshold.

Sounds like a nice feature to add to TT would be the ability to access/modify the parameters that determine the function of the knock detection scheme. Trying to artificially add timing to compensate for ghost knock events is rediculous. You're just guessing and hoping the knock events will always happen consistently. That's really just no way to tune. Neither is having the MAF max out way before you his max power. Don't get me wrong I think TT is an awesome option, but it sounds like there are some fundamental things that could use some tweaking... I agree it sounds like a nice feature to add to TT would be the ability to access/modify the parameters that determine the function of the knock detection scheme. Trying to add timing to compensate for ghost knock events is rediculous. You're just guessing and hoping the knock events will always happen consistently. That's really just no way to tune. Neither is having the MAF max out way before you his max power. Don't get me wrong I think TT is an awesome option, but it sounds like there are some fundamental things that could use some tweaking...

So you can still map the fuel based on boost pressure as if the system were map based? If you can do that then it's not so bad, but if [peggiung tha maf at say 18psi means that the ecu adds the same amount of fuel for 18psi as it does for 22psi then that friggin useless. If you enlarge the housing you do lose resolution, of course. However, you should not lose the bottom cells if you do it right, the "span" is increased so the resolution goes down. Defintely won't tune as nicely at lower loads though. How does the motronic interpolate between load points? Turbotuner, Megatune software totally sucks compared to Tuner Studio. If you like megatune you should try Tuner Studio. It's a million times better. Iknow they were at least working on support for VEMS but maybe not yet...

I am saying there's a good chance it won't, actually. The concern is effective VE. VE is reduced when exhaust gases with low O2 content take up space fresh intake air could have. This is charge dilution and reversion is only one cause of it, and turbine backpressure is only one cause for reversion. Not only that but changing the housing or wheel will actually change the hotside's efficiency, maybe for good, maybe for bad. Certain wheels work better with certain housing A/R's and bigger is not always more efficent, and if you are going to talk about EBR you need to include turbine efficiency in the equation. Add to that the boost curve will change in a way that may, or may not, compliment the engine's natural VE. IMO to get to 1:1 EBR with an 18t or whatever, you'd just have a laggy turbo that's still only maybe cabable of 300whp. The potentialy hasn't increased, all you did was reduce some thermal stress and trade it for some lag. It's a mismatch. I am saying there's a good chance it will, actually. The concern is effective VE. VE is reduced when exhaust gases with low O2 content take up space fresh intake air could have. This is charge dilution and reversion is only one cause of it, and turbine backpressure is only one cause for reversion. Not only that but changing the housing or wheel will actually change the hotside's efficiency, maybe for good, maybe for bad. Certain wheels work better with certain housing A/R's and bigger is not always more efficent, and if you are going to talk about EBR you need to include turbine efficiency in the equation. Add to that the boost curve will change in a way that may, or may not, compliment the engine's natural VE. IMO to get to 1:1 EBR with an 18t or whatever, you'd just have a laggy turbo that's still only maybe cabable of 300whp. The potentialy hasn't increased, all you did was reduce some thermal stress and trade it for some lag. It's a mismatch.

While I agree with your assessment of EBR overall (and btw it would appear trbicks tech discussion is leaking over here somehow.), the above is oversimplifying to some degree. A low ebr can also just mean both the cold side and hot side are equally undersized, or that exhaust flow throught the port is crappy enough that all of the pressure drop is across the port/valve seat. In other words those modifications might make EBR closer to 1:1, but power output might stay the same or even drop. That is the wierd thing. It's a value that needs to be evaluated systemically and not as a single attribute...

How do you perform accurate fuel calcs when the sensor is no longer reacting to increases in airflow?

It's still pegging the MAF.

Yeah new motor will be another T6. I want the later head/cooling and manual tbelt tensioner etc, so it's easier to stuff rods in a low mileage '00-'01 motor than refurb this crusty old '99. Yeah I used a matched pair intake an exhaust of early 960 cams for 9mm of lift. vs. the T6's 7mm of lift. NA FWD cams are 8mm or 8.5mm I think. So it's a bonus for a 6 cylinder app to have the early 960 cams as an option.

Yeah I have been messing with the same crappy old JY motor this whole time I've just damaged it and repaired it a couple times. lol. I am going to disassemble it as I want to verify a few things. I want to see how the rods, bearings, and pistons look, and how the cam journals etc look with the frankenstein cam setup. This data might be helpful when it comes to assembling and tuning the "new" motor

You mean what are those spacers made from? Yeah just aluminum. Made as a single ring on a lathe and then sliced in half. I am tearing the motor down this weekend- I will report back if it looks like they moved at all. In retrospect some manner of mechanical attachment would be better. Tiny set screws or something. I get to re-do it all since I'm not re-using that head or that bottom end this year so I will keep folks posted on anything new I think of or find. I do want to re-use the 960 cams I think mo matter what I end up with as a motor as they seem to work nice in terms of powerband.

I used sleeve retainer. Definitely would be a bad plan to leave them free floating. I was too scared of messing up the head to try to weld them in right beside the bearing journal like that.

Yeah it's to do with how they are located axially in the head. "N" cams in an "RN" head need a spacer. Installed on both "halves" of the head. This puts the cam lobes in the right position relative to the lifters.

Agreed that sounds right. Sorry - my previous post was making things more confusing, I missed the clarifying post immediately before my post.

Yes but it's not drop-in. you need to press a sleeve onto the back of the cam like I did and ad a spacer in the head. I posted some details on tbricks but I'm too lazy to find the thread at the moment. You can just leave the VVT disconnected... I don't see why you want to get rid of it though, really. I only did becuase 960 cams give an extra 2mm of lift vs T6 cams. In your case you might as well just install VVT cams from an NA motor.

You guys make my head spin. Never mind.

Not quite true- how they are located axially in the head is different. The VVT gears are missing a raised journal at the rear that non vvt cams have, and the raised journal at the front that locates the VVT gears in the VVT head is slightly in the wrong spot by about 5mm...

The tps is adjustable. Move it if you want it to read higher. But seriously. Hold the throttle wide open with the car not running, physicallty check that the TB is fully open, and note the ODB value. That's it, you're done.

As long as you consistently get a value that you know corresponds to your throttle plate being fully open, what that value actually is really means absolutely nothing. I don't see what difference it makes.

It does that for diagnostic purposes. If it dropped right to 0v / 0% in normal operation, it would not be able to detect when it has lost the signal.

Agreed. If those numbers are right, the car needs a complete re-tune. If they're wrong, then the whole exercise is meaningless. TT and dyno time will show what really works and what doesn't.

Does he actually mean post turbo egts? Post turbo egts are often 300 degrees cooler than pre turbo. 1400 post turbo is meltdown city.

Well, it's difficult to say for certain what post turbo EGT readings translate to IMHO - the effect the turbine has via converting heat energy is hard to really account for, since it varies with pressure ratio, flow rate, etc. But I agree you'd think there'd be some indications of crazy EGTs one way or another. I wonder though if the simplest answer might be if H could send a sample log to Jan explaining he's trying to tell if his datalogging is working correctly, and was hoping he could confirm/deny if the timing values seem right? I assume Jan doesn't want to just start handing out what his maps are, but maybe he could just confirm if the readings H is getting are in the ballpark or way out to lunch at least?

Agree with both posts above. It just keeps getting leaner and leaner, that just isn't healthy. That makes me think that make the timing values might actually correct, oddly enough. It's possibly it's not pinging itself to death running 13:1 and leaner afr's at 17psi+ because it's got no timing. If those timing values are correct, pretty much the whole map needs like, probably 10 degrees added. It would be a LOT faster a little richer and with that timing added in. As it is if the logs are accurate I'd expect EGT's to be fairly high pre-turbo...

Ah perfect, yeah having it match the EBC's readout is a reasonable thing to do. In that case it really doesn't matter what is or isn't "calibrated" - your boost setpoint/target is based on what the EBC thinks it is - so you might as well log based on that, for sure. I know we've talked about it before, but that dyno time is just highway robbery. :(