E30 2.9L Stroker ITBs etc build...

[mrlucretius]

Dbilas ITBs for sale (SOLD).

RHDs are installed.

Butt dyno says lost a touch on the topend, but feels much better midrange.

Also ICV is up and running.

Waiting for a new tune and some dyno time.

Stay posted!

[AWDBOB]

Woohoo! I'm sure once you tune for new new setup the gainz will be fully realized.

[digger]

Dbilas ITBs for sale.

RHDs are installed.

Butt dyno says lost a touch on the topend, but feels much better midrange.

Also ICV is up and running.

Waiting for a new tune and some dyno time.

Stay posted!

i'd be surprised if you made less power, reserve your judgement until its tuned properly though

[ForcedFirebird]

i'd be surprised if you made less power, reserve your judgement until its tuned properly though

I have a hunch the "feeling" is the fact that it's probably making a ton more low end power/TQ and similar upper end power to the DBilas. So it might "feel" like it's less on top, but in reality the DBillas was coming on late. I know the 9.3:1 2.8 I used the RHD kit on was making something like 190wtq at a measly 2500rpm. I have never seen a DBilas car come close (or even the Extrudabody car we did just before RHD went live with his retail kits).

Thanks for the logs, Alex, that will speed thing up for sure!

[digger]

yeah the dbilas feels like it has great topend cause it has no mid range

[mrlucretius]

Yes, my thoughts exactly, there definitely is much better midrange. So the top end feels weaker.

ForcedFirebird is selling me with a proper Alpha-N tune based on many similar builds he has done.... Can't wait to get that running and on a dyno!

John I will send you some new logs now that I fixed the AE issues I have emailed you about.

Thanks,
Alex

[mrlucretius]

Alpha N tune incoming today...

Woot!

[mrlucretius]

Hi People,

So I am having trouble getting the tune to run in Alpha-N mode. Even though there is a smooth signal 0-100 percent from the TPS, the fuel load somehow does not follow the TPS.

In the tuner studio Auto tune view, the fuel load stays at the bottom 30.1% regardless of throttle position, except very near WOT then it jumps to 100%. Here is a log of it in AlphaN mode if anyone wants to take a look with MegaLogViewer (from TunerStudio):

https://www.rettc.com/files/AlphaN_Log.msl

The car is running in MAP mode fine, and I have the spark and fuel tables from ForcedFirebird. These made a whole bunch more torque across the band. Feels way better.

I hope to sort out the Alpha-N and then go to a dyno.


On a brighter note, I did the morning open lapping session at High Plains Raceway Friday. I chose the fast group as opposed to slow. There was some porsche event over the weekend. So I was driving with few Porsche GT3 RS cars... A few souped up modern turbo M3's as well.

Needless to say they are a different class of car. However, there was only a few cars on at a time, at one point I had the whole track to myself for a few laps. Usually, I would only get passed once by the fast cars per 30 minute session so I was keeping my speed up. Drove as fast as I could. Had to be careful accelerating out of 2nd gear corners. 3rd gear also could cause oversteer if you were positioned correctly at high RPM.

Car ran awesome, no issues, drove it home, daily driver style.

Up next hopefully Dyno plots and tune.

[mrlucretius]

[mrlucretius]

Dyno baseline.

This is running RHD ITBs, ForcedFirebird's AFR and Spark tables (and AE settings but that shouldn't matter here). Still in MAP mode.

Making ~206 peak wheel horsepower at 6000 rpm, ~187 wheel torque at 5200 rpm.

This is on a DynoJet 248.

So that's right about 235-240 hp crank? Not to shabby...

Need to get some remote tuning done to polish her up.

-Alex

[ForcedFirebird]

Yeah, there's more in there too, that's my base spark table, we need to do MBT testing on the dyno. You are little lean on tip in, but those AFR's up top look much better than your first graphs, probably can even lean it out a bit more after 6500. Your old graph was seeing .87 Lambda almost the entire run which is about 12.5 - about a point too rich for my blood. The m20 design is naturally a lean burning engine. It's not uncommon to see near stoich during WOT pullson stock ECU's, that's why we pull timing near peak TQ. They are very happy in the lower/mid 13's (~.92-.94 Lambda).

[ForcedFirebird]

Also, nice to see you on a dynojet. People claim they are forgiving with power, but I have used a few different dynos locally, and they all agree with each other - even NASA racing requires dynojet for HP/WT ratios since they are so consistent.

[mrlucretius]

Definitely more to be had. The 3500 dip should go away, the low end torque should be taller and flatter (looking at your dyno plots earlier in this thread) and I think there is more hp at the very end, perhaps the peak will lift up more as well. That little uptick near 7k is real we think... What is that?

Ya, I was recommended this shop:

http://dyno-pro.com/

They are about 30 minutes away, have two dynos, been in the business 24 years.

Totally reasonable pricing.

How much time would you (John) need to be satisfied with a final tune? 2-4 hours?

I trust your experience regarding leaner AFRs.... Let's do it!

Perhaps you have time one of the next few Saturdays? Or if needed I can skip a half day of work. Let me know I will schedule something.

We can screw around briefly with Alpha-N as well. However, it really seems to run fine in MAP.

I regret not logging those dyno pulls... I will send you the latest tune. I did some autotuning, and added smoothing to the TPS (which made it behave better for sure).

I think I have spark induced TPS noise still. I am going to reroute a shielded TPS loom sometime.

Thanks,
Alex

[mrlucretius]

[digger]

much better result, heaps more torque. it would drive a whole lot better than the peak hp difference suggests

the dip at 3700rpm will be in part due to X-pipe location IMO