My new e85 16g setup!!

[Black_Bullet]

I think I may pull it back two degrees also. Its amazing how much timing the guys on the link forums run. Pretty much the same as me. Kevin at Jacks shop here is running 42psi, 1150's, safc/evo maf and seeing 28* at 5* base timing. He has ran it for a long time now and still has not blown anything. Im still using the excuse of how e85 burns slower and needs higher timing levels.

Heres some really good posts I quoted from other people worth listening to on this site to aid in this topic.

It's tough to look at absolute timing numbers and take anything meaningful away from them. There are just too many variables... Base timing, placement of the marks on the pulley and the cheap plastic timing belt cover, slop in the crank or pulley key/slot, timing belt tension and amount of stretch, valve springs, cam gears, cam dowel pins, cam angle sensors themselves, spark plug type, actual AFR and distribution in the chamber, and so on. Run whatever timing numbers provide the most power while working within your personal tolerance for risk and goals. It will vary by a few degrees from car to car,

The statement that timing makes power is only half correct. Timing just allows you to make the power you should relative to the amount of fuel/air you're burning. Increasing beyond that point will cost you power, and eventually parts. To increase power potential, you need to increase air/fuel flow. The easiest lever here is boost. The tricky part comes in when adding boost requires dropping timing as a bandaid (in other words, more than you would have to drop it due to charge density increase, which doesn't cost you any power). This is where you need to be on the lookout for diminishing returns.

If you're burning the fuel faster via fast burn chamber that allows higher compression, then you need to start the fire later. You don't NEED as much timing advance. Getting power from timing is not about more timing, it's about literally timing. Timing it right. MBT is the term used. Mean best timing is the best timing for the motor at specific conditions. 3000rpms typically needs LESS timing than 7000rpms because firing off the fuel earlier will cause it to burn up before the piston/rod combo can get to put the most torque on the crank after top dead center. The piston is moving slower. Adding boost, heat, and compression means that the fuel will burn even faster. Hence, turbo motors have lots of timing retard. That doesn't mean that they are losing power from timing retard. That just means that the airfuel mixture is burning faster than it's non-turbo counterpart.

 

[Black_Bullet]

I guess bottom line is get a REAL tuning tool so you can tune your timing and AFR for real, then get to a dyno, and find what point your car makes the best power and has the most optimum timing curve for your application.

Until then hope you dont mess your motor up with your current methods of tuning. GL

 

[JayRolla]

I guess bottom line is get a REAL tuning tool so you can tune your timing and AFR for real, then get to a dyno, and find what point your car makes the best power and has the most optimum timing curve for your application.

Until then hope you dont mess your motor up with your current methods of tuning. GL

Well I guess Im kind of testing right now. Those where good quotes, expecially the last one. E85 burns slower, im not sure how much but people on the dsmlink forums are saying its a lot. Since I'm running low compression, and a slower burning fuel I should beable to get away with higher timing. But how much is the question. Back in the day before timing control they would through 850cc injectors and a safc. Race fuel, base timing at 5* and run 30+psi all day.

I remember when the maf-t was the best mod for our cars and we where so happy when it was released. Jack through it on and it was crazy. We never heard a turbo without the maf in front of it. These 1g's where running real high timing. Some forums have also said that real timing is actually 5* lower than what any logger reads.

Only way to find out though is on the dyno like you said. If I blow this motor I guess I will have to build me a stroker. I will be taking timing back to around 2* base.

 

[MidnightTSI]

We have a few in the springs but I think I will hit MAC. I can rent the dyno for an hour at $105/hr. I dont like they guys at the shops here in the springs. MAC has been around so I go to them. Carz is pretty good but they wanted to charge me $300 minimum to tune my SAFC when I told them its pretty much done already. The guys there are real good and just wanted to see what they do when tuning my car but thats not worth the money when I know how to tune it myself.

Nice, I was going to go to MAC but I didn't get my car running in time before I moved to AZ. I've heard good things about CARZ and MAC so either way. I heard the guys at MAC are really good tuners also. Sounds like you have everything worked out. The extra money at CARZ is definitely not worth it since your tune is basically dialed in already as you stated

I'm still a newb to tuning and I have a lot to learn but do you think the higher timing numbers could have less of an effect at the Denver area high altitude? It seems as if in that area we have to run bigger injectors, more boost, and more timing for similar results that could be obtained at sea level with much milder settings across the board. I know that there is less oxygen and that the barometric pressure and such can make a big difference from day to day. It is interesting to see the different values used at different altitudes. Maybe I am just trying to think too much. I am just trying to learn guys so correct me if I am wrong. Thanks

 

[Black_Bullet]

Nice, I was going to go to MAC but I didn't get my car running in time before I moved to AZ. I've heard good things about CARZ and MAC so either way. I heard the guys at MAC are really good tuners also. Sounds like you have everything worked out. The extra money at CARZ is definitely not worth it since your tune is basically dialed in already as you stated

I'm still a newb to tuning and I have a lot to learn but do you think the higher timing numbers could have less of an effect at the Denver area high altitude? It seems as if in that area we have to run bigger injectors, more boost, and more timing for similar results that could be obtained at sea level with much milder settings across the board. I know that there less oxygen and that the barometric pressure and such can make a big difference from day to day. It is interesting to see the different values used at different altitudes. Maybe I am just trying to think too much. I am just trying to learn guys so correct me if I am wrong. Thanks

Im sure someone could better answer this question, but your cylinder pressures would probably be less than say mines at sea level, for the same given setup, so theoretically i think you could get away with a little bit more aggressive tunes.

 

[Black_Bullet]

Well I guess Im kind of testing right now. Those where good quotes, expecially the last one. E85 burns slower, im not sure how much but people on the dsmlink forums are saying its a lot. Since I'm running low compression, and a slower burning fuel I should beable to get away with higher timing. But how much is the question. Back in the day before timing control they would through 850cc injectors and a safc. Race fuel, base timing at 5* and run 30+psi all day.

I remember when the maf-t was the best mod for our cars and we where so happy when it was released. Jack through it on and it was crazy. We never heard a turbo without the maf in front of it. These 1g's where running real high timing. Some forums have also said that real timing is actually 5* lower than what any logger reads.

Only way to find out though is on the dyno like you said. If I blow this motor I guess I will have to build me a stroker. I will be taking timing back to around 2* base.

Yea, I dont know about the timing being lower than what logger reads, maybe you can find some sources for that information, but 2*base sounds much safer and probably more ideal for power as well.

Cars back in the day, sure they were getting away with shitty safc/maft tunes, but look how many people have blown their motors several times also.
I personally know of a guy that had a 16g setup on his gst and he blew it from running too much timing on safc over a long period of time, and what makes it worse is he had forged pistons and rods and ARPs. Mind you he was only on 93 octane and likely knocking a lot and never knowing it, but still, safc/maft tuning is very primitive in todays tuning world.

Building a stroker sounds intense, you'll want a bigger turbo with that added displacement, hopefully your drivetrain will be up for your future goals. Sounds fun though.

 

[JayRolla]

I agree. When you tear down a motor at this altitude and compare them to sea level cars they seem to be in a lot better shape.

 

[MidnightTSI]

Im sure someone could better answer this question, but your cylinder pressures would probably be less than say mines at sea level, for the same given setup, so theoretically i think you could get away with a little bit more aggressive tunes.

Ok, thats what I was thinking. I will be tuning using DSMAP VII, so it will be interesting to see how that goes. I have been thinking about the new Link setup, but speed density with the moates emulator will be way cheaper and probably even give me a better tune once it is dialed in. I don't think I will want to run any more than 29 PSI until I switch to E85. Even then the numbers should be nice with 29 PSI and some conservatively high but safe timing. I probably won't go as aggressive as Jay because as I said, I am still a noob to tuning and the G50 should do alright

 

[yangtech]

I didn't see it in your profile or maybe I might of just miss it, but are you running ARP headstuds?

 

[JayRolla]

Negative, 6 bolts have good headstuds and usually dont stretch.

 

[dsm-onster]

I have to go with Jay on this one. You NEED more advance with a slower buring rate. Race fuel has a slower burning rate. Injecting water causes the burn rate to slow because heat is absorbed in the CC. Most alcohols need a larger a/f ratio number to make the same lambda number; more fuel is needed to reach stoich or complete burn of the most fuel. Hence, pure E-85 and pure Methanol fueled motors have MUCH more mass in the CC than pump gas or even race gas. More mass to burn slows the burn rate. It takes longer to burn a log vs. a twig.

Thus, MBT is DRASTICALLY different for a car with e85. Water injection alters MBT, too. So does race gas. Even when all other variables are the same (VE, Boost, Volume, Stroke). It seams that Jayrolla has tuned to the apparent MBT of typical e85 setups based on the link forums.

6bolt head bolts have their limit. And that is well before 6-bolt arp head studs. No I do agree that 6bolt head bolts rival 7bolt arp head studs. . .

 

[->PrOjEcTGS<-]

Jay, remember to subtract your 3* base timing retard from what is seen on the logs since the ECU still thinks it's set at 5*.

I just looked at your log again. Why does your timing start high, retard til 4300rpm then start rising? Shouldn't it start low and steadily rise till peak torque then go up from there??

 

[jrohner]

It has to do with what load he's at in the maps, since he's tuning with a piggyback setup.

Almost seems like 4300 was where he hit a boost spike, although a 16g should be hitting max boost at 1000-1500 rpms less so it's most likely just his piggyback's correction factor doing it. It hurts the spoolup tremendously to have high timing where it starts to spool. I put my spool-rpm timing back to about stock 2g settings, and it lowered my spool rpm 400rpm's or more over my aggressive timing settings.

 

[yangtech]

Negative, 6 bolts have good headstuds and usually dont stretch.

30+ psi on the stock head bolts aight. I was thinking about upgrading to ARP studs but after seeing a few people running high boost with the stock head bolts I'm not going to change it till I do a full rebuild.

 

[JayRolla]

Jay, remember to subtract your 3* base timing retard from what is seen on the logs since the ECU still thinks it's set at 5*.

I just looked at your log again. Why does your timing start high, retard til 4300rpm then start rising? Shouldn't it start low and steadily rise till peak torque then go up from there??

MMCD lets you choose base timing so that is the right numbers. Also it retards just a little because I let off the gas right then. If you look I have 12 counts of knock which is phantom knock, so I let go and get back on it to get a clean run.

 

[->PrOjEcTGS<-]

MMCD lets you choose base timing so that is the right numbers. Also it retards just a little because I let off the gas right then. If you look I have 12 counts of knock which is phantom knock, so I let go and get back on it to get a clean run.

Cool, I just thought it was odd and was curious.

I'm used to TMO logger and that is not an option... I have limited experience with MMCD. Although I use it on my laptop with an emulator.

 

[Black_Bullet]

Dsmonster made some really good points.
Personally, I still think you should run the base timing lower until you get to a dyno, and then play with it on the dyno to see the gains/loses of advancing/retarding base timing, otherwise were just guessing were your MBT is at right now.

 

[JayRolla]

Dsmonster made some really good points.
Personally, I still think you should run the base timing lower until you get to a dyno, and then play with it on the dyno to see the gains/loses of advancing/retarding base timing, otherwise were just guessing were your MBT is at right now.

I went to Jacks to talk for a bit. They where pretty dead so me, Jack and his bro Kevin started to BS. Anyways Kevin is running 40psi on a very large t3/t4 of some sort with just an safc, evo maf and 1150's. Timing is hitting 28* on his car also. He said he has had gains from 22-26* depending on the car. But he said we are little high.

 

[Black_Bullet]

Jayrolla, so what are you going to do about your headgasket pushing coolant now?
Id say get a stock OEM mitsu headgasket with ARPs and be done with it, and that should handle those really high cylinder pressures your seeing much better.
Also consider you dont have cams yet, and the cylinder pressures will jump up even HIGHER when you do. Plus your saying you want a bigger turbo down the line, yea just gone and get ARP's, or Oring it like you were talking about in the other thread.

 

[JayRolla]

Im not positive its pushing coolent. If it is Im going to leave it for a little, its not bad. Ive seen people run low 11's pushing coolant. Not a big deal to me at the moment.

I will get some arp's (which are the same as stock 6 bolt studs IMO) and another OEM ML or try the Felpro metal HG. Either way I may pull the head so I can do the oring, along with 3g lifters (fix that pesky PK), cams and dual springs/retainers and be done with the head.

 

[Turbo Talon DL]

I've been following this thread for a few months now waiting to see which items will begin to fail after pushing the engine this hard. The 6-bolt head 'bolts' have a lower tensile strength rating than the ARPs but it wasnt much. It came up a few years ago when I was working on my forged bottom end. I believe it was 110,000 psi for the head bolts and 160,000 psi for the ARPs. I didnt get them because I dont ever plan on running more than 20 psi with any turbo I upgrade to after I get tired of this E3 16g. I was told by my builder that in order to use ARPs you need to torque-plate bore/hone the cylinders so that way when you apply the clamping load (head bolt/stud+the head) the cylinder walls 'distort' straight. I remember he asked me what I wanted to use and he said it was important so that he could torque the plate to 65ft/lbs and bore/hone the cylinders.

Is there a way to make sure you dont exceed cylinder pressures besides using a wideband, logger, and EGT gauges/tools?

 

[dsm-onster]

Cylinder pressure is the primary determination of torque. If you limit your self to a certain torque number then you will limit the cylinder pressure.

 

[JayRolla]

Im not even pushing the motor that hard. People have made a lot more power than me on a stock long block. Your going to be waiting forever to see this motor fail. .

 

[Turbo Talon DL]

Im not even pushing the motor that hard. People have made a lot more power than me on a stock long block. Your going to be waiting forever to see this motor fail. .

My bad.....Figured I'd take some 'flack' for what I said but I am not wishing any ill-will towards your goals. I was thinking because of the 16g being pushed so hard and all the backpressure being generated that the engine wouldnt like it too much.

I obviously dont have all the knowledge of tuning that you do which is why I follow these threads. You're a pretty active member so I follow a lot of what you are doing. I thought the 16g was best suited for at the most 20 psi and if you wanted to push it harder then something larger would be better suited for the task. My WG nipple popped off one hot summer day and boosted to 22 psi on 93 shell vpower. It made two really loud pow's and the blackest cloud of smoke i'd ever seen through my rear view. Compression test concluded everything was fine though. Maybe the 16g isnt that brutal after all or I just got lucky.

 

[JayRolla]

Well I turned boost down to 20 the other day and it was weak!! Im talking real weak compared to where it was at. I then gave the mbc two turns and it spiked to 22psi holding 20psi to redline. But it was like night and day in power. The 16g does not really open up till 22+psi.