Greddy E-Manage Tuning - Page 2

explosivpotato · #21 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 12:57 AM

Wow dude 270 all motor! That's pretty intense. And 13.8 compression! Damn dude a couple more points, and replace the spark plugs with direct injectors and you've got yourself a diesel LOL!

artieman · #22 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by explosivpotato

Wow dude 270 all motor! That's pretty intense. And 13.8 compression! Damn dude a couple more points, and replace the spark plugs with direct injectors and you've got yourself a diesel LOL!

naw diesel takes a lot more compression then that....but at this compression i can run alcohol methanol or ethanol....im waiting on e85 to get here already....the drag motors at the shop run on alcohol with 18.0:1 compression...they make about 290whp or about 340hp at the crank...

explosivpotato · #23 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 01:09 AM

Yeah we got e85 for ~1.70 a gallon. Can you imagine, 100+ octane for 1.70 a gallon?!

kylerwho · #24 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 01:09 AM

your making that power with a k20 in the civic si right?

artieman · #25 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kylerwho

your making that power with a k20 in the civic si right?

no...its a fully built bored and stroked b series....fully built k series are making well over 300whp all motor....skunk2 has a prototype k motor making over 400hp n/a....bisi makes over 300hp in his wack sohc setup...

kylerwho · #26 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 01:13 AM

bisi was making 422hp with his f22. i want to know how his castrol challenge f22 did. it was built hardcore!!

artieman · #27 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kylerwho

bisi was making 422hp with his f22. i want to know how his castrol challenge f22 did. it was built hardcore!!

that 422 is at the crank...not wheel...he makes about 346whp if you figure 18% loss
he also cheats....ever wonder why they wont let you know the weight of his car....also if you watch at the tree he preloads and his wheelie bar hits the ground before he launches...wheelie bar touching ground before tree says go is a no no....we tried to get him disqualified for doing it even though its against nhra rules and got blown off by officials...if we preloaded like he does we could shave quite a bit of time off our low 10 seconds runs...

artieman · #28 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 01:36 AM

explosivpotato we seem to have gotten a bit off topic in this thread....we should start another thread with just the info regarding tuning and see if we can have it stickied....

artieman · #29 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by explosivpotato

Hmm good points! I'll change that. It's very possible that my bad timing adjustments were "covered up" by the knock sensor retarding. Does this hold even when switching from regular to premium fuel? As in you can run advanced from the stock map in boost, because you're running premium and low boost? Or is it a rule for boost in general?

I'm coming up with a better tune with all of this... I'll upload it before work!

Thanks a LOT for your input!

EDIT:
I adjusted my ignition map to hit 2* retard (from stock) at 8psi, and interpolated into the start of vacuum. Just under 0psi, I think it's about 8 degrees advanced (from stock), and its ~5-7 otherwise (these are the values I was getting with the basemap), increasing as manifold pressure and RPM increase. So, timing increases from idle to 0 vacuum, then decreases in to boost. Sound right?

Thanks again for this info, +rep for you!

yes partially correct....but the timing your adjusting is on top of the stock timing maps....the emanage is a piggy back system....

this is typically what a boosted timing map will look like...this is comparable to hondata which is not piggy back

explosivpotato · #30 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 01:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by artieman

yes partially correct....but the timing your adjusting is on top of the stock timing maps....the emanage is a piggy back system....

Yeah I know, that's why I said (from stock). Is there something wrong with the numbers I used? Less advance in vacuum maybe? I just took it for a drive, and watched my laptop and the ScanGauge, trying to see if the timing numbers on the scangauge dropped sharply at any point (possibly indicative of knock retard), and it didn't seem to. After pulling timing in the top end in boost and getting my afr's to 12.5-12.7, it actually pulls a lot harder!

I'll consolidate the information we've got here and put it on a new thread. Then we've just gotta petition the mods to sticky it!

artieman · #31 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 01:59 AM

typically people disable the knock sensor on boosted setups...the knock sensor is "tuned" for the setup and any changes to the motor makes the sensor no longer accurate....also the knock sensor typically only works between certain rpm ranges and in closed loop....engine harmonics above a certain rpm range will make the sensor useless....

explosivpotato · #32 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 02:09 AM

Well damn. I figured the knock sensor would only really be useful in high-load, high-rpm situations, when knock is actually doing damage. I would have thought that they would have been engineered to work in that range.

What would you suggest then, short of just taking it to a dyno tuner?

BTW I made a new thread with our info (and your pictures) consolidated. Let me know if you think something should be changed

artieman · #33 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by explosivpotato

Well damn. I figured the knock sensor would only really be useful in high-load, high-rpm situations, when knock is actually doing damage. I would have thought that they would have been engineered to work in that range.

What would you suggest then, short of just taking it to a dyno tuner?

BTW I made a new thread with our info (and your pictures) consolidated. Let me know if you think something should be changed

take it to a dyno and play with timing starting with very little timing in boost....leave the map out of boost stock....the term you need to know here is MBT or minimum best timing....that is increase timing untill it stops making power....you want the least amount of timing that creates the most power....start low and increase it a couple degrees with each pull....make sure to let the car cool down between runs to avoid heat soak....after the car cools a bit start it up bring it up to normal engine coolant temp and do the pull....the key here is being consistent on the dyno

explosivpotato · #34 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 02:24 AM

OK that sounds simple enough. I'll see what I can do about finding some dyno time..

Just out of curiosity, what would you do for a street tune? You obviously can't tell the difference close enough to tell what the MBT is, so what do you do to ballpark it?

kylerwho · #35 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 02:24 AM

i know this is going a bit off topic but how reliable is running a turbo on a car in the long run? i have never dealt with a turbo before.

artieman · #36 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 02:28 AM

Timing can not be done properly on the street...although ive gotten pretty good at doing it by feel and sound and knowing how to tune and having an insane amount of hours on a dyno....

turbo setups can be just as reliable as stock setups at low boost levels if tuned properly...my friends 96 gsr i tuned here in california makes 426whp at 17psi and he now has moved to vegas and even in 100+ degree weather the car screams and now has considerable mileage on it without one problem....at the track near vegas we run it at 22psi on 91 octane and hasnt skiped a beat yet...but thats a fully built motor...

kylerwho · #37 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 02:32 AM

how reliable would you say a turbo is on the fit? would a supercharger be more reliable? im not looking for huge power figures but i do dd my car so that is important to me.

artieman · #38 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kylerwho

how reliable would you say a turbo is on the fit? would a supercharger be more reliable? im not looking for huge power figures but i do dd my car so that is important to me.

as long as the turbo setup has a good intercooler and the intake air temps arent very high it will be very reliable....one thing that bothers me about superchargers is most dont have heat exchanger anywhere to deal with increased air temps...a lot of high powered supercharged honda's only got where they are due to air to liquid heat exchangers...ANY TIME you compress air no matter how its compressed it will get hot....a turbo or supercharged fit will be very reliable if tuned properly at low boost levels 6-7psi...going 10psi or above you will increase air temp in a linear fashion...there is a lot of horror stories on the web about jackson racing superchargers and a lot of companies out there that make air to water intercoolers for them now....if you live anywhere that has hot summers i would buy an air to water intercooler for the supercharger setups even at low boost...

here is a system used for the miata with with jackson s/c http://www.modacar.com/products/Mazda/Miata/JRAWIC
i would suggest something like this for the fit with the supercharger

kylerwho · #39 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 02:45 AM

i live in washington where the temperature reaches 87 on good days. i would run an air to air intercooler because of the colder temp up here but i want to know which kit seems more realiable. 6psi is about as high as i want to go until i get the boost addiction.

artieman · #40 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kylerwho

i live in washington where the temperature reaches 87 on good days. i would run an air to air intercooler because of the colder temp up here but i want to know which kit seems more realiable. 6psi is about as high as i want to go until i get the boost addiction.

either will be just as reliable if setup properly....