<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blundar &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I'm tuning my homefry Tony Fowee's turbo D16A6 CRX in the next couple days. Will not be uberdata, but rather NG22 / TurboEdit 2.0-try10 'cause it's an OBD0 car. I thought I'd share my plan for tuning it so that it might help someone.

The car will be tuned on 93 octane unleaded pump gas. I'll prob dump a gallon of tolulene in the car + tweak the maps a little at the track sunday. Stock D16A6 motor, gutted 89 HF CRX. HF manifold, T3 turbo, DSM 450s, Saab viggen IC. Nothing bling. Hope to hit mid-low 13s on slicks. Shouldn't be hard considering weight of car.

I'll be aiming for:

13.5 AFR while NA. 28 degrees timing at boost/NA transition peak power production. Timing retarded by 1 deg / 1000 RPM on top side of RPM band after peak power production.

12.5 AFR from 0psi to 3psi. retard 0.25 degrees cumulative by 3psi (i.e. 0.08 degrees/psi)

12.25 AFR from 3psi to 5psi. retard 0.75 degrees cumulative by 5psi (i.e. 0.25 degrees/psi)

12.0 AFR from 5psi to 7psi. retard timing 1.75 degrees cumulative by 7psi (0.5 degrees/psi)

11.5 AFR from 7psi to 10psi. retard timing 5 degrees cumulative by 10psi (0.75 degrees/psi)

Timing ends up at 23 degrees @ 10psi ... little on the high side but not much. The gradual increase of retard is called a "step-retard." The step retard is designed to retard the timing when it is needed (high boost) and leave you with as much advance as possible when you don't to spool the turbo and get overall better performance. (low boost) BE CAREFUL. The key to a good step retard is to figure out where you want your FINAL timing to be, and work backwards from there.

AFRs get richer as boost climbs because fuel acts to cool combustible charge, makes for safer motor at expense of power production. The saying "lean is mean" applies here too - generally you'll make more power from the leaner AFRs at the expense of EGTs, detonation danger, etc. Run the higher AFRs while you can and gradually drop them as the motor needs it. Motors rarely like sudden changes in anything, and AFR is no exception.

I really spewed off a lot of garbage (and others did too - good stuff) in the thread on HMT so if you're curious, read up more there. (engine management forum)</TD></TR></TABLE>

WOW GREAT INFO!! Thanks a LOT!

Im happy to find this stuff out! I know a lot of people are finding this helpful.

 

hell yea blundar!- imma have to print that out when i tune my car

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by racinskittle &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

If I understand your question, the boost retard function retards it a set degree/lb across the whole boost portion of the map (you already knew this). Usually people are setting it at .7deg/lb on the basemap. This can be a little too much in the 1-3-5 lb portion of the map. So they set those individually at a lower retard/lb of boost. say .3 in these areas instead of the usual .7 across the board.

I tried this and it helped the lag noticeably actually.

</TD></TR></TABLE>

did you do yours in the 2d graph, i played with mine some and i noticed a better spool today

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by warwagon &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

did you do yours in the 2d graph, i played with mine some and i noticed a better spool today</TD></TR></TABLE>

You can do it in the 2D. Personally, I didn't because I like looking at the exact numbers. It may be easier to get it a little more consistent with adding through the table and then looking at the changes via the 2D map, but that will work fine. Just make sure you've changed the whole table

 

hey guys i was running a .bin del_slowest on turbod16 had made by modifying beerbong's maps and my car was bogging down up until after 3k rpms. Now I put in beerbong's map that leed posted up and now my car runs way smoother down low. I think that other map i had my ignition timing retarded way too much in low boost.

 

omg, FOWEEEEEEEE!!1111

Tell him I said hello.

 

Damn, this is making the hack look like more and more of a waste of time.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by SOHC_MShue &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">hey guys i was running a .bin del_slowest on turbod16 had made by modifying beerbong's maps and my car was bogging down up until after 3k rpms. Now I put in beerbong's map that leed posted up and now my car runs way smoother down low. I think that other map i had my ignition timing retarded way too much in low boost.</TD></TR></TABLE>

you wanna send that map to me
gozway99@hotmail.com

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by boostincoupe &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Damn, this is making the hack look like more and more of a waste of time. </TD></TR></TABLE>

lol not only that, but a huge rip-off too

 

great info! hmmm, i wonder if the boost retard function in uberdata can be updated from a flat retard per lb of boost to a step retard as described here. just have like 3 or 4 textboxes for each of the steps. anyways to everyone.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 1.8T_EG &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">great info! hmmm, i wonder if the boost retard function in uberdata can be updated from a flat retard per lb of boost to a step retard as described here. just have like 3 or 4 textboxes for each of the steps. anyways to everyone. </TD></TR></TABLE>

That is an excelent idea!

 

i concur

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blundar &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I'll be aiming for:

13.5 AFR while NA. 28 degrees timing at boost/NA transition peak power production. Timing retarded by 1 deg / 1000 RPM on top side of RPM band after peak power production.

12.5 AFR from 0psi to 3psi. retard 0.25 degrees cumulative by 3psi (i.e. 0.08 degrees/psi)

12.25 AFR from 3psi to 5psi. retard 0.75 degrees cumulative by 5psi (i.e. 0.25 degrees/psi)

12.0 AFR from 5psi to 7psi. retard timing 1.75 degrees cumulative by 7psi (0.5 degrees/psi)

11.5 AFR from 7psi to 10psi. retard timing 5 degrees cumulative by 10psi (0.75 degrees/psi)

Timing ends up at 23 degrees @ 10psi ... little on the high side but not much. The gradual increase of retard is called a "step-retard." The step retard is designed to retard the timing when it is needed (high boost) and leave you with as much advance as possible when you don't to spool the turbo and get overall better performance. (low boost) BE CAREFUL. The key to a good step retard is to figure out where you want your FINAL timing to be, and work backwards from there.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Hey Blundar whithout trying to put any responsibility on you how safe do you feel what you said above is to someone that does not have access to a Wideband to tune their vehicle? Or should they mabye go with the other suggestion of ".25 deg/psi from transition to ~5 psi, .5 deg/psi from 5-8 psi, and .75 deg/psi from 8+..."

Thanks

 

for a low boost (&lt;10psi) setup I will assert that shitty fueling as opposed to shitty timing kills more motors.

I say this for the simple reason that MANY people ran around with the AFC hack or similar setups on MORE advance than you end up with using a step retard and didn't blow their **** up. Although I'll probably get flamed for saying this, I think a properly done step retard can be safer than a linear retard because it will actually decrease EGTs because the motor runs closer to its optimal timing, instead of too far retarded.

My wideband is my new favorite tool. I can't stress how useful and fun playing with it is. As long as you err on the side of caution (richness) you won't have trouble with step retards - it's still less advance than an AFC hack.

 

yea i need to get a wideband sometime soon. I really wish i had the money for one

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by SOHC_MShue &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">yea i need to get a wideband sometime soon. I really wish i had the money for one </TD></TR></TABLE>

if you were closer than 12 hours away you could use mine

 

yea for real man. Maybe i'll have to take a drive to NC and use ricey mcricerton's

 

I have an ecu from a 94-95gsr with the uberdata chip for sale

Didn't mean to hijack thread..
Just wondering if anyone needed this cause I don't

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 202B &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I have an ecu from a 94-95gsr with the uberdata chip for sale

Didn't mean to hijack thread..
Just wondering if anyone needed this cause I don't</TD></TR></TABLE>

no hijacking son, i have a p30 in my sig

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blundar &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">for a low boost (&lt;10psi) setup I will assert that shitty fueling as opposed to shitty timing kills more motors.

I say this for the simple reason that MANY people ran around with the AFC hack or similar setups on MORE advance than you end up with using a step retard and didn't blow their **** up. Although I'll probably get flamed for saying this, I think a properly done step retard can be safer than a linear retard because it will actually decrease EGTs because the motor runs closer to its optimal timing, instead of too far retarded.

My wideband is my new favorite tool. I can't stress how useful and fun playing with it is. As long as you err on the side of caution (richness) you won't </TD></TR></TABLE>

There's no reason to argue with that at all. It can smother detonation (if it does occur), and it keeps EGTs at safe levels. You dont see too much fuel meltiong pistons or cracking ringlands.

 

you see too much fuel washing out rings and leading to having no power whatsoever as the motor is choked. why play games when one can just use uberdata for LESS?

 

Results:

60'...........2.126
330..........5.718
1/8..........8.588
mph.........85.98
1000........11.067
1/4..........13.146
mph........107.91



What up jd, let atlee and rob know I said hey

 

FOWEEEEEeee!!!11

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 1.8T_EG &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">great info! hmmm, i wonder if the boost retard function in uberdata can be updated from a flat retard per lb of boost to a step retard as described here. just have like 3 or 4 textboxes for each of the steps. anyways to everyone. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Any updates available for this feature?

 

lol guys it's not hard. Just subract it from the whole column by hand and you have a step retard