Datalog Interpretation

[Siestarider]

http://www.datazap.me/u/siestarider/siestarider-ic-testing?log=1&data=8

Above is link to logs. When I updated my AP before flashing Cobb S3, I noticed the default log now records target AFR as well as actual AFR. Log 16 shows me I am running richer than target, ok for safety I guess, wonder if that will change with more run time?

Also, seems like all the breathing improvements have little effect on lbs/min air flow at high rpm. I may put stock exhaust back on.

Finally, I see a little timing pulled between 4000 and 5000 rpm. Unique to me?

My conclusion so far is that those of us in hot humid climates benefit from IC upgrade more than any other mod besides tuning.

 

[razorlab]

I must be blind, I'm not seeing Target AFR in your logs? I also do not seeing the timing pull you are stating?

 

[dyn085]

I must be blind, I'm not seeing Target AFR in your logs? I also do not seeing the timing pull you are stating?

This x2.

 

[Siestarider]

10-4, my errors. Logs 11-15 show a timing stumble, but the logs I posted do not.

Log 16 is the only one posted that shows both AFR and commanded AFR, must be part of the software update I received yesterday before I loaded Stage 3. I will post log 15 on datazap and a link, the stumble is between 4400 and 4700 rpm.

 

[Siestarider]

http://www.datazap.me/u/siestarider/siestarider-ic-testing-log-15?log=0&data=10

 

[razorlab]

http://www.datazap.me/u/siestarider/siestarider-ic-testing-log-15?log=0&data=10

That difference you are seeing in lower RPM is most likely accel enrichment.

 

[razorlab]

I wouldn't worry too much about that tiny little drop in the logged timing, it's just the dynamic timing doing it's thing.

If you log base timing, timing ceiling and and knock you will see how it all works it's magic.

 

[Siestarider]

Thanks, I will try more data categories. Very new at this.

 

[Siestarider]

When I went back and re-read this thread, I realized I should have followed up and posted my 3rd gear 2500-6500 rpm pull times with different setups.

With stock IC, Cobb S1, Mountune air, 2J DP, MBRP 3" exhaust around 8.6 sec.
Changed out stock to Cobb IC, around 8.0 sec. Cooler CAT is huge here in tropics.
Flashed to Cobb S3, around 7.6 sec w/same hardware, plus it was a few degrees cooler ambient.

So F=MA after all, I was slow realizing how powerful tuning is vs bolt on breathing improvements. Now I get why Razor took the development path shown in his build thread. A lot more cost-effective than my path.

Undeterred by my flaws, off to mountains late this week to test in cool air.

Anyone see the Oct issue R&T? A local driving a 99 Mazda dusted a R&T Editor driving a '14 Ferrari 458 Speciale over 11 miles of the Tail. Prancing pony could not keep up. Homies rule.

 

[Siestarider]

Swapped OEM exhaust for 3" today, ran logs to see how much I lost. Apparently nothing but the sound. All 3rd gear pulls, one typical 3" exhaust pull vs vs two OEM exhaust pulls, nothing else changed from most recent post. Still 7.6 sec under WOT 2500-6500 rpm.



Ok, log 16 is the 3". 17 and 18 are run both ways to control for wind, road is flat.

 

[dyn085]

The FiST does't benefit much from intake or CBE. It does benefit from the tune, IC, and downpipe. Here's my latest V-Dyno:

 

[Siestarider]

Very interesting. I converted to DynoJet output (fortunately left VDyno open last night) for better comparison, only thing I see is my TQ and HP peak a little later in rpm range.

But great to have confirmation of hardware vs software, thanks for posting. Do you check time elapsed at WOT through an rpm range?

 

[dyn085]

Very interesting. I converted to DynoJet output (fortunately left VDyno open last night) for better comparison, only thing I see is my TQ and HP peak a little later in rpm range.

But great to have confirmation of hardware vs software, thanks for posting. Do you check time elapsed at WOT through an rpm range?


View attachment 2131

No, but if our V-Dyno's are showing roughly the same numbers then you can assume we have roughly the same times as it's all just math.

Yes, I spool a touch faster. My latest tune revision added some fuel sooner for that. Note that while I show slightly higher numbers, I'm not running an intake-just a drop-in filter. That is an example of how most breathing mods don't really affect the baby-turbo. I've done data-logging to see how the drop-in compared to the OEM filter and it was basically identical.

 

[razorlab]

The stock turbo basically dictates the power curve, even more so when you don't have to worry about timing being knock restricted, like with Ethanol. Biggest gains are to be had right at peak torque because the turbo can still flow a bit more there.

Here are a couple examples.

This is my FiST with zero power mods other than tuning and E45 fuel (vs stock everything)

This is my FiST with FMIC upgrade, tuning and E30 fuel and tuned with less ignition timing for track use. Notice the whole curve just drops down, except for peak torque.

 

[Siestarider]

Hence your track logs indicating shift point 5500 rpm? Not worth the wear past that point?

 

[razorlab]

Hence your track logs indicating shift point 5500 rpm? Not worth the wear past that point?

Not worth the added heat from the turbo, not worth the higher rpm and shifting at 5500 rpm put me right back into the meat of the power band, where shifting higher would make for a shorter window.

 

[re-rx7]

Not worth the added heat from the turbo, not worth the higher rpm and shifting at 5500 rpm put me right back into the meat of the power band, where shifting higher would make for a shorter window.

I do this.

 

[JPGC]

The stock turbo basically dictates the power curve, even more so when you don't have to worry about timing being knock restricted, like with Ethanol. Biggest gains are to be had right at peak torque because the turbo can still flow a bit more there.

Here are a couple examples.

This is my FiST with zero power mods other than tuning and E45 fuel (vs stock everything)

This is my FiST with FMIC upgrade, tuning and E30 fuel and tuned with less ignition timing for track use. Notice the whole curve just drops down, except for peak torque.

Are these tunes specifically for E45 and E30 or are they 91 or 93 octane tunes for E10 with extra ethenal added to the fuel?

 

[razorlab]

Are these tunes specifically for E45 and E30 or are they 91 or 93 octane tunes for E10 with extra ethenal added to the fuel?

Because of the actions of the "staff" here, I am no longer posting on this forum. Feel free to ask me questions or follow my posts on the other forums. Thanks.

 

[BoostBumps]

Because of the actions of the "staff" here, I am no longer posting on this forum. Feel free to ask me questions or follow my posts on the other forums. Thanks.

wow...I'm really sorry to hear this...