Mike Hood - who can you talk to on the CF stuff that was made for you?
07-16-2008, 10:50 AM
#22
AudiWorld Super User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ABA from a 94' Golf, best geometry of any of their engines + oil squirters and timing wheel
Takes all the worry about things fitting out of equation. If you modify like mine you will still be going thru a machining nightmare for the maincaps and girdle spacers (which are the key to holding the crank together @ hi rpms). But if you dont go the way I did you will have a ready made 2L, and will just have minor head work (plug 2 oil retn holes in head) and use a Honda timing belt if you go w/the big 1.8t heads. I think there may be a similar diesel 2L if you are willing to work the crank or settle for less than 8000+ RPM's that may be a little stronger, I seem to remember it had stronger reinforcement webbing, but it has been a few years since we looked at all the blocks made. I would just recommend that you get one w/forged crank, Pauter and J&E should have specs on the pieces for ABA, but I did do some options you may not be interested in such as moving ring lands down, stronger wrist pins/retainers and set up for Perfect Circle rings. There seems to be more torque than I have found on some strung together 2 litres because of the extra block deck height. Before I put in the dry sump I did spin a bearing on a very long hi-G sweeper. This caused me to dry sump for longevity.
07-16-2008, 11:54 AM
#23
AudiWorld Super User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you have a bias toward 034 then fine, by them or continue to pick up your check
I stated my problems. I said I would go Autronics because it was easier and had better docummentation. If that is not obvious to you, you need to read up on Autronics or look at a setup.
I have a strong suspicion that you are connected
to 034 - I cant imagine what your excuse would be if you are not, so instead of arguing with me, try to take my points and see if you could improve on those things I have pointed out as shortcomings. That would actually be beneficial. The simple fact that there was a glitch that the company had me chasing MY tail after when they knew it was their problem speaks volumes and volumes, at least to me.
Even if the update - which I was never informed of despite the fact that 034 knew I was having large and continued problems - fixes everything, the issue of getting run around for 3 or more years will keep 034 from ever being on par with Autronics in my estimation. Yes I DO have some ill will toward 034 as would anyone who had walked in my shoes!
I have a strong suspicion that you are connected
to 034 - I cant imagine what your excuse would be if you are not, so instead of arguing with me, try to take my points and see if you could improve on those things I have pointed out as shortcomings. That would actually be beneficial. The simple fact that there was a glitch that the company had me chasing MY tail after when they knew it was their problem speaks volumes and volumes, at least to me.
Even if the update - which I was never informed of despite the fact that 034 knew I was having large and continued problems - fixes everything, the issue of getting run around for 3 or more years will keep 034 from ever being on par with Autronics in my estimation. Yes I DO have some ill will toward 034 as would anyone who had walked in my shoes!
07-16-2008, 12:46 PM
#24
New Member
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: If you have a bias toward 034 then fine, by them or continue to pick up your check
>>I have a strong suspicion that you are connected
to 034
I'll tell you straight up that I am the designer of the ECU but the following are my words, not those of 034motorsport. I am not an 034 flagboy, nor an employee.
I know that although you have some legitimate gripes, your continued downplay of the 034 ECU and all things 034 has struck a chord with me.
>>the issue of getting run around for 3 or more years...
Your 3 year time-frame simply is an exaggeration.
The first introduction of "code" that led to the manifestation of the "glitch" was released into Beta on June 6th 2006.
When exactly did you purchase your ECU?
https://forums.audiworld.com/a4/msgs/2623988.phtml
>>The simple fact that there was a glitch that the company had me chasing MY tail after when they knew it was their problem speaks volumes and volumes, at least to me.
I am not going to go into detail as to what 034 said to whom and when, I am not privy to such information, but from what I have seen, read and experienced, they have always been honest and accurate of the problem as they understood it.
034 could not duplicate your issue, I would not say they had you chasing your tail on purpose, nor would I say that they knew what your problem was and failed to tell you about it. This is not the way they do business, there are plenty of people who will vouch for that.
You telling me that autronic is easier to tune, would be subjective at best. The 034 interface was designed to be easier, simpler offering tooltip help right in the user interface, and was designed around the fact that most other ECUs were difficult to tune.
Telling me that your tuner made more power on a lower powered engine is pure poppycock and has no weight IMO as to the ease of tuning. Not sure if you even tried tuning it yourself since you keep telling me your tuner tuned one of each time and the autronic made more power...
You keep talking about the lack of a user manual.
Did you or did you not receive a CD with your purchase? Did it not have documentation and a Stage "C" tuning manual installed on it?
If you ever get round to buying an autronic, let me know and I'll teach you how to test for ignition timing scatter and accuracy, then I will show you the real extra value when tuning to the bleeding edge of an engine.
Edited to add 11-06-2006 AW link.<ul><li><a href="https://forums.audiworld.com/a4/msgs/2623988.phtml">3 years?</a></li></ul>
to 034
I'll tell you straight up that I am the designer of the ECU but the following are my words, not those of 034motorsport. I am not an 034 flagboy, nor an employee.
I know that although you have some legitimate gripes, your continued downplay of the 034 ECU and all things 034 has struck a chord with me.
>>the issue of getting run around for 3 or more years...
Your 3 year time-frame simply is an exaggeration.
The first introduction of "code" that led to the manifestation of the "glitch" was released into Beta on June 6th 2006.
When exactly did you purchase your ECU?
https://forums.audiworld.com/a4/msgs/2623988.phtml
>>The simple fact that there was a glitch that the company had me chasing MY tail after when they knew it was their problem speaks volumes and volumes, at least to me.
I am not going to go into detail as to what 034 said to whom and when, I am not privy to such information, but from what I have seen, read and experienced, they have always been honest and accurate of the problem as they understood it.
034 could not duplicate your issue, I would not say they had you chasing your tail on purpose, nor would I say that they knew what your problem was and failed to tell you about it. This is not the way they do business, there are plenty of people who will vouch for that.
You telling me that autronic is easier to tune, would be subjective at best. The 034 interface was designed to be easier, simpler offering tooltip help right in the user interface, and was designed around the fact that most other ECUs were difficult to tune.
Telling me that your tuner made more power on a lower powered engine is pure poppycock and has no weight IMO as to the ease of tuning. Not sure if you even tried tuning it yourself since you keep telling me your tuner tuned one of each time and the autronic made more power...
You keep talking about the lack of a user manual.
Did you or did you not receive a CD with your purchase? Did it not have documentation and a Stage "C" tuning manual installed on it?
If you ever get round to buying an autronic, let me know and I'll teach you how to test for ignition timing scatter and accuracy, then I will show you the real extra value when tuning to the bleeding edge of an engine.
Edited to add 11-06-2006 AW link.<ul><li><a href="https://forums.audiworld.com/a4/msgs/2623988.phtml">3 years?</a></li></ul>
07-16-2008, 04:44 PM
#25
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 12,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could also run SDS :)....
I know a DBW that's running it, now what's that say 
and he put's down around 465whp daily and he on occasion drives it in the winter IIRC.<ul><li><a href="http://sdsefi.com/">Cleek</a></li></ul>
and he put's down around 465whp daily and he on occasion drives it in the winter IIRC.<ul><li><a href="http://sdsefi.com/">Cleek</a></li></ul>
07-16-2008, 05:32 PM
#26
AudiWorld Super User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, What about this?
"You telling me that autronic is easier to tune, would be subjective at best. The 034 interface was designed to be easier, simpler offering tooltip help right in the user interface, and was designed around the fact that most other ECUs were difficult to tune."
Can you say Autotune and have you seen or used it. This is a program in Autronics that tunes to a specif preset A/F ratio. Not a bleeding edge tune, but close. Yes you do have a nicer user interface, but getting the A/F close is quite a bit more important IMO.
I guess I should say if you had an Autotune system then your ECU would be nicer.
I will say again that my ECU has exhibited the same problems since the get-go. I really dont want this firefight to escalate, but I will tell you it had more to do with what I was told and what happened with Javad than your SW. Ask him the details. I have no problems that there is a glitch, but dont blame problems on mechanical issues.
But yes for almost everyone I have read from here on AW or MG, the vast majority would have been much better off with Autronics w/Autotune option. Whether you agree with me or not, that is my opinion having been associated w/034/Autronics/and Motec cars. The Autotune is the easiest option for a fair tune. It is not the bleeding edge, but it will go a long way for most. And while I am talking to you, would you please do some type of knock sensor hooked in;>}
I will see if I can get the knock frequencies for you.
Can you say Autotune and have you seen or used it. This is a program in Autronics that tunes to a specif preset A/F ratio. Not a bleeding edge tune, but close. Yes you do have a nicer user interface, but getting the A/F close is quite a bit more important IMO.
I guess I should say if you had an Autotune system then your ECU would be nicer.
I will say again that my ECU has exhibited the same problems since the get-go. I really dont want this firefight to escalate, but I will tell you it had more to do with what I was told and what happened with Javad than your SW. Ask him the details. I have no problems that there is a glitch, but dont blame problems on mechanical issues.
But yes for almost everyone I have read from here on AW or MG, the vast majority would have been much better off with Autronics w/Autotune option. Whether you agree with me or not, that is my opinion having been associated w/034/Autronics/and Motec cars. The Autotune is the easiest option for a fair tune. It is not the bleeding edge, but it will go a long way for most. And while I am talking to you, would you please do some type of knock sensor hooked in;>}
I will see if I can get the knock frequencies for you.
07-16-2008, 09:16 PM
#27
New Member
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: OK, What about this?
>>Can you say Autotune and have you seen or used it. This is a program in Autronics that tunes to a specif preset A/F ratio.
Of course, its an automatic cell tweaker.
Ive seen it and in concept its a good idea, but while I watched it work on different iterations, it came up with differences in a single cell values that are outside what I would call an acceptable tune.
I'll ask you now, have you ran 034 with a decent but imperfect map and let "closed loop" operate while using a wideband?
Ive tuned cars with a flat map (all 1.00s) and set the scaler and offset, then let the closed loop go to town with a +- 10% authority, priceless daily drivable performance with 5 minutes of tuning.
>>I guess I should say if you had an Autotune system then your ECU would be nicer.
Fair enough, its on the short list but ignition is FAR more important than fuel is.
Everybody tunes the cars with over-rich mixtures anyhow, but when it comes to ignition, no one is brave enough to let the software guess at playing with ignition values.
>>But yes for almost everyone I have read from here on AW or MG, the vast majority would have been much better off with Autronics w/Autotune option.
Well if the tuning experience was the most important aspect to standalone engine management then perhaps your statement would be correct, but the ECU has to work, and be accurate at both fuel and spark timing long after the tuning experience is over. This is where the whole accuracy thing comes into play. Trust me when I say Ive been round the block a few times when it comes to SEM, and I learned long ago that the most expensive SEM systems do not always have the best performance. If you want some homework look into the difference between an event based and a degree based system. Its a muddy line and most SEM mfgrs wont even tell you which one they are, but more or less it relates to having the ability to putting a spark or begin of injection event ANYWHERE in the 720 engine degrees. It also has to do with the fact that ALL crank trigger teeth are decoded so that accurate crank rate (not quite the same as RPM) is known in real time.
Based on this, certain mfgrs, (guess whos one of them) decode ONLY the crank wheel # teeth divided by the number of cyls. For a 60-2 (60 effective teeth) thats an event every 15 teeth, or 90 crank degrees. Why does this tidbit of info matter?
Well it relates to the ability to "predict" the extact intant in time between two "tooth events" where an ignition spark or begin of injection event occurs. The greater the number of degrees, the greater the rotational variation and idle fluctuation will impact the spark accuracy (injection timing is FAR less important).
Heres an experiment for you:
Take your car (with 034) and dial in a fixed 15 or 20 degrees of timing by setting all the cells so that this value will not vary.
Take your buddies super powerful autronic tuned engine and do the same.
Put a timing mark on the crank pulley and index it at whatever timing you set it to.
Start and run each engine and hook up a non advancing (dumb) timing light and watch the ECU SW (to verify that timing is what you think it should be and not bouncing around). Watch the timing light and note the amount that the timing bounces around the reference line.
Next rev the engine at a high rate (not RPM, make the engine accelerate quickly). Again watch the timing as you accelerate and decelerate the engine. Note the amount of timing lag on acceleration, and lead on deceleration.
Perform this test on both engines assuming they are suitably and similarly tuned.
Let us all know what you come up with (I all ready know but I'm not a spoiler).
>>And while I am talking to you, would you please do some type of knock sensor hooked in;>} I will see if I can get the knock frequencies for you.
I am not a big fan of knock sensors, mostly becuase nearly SEMs either dont implement knock detection in a realistic manner (they treat the sensor as a microphone and retard on any noise) and end up pulling timing with about any noise that sounds like it could be knock. A perfect example Ive seen at trade shows is when someone hits the engine block with a wrench and suddenly the timing starts to retard, "yeah thats what knock sounds like".
As you probably know based on your statement, knock detection is an engine specific phenomena with a narrow-band filter whose pass band corner frequencies and "Q" of the filter are parameters that need to be tuned by the tuner.
19 out of 20 tuners would have no clue how to handle this correctly, and those who might know lack the audio tools and spectrum analyzer needed for the data.
Among serious professional SEM tuners, there is a procedure which requires a dyno, that tunes the timing envelope bit by bit until peak mean brake torque is determined. This method works well becuase peak torque is experienced typically several degrees before detonation occurs. This means that if you tune it correctly (and the dyno is reproducible) you have several degrees of det margin built in by looking for the flat spot, and going back a degree or so. Your mileage will vary. For more info on this, goto www.efi101.com or better yet take the EFI101 tuning course.
Now there are always some that feel that SEM X and SEM Y have knock detection capabilities, so if SEM Z doesnt have it, then the others are a better value right?
Well, depends on if their detection actually works, and can be tuned to isolate other engine noises. IMO knock detection is a band-aid if it works, and a detriment if it doesnt.
My advice to you or any other SEM users thinking knock detection is mandatory, if the SEM doesnt let you set the upper and lower band corner freqs, or the center freq and band "width", AND if it doesnt let you set an amplifier sensitivity, AND doesnt have a trigger window timing, AND doesnt trigger the window off each individual spark instant time (cause thats when detonation begins), then the system is flawed and falls into the detriment category.
In any case there is a hardware project to add knock detection capabilities to 034 as well as other nice I/O expanding features via the CAN bus. It would have been released months ago but working on the "glitch" effectively halted all hardware and future firmware enhancements until the problem was fixed. It will be a while, no promises on when but a major firmware update will be first which will have the internal functionality already in it ready for the actual hardware release.
Sorry this is so long, I appreciated your last response (far more helpful than your previous ones) and felt you deserved a decent writeup relating to what you may and may not know about SEM.
Of course, its an automatic cell tweaker.
Ive seen it and in concept its a good idea, but while I watched it work on different iterations, it came up with differences in a single cell values that are outside what I would call an acceptable tune.
I'll ask you now, have you ran 034 with a decent but imperfect map and let "closed loop" operate while using a wideband?
Ive tuned cars with a flat map (all 1.00s) and set the scaler and offset, then let the closed loop go to town with a +- 10% authority, priceless daily drivable performance with 5 minutes of tuning.
>>I guess I should say if you had an Autotune system then your ECU would be nicer.
Fair enough, its on the short list but ignition is FAR more important than fuel is.
Everybody tunes the cars with over-rich mixtures anyhow, but when it comes to ignition, no one is brave enough to let the software guess at playing with ignition values.
>>But yes for almost everyone I have read from here on AW or MG, the vast majority would have been much better off with Autronics w/Autotune option.
Well if the tuning experience was the most important aspect to standalone engine management then perhaps your statement would be correct, but the ECU has to work, and be accurate at both fuel and spark timing long after the tuning experience is over. This is where the whole accuracy thing comes into play. Trust me when I say Ive been round the block a few times when it comes to SEM, and I learned long ago that the most expensive SEM systems do not always have the best performance. If you want some homework look into the difference between an event based and a degree based system. Its a muddy line and most SEM mfgrs wont even tell you which one they are, but more or less it relates to having the ability to putting a spark or begin of injection event ANYWHERE in the 720 engine degrees. It also has to do with the fact that ALL crank trigger teeth are decoded so that accurate crank rate (not quite the same as RPM) is known in real time.
Based on this, certain mfgrs, (guess whos one of them) decode ONLY the crank wheel # teeth divided by the number of cyls. For a 60-2 (60 effective teeth) thats an event every 15 teeth, or 90 crank degrees. Why does this tidbit of info matter?
Well it relates to the ability to "predict" the extact intant in time between two "tooth events" where an ignition spark or begin of injection event occurs. The greater the number of degrees, the greater the rotational variation and idle fluctuation will impact the spark accuracy (injection timing is FAR less important).
Heres an experiment for you:
Take your car (with 034) and dial in a fixed 15 or 20 degrees of timing by setting all the cells so that this value will not vary.
Take your buddies super powerful autronic tuned engine and do the same.
Put a timing mark on the crank pulley and index it at whatever timing you set it to.
Start and run each engine and hook up a non advancing (dumb) timing light and watch the ECU SW (to verify that timing is what you think it should be and not bouncing around). Watch the timing light and note the amount that the timing bounces around the reference line.
Next rev the engine at a high rate (not RPM, make the engine accelerate quickly). Again watch the timing as you accelerate and decelerate the engine. Note the amount of timing lag on acceleration, and lead on deceleration.
Perform this test on both engines assuming they are suitably and similarly tuned.
Let us all know what you come up with (I all ready know but I'm not a spoiler).
>>And while I am talking to you, would you please do some type of knock sensor hooked in;>} I will see if I can get the knock frequencies for you.
I am not a big fan of knock sensors, mostly becuase nearly SEMs either dont implement knock detection in a realistic manner (they treat the sensor as a microphone and retard on any noise) and end up pulling timing with about any noise that sounds like it could be knock. A perfect example Ive seen at trade shows is when someone hits the engine block with a wrench and suddenly the timing starts to retard, "yeah thats what knock sounds like".
As you probably know based on your statement, knock detection is an engine specific phenomena with a narrow-band filter whose pass band corner frequencies and "Q" of the filter are parameters that need to be tuned by the tuner.
19 out of 20 tuners would have no clue how to handle this correctly, and those who might know lack the audio tools and spectrum analyzer needed for the data.
Among serious professional SEM tuners, there is a procedure which requires a dyno, that tunes the timing envelope bit by bit until peak mean brake torque is determined. This method works well becuase peak torque is experienced typically several degrees before detonation occurs. This means that if you tune it correctly (and the dyno is reproducible) you have several degrees of det margin built in by looking for the flat spot, and going back a degree or so. Your mileage will vary. For more info on this, goto www.efi101.com or better yet take the EFI101 tuning course.
Now there are always some that feel that SEM X and SEM Y have knock detection capabilities, so if SEM Z doesnt have it, then the others are a better value right?
Well, depends on if their detection actually works, and can be tuned to isolate other engine noises. IMO knock detection is a band-aid if it works, and a detriment if it doesnt.
My advice to you or any other SEM users thinking knock detection is mandatory, if the SEM doesnt let you set the upper and lower band corner freqs, or the center freq and band "width", AND if it doesnt let you set an amplifier sensitivity, AND doesnt have a trigger window timing, AND doesnt trigger the window off each individual spark instant time (cause thats when detonation begins), then the system is flawed and falls into the detriment category.
In any case there is a hardware project to add knock detection capabilities to 034 as well as other nice I/O expanding features via the CAN bus. It would have been released months ago but working on the "glitch" effectively halted all hardware and future firmware enhancements until the problem was fixed. It will be a while, no promises on when but a major firmware update will be first which will have the internal functionality already in it ready for the actual hardware release.
Sorry this is so long, I appreciated your last response (far more helpful than your previous ones) and felt you deserved a decent writeup relating to what you may and may not know about SEM.
07-17-2008, 11:41 AM
#28
AudiWorld Super User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, this is meaningful.
"I'll ask you now, have you ran 034 with a decent but imperfect map and let "closed loop" operate while using a wideband?
Ive tuned cars with a flat map (all 1.00s) and set the scaler and offset, then let the closed loop go to town with a +- 10% authority, priceless daily drivable performance with 5 minutes of tuning."
You and I agree on tuning all load points w/o closed loop and only after a good spin up should you turn on closed loop which should smooth the transition between load points (which should be spot on before you proceed)only, and not rule the road. I cannot say if this hapened 1st time, but it will happen this time.
"Take your car (with 034) and dial in a fixed 15 or 20 degrees of timing by setting all the cells so that this value will not vary."
Yes you will see more scatter and I am awre of that, Motec scatters some too.
Regarding knock sensors, we are in agreement that most arent done right and at best are a bandaid to bad tuning OR broken or malfnctioning components - which is why I am interested in it. If I tune correctly I should never see knock unless I get bad gas/have an injector malfunction, etc.. I just want some warning - not necessarily a timing pull, I would be happy with a light that only functioned when it hits the right frequency in the correct timing window for the cylinder (S). I plan to tune so it is not really needed, but malfunctions and bad gas do worry me, so I can get it off the road quickly and check things out. I have a friend who is a VW engineer on a German plant floor and access to some knock noise info, it was my understanding that fairly similar engines say all 1.8t's will have the same approximate frequency and timing window. Is it so specific that it is every individual engine that must be measured to find the specific frequency and window? Is it also necessary to have a cylinder specific sensor before it will work or can the ECU detect the frequency under the 4 different windows for each cylinder?? I would love to be involved in working this out and will use my resources to help it happen.
Anyway, your post was notable as I feel someone is trying to help versus point fingers. I dont think Javad and I got off on the right foot. Thanks
I would like to communicate with you some more as I want to put into place a set routine to use when we do dyno time. I will be using Mark Swanson for tuning this time and we can tie up a dyno as long as possible to do it right. e-mail me @ s4audinut@aol.com if you would like to help me tie some of what I know together with a true plan to say my car was fully tuned. I will be doing a daily driver tune and a high perf tune where I will be utilizing an Aquamist 2c instead of race gas. Any help is appreciated, and I will not bash the machine anymore, as I mentioned my issues were more about the way it was all handled, my hat is off to you and your efforts, I am sure it will only get more robust!
Ive tuned cars with a flat map (all 1.00s) and set the scaler and offset, then let the closed loop go to town with a +- 10% authority, priceless daily drivable performance with 5 minutes of tuning."
You and I agree on tuning all load points w/o closed loop and only after a good spin up should you turn on closed loop which should smooth the transition between load points (which should be spot on before you proceed)only, and not rule the road. I cannot say if this hapened 1st time, but it will happen this time.
"Take your car (with 034) and dial in a fixed 15 or 20 degrees of timing by setting all the cells so that this value will not vary."
Yes you will see more scatter and I am awre of that, Motec scatters some too.
Regarding knock sensors, we are in agreement that most arent done right and at best are a bandaid to bad tuning OR broken or malfnctioning components - which is why I am interested in it. If I tune correctly I should never see knock unless I get bad gas/have an injector malfunction, etc.. I just want some warning - not necessarily a timing pull, I would be happy with a light that only functioned when it hits the right frequency in the correct timing window for the cylinder (S). I plan to tune so it is not really needed, but malfunctions and bad gas do worry me, so I can get it off the road quickly and check things out. I have a friend who is a VW engineer on a German plant floor and access to some knock noise info, it was my understanding that fairly similar engines say all 1.8t's will have the same approximate frequency and timing window. Is it so specific that it is every individual engine that must be measured to find the specific frequency and window? Is it also necessary to have a cylinder specific sensor before it will work or can the ECU detect the frequency under the 4 different windows for each cylinder?? I would love to be involved in working this out and will use my resources to help it happen.
Anyway, your post was notable as I feel someone is trying to help versus point fingers. I dont think Javad and I got off on the right foot. Thanks
I would like to communicate with you some more as I want to put into place a set routine to use when we do dyno time. I will be using Mark Swanson for tuning this time and we can tie up a dyno as long as possible to do it right. e-mail me @ s4audinut@aol.com if you would like to help me tie some of what I know together with a true plan to say my car was fully tuned. I will be doing a daily driver tune and a high perf tune where I will be utilizing an Aquamist 2c instead of race gas. Any help is appreciated, and I will not bash the machine anymore, as I mentioned my issues were more about the way it was all handled, my hat is off to you and your efforts, I am sure it will only get more robust!
07-17-2008, 06:27 PM
#29
AudiWorld Super User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
? regarding the timing scatter.
I had been told, therefore ***-umed the scatter was within +/- 2 degrees, what does it really work out to. I would assume someone had scoped it to get exact measurement.
07-18-2008, 09:40 AM
#30
New Member
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: ? regarding the timing scatter.
>>I had been told, therefore ***-umed the scatter was within +/- 2 degrees, what does it really work out to. I would assume someone had scoped it to get exact measurement.
It depends on a lot of variables, could actually be worse.
1) The timing point (you are measuring) and how many degrees after the tooth that is being used for timing.
2) The mass of the flyweel and crank.
3) The degree of induction camming.
The scatter (and lead/lag which you are not mentioning) relates to errors in the calculation of "when" to time the spark when the engine is not spinning at a constant rate, which face it, they do not. A 4 cyl engine has an odd sinusoid of acceleration and deceleration as the crank rotates under power. Time into the sloped areas of the sinusoid and you get a variable degree of degree related timing errors.
Having more teeth on the timing wheel (and using every one of them) allows you to minimize timing errors related to variation in rate. The frosting on the top of the cake is having enough processing power to detect and compensate for repeatable variations in rotational rate.
It depends on a lot of variables, could actually be worse.
1) The timing point (you are measuring) and how many degrees after the tooth that is being used for timing.
2) The mass of the flyweel and crank.
3) The degree of induction camming.
The scatter (and lead/lag which you are not mentioning) relates to errors in the calculation of "when" to time the spark when the engine is not spinning at a constant rate, which face it, they do not. A 4 cyl engine has an odd sinusoid of acceleration and deceleration as the crank rotates under power. Time into the sloped areas of the sinusoid and you get a variable degree of degree related timing errors.
Having more teeth on the timing wheel (and using every one of them) allows you to minimize timing errors related to variation in rate. The frosting on the top of the cake is having enough processing power to detect and compensate for repeatable variations in rotational rate.