BOP reflash dyno graphs
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
From: Conway, AR
Originally posted by jmimac351
I am through repeating myself to people that don't take time to read. The issues have been explained to you.
I suggest you buy yourself a chip.
Jim
IGNORANCE IS BLISS
I am through repeating myself to people that don't take time to read. The issues have been explained to you.
I suggest you buy yourself a chip.
Jim
IGNORANCE IS BLISS
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Originally posted by jmimac351
That is very true. It is not in question whether you can tune a motor for added mods by using a chip. That's been proven. The great advantage of the reflash is its ability to adjust to additional mods, within reason, and still reach its A/F goal. And not only adjust for mods, but adjust with the same mods for a different weather condition.
That is very true. It is not in question whether you can tune a motor for added mods by using a chip. That's been proven. The great advantage of the reflash is its ability to adjust to additional mods, within reason, and still reach its A/F goal. And not only adjust for mods, but adjust with the same mods for a different weather condition.
Hmm the computer didnt adjust to the shot of N20 ? What is its A/F Goal ? It was different in both N20 non N20 pulls
Originally posted by jmimac351
Doug, I have explained it many times and I have mentioned that exact issue several times. The reason is since the reflash enables the computer to use different air density readings at WOT it will know which setpoint in the tables to begin with based on the air density figure. If all of the setpoints are calibrated to reach "X" A/F goal then it is a matter of picking the proper setpoint for any given air density reading. Not sure why that is hard to understand.
Doug, I have explained it many times and I have mentioned that exact issue several times. The reason is since the reflash enables the computer to use different air density readings at WOT it will know which setpoint in the tables to begin with based on the air density figure. If all of the setpoints are calibrated to reach "X" A/F goal then it is a matter of picking the proper setpoint for any given air density reading. Not sure why that is hard to understand.
Originally posted by jmimac351
Stay tuned... you are getting ready to eat your words...
[Hint] Nathan has been to the dyno.
Stay tuned... you are getting ready to eat your words...
[Hint] Nathan has been to the dyno.
Originally posted by jmimac351
Read this quote from Onelfastlride above:
"The A/F was a dead on, I mean straight line 12:1 from 2500-6900rpm, it toed the line and didn't stray."
That is what the reflash enables you to do. And it should go without saying that something like that means more reliability. And that is what I care about with my $35,000 cobra that I am making payments on.
Read this quote from Onelfastlride above:
"The A/F was a dead on, I mean straight line 12:1 from 2500-6900rpm, it toed the line and didn't stray."
That is what the reflash enables you to do. And it should go without saying that something like that means more reliability. And that is what I care about with my $35,000 cobra that I am making payments on.
Originally posted by jmimac351
Hi Doug, that's great. But I don't think you realize where I am going with my question to Skip.
But since you posted your results... that is your A/F on that day, with that weather, with that particular tune - and it is not flat. The reading is getting fatter and fatter. In other words, it's obviously not trying to reach any particular "goal". The computer is not adapting to the conditions because it is still operating under the stock constraints with the chip fooling it into delivering more fuel. Compare your results with the comments by Onefastlride at the beginning of this thread:
"The A/F was a dead on, I mean straight line 12:1 from 2500-6900rpm, it toed the line and didn't stray."
That's the difference between a bandaid with a chip, and the computer actually intelligently adjusting to the conditions to reach a specific A/F goal via a reflash. Timing, et al notwithstanding, your truck is running safe with that setup. But that graph you posted does illustrate the shortcomings of the chip quite well - yet also shows how a chip can get by. It just doesn't do the job with timing or fuel the way I would want it done in my vehicle.
Hi Doug, that's great. But I don't think you realize where I am going with my question to Skip.
But since you posted your results... that is your A/F on that day, with that weather, with that particular tune - and it is not flat. The reading is getting fatter and fatter. In other words, it's obviously not trying to reach any particular "goal". The computer is not adapting to the conditions because it is still operating under the stock constraints with the chip fooling it into delivering more fuel. Compare your results with the comments by Onefastlride at the beginning of this thread:
"The A/F was a dead on, I mean straight line 12:1 from 2500-6900rpm, it toed the line and didn't stray."
That's the difference between a bandaid with a chip, and the computer actually intelligently adjusting to the conditions to reach a specific A/F goal via a reflash. Timing, et al notwithstanding, your truck is running safe with that setup. But that graph you posted does illustrate the shortcomings of the chip quite well - yet also shows how a chip can get by. It just doesn't do the job with timing or fuel the way I would want it done in my vehicle.
Hmm I dont see the above line any flatter than Dougs, No difference between the bandaid chip or recal reflash. I think Mike Wesley is right, they both achieve the same goals.
Originally posted by jmimac351
Doug, this was touched upon in the other post that you did away with.
Doug, this was touched upon in the other post that you did away with.
1) A/F is not a straight line like some of the Proflash people said.
2) Its obvious your truck is running very fat without N20 but on N20 it leans out. It was stated before that a reflash would keep the same A/F as mods were added.
Originally posted by jmimac351
I am through repeating myself to people that don't take time to read. The issues have been explained to you.
I suggest you buy yourself a chip.
I am through repeating myself to people that don't take time to read. The issues have been explained to you.
I suggest you buy yourself a chip.
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Originally posted by NateTrun2
buzz . what the hell is your malfunction?GEE I WONDER WHY I RAN RICH OFF NITROUS. CAUSE THE FREAKING N02 KIT'S FUEL REG. VAC LINE WAS F'ING IT UP.
buzz . what the hell is your malfunction?GEE I WONDER WHY I RAN RICH OFF NITROUS. CAUSE THE FREAKING N02 KIT'S FUEL REG. VAC LINE WAS F'ING IT UP.
Last edited by BuzzzLightyear; Jul 10, 2003 at 09:47 PM.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
From: Conway, AR
2 lines shooting n20. no. 1 line trying to make corrections to the fuel pressure while the computer is too on the basline run. yes. then tell me why i would always run 10.1 a/f with the vac line on no matter how we tryed to tune the fuel jet spraying. it was effecting wether you want to believe it or not. i don't care. you made your statements.
edit: it's obvious you have your mind made up. if your going to run it then you can make your own oppinion. if not, other options.
edit: it's obvious you have your mind made up. if your going to run it then you can make your own oppinion. if not, other options.
Last edited by NateTrun2; Jul 10, 2003 at 09:56 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 668
Likes: 0
From: Mi.
NateTrun2/jmimac351,
What we have here, is the failure to understand....
Some people you just can't reach!!
I'd like to see a single program chip compensate for a multiple 50 to 110hp shots of N20.
Flying **** is correct about the A/F. Getting A/F data after the cat's using a tail pipe sniffer is ball park.
What we have here, is the failure to understand....
Some people you just can't reach!!
I'd like to see a single program chip compensate for a multiple 50 to 110hp shots of N20.
Flying **** is correct about the A/F. Getting A/F data after the cat's using a tail pipe sniffer is ball park.
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Originally posted by NateTrun2
2 lines shooting n20. no. 1 line trying to make corrections to the fuel pressure while the computer is too on the basline run.
2 lines shooting n20. no. 1 line trying to make corrections to the fuel pressure while the computer is too on the basline run.
Originally posted by NateTrun2
yes. then tell me why i would always run 10.1 a/f with the vac line on no matter how we tryed to tune the fuel jet spraying. it was effecting wether you want to believe it or not. i don't care. you made your statements.
yes. then tell me why i would always run 10.1 a/f with the vac line on no matter how we tryed to tune the fuel jet spraying. it was effecting wether you want to believe it or not. i don't care. you made your statements.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 673
Likes: 0
From: Lexington, Ky
Originally posted by Flying ****
Contrary to belief, a 12.5 is considered a PERFECT A/F. That A/F is right on the nose. Another thing, which wasnt taken into account is Nates AFR reading was from a tailpipe sniffer instead of a wideband inside an 02 bung before the cats. This can affect your afr from .5 to .9, which in relative terms, is between half to one full point.
So, it does not work? Bah, that is sooo untrue. It worked as advertised.
I also have to add one more thing.. Nates recal'd PCM was NOT calibrated for Nitrous... So it took a 110 shot of juice, dry none the less and never hit 13.0. Had he has a wideband in before the converters, it would of been between a 12.3 - 12.5
Contrary to belief, a 12.5 is considered a PERFECT A/F. That A/F is right on the nose. Another thing, which wasnt taken into account is Nates AFR reading was from a tailpipe sniffer instead of a wideband inside an 02 bung before the cats. This can affect your afr from .5 to .9, which in relative terms, is between half to one full point.
So, it does not work? Bah, that is sooo untrue. It worked as advertised.
I also have to add one more thing.. Nates recal'd PCM was NOT calibrated for Nitrous... So it took a 110 shot of juice, dry none the less and never hit 13.0. Had he has a wideband in before the converters, it would of been between a 12.3 - 12.5
This is a very simple test for you ****, take your truck, take pulley off it, reflash pcm for stock mods, Dyno it, put the pulley on there without reflashing again, and dyno it.
Till we all see that we will be skeptical. it seems as though everyone expects us to jump up and down for this new reflash providing 'grey' info for us to make us decide on. This is in no way saying reflashes aren't the 'cats ***' but we would like to see REAL results. That dyno is great and dandy but a reflash with an N2o program is no differant than a chip with an n2o program on the dyno. DO my test (which really cant be that hard since a sh*t ton of people have lightnigns in that area, and there are tons of dynos there, I am sure one of the tuners in that area would be happy to donate the time for the test.
Brandon
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Originally posted by Thor01
NateTrun2/jmimac351,
I'd like to see a single program chip compensate for a multiple 50 to 110hp shots of N20.
NateTrun2/jmimac351,
I'd like to see a single program chip compensate for a multiple 50 to 110hp shots of N20.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
From: Conway, AR
stop, read, and understand.
Originally posted by 03Lightning
The dyno was done on the same dyno that he dynoed his truck on 03/22/2003. The differences include the addition of an electric fan, spark plugs, NO2 (not used for baseline) and computer re-flash. I believe that the dyno software compensates for weather conditions but on 03/22/03 the temperature was 65 degrees and on 7/8/03 it was 99 degrees. The two dyno conditions were not as equal as I would like to have seen because of the installation of the NO2 system. The system manipulates the vacuum pressure of the line going to the fuel pressure regulator. I don’t know if it affects the vacuum pressure all the time or only when the system is used. These are just the facts form what I saw and what the dyno operators said of the results.
Here is a chart that I made form the dyno sheets. On 3/22/03 Nate made more HP and TQ but his AFR was consistently one point leaner. The dyno operator felt that it was because of the changes to the fuel pressure regulator (due to the NO2 system). As I said before I don’t think that this gives us a true apples to apples comparison. The most interesting thing about the program (re-flash) is that it seemed to adjust for different jets for the NO2 system. With the fuel pressure regulator vacuum line modified the fuel ratio was consistently rich both with and with out the NO2. Run.006 is with the NO2 system completely hooked up but not spraying. Run.001 is when he dynoed on 03/22/03 Run.012 is with a 45 NO2 jet with the fuel pressure regulator vacuum line returned to stock. Run.011 is with a 50 NO2 jet with the fuel pressure regulator vacuum line returned to stock. I do not know what each jet size equals in HP shot but it was supposed to be a 55 to 75 lb adjustable dry kit. As you see in runs 011 and 012 the AFR stayed in the mid 12s even as we adjusted the shot. The dyno operator said that it was only the second time that he has seen a computer adjust to the different shots of NO2. He said that he was surprised that Nate could run the truck with three different setups and the same chip/program. I wish we could have gotten a run with no NO2 and the fuel pressure regulator vacuum line returned to stock. We got a total of 9 dyno runs with the dyno operator changing jets and playing with the vacuum lines. We only paid for 3 runs and a NO2 bottle fill so we did not want to push our luck. As the dyno operators changed jets and ran the truck they kept saying that they expected the truck to run leaner with each step up in jets, one of the guys said “I don’t know how this thing keeps hitting around 12.5:1 AFR”. One of the guys then questioned us as to who wrote the program and how to get in touch with them.
The dyno was done on the same dyno that he dynoed his truck on 03/22/2003. The differences include the addition of an electric fan, spark plugs, NO2 (not used for baseline) and computer re-flash. I believe that the dyno software compensates for weather conditions but on 03/22/03 the temperature was 65 degrees and on 7/8/03 it was 99 degrees. The two dyno conditions were not as equal as I would like to have seen because of the installation of the NO2 system. The system manipulates the vacuum pressure of the line going to the fuel pressure regulator. I don’t know if it affects the vacuum pressure all the time or only when the system is used. These are just the facts form what I saw and what the dyno operators said of the results.
Here is a chart that I made form the dyno sheets. On 3/22/03 Nate made more HP and TQ but his AFR was consistently one point leaner. The dyno operator felt that it was because of the changes to the fuel pressure regulator (due to the NO2 system). As I said before I don’t think that this gives us a true apples to apples comparison. The most interesting thing about the program (re-flash) is that it seemed to adjust for different jets for the NO2 system. With the fuel pressure regulator vacuum line modified the fuel ratio was consistently rich both with and with out the NO2. Run.006 is with the NO2 system completely hooked up but not spraying. Run.001 is when he dynoed on 03/22/03 Run.012 is with a 45 NO2 jet with the fuel pressure regulator vacuum line returned to stock. Run.011 is with a 50 NO2 jet with the fuel pressure regulator vacuum line returned to stock. I do not know what each jet size equals in HP shot but it was supposed to be a 55 to 75 lb adjustable dry kit. As you see in runs 011 and 012 the AFR stayed in the mid 12s even as we adjusted the shot. The dyno operator said that it was only the second time that he has seen a computer adjust to the different shots of NO2. He said that he was surprised that Nate could run the truck with three different setups and the same chip/program. I wish we could have gotten a run with no NO2 and the fuel pressure regulator vacuum line returned to stock. We got a total of 9 dyno runs with the dyno operator changing jets and playing with the vacuum lines. We only paid for 3 runs and a NO2 bottle fill so we did not want to push our luck. As the dyno operators changed jets and ran the truck they kept saying that they expected the truck to run leaner with each step up in jets, one of the guys said “I don’t know how this thing keeps hitting around 12.5:1 AFR”. One of the guys then questioned us as to who wrote the program and how to get in touch with them.
Originally posted by 03Lightning
It looks like we are still not on the same page. The AFR went up bacause you are comparing it to a none NO2 run that was unusually ritch. The tuners at Speed Works felt that it was because interfearance from the NO2 fuel pressure modification. What AFR do 4lb chiped trucks show in the same conditons? Also no one has addressed why when the NO2 jets were changed the AFR stayed within .50 and as close as .00 (even) as the increasingly higher shots were used. This couldn't be adaptive strategy could it?[/B]
It looks like we are still not on the same page. The AFR went up bacause you are comparing it to a none NO2 run that was unusually ritch. The tuners at Speed Works felt that it was because interfearance from the NO2 fuel pressure modification. What AFR do 4lb chiped trucks show in the same conditons? Also no one has addressed why when the NO2 jets were changed the AFR stayed within .50 and as close as .00 (even) as the increasingly higher shots were used. This couldn't be adaptive strategy could it?[/B]
Originally posted by 03Lightning
Beefcake, every time the truck was run with the NO2 system's fuel pressure regulator vacuum line working as the kit was designed the truck ran rich (10.9:1-11.3:1). Even with diferent sized jests and no NO2 the AFR stayed rich. Then we decided to take the NO2 vacuum line kit off and the truck stayed around 12.2:1-12.5:1. Also, the AFR would progressively get richer as the RPM's went up.
Beefcake, every time the truck was run with the NO2 system's fuel pressure regulator vacuum line working as the kit was designed the truck ran rich (10.9:1-11.3:1). Even with diferent sized jests and no NO2 the AFR stayed rich. Then we decided to take the NO2 vacuum line kit off and the truck stayed around 12.2:1-12.5:1. Also, the AFR would progressively get richer as the RPM's went up.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,433
Likes: 3
From: cincinnati, ohio
THE REASON BUZZ KEEPS ASKING IS BECAUSE YOU GUYS SAY THE PROBLEM WAS FIXED, HOWEVER WE HAVE YET TO SEE A DYNO WITHOUT THE N20 WITH ANYTHING OTHER THAN A 10.9 AFR
jesus christ, you guys are complaining about repeating when you have yet to prove anything,
just like buzz said, if you were burned for a 100 shot on a chip and you take it off, your going to run pig rich, just like i said you would run and just like you did,
also, the a/f looks fine, a little on the high side , but IT IS NOT STRAIGHT AS WAS CLAIMED IT WOULD BE
the a/f starts out fatter and gets leaner the higher it goes up, just like every dyno graph i have on my truck,
you guys can keep trying to throw around excuses, and this and that, bottom line, the dyno's speak for themselves, good luck with yor setup,
jesus christ, you guys are complaining about repeating when you have yet to prove anything,
just like buzz said, if you were burned for a 100 shot on a chip and you take it off, your going to run pig rich, just like i said you would run and just like you did,
also, the a/f looks fine, a little on the high side , but IT IS NOT STRAIGHT AS WAS CLAIMED IT WOULD BE
the a/f starts out fatter and gets leaner the higher it goes up, just like every dyno graph i have on my truck,
you guys can keep trying to throw around excuses, and this and that, bottom line, the dyno's speak for themselves, good luck with yor setup,
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 673
Likes: 0
From: Lexington, Ky
Originally posted by NateTrun2
crazy, put on a nitrous kit without a chip reburn and run a 100 shot through it , please, will you?
the computer is not a chip.
crazy, put on a nitrous kit without a chip reburn and run a 100 shot through it , please, will you?
the computer is not a chip.
The point of my statement is the n2okit is a differant because it alters the amount of fuel entering the motor by modulating fuel pressure.
So I am missing your point with this statement...
Brandon
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Hmm I dont know where that qoute comes from but it does answer my questions but still brings some conclusions too.
It appears that Nate is not only boosting fuel thru a chip but the N20 kit he has is boosting FP. He does have the T hooked up to the Fuel Pressure regulator. Nate your tune is set to add fuel for the added n20, you need to disconnect the n20 regulator and just spray thru 1 solenoid and straight into the TB. Since you have a chip, there is no need to boost fuel via the n20 regulator and 2nd line.
Here is the kicker, the program is fat without the n20. Im pretty sure its this way because BOP set it up to run with N20 as well as boost. (Thats just speculation and until Nate hooks his kit up correctly we wont know) That still brings the question up, Does the computer correct for added boost or n20 or is a reflash no different than a chip. Here is my opinion and go ahead and flame me ( I got the fire suit on ) I truely believe what Mike Wesley has said, both are different ways to achieve the same thing. The only advantage I see a reflash offering is no filing of the protective coating. Until Nate or somebody else Dynos again to prove or disprove all the BS, I think alot of spouting is being done by those who have nothing more than me, a opinion.
Good Luck to all in your opinions and Nate thanks for giving us results and not just opinions. I hope all this BS wont keep you from sharing info in the future. As far as Ive seen you are the only person to give proof on how this mod will improve our vehicles.
It appears that Nate is not only boosting fuel thru a chip but the N20 kit he has is boosting FP. He does have the T hooked up to the Fuel Pressure regulator. Nate your tune is set to add fuel for the added n20, you need to disconnect the n20 regulator and just spray thru 1 solenoid and straight into the TB. Since you have a chip, there is no need to boost fuel via the n20 regulator and 2nd line.
Here is the kicker, the program is fat without the n20. Im pretty sure its this way because BOP set it up to run with N20 as well as boost. (Thats just speculation and until Nate hooks his kit up correctly we wont know) That still brings the question up, Does the computer correct for added boost or n20 or is a reflash no different than a chip. Here is my opinion and go ahead and flame me ( I got the fire suit on ) I truely believe what Mike Wesley has said, both are different ways to achieve the same thing. The only advantage I see a reflash offering is no filing of the protective coating. Until Nate or somebody else Dynos again to prove or disprove all the BS, I think alot of spouting is being done by those who have nothing more than me, a opinion.
Good Luck to all in your opinions and Nate thanks for giving us results and not just opinions. I hope all this BS wont keep you from sharing info in the future. As far as Ive seen you are the only person to give proof on how this mod will improve our vehicles.
