You can go to AZ and see this guys logs for yourself. The guy who saw 28 degrees of timing peaked at close to 14psi boost and 1400 kg/hr MAF and something like 35 deg C average IAT on his pump APR program. I checked my logs and my APR 93 timing curve (with enough corn juice in the tank) appears to follow his within a fraction of a degree at maybe 50kg/hr less load/MAF and IATs in the 40s. I know load makes a significant difference going from stock to tuned, but once you are on an established tune in average conditions (not heatsoaked) there is a pretty good consistency on what ignition timing the car will support without knock.
Haha, I have zero interest meeting you in real life. You have shown to have no respect for me, a pretty wide lack of knowledge of this platform, complete blinders on when people provide counter arguments (reading comprehension 101), and a propensity to just vomit out unrelated tuning knowledge as some sort of way to make you seem like an expert. I don’t think you are even remotely close to an expert. And you aren’t going fast on this platform, and you have zero mods/experience that I would be interested in learning about. Even your little mid-ohio highlight reel on AZ shows you were pretty damn slow at MO.
As far as how I act in real life, that’s a pretty hilarious passive aggressive way to somehow challenge me. If I saw you in real life, I would tell you to fuck off and would immediately end the interaction with you. Why? Because I have literally zero to gain from your conversation.
And please don’t lump Jran into your little party of CW “logging zealots”. I’ve been in touch with him many of times and have only the highest respect for his intellect, opinions and what he’s done with this platform. I would absolutely meet up with him, shoot the shit and grab some beers.
Lol, that log was taken on my tablet with whatever saved config I had for logging knock. Which is exactly what you were bitching about. And regarding the timing curve. It was good enough for me to trap 116, so something is right. How did your car run at the drag strip?
Ok, so drob suggest heat and fuel quality may be an issue causing that car to be requesting more timing than it can achieve and retard timing based on knock detection.
And i’m crazy for also suggesting to a poster the same thing which is that his timing profile may be too high for his fuel quality and to try a lower timing profile until or if he can make improvements?
Mike
[/quote]
Dude, that guys IAT were 70-85 C!!! The ones you took from my car were 40 C. I’m am confused why you don’t see this as significant??? And basically why comparing them is meaningless.
where did I say anything about the E85 not influencing anything? I said he posted a 93 only log with very similar results (difference of 0.5 degrees pulled). Why did he post it? YOU FUCKING ASKED HIM FOR IT
Basically you’re the lowest ranking member of this website…and you’re accusing a well respected member of the site of lying? Why don’t you just say ‘sorry drob, I shouldn’t have made that remark’
Like drob has anything to gain by lying to a couple of internet nobodies about his fucking fuel tank contents.
You two act like we’re all secret APR shareholders here. NEWSFLASH…APR hates this site because the open nature has singlehandedly stained APR’s reputation, permanently by allowing members to post without fear of deletion or censorship. Good and bad, APR or competitors. Nobody has any allegiances here other than to facts.
I am neither an owner, nor a moderator. I just recognize that you guys are here for no positive reasons and when you start calling people liars because their results contradict your witch hunt theory, that’s when you’re basically worthless to me. .
And mine were 45, another guy’s were 35, and IATs in between all saw 6-8+ degrees of correction. Knock correction is not due to heatsoak, it is due to the timing map not selecting the appropriate value for your heatsoak. It knows your IAT. With a different timing map you could see no correction at all at 85 C. I explain it a bit in the other thread.
I completely agree with you Drob - your timing was probably very high to make that happen. Probably higher than the usual pump tune 
I don’t understand what you are insinuating. I have some magical tune that runs more aggressive timing than the pump tune?
LOL, no - I’m insinuating that the APR 93 tune runs more aggressive timing than the usual pump tune. I thought that is what we’ve been debating but I doubt anyone is listening to each other anymore.
I don’t see any evidence that you know how the timing map is created. Using whatever knowledge you gained from your B5 days just seems like speculation. I know that 85 C intake temperatures are ridiculously high and would certainly increase the probability of auto-ignition. You thinking that there is a static function
timing(t) = f(IAT(t), RPM(t), MAP(t), …, Map1, Map2, …)
just seems like you are trying to explain something complex in a simple manner. Engine control systems are compositions of adaptive controllers, basic feedback structures, feedforward look up tables…all attempting to minimize multi-variate cost functions (emissions, performance, fuel-econ) while maintaining measures of robustness to DTC’s and other disturbances such as leaks and hardware failures.
I have no idea why you are seeing knock and I have no idea why the other guy is. Why don’t you start a new thread (about your car), take a bunch of logs, go run the car at the drag strip for an actual objective benchmark, and we’ll see if the collective community can understand what is going on. But please leave my logs, moogas’s logs out of it. Make a thread for your car.
And realize that people generally post logs when their cars actually have problems. I know you guys think that’s backwards because the CW group is so focused on logging timing correction…but that’s because those cars are stuttering on shifts, throwing hard and soft codes, and performing poorly in certain operating conditions.
Yea ok…so I just ran the tune for you on pump gas (I filled up with 93 on my way home from work yesterday, do you need a log for that too?) and I don’t see the car dialing back much timing. Seems like you are still grasping at straws here. I think it’s time for you to move on from your general theories on APR and focus on your car. To start with, how does it perform at the drag strip?
Just asking to see a log of your actual ignition angle along with the knock correction. Whenever you get a chance. And I doubt anyone in this thread cares about how my car is performing lately.
I don’t know the intricate details but yes the timing maps are indeed a function of those factors by same method or another. That isn’t S4, that is tuning 101 for all engines. But how about a REVO engineer who tunes the SIMOS on the S4 as posted on Audizine:
you have to have an understanding of how the SIMOS ECU works. It has three different timing tables that it will interpolate from to arrive at a final ignition timing value after passing through many factors for cat temp, intake air temp, load, etc etc… Precise calibration of these tables is necessary to achieve a smooth and strong timing curve.
So the map lookup should take 85 deg C IAT into account with a calibrated timing value for that condition. If the tune is ‘right’ there won’t be excessive knock correction.
Exactly, “passed through many factors” doesn’t mean it’s black/white. Partial compensation does not imply absolute compensation. There are integrators, matrices, blending factors etc. There are not little gnomes that live in the ECU, watch a bunch of monitors and treat it like mission control where they make sure the “ignition timing” is perfect over ALL operating states. And by a static function, I mean that the controller is not memoryless, so one day it might do one thing, another something else.
I can verify first hand that no matter what they thought they calibrated, that the REVO engineers end result did not practically correct timing advance, at all, when there are high IATs lol.
Yeah I heard about that - incidentally this engineer came out recently (post-timing debacle - if I’m right in hearing their tune is safe now).