224 Stage I Single Turbo Buick V6 does the impossible. 8.76 @ 158.7

[Alky V6]

I was actually talking about not being able to reach the Target CO2 levels you are programming in the AMS. It appears you are not giving enough time in some stages for the ramp to actually acheive the target. I may be mistaken since I didn't actually plug the values into the controller.

I know in previous threads you mention you aren't really looking for advice and you do find it more rewarding when you go through the learning process yourself and come up with the answer on your own. My concern with this, is that in some of your threads it might "appear" that you are offering a sort of learners guide when some of the info may not be quite correct and someone might take it as gospel. After seeing here (a year and a half later) that you were being sarcastic about the AMS thread, I now understand your REAL intent.

You didn't have to wait a year and a half to find that out. All you had to do was read the first post of that thread.

 

[Alky V6]

The turbo won't stop making boost due to those surging conditions unless a piston shoots through it

That turbo is enough to push well into the 7 second range in a 3200# car without issues. Probably 50# of boost or more on your motor.

Well, 50 pounds isn't going to happen. I'll be happy with an 8.50... I think.

 

[Dusty Bradford]

Wow, this is something that I had never thought of before. My old car (Franks) flat lined and dipped in 3rd gear. I didn't have enough passes to tune it out, but was puzzled (and nervous) about possible causes - converter-trans-valvetrain . Now i'm convinced the converter was too tight and the engine wasn't in the correct operating range in 3rd. This one post (if it applies to my situation) was probably the single most important thing I've read on this board all year.

Yes that converter was too tight. The car needed more power to overcome the converter. But that's the drawback of the 4L80 behind a big turbo V6. Same issue that troubles large turbo, stock cam engines.

Get enough stall to spool the turbo and it slips too much, get it to couple effectively and you can't spool the turbo. It's something you will fight with any lock-up based converter if the combo isn't well matched....meaning the turbo needs to be just big enough to meet the e.t goals of the owner.

 

[HighPSI]

You didn't have to wait a year and a half to find that out. All you had to do was read the first post of that thread.

Then I read your second and subsequent posts and got that old familiar feeling I was being lectured back in 4th grade again.

I am curious why you have ignored my questions about the possibilty of not being able to reach the Target CO2 levels you are programming in the AMS? I suppose I can set one up on the bench to see if there is any merit to this. I would assume you would know off the top of your head since you programmed the unit

 

[Alky V6]

First of all, thanks Cal for encouraging me to waste 30mins of my life that I will never be able to get back.................

Congrats Donnie on your new personal best!

I'm contemplating trying the same engine management TEC3-r on my new twin turbo GS project. The only reservation I have at this point is the software appears to SUCK as well as the data logger when comparing to a FAST or BS3. If I stay the course with the TEC system I will run a separate PCS datalogger which can interface with the TEC via the RS232 port. This is the same company that makes the dash logger for FAST. This would be the equivalent of having the datalogging capabilities of the FAST system although it still wouldn't have the ability to spread everything you need out on one screen and overlay data onto tables. FWIW.

Couple of observations from all the BS........




I can attest to this. My RPM curves look relatively flat other than the shift changes but the ds rpm just continues to build. And like Dusty said, the rpm should always fall back to the true stall regardless of the shift points. You could save yourself a lot of headache and $$ if you let Dusty spec you a converter and improve your performance to boot. You will never get the perfect converter using NOS to spool a turbo - there will always be a certain amount of compromise. I speak from experience in using the juice with a BIG turbo.

BTW, my PTC calculated slip up top is around 4% I guess I need to install that tire growth sensor to see what it really is.



I noticed the same thing. Why do you feel you need to use all the available stages on the AMS if you don't necessarily need them?

LOL! Sorry. I didn't expect this thread to keep going on like this. Although, I think others have graciously offered up some very good information. Funny how a timeslip thread would turn into such a technical piece.

I agree with you on the TEC system. Electromotive has really lagged behind everyone else. Still, it's very hard to beat their ignition system. Data Log Lab is another aftermarket option that can be used to read TEC unit datalogs. That is the program that was used to come up with the datalog posting in this thread.

 

[Alky V6]

Then I read your second and subsequent posts and got that old familiar feeling I was being lectured back in 4th grade again.

I am curious why you have ignored my questions about the possibilty of not being able to reach the Target CO2 levels you are programming in the AMS? I suppose I can set one up on the bench to see if there is any merit to this. I would assume you would know off the top of your head since you programmed the unit

Sorry. I didn't mean it to appear that I was ignoring your question. I figured since you had so much experience with these units, you didn't need me to tell you how my strategy works.

I'm not clear what the question exactly is? Are you wondering if the target pressure can actually ramp as quickly as my program is set up to?

Cal. I don't start posts with the intention of informing a person that has much more experience than me, such as yourself. I start a thread with the idea that there are those that appreciate me taking the effort and time to bring them up to speed with my understanding of the topic I'm writing about. I'm sorry if it bores you, but if I were writing a technical thread for someone like you, well, I'd probably not even bother starting it since I do realize it would just bore someone like yourself.
Do me a favor. I really don't need to hear from you that my threads bore you. Be polite enough to keep those kind of comments to yourself, please.

 

[Eticket]

Yes that converter was too tight. The car needed more power to overcome the converter. But that's the drawback of the 4L80 behind a big turbo V6. Same issue that troubles large turbo, stock cam engines.

Get enough stall to spool the turbo and it slips too much, get it to couple effectively and you can't spool the turbo. It's something you will fight with any lock-up based converter if the combo isn't well matched....meaning the turbo needs to be just big enough to meet the e.t goals of the owner.

Donnie, sorry to hack your thread - congrats on new best times.

Dusty, the converter worked well spooling up the 3 bolt 76 but in the end was too tight for optimium perf. - flashed 5100- but obviously was a issue when I upgraded the turbo. sending you a pm to take this offline.

 

[HighPSI]

Sorry. I didn't mean it to appear that I was ignoring your question. I figured since you had so much experience with these units, you didn't need me to tell you how my strategy works.

I'm not clear what the question exactly is? Are you wondering if the target pressure can actually ramp as quickly as my program is set up to?

Since I didn't currently have an AMS1000 installed in a vehicle, I decided to ask you instead of setting one up on a bench or doing the Math. Since you have spent so much time with YOUR program, I figured you would know immediately. In a nutshell, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR YOUR AMS TO REACH THE TARGET BOOST VALUES OF ALL THOSE STAGES? In case you are unsure, in spite of my experience, I am really asking for an answer. I am not be rhetorical, sarcastic, facetious, etc...

 

[HighPSI]

Do me a favor. I really don't need to hear from you that my threads bore you. Be polite enough to keep those kind of comments to yourself, please.

You edited your post, so I'll respond to this seperatly. I don't claim to know everything, hence my question to you about your program. I never claimed you bored me, and can't see where that was implied. My comment about being in 4th grade is not about boredom, but about you coming across as a teacher and someone actually using that as a guideline. Another example is your comment:

"WARNING: These low numbers that everyone is throwing around for torque converter slippage on the top end are not realistic numbers!!!
Sorry for not figuring this out a lot sooner for you people."

 

[HighPSI]

Take your time answering. I'm going to bed.

 

[Alky V6]

This thread has gone on long enough.

Cal. The answer is a little complicated. I think you would get more out of it if you waited until you had the chance to plug the numbers into a unit and saw how it worked first hand. You may find that it's worthless junk, but it's working well enough for me.

 

[HighPSI]

The answer isn't complicated. Is it either Yes or No?

If some of you haven't realized it by now, the majority of my threads and postings are meant to share with others the adventures I've gone through with this project, and maybe teach something to someone. If nothing else, to show them that there is more than ONE way to skin a cat. The feedback has been fun, but believe me, there's very little that I can't figure out on my own, and I think I've proved that throughout the many postings I've made.

I think your above statement says a LOT. I am willing to discus a potential flaw in your boost strategy and you just want to blow things off saying that the answer is "too complicated" or that I may find it's "worthless junk".

Answers like this and the your quote above are what give me the impression you aren't here to learn just teach.

 

[Alky V6]

I think that me trying to explain my boost controller strategy to you would be the same as me trying to explain why I went with a 91mm turbo. I can spend months trying to explain it, but will still receive grief for it, even though I've now shown that I could make it work. The same way my boost controller strategy works for my particular situation.
It is not a black and white, yes or no answer. I do have some interesting observations about how the unit works with my combination, and it would make for a very interesting read, but because of the risk of me appearing to be trying to teach the expert here, I'm going to pass on your more than gracious invitation you've made in front of us all to have me explain it to you.

Bottom line is, I really don't owe anyone here an answer. In particular, those that don't have it in them to ask for one with civility.

 

[Alky V6]

Realize, Cal, that I do my fair part in sharing the vast majority of my ideas, experiences and observations on this board, with no to very little reward. Most of the time, quite the opposite. This thread is a very good example.
There are a small number of mods, ideas and observations that I do prefer to keep to myself. Some because they're just too bitchin and others because I realize it would be too difficult to convey to others. This controller strategy falls into the later. You have to play with it in my particular situation to see how it works. It may not work with any other turbo. I don't know that for sure. But, as you can see, I think it would be pretty hard to clock an 8.76 with my type of combination if the boost controller strategy was complete junk.
Instead of trying so hard to understand my goofy controller strategy, why don't you simply offer up what I should be running? It would be interesting for us all to see you share something with me, instead of trying to tear down.

 

[S2V6RACER]

Only thing I can add here is if I would have spent more time working on my chassis in the early days than trying to out think myself with my boost controller I would have been better off. Our latest "tune" was launch to full boost in 1.4 seconds and that run us a 8.10 where before we would have just smoked the tires on the hit when the chassis wasn't sorted out. I am fairly certain some will get the point here.

 

[John Wilde]

Only thing I can add here is if I would have spent more time working on my chassis in the early days than trying to out think myself with my boost controller I would have been better off. Our latest "tune" was launch to full boost in 1.4 seconds and that run us a 8.10 where before we would have just smoked the tires on the hit when the chassis wasn't sorted out. I am fairly certain some will get the point here.

This is a great post Ted.
I have been saying this for years.
It is so easy to make power with a turbo car, people
just turn it up rather than making the rest of the car work.

 

[Dusty Bradford]

Only thing I can add here is if I would have spent more time working on my chassis in the early days than trying to out think myself with my boost controller I would have been better off. Our latest "tune" was launch to full boost in 1.4 seconds and that run us a 8.10 where before we would have just smoked the tires on the hit when the chassis wasn't sorted out. I am fairly certain some will get the point here.

I fought the same battle. It's easy to take power out and get down the track. Now I know it takes x amount of power to go say 1.26 60'...if the suspension won't do it I don't take power out. I make the car work to get there.

 

[Alky V6]

That's the same thing I've recently learned. I kept stepping up the power at the launch, and the car kept taking it. 60' and 330' slowly dropped. What also happened because of the increased power at the launch was the amount of boost (power) the car would handle through the rollout, the 1-2 shift, and through second gear. I also noticed that the boost control curve slowly moved to a smoother line than the lower powered launches had been. It's as if I was working the power level of the engine into the chassis tune. My 60' is now in the 1.28 - 1.31 range. I'm pretty happy with the launch now. It's time to move to the 330'. This is the area where I think chassis tune is going to be important for me. I just hope I can keep the same 60' performance as I change things to help from the 60' to the 330'.

Do you realize this thread is turning into a full car tech session? First converters, datalogging, boost controllers, and now chassis?

 

[HighPSI]

Bottom line is, I really don't owe anyone here an answer. In particular, those that don't have it in them to ask for one with civility.

Wow. You can start thread after thread about what you are doing, but if I question you about something, you go on defensive mode and say I am "tearing you down" and "not asking with civility". I have stated over and over, that I don't even know if there is anything wrong with your boost strategy, hence my question.

I think that me trying to explain my boost controller strategy to you would be the same as me trying to explain why I went with a 91mm turbo.

Not even remotely the same. I am NOT asking about WHY you are using that strategy. I am asking if that strategy is even possible for the controller to accomplish, nothing to do with your combination or anything to do with your car whatsoever. I am beginning to think your defensive attitude is because you don't have a basic fundamental understanding of the boost controller, otherwise, why not answer my simple question?

Obviously, you you used to think it was possible until I questioned you, so one of two things is true:
A) It is possible for it to reach all your target boost points, but you are unsure and afraid to answer since you don't completly understand the controller, or
B) It is not possible and you aren't running the boost curve that you think you are running, which really takes away from the thread you created explaining the controller. This too, would mean you don't have a real good understanding of the controller.

If you want my help, I suppose I can set one up on a bench and test it for you. Let me know, since I will have to open up a new controller and wire in the Boost Sensor, etc.. thus turning a new unit into a "used" unit.

 

[Alky V6]

Wow. You can start thread after thread about what you are doing, but if I question you about something, you go on defensive mode and say I am "tearing you down" and "not asking with civility". I have stated over and over, that I don't even know if there is anything wrong with your boost strategy, hence my question.



Not even remotely the same. I am NOT asking about WHY you are using that strategy. I am asking if that strategy is even possible for the controller to accomplish, nothing to do with your combination or anything to do with your car whatsoever. I am beginning to think your defensive attitude is because you don't have a basic fundamental understanding of the boost controller, otherwise, why not answer my simple question?

Obviously, you you used to think it was possible until I questioned you, so one of two things is true:
A) It is possible for it to reach all your target boost points, but you are unsure and afraid to answer since you don't completly understand the controller, or
B) It is not possible and you aren't running the boost curve that you think you are running, which really takes away from the thread you created explaining the controller. This too, would mean you don't have a real good understanding of the controller.

If you want my help, I suppose I can set one up on a bench and test it for you. Let me know, since I will have to open up a new controller and wire in the Boost Sensor, etc.. thus turning a new unit into a "used" unit.

When I make a small change to the boost controller settings, either in target CO2 pressure number or in timing, I can see and measure the change in the datalog. I'm not an expert, but I think that means that I do have control of the actual boost curve through the controller settings. That's all I'm asking for from the controller. Whether the CO2 control pressures are able to follow the settings exactly and as quickly as programmed is no concern of mine, unless I'm unable to receive the actual boost curve that I'm hoping to get out of the controller.
That may mean fudging the target numbers or the timing a little to get the boost curve I want. In the end, as long as the controller can give me the actual boost curve I want to test with, I really don't care what the numbers in the controller were that got me the right result. I don't care whether the CO2 control pressure followed the instructed settings perfectly or not. I only look at the actual boost curve to see if it's what I was looking for. If it isn't, then I fudge the settings a little until I do get the boost curve I want to test.

To answer in a straight yes or no, I have to say, I don't know. I've never made a laboratory study out of it. All I know is, I'm able to get the boost curve by manipulating the settings and I haven't found a limitation yet.

I hope this answer has quenched your curiousity.