Interesting case study: Results of using S-AFC to tune on top of Reflash

[c32c7]

Interesting data from EarlyApex on NCE about using an S-AFC to tune on top of a reflash and the results.

http://www.norcalevo.net/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=2&topic=13694.0

[Blak94GSX]

Yeah, everyone knows the AFC on top of ECUFlash is the way to go. Not sure why we need to continuously beat this up.

There is a lot of confusing misinformation in that thread anyway. 5 counts of knock for example is in no way dangerous. The ECU doesn't even pull timing at that point. In fact you WANT some knock sum in order to ensure you are getting enough timing. Under 10 counts is basically no knock. It retards timing from 10+. 30+ is enough for the ECU to pull a lot of timing and hurt the overall performance.

[Blak94GSX]

Not to mention, using logs to show how well a car drives is like reading the list of ingredients on a cookie box to determine how good it tastes. Sure logs are nice to have, but drivability is much more important.

[Blak94GSX]

Still pointless. The first logs show more overall timing, even though it is poorly tuned and too lean. The second logs show less timing and the fuel is generally too rich. Lastly, the logs are ECU+ logs which interprets things a bit differently than say a pocketlogger or EVOScan which reads only the ECU output.

[Blak94GSX]

If there is a dip in the timing curve, you use ECUFlash to fix it.

[earlyapex]

There is a lot of confusing misinformation in that thread anyway. 5 counts of knock for example is in no way dangerous. The ECU doesn't even pull timing at that point. In fact you WANT some knock sum in order to ensure you are getting enough timing. Under 10 counts is basically no knock. It retards timing from 10+. 30+ is enough for the ECU to pull a lot of timing and hurt the overall performance.


Timing pull with 2 knock counts:


RPM O2Sensor TPS AirFlow KnockSum TimingAdv
4531 0.96 99.22 1251.71 0 6
4625 0.96 99.22 1302.03 0 6
4750 0.96 99.22 1333.48 0 7
4906 0.96 99.61 1383.8 *2* 5
5031 0.96 99.61 1440.41 1 7
5156 0.96 99.22 1471.86 1 7
5312 0.96 99.22 1522.18 1 8
5437 0.96 99.22 1553.63 1 8


Timing pull with 7 knock counts:


RPM O2Sensor TPS AirFlow KnockSum TimingAdv
5062 0.96 99.22 1390.09 1 7
5156 0.96 99.22 1415.25 1 7
5250 0.96 99.22 1465.57 1 8
5343 0.96 99.22 1490.73 *7* 5
5468 0.96 99.22 1534.76 7 4
5531 0.98 99.22 1559.92 7 4
5625 0.96 99.61 1559.92 7 4
5718 0.96 99.22 1585.08 7 5
5843 0.96 99.22 1597.66 6 6
5906 0.96 99.22 1603.95 6 6








Lastly, the logs are ECU+ logs which interprets things a bit differently than say a pocketlogger or EVOScan which reads only the ECU output.


Using mitsulogger which is reading direct ECU output. ECU+ doesn't log knock sums




If there is a dip in the timing curve, you use ECUFlash to fix it.


There are no dips in the ECUFlash map where those knock counts create the dip.

[Blak94GSX]

Those logs show 2 different issues. Neither are tuned properly, and you are implying one is better than the other.

[Blak94GSX]

Well the short list of misinformation would include

-A properly tuned setup using one tool is somehow inferior to a properly tuned setup using another tool, when the comparison is between 2 poorly tuned setups

-5 counts of knock is dangerous

-A car that runs better with a bad looking log is somehow worse than a car that runs poorly with a great looking log

[earlyapex]

Evoscan log, timing pull with 2 knock counts:


RPM O2Sensor TPS KnockSum TimingAdv
7250 0.9165 100 0 19
7312.5 0.9165 100 0 19
7312.5 0.9165 100 0 19
7375 0.9165 100 0 19
7406.25 0.9165 100 *2* 18
7437.5 0.9165 100 2 18
7500 0.9165 100 2 18
7531.25 0.9165 100 2 18
7593.75 0.9165 100 2 18



There are times that there isn't timing pull with under 5 knock counts. It's possible the ECU is looking up other then just knock counts for timing pull.

Another evoscan log:


RPM O2Sensor TPS KnockSum TimingAdv
6187.5 0.9165 100 0 9
6250 0.9165 100 0 10
6312.5 0.9165 100 2 9
6343.75 0.9165 100 2 9
6375 0.9165 100 2 9
6437.5 0.9165 100 8 7
6468.75 0.9165 100 8 7
6531.25 0.9165 100 8 7
6562.5 0.9165 100 8 7
6593.75 0.9165 100 8 7
6625 0.9165 100 7 8
6656.25 0.9165 100 7 8
6687.5 0.9165 100 7 8
6718.75 0.9165 100 7 8
6750 0.9165 100 7 9
6781.25 0.9165 100 6 10
6812.5 0.9165 100 6 10
6875 0.9165 100 6 11

[Mike W]

Bryan, how do you know that the ECU is pulling timing because of knock? 2 and 5 counts of knock pulling timing is totally new for me. You were around for TMO loggers in your 1G days right? If as you are moving through the timing chart with timing going up with RPM and then because of other tuning it knocks you back one load cell to drop timing one degree maybe? That is what Scot is talking about with poor tuning I think.

I can PM the both of yous each other's cell phone numbers so you can work this out much faster :-P

Mike W

[earlyapex]

-A properly tuned setup using one tool is somehow inferior to a properly tuned setup using another tool, when the comparison is between 2 poorly tuned setups

Not sure why you keep thinking this is a dig on a SAFC. Perhaps I worded the thread wrong or something but It is not. It's intended to show the differences between the too. Which again, is not yet in that thread. It's a case study, and it's still open.



-5 counts of knock is dangerous

If the ECU pulls timing because of those 5 knock counts, why is it pulling that timing?



-A car that runs better with a bad looking log is somehow worse than a car that runs poorly with a great looking log


Can you honestly sit there and tell me that a car with SAFC and 720's has better driveability then a car with it's ecu flashed and scaled correctly for those 720cc injectors?

As far as "badly" tuned, as stated above, it's a work in progress. You know as much as I do that when doing tunes via email, the first couple rounds aren't the uber tune. Case in point, your first map sent to Scott.

[Blak94GSX]

Well the point is that SAFC with ECUFlash together is the best combination. SAFC by itself, or ECUFlash by itself work good too, just not as nice as the combination.

[earlyapex]

Bryan, how do you know that the ECU is pulling timing because of knock? 2 and 5 counts of knock pulling timing is totally new for me. You were around for TMO loggers in your 1G days right?


Was new to me as well. I've even locked the timing with each vertical column containing the exact same timing numbers because of that doubt and I have still seen instances of pulled timing. Perhaps the ecu gets confused and just drops a degree for the hell of it when it senses any knock. Like I said, it can be sporadic. I have had 4 knock counts on my personal car without timing pull, while other times it will pull 2 degrees with 3 counts of knock.

[earlyapex]

Well the point is that SAFC with ECUFlash together is the best combination. SAFC by itself, or ECUFlash by itself work good too, just not as nice as the combination.


ahhhhh, doesn't this feel better? Perhaps I shouldn't have posted that thread before it was finished, as this was EXACTLY what it was going to be about. I have currently locked it until I can finish it.

[Blak94GSX]

It is probably decrementing the learned Octane value. Drive the car around for a few days first to get the Octane value settled below 255, then try running 10 degrees of timing everywhere and see what it looks like. You should get a lot of knock sum at 5000 RPM and then as the knock sum decays you can see at what point the timing is restored to the table value.

[earlyapex]

It is probably decrementing the learned Octane value. Drive the car around for a few days first to get the Octane value settled below 255, then try running 10 degrees of timing everywhere and see what it looks like. You should get a lot of knock sum at 5000 RPM and then as the knock sum decays you can see at what point the timing is restored to the table value.


The octane value is default at 255 (or 100 in newer evoscan versions) and will be reduced with knock count (usually 7 knock counts or higher). I've seen it restore itself back to 255 (or 100) as quickly as the knock subsides. Depends on the severity and length of the knock. Sometimes it sticks below 255 (or 100) and leaps back to 255 (or 100) as soon as you go WOT again. As long as the knock is under 7 counts.

Perhaps I'm not reading your post correctly?

[GokuSSJ4]

guess they don't like s-afc's up there.


Hopefully, someday the people down here will lose the blinders too... :sigh:

Terry S

it isnt that bad when you decided to combine the SAFC w/ a flash... its so simple and easy to use ... which makes something less to worry about, since not all people have access to a laptop

[Terry S]

guess they don't like s-afc's up there.


Hopefully, someday the people down here will lose the blinders too... :sigh:

Terry S

it isnt that bad when you decided to combine the SAFC w/ a flash... its so simple and easy to use ... which makes something less to worry about, since not all people have access to a laptop


Trashing a competent tune with a SAFC is never a good thing.

It comes back to the old XEDE arguments. Basically, everyone here shunned the XEDE because it cost so much to do what injectors/mbc/safc could almost replicate. (yes I know there were other factors, but those aren't on topic)

Now we have a technology that can do MORE than what an SAFC can do for even less. Seems like all the old anti-expensive-piggybackers would be all over ditching the safc since they can actually do a real 100% tune now for cheaper.

Terry S

[GokuSSJ4]

Trashing a competent tune with a SAFC is never a good thing.

It comes back to the old XEDE arguments. Basically, everyone here shunned the XEDE because it cost so much to do what injectors/mbc/safc could almost replicate. (yes I know there were other factors, but those aren't on topic)

Now we have a technology that can do MORE than what an SAFC can do for even less. Seems like all the old anti-expensive-piggybackers would be all over ditching the safc since they can actually do a real 100% tune now for cheaper.

Terry S


Been there done that!
Open Ecu flash on the good hands of a tuner seems to be the best option.. as you and I can agree on all the benefits behind this software.
SAFC makes it easier because you are able to make changes on the fly without the need of a laptop, cables or anything that it isnt needed.
Being able to control timing and now Mivec is something extremely important as this is something that the SAFC lacks off. So the flash will be always the better option and now is a lot less $$$ to get one as well. Also being able to have full tech support by people like Alfred@TT or Dr. Gray always makes it a win win! situation