+- Rawze.com: Rawze's ISX Technical Discussion and more (http://rawze.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Big Truck Technical Discussion... (/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: ISX Related Help (/forumdisplay.php?fid=68)
+--- Thread: SOI Advice (/showthread.php?tid=1385)
RE: SOI Advice - Marajin - 01-25-2017
(01-24-2017 )AussieISX Wrote: There is nothing slightly risky about running 8 degrees total in either 3774 or 2965 Cpl cals , As the stock cal peaks at 7.5 degrees @1650-1750 Rpm in the alpha 1 tables . That is why I said 8 degrees total advance . If he added the 2-3 degrees you advised he would have ended up with a total of 10.5 degrees. Just putting an incremental increase on these tables is bad in my opinion and they should be edited correctly . I think before giving advice you need to be familiar with the cal in question. I have trucks running in the north of Australia pulling 167,000 kg ( 368000lbs) on 24hr operations using the same timing I suggested. Those trucks are not owner driven and have been running this tune for nearly 2.5 years without any cracked Pistons or any problems outside of normal issues.
I agree that about 6-8 deg.(total, not soi setting) is all you want in an engine that is going to be used in high torque a lot. Personally, I have seen better results at about 6 degrees or so at 1650 on the occasional dyno testing I have done with them. Yup, it also matters what program you have in your engine as far as how the user SOI settings effect it.
The newest version (unreleased) "T" of MM - 2 that has been around for about 5 months now has all the advances for fuel mileage in the tables instead of SOI setting. Because of this, it no longer allows for any more than about 1.5 - 1.8 degrees in the main user SOI settings max.
[attachment=2390]
This is an example of a high hp table for the bigger injectors that I regularly use that already has an SOI advance of 4 degrees in the lower end for a bit of fuel savings and cleaner oil. The orange bar across the top shows the amount of advance. It should work good for someone but I take no responsibility for its use or abuse. User SOI setting must be at zero when using this table.
Like AussieISX has pointed out, it is better to do the corrections in the tables for engine reliability under constant high torque, and for older engines that may have weaker liners to prevent liner issues.
Here is a post I did a while back that is related.
http://rawze.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=437&pid=3421#pid3421
take a look it it too.
RE: SOI Advice - Unilevers - 01-25-2017
(01-24-2017 )AussieISX Wrote:(01-24-2017 )Unilevers Wrote: typically most trucks under heavy load run 1-3.5 in the SOI tables. A max (and slightly risky) would be 8 degrees BTDC total which would give you 4.5 on the increment to be there. Personally i would run the increment down to 2-3 to give you more of a safe margin and a total BTDC of 5ish.
if you are unsure of the driver and loads run a 0 increment to be on the safe side. a running engine is better than i blowed up efficient one.
my 0.02c
There is nothing slightly risky about running 8 degrees total in either 3774 or 2965 Cpl cals , As the stock cal peaks at 7.5 degrees @1650-1750 Rpm in the alpha 1 tables . That is why I said 8 degrees total advance . If he added the 2-3 degrees you advised he would have ended up with a total of 10.5 degrees. Just putting an incremental increase on these tables is bad in my opinion and they should be edited correctly . I think before giving advice you need to be familiar with the cal in question. I have trucks running in the north of Australia pulling 167,000 kg ( 368000lbs) on 24hr operations using the same timing I suggested. Those trucks are not owner driven and have been running this tune for nearly 2.5 years without any cracked Pistons or any problems outside of normal issues.
wow so quick to jump down my throat - i think you need to calm it down. i did base my advice on a north american cal, my mistake as i see the cal in question is a aussie one.
i said 8 total of advance and a TYPICAL truck should run 8 degrees or slightly less under full heavy load max, and if you are already running 7.5ish in the table then take that into consideration. personally i think 8 is slightly high but you have more testing in your neck of the woods than i do. i do not know what timing you guys run in your stock cals or what you get away with. also what you get away with does not mean everyone will as many things change everything including fueling, baro, ambient temp, state of engine, good fuel, etc.
on a side note is there a stock cal that fuels to 400 in aussie land? cause there is no north american cal that does.
RE: SOI Advice - AussieISX - 01-25-2017
(01-25-2017 )Unilevers Wrote: wow so quick to jump down my throat - i think you need to calm it down. i did base my advice on a north american cal, my mistake as i see the cal in question is a aussie one.
i said 8 total of advance and a TYPICAL truck should run 8 degrees or slightly less under full heavy load max, and if you are already running 7.5ish in the table then take that into consideration. personally i think 8 is slightly high but you have more testing in your neck of the woods than i do. i do not know what timing you guys run in your stock cals or what you get away with. also what you get away with does not mean everyone will as many things change everything including fueling, baro, ambient temp, state of engine, good fuel, etc.
on a side note is there a stock cal that fuels to 400 in aussie land? cause there is no north american cal that does.
I didn't jump down anyone's throat and was very calm. I don't post things to run my jaw . If I don't know, I listen . Your post seemed to refer to my advice as being " slightly risky" and I took offence when in fact based on the cal in question it was accurate and well proven in the environment the guy was asking about.
370mg is the highest an Australian cal will run .
RE: SOI Advice - Hammerhead - 01-25-2017
AussieISX, I don't want to derail or sidetrack this thread so I started this one.
I would appreciate your time and feedback on it.
http://rawze.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=1391
RE: SOI Advice - Running rough - 01-25-2017
Would the cold Canadian winter effect final crank angle, what works in the desert probly will not be optimized for colder climates, apparently stock cals use mass flow calculations to get the boost the tune is looking for, I am led to believe @m*m^2 style tuning uses a fixed position at a given rpm and load meaning you more then likely will have more boost the colder and denser the air is that is why the turbo mapping has to be fine tuned to the type of truck and environment it will run in, it is said that the stock mass flow calculation turbo mapping can not touch the @m*m^2 custom mapping in both performance and fuel efficiency when it is dialled in correctly for the given truck and application, soi is another thing but I would think the cold air up here combined with extremely advanced timing i would have a bad feeling about it under heavy load, for instance I can notice slight crank flex vibrations, in cold weather with the high torque cals, and I believe the timing is mostly stock, take it in to warmer summer conditions and the crank flex disappears, now if a guy advance the timing to much I am sure the vibrations would increase, and that can't be good, but as always don't lug the snot out of your engines if you want maximum life,
RE: SOI Advice - bazdan902 - 01-26-2017
I would think cooler air and colder fuel all retard your timing.... I think your most at risk on a hot day under full load with timing to far advanced. As far as air being denser in the cold is true and theoretically advancing your timing,, to my understanding the ECM calculates for this based on the readings out of your intake manifold pressure/temperature sensor. Also as far as the turbo in @m*m^2 being fixed I think this true in the sense that they are bound to the minimum and maximum vgt positions by MCF tables dictate where it needs to be within those fixed points to create the proper charge flow... My understanding of it anyways
RE: SOI Advice - Signature620 - 01-26-2017
(01-26-2017 )bazdan902 Wrote: ....as far as the turbo in @m*m^2 being fixed I think this true in the sense that they are bound to the minimum and maximum vgt positions by MCF tables dictate where it needs to be within those fixed points to create the proper charge flow... My understanding of it anyways
I believe that's how they operate aswell. You can set the minimum to 0 and max to 50 and it will follow the MCF table until it gets to 50% closed.
RE: SOI Advice - AussieISX - 01-26-2017
It's my opinion the biggest condition affecting timing would be heat . The hotter the air gets the more advanced the timing will get to a point. Slightly higher boost levels due to cold air will affect it but not as much as the heat will . The hotter the air in the cylinder becomes the more volatile the environment becomes to ignite the fuel. To me in a hot climate with high torque loads you want to reduce Soi .
RE: SOI Advice - Marajin - 01-26-2017
(01-25-2017 )Running rough Wrote: ..
I am led to believe @m*m^2 style tuning uses a fixed position at a given rpm and load meaning you more then likely will have more boost the colder and denser the air is that is why the turbo mapping has to be fine tuned to the type of truck and environment it will run in, it is said that the stock mass flow calculation turbo mapping can not touch the @m*m^2 custom mapping in both performance and fuel efficiency when it is dialled in correctly for the given truck and application,
...
Actually I can see that it has an operating window with a min and max correction range to the turbo itself. It is not completely "fixed". It simply limits the engine from allowing it to go too far out of whatever bounds someone has set for it. - Need a bigger window? -- just make the window larger.
I tend to mostly agree with this advice
http://rawze.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=1342&pid=11192#pid11192
that you should be on the lower side of optimized boost levels for exactly those reasons. I would think that setting a bit on the lower side also gives it that wiggle room that may have been programmed out of your own engine(s) to get more out of them.
(01-25-2017 )Running rough Wrote: ...
soi is another thing but I would think the cold air up here combined with extremely advanced timing i would have a bad feeling about it under heavy load, for instance I can notice slight crank flex vibrations, in cold weather with the high torque cals, and I believe the timing is mostly stock, take it in to warmer summer conditions and the crank flex disappears, now if a guy advance the timing to much I am sure the vibrations would increase, and that can't be good, but as always don't lug the snot out of your engines if you want maximum life,
As far as hot/cold environ, high altitude, sea level, etc.. The "explained" doc I read on MM strongly and heavily is against disabling corrections for altitude, temp and everything else an engine needs to make proper timing, etc.
I have also seen plenty of factory programs with MCF turned on that could not handle extreme cold or hot too. I think even Unilevers talked about it on here before because he has to deal with it up north where he is at quite a lot.
Just what I see here after reading all of this ..
- Not very many people have power set for high torque or go to the extremes that you seem to want to do. Looks counter-productive to push an engine hard like that only to have to spend so much money replacing its guts more often for such slight gains on the roadways. - Throw that upper edge programming and mods and pushing boost to its upper end into an extreme cold or hot and that may be the very thing that does your engine in. I think at that point you would only have yourself to blame for it. Those things can only take so much stress before they say enough is enough. Just because you keep wanting more does not mean it can keep up long term, or in extreme hot/cold. There must be wiggle room for just those scenarios. I know plenty of guys that have pushed and pushed and pushed,.. only to end up with a broken engine saying that it costs too much to operate like that. They usually always end up setting their truck power back down to more reasonable levels and settings in the end.