Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Tuning, diagnostics, ECUs and associated bits and bytes
Forum rules
Please respect copyright.
Do not post full copies of professionally tuned roms!

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby KiDo_Tuning » Fri Jan 25, 2013 12:04 am

bass_straitener wrote:$25 for a reset ECU. I can see why your mate Sharpie is loving you... :air_kiss:

On another note if I had boost cut on a twisty mountain road, I'd already be both pretty worried and pissed. And I'm not sure I'd want to have further unique experiences such as that whilst driving so best the CEL come on, and I get off the mountain safely.

I'm glad I stopped when I did as these unique experiences aren't for me. :wink:

I guess each to their own on this one though.


No CEL's... no $$ for Sharpie to visit Sunbury :angel:

Up hill generates more load ;) Get some fat friends in the car and it is easy enough to need 0% WGDC to stop boost cut!
KiDo Racing Tunes Info: HERE

Great minds discuss ideas;
Average minds discuss events;
Small minds discuss people
User avatar
KiDo_Tuning
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:53 pm
Car: Subarus + Nissans
Real name: Matt

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby Zaccy182 » Sat Jan 26, 2013 10:54 am

Total noob, so genuinely after some feedback. Only mods being k&n panel filter and cat back with matts tune. This was pulled from my car this morning...
Attachments
image.jpg
image.jpg (114.77 KiB) Viewed 3529 times
[ 05 Liberty GT 5MT Wagon ]
240,000kms -mostly stock- going strong
Tune by Matt from KiDo | COBB short shifter + kartboy bushings | Whiteline sway bars | GFB respons BOV | K&N panel filter | eBay 3" cat-back to 2.5" Y pipe exhaust | 8000k HIDs | Lenso 17" Project D Spec B wheels
User avatar
Zaccy182
 
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 4:55 pm
Location: Canberra
Car: 05 GT Wagon
Real name: Zac
Profile URL: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=18204

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby KiDo_Tuning » Sat Jan 26, 2013 11:07 am

Zaccy182 wrote:Total noob, so genuinely after some feedback. Only mods being k&n panel filter and cat back with matts tune. This was pulled from my car this morning...


With the way your tune is setup the KCA value which is the IAM full advance value is 2.11 so it has added all of the timing back in that was taken out by the IAM drop but it is pulling timing at 4400rpm to 5200rpm and is a total of 1.51 degrees timing being pulled in one spot :) No knock on boost, just at around 0psi boost :)

I am in Canberra again in late Feb so happy to tweak or can email you a tune revision today :)
KiDo Racing Tunes Info: HERE

Great minds discuss ideas;
Average minds discuss events;
Small minds discuss people
User avatar
KiDo_Tuning
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:53 pm
Car: Subarus + Nissans
Real name: Matt

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby bass_straitener » Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:11 pm

Zaccy182 wrote:Total noob, so genuinely after some feedback. Only mods being k&n panel filter and cat back with matts tune. This was pulled from my car this morning...


I personally wouldn't be happy if I saw that learning view. And be looking for a plain English explanation of what's gone wrong. Not some gobbledygook that no one can understand.

What did your mate who extracted this for you say?

Given your mods, it should have been pretty easy to tune.

This result to me is unacceptable, though I'm known to be a bit harsh, and actually want a tune with no knock.

You might be different.. :roll:
"If A is a success in life, then A equals x plus y plus z. Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut."
User avatar
bass_straitener
-stickered-
 
Posts: 2247
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 8:31 pm
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Car: MY12 C63
Real name: Bruce
Profile URL: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=14781

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby alexeiwoody » Sat Jan 26, 2013 8:43 pm

What's with the 12 in maf scaling? Did one of the vacuum hoses pop off or something...should check it out mate. I had a map sensor hose pop off once and where you have a 12 I had a 20. Normally it should be as close to 0 as possible. At least within 5 points off 0.


Also I have no idea what Matt said? Just that it needs a revision...
Running no. of weeks without breaking something in the lib: 0
No. of things still to fix in in the lib: 97
User avatar
alexeiwoody
 
Posts: 1900
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 11:47 pm
Location: Melbourne
Car: MY07 LibGT 5EAT
Real name: Alexei

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby Kekotic » Sat Jan 26, 2013 8:54 pm

Yeah gotta agree there, Matt you need to speak a little more plainly :D
User avatar
Kekotic
-stickered-
 
Posts: 6452
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 6:46 pm
Car: MY07 Liberty GT Spec.B
Profile URL: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=13066

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby Zaccy182 » Sat Jan 26, 2013 11:31 pm

I check the hoses/engine bay regularly. No noises to indicate a leak. Could it be possible to be a very small leak? Also why would the AIM have dropped in the first place??
[ 05 Liberty GT 5MT Wagon ]
240,000kms -mostly stock- going strong
Tune by Matt from KiDo | COBB short shifter + kartboy bushings | Whiteline sway bars | GFB respons BOV | K&N panel filter | eBay 3" cat-back to 2.5" Y pipe exhaust | 8000k HIDs | Lenso 17" Project D Spec B wheels
User avatar
Zaccy182
 
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 4:55 pm
Location: Canberra
Car: 05 GT Wagon
Real name: Zac
Profile URL: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=18204

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby alexeiwoody » Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:36 am

The hose that popped off on mine was the hose in the picture with the one way valve on it, the little white wheel thingy. If yours is on, then maybe the maf sensor just wasn't scaled properly.

Iam drops to pull timing so as not to damage the engine, as it has sensed knock in there. So you had knock in the engine, ecu sensed it, and is now running a safer version. Whatever you do don't reset the ecu until you get a revision/retune. Otherwise your engine will have to experience the same knock/detonation again in order for your ecu to learn it again.

Engine.jpg
Engine.jpg (134.88 KiB) Viewed 3423 times
Running no. of weeks without breaking something in the lib: 0
No. of things still to fix in in the lib: 97
User avatar
alexeiwoody
 
Posts: 1900
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 11:47 pm
Location: Melbourne
Car: MY07 LibGT 5EAT
Real name: Alexei

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby Kekotic » Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:43 am

alexeiwoody wrote:The hose that popped off on mine was the hose in the picture with the one way valve on it, the little white wheel thingy. If yours is on, then maybe the maf sensor just wasn't scaled properly.

Iam drops to pull timing so as not to damage the engine, as it has sensed knock in there. So you had knock in the engine, ecu sensed it, and is now running a safer version. Whatever you do don't reset the ecu until you get a revision/retune. Otherwise your engine will have to experience the same knock/detonation again in order for your ecu to learn it again


What is the timing on re-learning for knock correction? Because if it has detected knock at a certain rpm range wouldn't it just re-add the timing if it didn't detect the knock again at the same rpm and conditions?
User avatar
Kekotic
-stickered-
 
Posts: 6452
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 6:46 pm
Car: MY07 Liberty GT Spec.B
Profile URL: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=13066

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby alexeiwoody » Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:56 am

It normally would. But I believe a drop in IAM is not as simple. Matt said if you put it 95 or 91 fuel in by accident, then the Iam drops to protect the engine.

So we're talking a more serious knock issue than just individual areas of rpm and load. This is across the board and I don't know if it adds it back up. Curious as to what caused it.
Running no. of weeks without breaking something in the lib: 0
No. of things still to fix in in the lib: 97
User avatar
alexeiwoody
 
Posts: 1900
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 11:47 pm
Location: Melbourne
Car: MY07 LibGT 5EAT
Real name: Alexei

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby KiDo_Tuning » Sun Jan 27, 2013 9:47 am

OK. So surprised we have a Learning View thread without having a discussion on what the values mean!

First up: AF#1(and AF#2 for H6) Learning

The values are Long Term Fuel Trims which is actually a reflection of Closed Looop Fuel Compensation. The O2 sensor has constant feedback to maintain stoich(14.7 on petrol) fuel mixtures and that compensation is monitored by the ECU. It then determines a bell curve of the compensation values across a range of airflow values. So in Zac's tune the +12 means at idle, the ECU has applied +12 compensation as the most common bell curve value which is typical of a vacuum leak OR an exhaust gasket leak which results in oxygen not being measured by the MAF sensor having the O2 sensor run lean so the ECU trends to add fuel.
Just because you have values other than zero, does not mean you have an issue, it means your car is achieving optimal fuel mixtures
This applies to the first 3 of the AF#1 ranges, the red or blue means the ECU is running the target air to fuel ratio. It does not mean it is running lean or rich.
The important one is the D range as this applies the closed loop learnt range to the entire MAF scaling from D range value to the end of the MAF scale. So on a stock tune for a 2.5T, the value is from 40 to 80g/sec with 80g/sec being the typical range where 0psi occurs on spool. 2 Litre and 3L have slightly different values for the D range. A value of -10 in the 3rd range can influence spool as well even if 4th range is 0, as the ECU tries to smooth out the transition from -10 to 0 on a timer.

2nd: IAM
In the ECU software, there is two timing tables. Base Ignition Timing is a timing table designed for a bad batch of fuel as a worst case scenario and is when IAM is on zero. While there is also a timing value known as Knock Correction Advance(KCA) which is a table which adds ignition timing to the base timing value to have a total ignition timing value when IAM is on 1.00. The closer the Knock Correction Advance Value is to 0, the more likely you are to have an IAM change. Most tuners use values above 8(stock has values of up to 18 in some tunes!) so rarely see an IAM drop.
By setting the KCA table lower on lower values than stock, you are more likely to see an IAM drop BUT this has an advantage

There is also two fuel tables, Primary Fuel table which is the one run under normal conditions. There is also a Failsafe Fuel table which is for when IAM drops. Factory sets this at 0.35 IAM and the ECU has to drop to IAM of 0.349 before it will activate. I set mine at 0.751 so it only needs to drop to 0.75 before activating so if an issue is detected, the IAM drops to add fuel and pulls only a small amount of timing in comparison. Pull too much timing from the IAM being 0.35(2/3rds of KCA advanced timing)

So how does the IAM influence timing? In Zac's case 0.9375 is 15/16th's of 1.000 so in essence the Knock Correction Advance tables only applies 15/16ths of the total KCA timing. If the KCA value had been flat 16 degrees, then it would only be pulling one full degree of timing across the whole map and the blue values is the timing being added back in so the equivalent if IAM had been 1.00 would have pulled -0.75 in all the blue areas and the single red area would have been roughly -2.1
Zac's tune actually has an IAM value of 4 tapering down to 2.11 on boost as the EJ20y commonly has issues with the Camshaft solenoid filters blocking and inducing knock so since 15/16's of 2.11 is 0.125 of a degree, the ECU has actually learnt to pull 0.125 of a degree of timing across the map on boost and learnt to add more timing in Fine Learning Knock Correction as it attempts to return to IAM 1.000 so it has added timing in all of the blue areas. The single red area comes up to a total of less than -1.4 degrees of timing being pulled if IAM was on zero.
Suddenly, an IAM drop is not as 'serious' as it looks :) Personally, if the EJ20y camshafts developed a problem and IAM drops to 0.75, pulls the 0.5 degrees of timing and then apllies the Failsafe Fuel map values fuel, so it wont suffer from pre-ignition from heaps of timing being pulled at IAM 0.35 with lots of fuel suddenly added in. If IAM continues to drop below 0.75, with slightly less timing and more fuel, then the Boost Disable table kicks in and disables boost... I get accused of having 'dangerous' tunes but the reality is, I tune for safety margins... the ECU logic from subaru is there ripe for the picking ;)
Reason behind this? I drive in rural areas a lot, I have bought some NASTY claimed 98 fuel and IAM dropping to 0.75 saved my engine, it pulled the right amount of timing and added the right amount of fuel. Try finding a tuner who has mixed a litre of kero and litre of diesel sump oil into 91RON fuel to find the worst case scenario tune(IAM target of 0.00 with boost disabled, car ran completely knock free within 30 seconds after an ECU reset of IAM back to 1.00)

Fine Learning Knock Correction:
If IAM is on 1.00 then FLKC is a memorised pulled timing value that is applied between ranges. g/rev i the amount of air being sucked into two cylinders on a H4(or 3 cylinders on a H6) on each engine revolution(on a 4 stroke engine). So values of less than 1.4 are typically manifold vacuum under light throttle, with values over 2.8g/rev being over 15psi in most cases.
KiDo Racing Tunes Info: HERE

Great minds discuss ideas;
Average minds discuss events;
Small minds discuss people
User avatar
KiDo_Tuning
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:53 pm
Car: Subarus + Nissans
Real name: Matt

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby dr20t » Sun Jan 27, 2013 11:41 am

Very informative post Matt but a couple of things I've picked up:

1. Alot of people don't understand the af correction ranges A to D. For those who have never logged airflow in g/second, typically WOT at anything above 2500rpm to redline is in the D range. This signifies the importance of the D range correction value. If this value was negative in your LV, and from Matt's explanation above of what happens to your entire range of maf correction once a negative value is seen in D range, then you know just how important it is to ensure D range has an accurate scaling.

2. In your last paragraph, you mention Flkc only being activated when IAM is at 1.00. However earlier on you mentioned if IAM has dropped below 1.00, and your fbkc / kca tables are activated, then flkc is applied to correct the timing whether up or down. Up being to try to reach Iam of 1.00 again, or down to rectify detected knock. Seems the two must be mutually exclusive, so which one is it? Is it that flkc only kicks in if IAM is still at 1.00, or will it work even in rough correction mode (which generally means IAM is below 1.00) ???

3. Your kca advance tables are quite sound from comparing to other tunes. However, wouldn't it be easier to set it as close to factory as possible and allow rough correction mode to rectify any detected knock that flkc and fbkc couldn't resolve?

4. The fuel trim fail safe map setup you do i believe is a good thing. However, for a car using a lambada rear sensor (like factory) instead of a true wide band, wouldn't it be better to have the fuel trims set to add even ridiculous amounts of fuel to be safe, remembering in open loop you're not shooting for stoich anymore, and generally your highest combustion point and peak cylinder pressure is in open loop not closed loop. (Again for those who aren't aware your 02 sensor generally doesn't mean squat once you're in open loop, only works in closed loop to reach stoich which is afr of 14.7:1). Correct me if im wrong anyone.

As a summary to the above, and without picking on anyone, what I'm seeing is a trend of people logging their car, seeing what they interpret as "bad" according to their minimum knowledge, and then passing blanket judgement on a tune to cause some hysteria.

Without understanding the fundamentals of what your tables are even telling you, how are we to know what the root cause or explanation is.

I'm not singling you out here GB (please don't take this as a personal attack I'm just raising awareness) - when you posted your LV a couple of pages back, i had a cursory view and thought yeah looks alright, and I'm sure you did the same. However upon closer inspection, your airflow ranges were not truly reflective of the true airflow ranges you should be looking at for an extensively modified motor such as yours, and worse still, the flkc y axis load reference points were pretty pointless for yours or anyon else on this forum's motor.

So even if this value was honky dory, it doesn't really tell you squat about how 'safe' your tune is. Because the values are not applicable or relevant to your particular setup. So when I pointed this out and posted about how to change these, it was hopefully an eye opener for a few people to check their ranges and understand exactly what these mean. If you don't understand what these mean then I'm sorry but you're not qualified or competent enough to pass judgement and say the tune is shit.

It may well be (and probably is) that your tune is safe and truly ok, but I'm merely pointing to the fact that you can't deduce so from your learning view, and worse still - you cannot by any stretch juxtapose your LV over say Alexeis and compare the outcome because the values are completely different, the knock correction and detection strategies applied by the different tuners are vastly different (proof is in the pudding just look at two different roms), and what could be dangerous for your motor (forged pistons, free-er flowing exhaust etc) may be a ticking time bomb for someone else with the same LV. I'm sure cosworth designed pistons to withstand more detonation than a Subaru cast one, especially if you research into the silicone content of the cosworth pistons compared to even other manufacturers silicone content (I digress).

As for the argument that it shouldn't have to be up to a customer to decipher all of this - rubbish. You have a duty of care to your car and yourself to make sure you know what's going on before passing judgement on your tuner. For those who disagree, let's consider the alternative: you look at your LV, see a few things you really don't understand but have heard from others on the Internet that its "bad", and you then say the tuner is negligent and doesn't know what he's doing etc. when it just *could* be a possibility that you are the one not understanding what's going on.

Applying an objective standard is impossible in this scene - every tuner does things differently and whilst its nice to think we should be able to just look and say "yep according to the industry standard this is ok", it won't happen. Clearly evidenced by the above comments of mart showing he does things differently. And attested to in my three different tunes by different tuners. I'm not saying that Matt's way or any other tuners is correct (cos I don't have the knowledge to do this), but merely saying we can't judge two different knock correction strategies by two different tuners the same way.

I personally take my car and modification seriously. Thus my little dumy spit last week as some of you may have seen. However I take it upon myself now to learn about what im doing before doing it or at least in close proximity to making the modification. Where I can't, then I have to trust others' experiences to rely upon, which I recognize as dangerous cos its in chartered waters for me personally so have to take what I get with a grain of salt.

I am currently educating myself as much as possible in tuning, and may even consider doing this for my own tunes in 12-18 months which I believe is the required time (for anyone with a normal full time job and life) at least before being able to touch your own car with any degree of certainty (let alone others' cars). So lets see where this goes..

Hope I haven't bored you guys

Mick
Addicted to corn juice....

My FrankenStien build thread here: viewtopic.php?t=14137
User avatar
dr20t
 
Posts: 4191
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:43 pm
Location: South West Sydney NSW
Car: 04 Liberty GT Auto
Real name: Mick
Profile URL: viewtopic.php?t=14137

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby KiDo_Tuning » Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:03 pm

Zaccy182 wrote:I check the hoses/engine bay regularly. No noises to indicate a leak. Could it be possible to be a very small leak? Also why would the AIM have dropped in the first place??


A very small leak can alter the 1st value quite quickly. Your original idle range quickly pulled to -4%

Most likely leak point is the BOV hose at the inlet manifold end.
KiDo Racing Tunes Info: HERE

Great minds discuss ideas;
Average minds discuss events;
Small minds discuss people
User avatar
KiDo_Tuning
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:53 pm
Car: Subarus + Nissans
Real name: Matt

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby alexeiwoody » Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:04 pm

That actually made sense! Haha Except maybe the kca values.

Good to see the failsafe kicking in to protect the engine, but there's clearly a mechanical problem that needs to be fixed.
So I'd still say an iam drop is more serious than a few red values in the flkc. Because it's most likely NOT the the result of a bad tune, but a mechanical issue.

Now is it a vacuum leak or bad fuel or something else?
Running no. of weeks without breaking something in the lib: 0
No. of things still to fix in in the lib: 97
User avatar
alexeiwoody
 
Posts: 1900
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 11:47 pm
Location: Melbourne
Car: MY07 LibGT 5EAT
Real name: Alexei

Re: Learning View Snapshots \ Discussions

Postby KiDo_Tuning » Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:31 pm

dr20t wrote:Very informative post Matt but a couple of things I've picked up:

1. Alot of people don't understand the af correction ranges A to D. For those who have never logged airflow in g/second, typically WOT at anything above 2500rpm to redline is in the D range. This signifies the importance of the D range correction value. If this value was negative in your LV, and from Matt's explanation above of what happens to your entire range of maf correction once a negative value is seen in D range, then you know just how important it is to ensure D range has an accurate scaling.

Hence why I set my D range so it nevers goes to a negative or positive :)

2. In your last paragraph, you mention Flkc only being activated when IAM is at 1.00. However earlier on you mentioned if IAM has dropped below 1.00, and your fbkc / kca tables are activated, then flkc is applied to correct the timing whether up or down. Up being to try to reach Iam of 1.00 again, or down to rectify detected knock. Seems the two must be mutually exclusive, so which one is it? Is it that flkc only kicks in if IAM is still at 1.00, or will it work even in rough correction mode (which generally means IAM is below 1.00) ???

Sorry, was simplifiying it as I brushed over it in another paragraph but FLKC occurs under all IAM values. If IAM was 0.500 and the KCA was a flat 2.8 and FLKC value rnge was -1.4 for knock correction, then it is possible to have all of the IAM 0.500 values ata blue +1.4 except for say one range with a 0 and your IAM is equivalent to being 1.00 but the one range at 0 would be a -1.4 so if IAM was at 0, you could have blue +2.8 in the ranges which is no timing being pulled.

3. Your kca advance tables are quite sound from comparing to other tunes. However, wouldn't it be easier to set it as close to factory as possible and allow rough correction mode to rectify any detected knock that flkc and fbkc couldn't resolve?

Once the factory Primary fuel maps are altered, the timing retard is too much for leaner mixtures. Finding the best compromise is tough and in my NASTY 98 scenario, I would have needed a LOT of actual knock to get IAM to drop to 0.75 and with so much timing pulled then adding fuel would have induced preignition with total timing past TDC

4. The fuel trim fail safe map setup you do i believe is a good thing. However, for a car using a lambada rear sensor (like factory) instead of a true wide band, wouldn't it be better to have the fuel trims set to add even ridiculous amounts of fuel to be safe, remembering in open loop you're not shooting for stoich anymore, and generally your highest combustion point and peak cylinder pressure is in open loop not closed loop. (Again for those who aren't aware your 02 sensor generally doesn't mean squat once you're in open loop, only works in closed loop to reach stoich which is afr of 14.7:1). Correct me if im wrong anyone.

Too much fuel and retarded timing induces preignition which is where you can end up with two combustion chamber flame fronts(one from too much fuel in the chamber self igniting from not enough timing with the 2nd flame front occuring when the spark plug actually can fire)
Two flame fronts meeting causes the biggest knock and has enough heat to cause the most damage(Rotary engine is a good example!)


As a summary to the above, and without picking on anyone, what I'm seeing is a trend of people logging their car, seeing what they interpret as "bad" according to their minimum knowledge, and then passing blanket judgement on a tune to cause some hysteria.

Without understanding the fundamentals of what your tables are even telling you, how are we to know what the root cause or explanation is.

An IAM of 0.9375 on an EJ25 with KCA values of under 6 means roughly 0.35 degrees of global timing pulled

I'm not singling you out here GB (please don't take this as a personal attack I'm just raising awareness) - when you posted your LV a couple of pages back, i had a cursory view and thought yeah looks alright, and I'm sure you did the same. However upon closer inspection, your airflow ranges were not truly reflective of the true airflow ranges you should be looking at for an extensively modified motor such as yours, and worse still, the flkc y axis load reference points were pretty pointless for yours or anyon else on this forum's motor.

So even if this value was honky dory, it doesn't really tell you squat about how 'safe' your tune is. Because the values are not applicable or relevant to your particular setup. So when I pointed this out and posted about how to change these, it was hopefully an eye opener for a few people to check their ranges and understand exactly what these mean. If you don't understand what these mean then I'm sorry but you're not qualified or competent enough to pass judgement and say the tune is shit.

It may well be (and probably is) that your tune is safe and truly ok, but I'm merely pointing to the fact that you can't deduce so from your learning view, and worse still - you cannot by any stretch juxtapose your LV over say Alexeis and compare the outcome because the values are completely different, the knock correction and detection strategies applied by the different tuners are vastly different (proof is in the pudding just look at two different roms), and what could be dangerous for your motor (forged pistons, free-er flowing exhaust etc) may be a ticking time bomb for someone else with the same LV. I'm sure cosworth designed pistons to withstand more detonation than a Subaru cast one, especially if you research into the silicone content of the cosworth pistons compared to even other manufacturers silicone content (I digress).

As for the argument that it shouldn't have to be up to a customer to decipher all of this - rubbish. You have a duty of care to your car and yourself to make sure you know what's going on before passing judgement on your tuner. For those who disagree, let's consider the alternative: you look at your LV, see a few things you really don't understand but have heard from others on the Internet that its "bad", and you then say the tuner is negligent and doesn't know what he's doing etc. when it just *could* be a possibility that you are the one not understanding what's going on.
Applying an objective standard is impossible in this scene - every tuner does things differently and whilst its nice to think we should be able to just look and say "yep according to the industry standard this is ok", it won't happen. Clearly evidenced by the above comments of mart showing he does things differently. And attested to in my three different tunes by different tuners. I'm not saying that Matt's way or any other tuners is correct (cos I don't have the knowledge to do this), but merely saying we can't judge two different knock correction strategies by two different tuners the same way.
I personally take my car and modification seriously. Thus my little dumy spit last week as some of you may have seen. However I take it upon myself now to learn about what im doing before doing it or at least in close proximity to making the modification. Where I can't, then I have to trust others' experiences to rely upon, which I recognize as dangerous cos its in chartered waters for me personally so have to take what I get with a grain of salt.
I am currently educating myself as much as possible in tuning, and may even consider doing this for my own tunes in 12-18 months which I believe is the required time (for anyone with a normal full time job and life) at least before being able to touch your own car with any degree of certainty (let alone others' cars). So lets see where this goes..
Hope I haven't bored you guys
Mick
KiDo Racing Tunes Info: HERE

Great minds discuss ideas;
Average minds discuss events;
Small minds discuss people
User avatar
KiDo_Tuning
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:53 pm
Car: Subarus + Nissans
Real name: Matt

PreviousNext

Return to Tuning

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron