OFT Tune for OFH+Phantom ESC with 1.5 Dump Pack [Beta]

[fenton]

Originally Posted by WNDSRFR

Well, this is about as low as I dare to go. I went about 47 miles after the fuel light came on. What a nerve wracking drive. Time to try the E. I hope the rain holds off.

I usually go lower than that. I find if it is below the "E" completely it will take about 45 Liters in the 50L tank. Where you are at there would be about 42L

[DAEMANO]

Originally Posted by fenton

Did a quick area under the curve comparison:
Attachment 85677

Hi Fenton, since the ESC competes more directly (on price) to the Stg1 Innovative kit (non-intercooled) do you mind running the same analysis against an "average" one of those?


http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40066

[raven1231]

Originally Posted by DAEMANO

Hi Fenton, since the ESC competes more directly (on price) to the Stg1 Innovative kit (non-intercooled) do you mind running the same analysis against an "average" one of those?


http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40066

agree hp is dead on

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by fenton

The tune cannot change the boost numbers unless very weird things are done with the intake cams if im not mistaken.

What is most likely happening is it is just a better day for ESC boost...Better temp in the battery, cooler air can sway the amount of boost you create by about .5psi.

That's what I figured, just saw a lot of posts about boost levels after tune changes and was curious if there were other factors I didn't think of.

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by fenton

Looks like the torque crossover is at 5500rpm ~. Phantom would feel quicker from 2000-5500 and vortech faster from 5500-7400.

When shifting at WOT i think the rev's drop to about 5000rpm if im not mistaken so Vortech would drop to 175hp and phantom to 185hp.

I think the race would be closer than some think especially through the first 3 gears. I dont doubt that vortech would start pulling in 4th and 5th.

Well shiv looks like you have some work to do, time to do "comparison" video with both cars either from a dig or a 3k rpm rolling start

I think we need to somehow add a dyno plot with just the drag reduction on to compare all aspects - i.e. part throttle driveability. The vortech should be quite a bit peppier than stock above 3K rpm at part throttle as it's providing boost even at part throttle - the ESC is doing something as well with the DR, but it's hard to say how much DR by itself does.

In the end, probably a back to back test, both subjective and maybe a couple drags would be the best way to compare.

[Jac]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

I think we need to somehow add a dyno plot with just the drag reduction on to compare all aspects - i.e. part throttle driveability. The vortech should be quite a bit peppier than stock above 3K rpm at part throttle as it's providing boost even at part throttle - the ESC is doing something as well with the DR, but it's hard to say how much DR by itself does.

In the end, probably a back to back test, both subjective and maybe a couple drags would be the best way to compare.

I dyno'd DR only and it was basically the same* peak hp/tq with slightly less below 3/4K as it was causing a restriction.

*Same = verses stock/non-modified

[fenton]

Originally Posted by Jac

I dyno'd DR only and it was basically the same* peak hp/tq with slightly less below 3/4K as it was causing a restriction.

*Same = verses stock/non-modified

Ya when we did mine and when it would pulse it would go about 10hp higher than stock but then would drop to stock level on the "off" pulse.

[jflogerzi]

What would be cool is a full time DR mode

[Jac]

Originally Posted by jflogerzi

What would be cool is a full time DR mode

In other words full time FI? Not sure how far battery/recharging tech needs to come for that to be realistic at a psi that would actually make a noticeable difference. Ignoring the tuning complications.

Personally i like the on demand nature of the ESC.

[jflogerzi]

Originally Posted by Jac

In other words full time FI? Not sure how far battery/recharging tech needs to come for that to be realistic at a psi that would actually make a noticeable difference. Ignoring the tuning complications.

Personally i like the on demand nature of the ESC.

Yea your right

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk

[enwave]

Originally Posted by Jac

In other words full time FI? Not sure how far battery/recharging tech needs to come for that to be realistic at a psi that would actually make a noticeable difference. Ignoring the tuning complications.



Personally i like the on demand nature of the ESC.

Biggest complication would be pushing all 5psi at 2k RPM while cruising in sixth, for example. Or even more assuming the tech advances. That's probably not ideal, I imagine. You'd want some sort of modulation to occur to make sure you're in a good range before forcing air in. Something like throttle position modulation as mentioned earlier or something could be fun too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DAEMANO]

Originally Posted by enwave

Biggest complication would be pushing all 5psi at 2k RPM while cruising in sixth, for example. Or even more assuming the tech advances. That's probably not ideal, I imagine. You'd want some sort of modulation to occur to make sure you're in a good range before forcing air in. Something like throttle position modulation as mentioned earlier or something could be fun too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I find this to be a fun thing to kick around from an engineering perspective, but from a practical perspective it doesn't really add up.


What's funny is that the variable boost idea is generally chased more aggressively by people without the kit. Kind of like "this would be a perfect kit if boost was tied to engine speed". In practice, the WOT pedal switch seems to work very well.


Driving the car with the amount of boost it generates AND the gradual speed that the compressor ramps up makes the power very controllable, even mid-corner (depending on the corner of course).


I've come to the understanding that the potential gain from variable boost versus the complexity of building & tuning probably offers diminished returns at best and limited value worst. To be short, maybe variable boost for this application just isn't worth it. What do you think?

[enwave]

Originally Posted by DAEMANO

I find this to be a fun thing to kick around from an engineering perspective, but from a practical perspective it doesn't really add up.


What's funny is that the variable boost idea is generally chased more aggressively by people without the kit. Kind of like "this would be a perfect kit if boost was tied to engine speed". In practice, the WOT pedal switch seems to work very well.


Driving the car with the amount of boost it generates AND the gradual speed that the compressor ramps up makes the power very controllable, even mid-corner (depending on the corner of course).


I've come to the understanding that the potential gain from variable boost versus the complexity of building & tuning probably offers diminished returns at best and limited value worst. To be short, maybe variable boost for this application just isn't worth it. What do you think?

I tend to agree that in our boost range the variable speed isn't really a big deal. But if we ever end up doubling the amount of boosts for example, I could see variable boost being fun and useful. If nothing else, it would just bring the engine closer to a true NA experience, where torque is more or less linearly related to throttle position (ignoring stock torque dips and such). But then you get the same problem -- what if I floor it at 2k RPM in sixth?

Either way, it requires the driver to be smart about when they go WOT. That is something that is common between both binary and variable boost and will always be part of driving a car with any non-parasitic boost (and most traditional boost if you're in a certain power band). So you're probably right, the benefit is most likely not worth it.

The biggest benefit would be the elimination of the 0.5s-1.0s compressor ramp, since you would likely already be spinning at a closer speed than DR or natural aspiration through the airbox.

But if you tell the traditional turbo guys that we're upset that it takes us a half second to get to full spool, I think they'd give us a pretty hard time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WNDSRFR]

I just finished my first 10 gallons of E? and thought I would share my impressions/opinions.
First off let me say the conditions were less than ideal for any kind of FI testing, WAY less than ideal. The air temp was about 95 degrees with about 90% humidity with low atmospheric pressure.
My initial impression was that the E-85 tune has less power than the 93 tune. I know that it doesn't but it FEELS less powerful. I think it may be because the E85 tune is sooo smooooth. I actually ran into the rev limiter a few times not realizing my RPM was so high.
And the flat foot shifting really is cool. But you better watch your speed. You get past "go to jail" speed before you know it.
As for MPG/economy goes, my long term MPG with 93 octane is 29.1 MPG according to the MPG meter. On E? my average MPG was 32.4 MPG according to MPG meter. Of course that is impossible. So according to my odometer I got 27 MPG. That's believable.
So, The current price for 93 is $3.69 per gallon. And that's the cheapest it's been in a long time. It's usually closer to $4.00.
The E85 cost $3.11 per gallon.
So according to my calculations it cost .1268 per mile for 93 octane and E85 is .1152 per mile.
Enough reason alone to run alcohol.


But now I am running e>85. I got an alcohol hydrometer to check the purity of my E85 but it says it's about 120% alcohol. So it doesn't work. I'm assuming then that my current fuel tank contains a least E85 after the first tank purging. My first impression now is that yes it has more power.
At less cost.
More to come...


THANKS SHIV YOU ARE THE MAN.