Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Sunday February 1, 2015
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Technical > Engine Management & Tuning

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
View Poll Results: Whats your max advance?
20 or less 6 20.00%
21 1 3.33%
22 6 20.00%
23 0 0%
24 4 13.33%
25 6 20.00%
26 or greater 7 23.33%
Voters: 30. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-06-2004, 10:01 AM   #1
cdvma
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 21980
Join Date: Jul 2002
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Central MA
Vehicle:
2002 PSM WRX (Sold)
2009 BMW X5

Default Your max advance?

I'm curious as to what people are running for their maximum timing values and their various setups. I'm most interested in VF22s and 93 pump gas on an EJ205. Please if you vote in this poll also reply and explain briefly the setup, as obviously not all setups are the same. Any comments on the timing is also appreciated. For example

VF22, EJ205, TXSv1 TMIC, one cat, 93 pump, 25* max, 20/21 PSI @ 10.8:1 AFR. I'm thinking of taking out a degree of timing because it knocks occationaly on brisk days in the upper gears.

Since there is confusion from someone, this is my attempt to clarify exactly what I intended to ask about in this thread: please specify the maximum timing advance you use while under full load conditions. So for example what the highest value in the 100 load site if you have a UTEC is (and if you feel like specifying, the RPM value as well).

Thank you.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

Last edited by cdvma; 08-07-2004 at 06:58 PM.
cdvma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 12:57 PM   #2
Blennophobic
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 25886
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: E. Canada
Location: Ottawa area
Vehicle:
2003 WRX Rally Blue
- sold, waiting for 2015s

Default

EJ205, SR-30 @17psi, TBE w/3" cat, 10.2:1 AFR, on 91 pump.

running 22*max at 6500 due to the crappy gas... WI coming next!

Steve.

PS. Chris: this has the makings of a great thread. Can someone with lots of tuning experience tell me if I'd make more power by running leaner with less advance?
Thanks.

Last edited by Blennophobic; 08-06-2004 at 01:59 PM.
Blennophobic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 01:31 PM   #3
happasaiyan
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 37731
Join Date: Jun 2003
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Rolling Meadows, IL
Default

19* for me.

EJ257 SR50 @ 19psi
dr500 + TBE
11.1:1 AFR on 93oct.

happasaiyan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 02:25 PM   #4
big_adventure
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 40501
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Paris, FR
Vehicle:
2005 Decathalon 21sp
One WheelSeanPower

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blennophobic
EJ205, SR-30 @17psi, TBE w/3" cat, 10.2:1 AFR, on 91 pump.

running 22*max at 6500 due to the crappy gas... WI coming next!

Steve.

PS. Chris: this has the makings of a great thread. Can someone with lots of tuning experience tell me if I'd make more power by running leaner with less advance?
Thanks.
10.2:1 is way, way rich. Try running around 10.7:1 or maybe 10.8:1 on that gas through the torque peak, leaning out to 11.0:1 up top. You should be able to run even more timing on a TMIC. If you have an FMIC, that's probably as good as it will get pouring YooHoo into the tank.

-Sean

Last edited by big_adventure; 08-06-2004 at 02:36 PM. Reason: I'm a very stupid boy...
big_adventure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 02:28 PM   #5
big_adventure
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 40501
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Paris, FR
Vehicle:
2005 Decathalon 21sp
One WheelSeanPower

Default

Oh, and 26.5 points at 8500 on pump, 31.5 on c16.

RA-C, GT30R
big_adventure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 02:32 PM   #6
happasaiyan
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 37731
Join Date: Jun 2003
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Rolling Meadows, IL
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by big_adventure
10.2:1 is way, way lean. Try running around 10.7:1 or maybe 10.8:1 on that gas through the torque peak, leaning out to 11.0:1 up top. You should be able to run even more timing on a TMIC. If you have an FMIC, that's probably as good as it will get pouring YooHoo into the tank.

-Sean
im thinking you meant rich?
happasaiyan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 02:37 PM   #7
big_adventure
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 40501
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Paris, FR
Vehicle:
2005 Decathalon 21sp
One WheelSeanPower

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by happasaiyan
im thinking you meant rich?
I don't know how I made such a typogrphical error. Imagine it, I hit four completely wrong letters, and they spelled a real word that just happens to mean the opposite of what I intended. Incredible!

Thanks - I edited my idiocy.

-Sean
big_adventure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 02:38 PM   #8
Blennophobic
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 25886
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: E. Canada
Location: Ottawa area
Vehicle:
2003 WRX Rally Blue
- sold, waiting for 2015s

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by big_adventure
10.2:1 is way, way lean. Try running around 10.7:1 or maybe 10.8:1 on that gas through the torque peak, leaning out to 11.0:1 up top. You should be able to run even more timing on a TMIC. If you have an FMIC, that's probably as good as it will get pouring YooHoo into the tank.

-Sean
Thanks Sean... I don't want to get too far OT for this thread. I'll just say that I'm thinkin I should try different gas because I was knocking at 10.5:1 and 22* of timing so I richened it up... maybe I should have lowered timing first?
Blennophobic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 02:42 PM   #9
big_adventure
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 40501
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Paris, FR
Vehicle:
2005 Decathalon 21sp
One WheelSeanPower

Default

Probably, just watch your EGTs. Also, what was the temp?
big_adventure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 02:43 PM   #10
Macabre
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 3841
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sacramento, CA
Vehicle:
2004 WRX Wagon
UTEC+VF22+WI

Default

Picture's worth a thousand words. Anyways, VF22, EJ205, stock TMIC, 100+ degree ambient temps, 91 octane RFG gasohol. Should have WI installed this weekend or next... I run more timing and less fuel than this in my "winter" map, but that is more knock sensitive than I like in the summer.

Macabre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 03:03 PM   #11
Blennophobic
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 25886
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: E. Canada
Location: Ottawa area
Vehicle:
2003 WRX Rally Blue
- sold, waiting for 2015s

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by big_adventure
Probably, just watch your EGTs. Also, what was the temp?
Temp was unseasonably hot for us in PNW (pushing 90*) when I was tuning. Max EGT I get is 800C which is not bad. I should have some room to move now that the ambient has cooled off.
Steve.
Blennophobic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 03:26 PM   #12
gpatmac
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 18446
Join Date: May 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Stratford, CT
Vehicle:
2002 WRX wagon
psm

Default

For Aeons, my fried Is2Scooby and I were spending so much time with WB kit in order to just see 11.1:1 in the upper RPM band. Cars were pretty much generic TXS UTEC stage 4's except made up of many different brand name parts. We both generally used some sort of Xylene or Toluene mixture to bring octane to between 95 and 96. We were also both boosting to a peak of 20.5 or so with both of our gains being pretty agressive (I know I was hitting 14psi in 1st gear after about 4-5 (?) cycles...a UTEC cycle equating to about 100 crank cycle, if I recall). I used the UTEC to control boost and he was using the JoeP.

Annnnyhow, for probably 6 months, we both slowly whittled our times/traps down from 13.5/99 to 13.0/100 or so. Then, the fateful day came where we were both getting near the end of our patience and so I ramped up my timing map by +2 across the board so that I would peak at 26 DBTDC, and viola! 12.9/104.0, 12.8/104.4, 12.798/104.6. For months, we were leaving the track at the end of the night, twice a weekend, so frustrated at our inability to tune with the UTEC, that we both almost sold them for like $100. Finally, the light seemed to turn on.

As a side note; if you have the techedge like we were using at the time, PM me for our tuning technique in using it. It required 3 people, a laptop, and a videocamera...and a lot of open highway (which is difficult to come by on Oahu.
gpatmac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 03:39 PM   #13
Blennophobic
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 25886
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: E. Canada
Location: Ottawa area
Vehicle:
2003 WRX Rally Blue
- sold, waiting for 2015s

Default

gpatmac... let me get this straight: you couldn't go any leaner without getting knock but you could add 2 deg timing without causing knock? A function of your net octane rating after additives I guess.
Blennophobic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 04:33 PM   #14
gpatmac
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 18446
Join Date: May 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Stratford, CT
Vehicle:
2002 WRX wagon
psm

Default

No, we were erring on the side of more fuel/higher timing than less fuel/lower timing. We set 11.5 as the goal as opposed to tuning fuel until we start seeing knock, if that makes any sense.

We were abiding by the philosophy that with a tad little bit more fuel (safety buffer), we could afford to ramp up higher in the higher rpm/higher mlp, especially since we believed that the higher timing value would tend to run a bit cooler up there. Since then, I've even experimented with ramping to 27 and 28...without knock. (I don't do that very often, though.)

Have you had a chance to look at Mick_the_Ginge's UTEC tuning guide? He has it posted for download over at WRXHackers....Here's the link. (right click/save as.)

Here's the page that discusses what I'm referring to.
gpatmac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 07:35 PM   #15
hippy
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 36528
Join Date: May 2003
Location: florida
Vehicle:
2002 Impreza Wrx
Silver

Default

vf34, muffler silencer(on road) 10.8 to 1 20-21 degrees at 18psi. about 23 without the muff silencer

water injection, 12 to 1 a/f ratio about a 10.5 to 1 air/liquid ratio..27 degrees with muff silencer..... I dunno what without
hippy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 08:08 PM   #16
jblaine
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 8512
Join Date: Jul 2001
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: St. Pete, FL
Vehicle:
2002 WRX chassis...
stage-infinity.com

Default

24 degrees from 6200 onward.

up-pipe
TXS stealthback with cat
IC hoses
Vishnu Stage 1 EcuTek reflash
11:2 AFR
1400 EGTs
16 IAM, 8 to 11 knock correction
jblaine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 11:26 PM   #17
Jon [in CT]
*** Banned ***
 
Member#: 2992
Join Date: Nov 2000
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Connecticut, USA
Vehicle:
02 WRX Sedan
Silver

Default

These are all pitifully low values for "maximum ignition advance." I can easily achieve over 40 spark advance running 91 octane without leaving my driveway. That's with a stock turbo but it wouldn't matter if I slapped on the biggest honkin' turbo that anyone's ever bolted onto a WRX. No water/alcohol injection and no knock.
Jon [in CT] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2004, 11:37 PM   #18
pegdrgr
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 25693
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Portland, Or
Vehicle:
2008 18x9" goodness
E85-380ftlbs @ 3100

Default

Man Jon you can be such an ass!

To clarify at low load situations your stock ECU will seek 40 degrees advance. Clearly the scope of this conversation was intended to only cover full boost situations, or high load situations.

Jon once again you have proven your posts can be totally useless. Try working on adding something to a discussion.
pegdrgr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2004, 12:14 AM   #19
cdvma
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 21980
Join Date: Jul 2002
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Central MA
Vehicle:
2002 PSM WRX (Sold)
2009 BMW X5

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pegdrgr
To clarify at low load situations your stock ECU will seek 40 degrees advance. Clearly the scope of this conversation was intended to only cover full boost situations, or high load situations.
Yep, you nailed it. Sorry, Jon, I should have been more specific with my request. All this info is great guys, thanks for the input and lets keep it coming...
cdvma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2004, 09:23 AM   #20
ride5000
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 32792
Join Date: Feb 2003
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: lincoln, ri
Vehicle:
2003 GGA MBP
12.9 / 105+

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon [in CT]
These are all pitifully low values for "maximum ignition advance." I can easily achieve over 40 spark advance running 91 octane without leaving my driveway. That's with a stock turbo but it wouldn't matter if I slapped on the biggest honkin' turbo that anyone's ever bolted onto a WRX. No water/alcohol injection and no knock.
jon, it seems counterintuitive, but a larger, more efficient turbo compressor along with a freeer-flowing turbine will end up using LESS advance. this is due to the greater VE and correspondingly denser in-cylinder charge causing a more rapid flame front propigation.

fwiw, i'm running a stocker, map dips to around 1 bar at redline (poor little turbo! ), and i run 29* @ 7k across the whole row.

ken
ride5000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2004, 10:54 AM   #21
TheMadScientist
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 23717
Join Date: Aug 2002
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Beverly, MA
Vehicle:
2005 Big red

Default

For a TXS stage2 WRX I used to run 29* at 7000 on sunoco 94 when we had it. I really don't know what the A/F was but it was below 11.3:1, that was as low as I could read. Now on the 93 I think the guys have to pull at least 1.5* out of that map some times more.

TMS
TheMadScientist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2004, 05:46 PM   #22
Jon [in CT]
*** Banned ***
 
Member#: 2992
Join Date: Nov 2000
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Connecticut, USA
Vehicle:
02 WRX Sedan
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ride5000
jon, it seems counterintuitive, but a larger, more efficient turbo compressor along with a freeer-flowing turbine will end up using LESS advance. this is due to the greater VE and correspondingly denser in-cylinder charge causing a more rapid flame front propigation.
Sorry, but this is nonsense. Advance tables are indexed by load (air ingested) and RPM. Suppose two engines, one with a stock turbo and the other with a larger more efficient turbo, are operating such that each is inducting identical amounts of air (as indicated by the MAF sensor) at, say, 7000 RPM. That means that each is using the same "cell" from an ignition advance table because the cell is indexed by RPM and load. Since, in this case, each cylinder of each engine is ingesting the same amount (mass) of air during its intake phase and since volumetric efficiency is defined as a mass ratio, the two engines are operating with identical volumetric efficiency. And, since density is defined as mass/volume, the density of the intake charges are identical, too.

The point of my post was that it's pointless to compare ignition advance without speicifying both the RPM and the load at which it occurs. My example involved a high-rpm low-load situation. Try it yourself. Put the car in neutral. Gradually rev the engine up to 6800 and try to hold it there without changing throttle position. Once you're able to hold that RPM without adjusting the throttle pedal, observe the ignition advance.
Jon [in CT] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2004, 05:56 PM   #23
pegdrgr
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 25693
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Portland, Or
Vehicle:
2008 18x9" goodness
E85-380ftlbs @ 3100

Default

Jon the problem is that most of the people on this forum are using the UTEC to control the timing, at least the ones that can change the timing values themselves. So those people are not setting them based on true load, as in mass of air. They are doing it based on the boost pressure that they are running. You are absolutely right to say it is more valuable to discuss the timing that they are running based on MAF voltage, but the rounding that the UTEC does makes that just to coarse.

Why not try to be helpful instead of putting up cryptic nonsense that is probably not going to be recieved well, or as you intend. I am now assuming that your intent was to be helpful in this case....
pegdrgr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2004, 05:59 PM   #24
gpatmac
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 18446
Join Date: May 2002
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Stratford, CT
Vehicle:
2002 WRX wagon
psm

Default

Jon,

Were you not able to get the gist of the post? Why detract and lead the thread in the wrong direction. You know he was asking about high rpm/high load, or weren't you able to intuit that?

What's your max timing values during high rpm/high load? Answer and hit reply. Simple as that.
gpatmac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2004, 06:05 PM   #25
Jon [in CT]
*** Banned ***
 
Member#: 2992
Join Date: Nov 2000
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Connecticut, USA
Vehicle:
02 WRX Sedan
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gpatmac
Jon,

Were you not able to get the gist of the post? Why detract and lead the thread in the wrong direction. You know he was asking about high rpm/high load, or weren't you able to intuit that?

What's your max timing values during high rpm/high load? Answer and hit reply. Simple as that.
There's precision for ya - "high load." Well, then, I run "lots" of advance at high load.
Jon [in CT] is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AVCS: Max advance on a built motor research results rlavalle Built Motor Discussion 68 10-24-2013 02:05 PM
Hey '04-'08 Nissan owners, want your timing advanced? SaabaruMike South West Impreza Club Forum -- SWIC 6 01-21-2009 05:30 PM
Wagon owners - post your max neg. camber with stock struts nocturn Brakes, Steering & Suspension 12 07-19-2004 03:53 PM
Whats your max boost, and what mods? chrislehr Factory 2.0L Turbo Powertrain (EJ Series Factory 2.0L Turbo) 2 04-13-2003 12:05 PM
Tell me your Ignition Advance... JenisonWRX Factory 2.0L Turbo Powertrain (EJ Series Factory 2.0L Turbo) 5 09-26-2001 12:25 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2015 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.