I've been thinking a lot about the wording CPE used when describing the wall.

First, they said that there is a definitive wall in the ECU which would suggest that the ECU is limiting HP in some way, shape, or form. Immeditately everyone jumped on the fuel pressure thing, but their response was that the fuel pressure increase only became necessary once the wall was found. In my mind that means that the ecu started to lean out on the upgraded pump and CPE had to increase fuel pressure to keep the AFR's in line. So let's for a second assume that CPE was being truthful in what they were saying (and I have no reason to believe they weren't). That would mean that fueling wasn't the issue and that the airflow is somehow being limited.

Now why do I say airflow...because the car should still make power even if the spark was off target right? So then I started to think has anyone ever actually confirmed visually or at the TPS sensor directly that the throttle is not closing. I'm thinking out side the box for second but, the traction control still controls the throttle in the event of slippage right? Maybe it also limits the HP on the top end some how. It some how overrides the throttle, but the ECU never reports the closure through some programming mistake. Maybe mazda put ecu logic in to close the throttle after 6k should it detect over a certain g/s at the MAF and not report it to deter ecu programmers. Out side the box right?

I really think the wall was just the fact that all the tables goto 200 load

Maybe, but someone would have thought about that by now other than CPE. That is the first thing we came up with, I can imagine that was also the first thing Christian would have thought of too.

Any thoughts on this? I know I'm probably way off, but even so I just wanted to get some feedback.

The way I see it is that timing advance may give us some gains in the short term, but isn't it making it harder for us to get fuel in before ignition?

Well I remember that Dada said he did some radical stuff with the timing on Robbies build, but never truly elaborated. We need to do 2 years of logging in a couple of weeks..lol.

IDK it just makes sense that if we can't make the fuel come in sooner, then we should just make the spark come in later...

Retarding timing will result in less power just because the flame front won't start until the piston is too far down the stroke.

The throttle closure is possible - sure. Using a voltmeter attached to the TPS on a car with a big turbo on a dyno would prove/disprove this very quickly. I unfortunately don't have such a car.

The really ODD thing is how CPE brings up the fact that they broke the "wall" yet can't even locate the dyno sheets of the cars that did it ... strange if you ask me. But this is not about them.

Keep the ideas and discussion coming, some good stuff is coming out of the woodwork.

Well the tables end at 7000rpms too, and raceroots hasnt had an issue with that, going to 7500rpms? I thought christian said the ecu just interpolated values outside of the tables?

like i said on the first page, christian said for timing above 2.0 load, you just use the 2.0 line and the ECU basically uses this. he said it was very crude but its the way they do it.

FWIW on my last dyno when i hit 385tq i saw loads of around 2.6 and was running about the same psi (26). that was just a peak number and i always usually see around 1.9 load by redline with about 22psi. my BT will be done by end of jan so ill be able to record whatever you guys want. my tune at akuma should also open up some new doors because john knows his shit when tuning and i hopefully will be able to see what he did.

I have the full control flash from CP-E, and I verified what the throttle plate does in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd (with the Dash Hawk).... but never paid any attention what the throttle plate was doing at WOT after I put the turbo on and had it on the dyno. Hmmmm interesting...........

My guess is that the wall is strictly tuning from what CPE has said, since we cant change injector timing and rail pressures require hardware, the only thing left is spark timing.

On DI engines, RPM is the enemy, so for them to have enough fuel for 400+whp they must be making the power in the lower rpms. If this engine makes ~415hp @ the crank @ ~7000rpm, then it can also make ~830hp @ the crank @ 3500rpm.

If it were tuning then we would have to go to them. Jake specifically said, it was in the flashes, but that the SB was only necessary to raise fuel pressure. I know some would disagree but I really do not believe the timing is playing role here. That is much too simple. It is another system that you would not normally think of that is limiting the airflow. TCS, DSC, EGR, PCV, VTCS, emissions, or something….it is one of these damn systems causing the problem I know. I just cannot see CPE coming out and exaggerating the 'wall' flash for it to be something as simple as timing or fuel. If it were that simple they would have just said, "Hey, here is what we did with the standback." This is something bigger; we just need to start looking into the extra systems and one by one eliminating them. Bring it back to basics and then see how much power is made. The more I think about this, the more confident I am that it is something extraneous creating this supposed wall.

Can you post the data logs for runs with the 3° advanced timing? I just want to see where it actually is at each RPM/load break point.

Tks,

It makes me wonder if they are flashing it to run 35-45* of timing and pulling fuel so that it isnt in the injection event. They have said that they were pulling fuel before.

I am pretty sure this is the correct file. I recently bought a new computer and I am trying to work between the new and old computer. It looks like the max torque is right on with the max timing advance.

It would appear that you definitely have ~5° more timing advance than I do in the 4500-5500RPM range.

After I install my FMIC and digest the changes that it requires in my tune, I will probably make my next map adding 1° in those ranges and monitoring for awhile.

How much boost are you running? We pulled 2 psi (ended up at 15psi) and added the timing to achieve the end result. It worked on my setup, give it a try and monitor the knock and see where you end up.

21 tapering to 17 PSI.

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j6...o/100909-3.jpg

hey i found this thread on M6C

the cobb ap - Mazda6 / Atenza

check out post #5, i dunno what to believe

WTF. I don't think I believe that, but even at 72% we shouldn't be as limited as we are.

seriously? if 72% correlates to say 350whp. then 100 % would be more like 500.....

EDIT: and btw its not that they cant find the dyno's its that they are just waiting for sean to come up and post everything himself.

I just got tired of waiting to see more results on a stock block.. so i've taken things into my own hands. Can't wait to see what 2010 brings us, as a community and a platform.

For now, I just want to say how much I appreciate everyone who has taken part in this thread, for all of your work and knowledge. I'm young and new to all of this, new to modding cars.. so I'm sitting back absorbing all that I can.

erection correction!....

i'm excited, can't wait for me to start tuning and testing with my BT set up.
Ive decided to go ahead and throw my shit on the car without building the internals.


soooooooon

You sure are hellbent that they are straight up lying about this...

You think they cant locate the sheets? ha. they dont want to post them.... you know why? nobody will believe them. just like nobody believed robbie's 409, or evilmonkeys 411, and even now, raceroots 428. Robbies car was a shop car, Raceroots car is a shop car. They have to have people out there with cars doing the same thing before people will believe it. It may turn out to be something more than that after this ordeal. But at this point, I've gotten myself here on my own and with my friends. Ive had alot of help from some really awesome vendors, but I've paid my way. Im not here to BS anyone. Im here to make my car go fast.

Thats what this whole ordeal with me going up there is about. Sure, I'm going up to CPE, and finally putting an end to my own ordeal, they wanted someone who has been around here for a while so you fuckers will see theres no BS. even if i barely break 400, thats all my turbo is supposed to do on pump gas. It may not be as good as the 450's coming from 3076's... but at that point, those can come later. We're also going to do a racegas tune, to bring a little more efficiency out of the car. when my car hit 355whp, it didnt matter racegas or not, there was no improvement.

Dont go thinking that I'm even fully convinced. I have my doubts. They still have to prove it to me too.

Trust me, I as well as others are looking forward to your results.

Based on our TB diameter, choked flow at atmospheric pressure would be good for over 700hp.

sounds like a bunch of hear-say

but, to be honest...I wouldnt be surprised to find out that is basically the answer. Like CPE said, it's something pretty simple (something along those lines).

Any way to tell?

I don't know near as much as you all hear discussing this, but this makes sense to me. I drive around with both the TCS and DCS system's (supposedly) off via the trick, but I am telling you guys, that shit is not all turned off completely. Between shifts and some other times I feel the car momentarily "hold back" so to speak and then it winds into its power rapidly. I've heard others say this too, but I can tell there is some kind of electronic system in the car (probably DCS and TCS) that is definitely still at play.

I'll know in about 2 weeks...I'm buying the wall flash for the GT35..:)

You're probably getting the "weird" behavior because you're doing the "trick," which is really nothing.

Pushing the button when the car is running turns off both DSC and TC (since TC is PART of DSC).

The steering angle torque reductions and 1st-2nd gear torque limitations are NOT part of DSC, so they are still present when it is shut off.

Sure it ain't just the fact it's a turbo car and when you get off the gas, even with a BPV, the turbo slows alot, which would manifest as "hold back" then go, after the shift....

I can speed this car up alot by not closing the throttle all the way on shifts or even...gasp...flat shifting.

shpankey, it's called turbo lag

I always flat foot shift when running it hard. Still does it.

I have the gas to the floor and blip the clutch and super speed shift up top.

This is my first turbo, so if that's what turbo lag is, then ok-doke. But it's very odd feeling.

Pressing the button during startup does something, the car feels different pulling out of corners and my lap times are lower with both off. It could just be a placebo effect, but I doubt it.

I have been lurking around these forums for a long time and have been of the opinion that the fuel is the limitation for nearly the entire time. The break through they are describing is likley the timing of the start of the injection event. I suspect that the stock ecu starts the injection at a fixed crank angle, no matter the load or rpm and advancing this would allow for proper fueling to occur. Because this is a DI engine, the time of injection is almost as important as the amount injected. Hopefully it calculates the start based on rpm and load, but based on the severe high rpm limitations seen, even with the throttle held wide open, I don't think that is the case.

You should go lurk in dj's fueling thread.

I decided to up my timing 5* with 20 psi boost and broke loose my tires for the first time in 3rd gear evah...easily...

I am going to up my timing to 10* at 1.00 load and higher, 3000 rpms - 6500 rpms , lower to 19 psi of boost and test it tommorrow.....it is very cold in Tampa so the 42* weather could be contributing to the tires breaking loose but damn it scared me not expecting tire spin in 3rd gear. :sgrin:

I would suggest getting on the dyno when playing with timing, to see if the gains are actually worth it.

When adding timing you will run leaner and pulling timing will make you run richer also so dont forget to account for that

lol and dont add 5 deg at a time!!!

in the words of a famous tuner,

"baby steps, baby steps"

I have had my eye on it. They seem to have it covered.


*Edit

Apparently I have been reading the wrong thread, and we are more fucked than I imagined. Some great information in the other thread that deals with injection timing and it explains why you guys have been so intent on increasing fuel rail pressure in the tread I have been keeping track of.

I would suggest that it isn't a completely lost cause though, the injectors don't open instantly so it should be possible to get minimal gains by pushing the injection event to slightly (3º or so) before the intake valve opens.

:offtopic: sorry...
i haven't done any conclusive testing, but i just push the button for normal driving, and only hold while starting when i'm at the drag strip. at the end of the 1/4 mile i can lock up my rear(i think? i can hear the tires squeal but its hard to tell while you wearing a helmet) brakes quite easily with no sign of ABS coming into play. on the street i have never managed to engage the ABS or lock up the tires on dry pavement, no matter how hard i slam on the pedal. maybe its a different type of asphalt on the strip, or traction compound residue, i've never cared enough to test my theory out. now back to the rest of the thread....