I know timing is a very controversial topic, but i though i would post my maps to see what ya'll thought. I don't want to be on the edge cause its mainly a street car, but not too conservative to give up a lot of power either.

Mods are new street ported engine, 3mm seals, ss tubular mani, T4 t-64 .96 a/r, 2.5"short pipes to front mount, twin power, NGK cycle race plugs 9's, all supporting fuel mods 550/1600cc, 50mm gate 11 psi spring, 3" dp, mp, and catback, tuning with PFC and datalogit. emissions and double throttle etc removed. That's the main ones that could effect tuning anyways.

I've attached the leading and trailing split. my PFC maps have been rescaled. stock scaling in vacuum. P14 is 6 psi and goes up in 2 psi increments to P19 which is 16 psi, and P20 is a max boost of 17.5.

Full boost around 4k (n10)

 

I am no expert, but those timing maps look very conservative. I run a streetport S5 based block with s6 housings and I have probably between 2 and 7 degrees more timing depending on the point.
Also, knowing where the rpm increments might shed some light on things as well

 

They go from 400 to 8000 in 400 rpm increments. 400 800 1200 1600 2000 etc

 

You can add a lot of timing to that map. It's way conservative.

 

should i add significantly more timing in the lower rpm range and only a couple degrees in the higher rpm from 6000 to 8000. Also i dont know if i should have it more flat across the board from say 3600 up to about 6k and then raise it for the higher rpms. or if i should gradually increase it all the way then stay flat around 5500- 6000 then go up a bit more. (similar to how it is but with more advance)

I've heard 15 degrees at 15 psi as a general rule, but i dont know if that is in the high torque area and then add some more timing after in the upper rpms.. or if that includes the higher rpms as well.

Since i havent been on the dyno yet i want to keep it a little conservative but if 15 @15 is still considered conservative i might go ahead and increase it up to there.

also any idea how much HP im leaving on the table with my maps? (not comparing to a tune on the edge)

i run 93 pump gas

 

Alright i made some changes. I hope i didnt go too high in advancing, i'm willing to trade some power for reliability so im hoping this map is still considered conservative. Any areas i should be worried about? Or make changes to? My split remains the same, i think its pretty good.

 

While I do agree that the original map you posted is perhaps too conservative, I wouldn't do anything to that timing (in the high boost area anyway) unless you are on the dyno. There's no point in advancing it unless you can measure some kind of difference in power, boost curve, EGT, something, because I don't trust the *** dyno. Use the really conservative map right now if you are just screwing around on the street, and then try the second map you posted on the dyno and adjust it from there.

 

well if the first one is way conservative, is the second one about where it probably would be on a dyno, or is it still on the conservative side too?

Or maybe i should run something in between? I dont want to push things, but is the second map pushing things? Timing is still kind of new to me though i have looked at probably 30 maps for the FD.

Also im planning to run only 15 - 16 psi max. i dont know if thats really considered high boost, but maybe high in the sense thats the highest it goes on my map. Thanks for the input guys.

 

I'm just one opinion out there, but I don't think the second one is "pushing it." I do think, based on my own (albeit limited) dyno tuning experience, that 2 or 3 degrees of timing often doesn't make a big difference--unless your original map was just way off. Does the first map you posted qualify as "way off (too retarded)" ? Depends on the setup I suppose.

On a big street port, 8.5:1 rotors and T04S turbo, I advanced my timing down low (up to about 5 psi) by about 2 or 3 degrees and I immediately noticed better spool and responsiveness. All the other timing adjustments I made after that (down low and up top, both leading and split) didn't make a noticeable difference in the driver's seat or more than a couple hp on the dyno. But every car is different I suppose. When I adjusted the timing on the dyno and made only 2 or 3 hp, I really wished at the time that I had that dual digital EGT setup that some people are running now.

Because then you start asking yourself "ok, I just picked up a small amount of power that I can't even feel when I drive the car, but did I just reduce reliability? I know the car didn't detonate, but what about in the future?" See what I'm saying? Look at the "advancing timing at high rpm" thread in the single turbo archive. Steve Kan posts in there (pluto is his name) and he just says he often doesn't mess with timing all that much on customer's cars without an EGT gauge. But Steve Kan does have a reputation as a conservative tuner. Without proper instrumentation (dyno, EGT gauge(s), plug reading under controlled testing, etc) all you can do is make educated guesses essentially based on what other people tell you, which can only get you so far.

 

yeah i read that thread a couple times, which is actually one of the reasons both my maps increased timing in the upper rpms. I'm in the same boat as i would rather leave the 5 hp and retard it back a couple degrees. But if im leaving a good 15 + hp then thats a different story cause that means obviously its too retarded.

I didnt really mess with the timing in the lower boost , does it seem like it should be higher?

 

You are getting closer. No need to advance it more than a couple degrees past peak torque.

 

LOL closer but still conservative i hope? Did i advance it too much past peak torque? I've seen some maps that advance it in the upper rpms several degrees more then i did. based on my scaling i think im around 11 degrees @ 15 psi with a max of 16 at 8000 rpm. i wasnt sure if the 15 for 15 psi rule was inlcuding the higher rpms or if it was safe to go higher then 15 in the upper rpms.

 

these questions you are asking, which are the exact questions I myself have pondered, are the reason why I am putting together the Howard Coleman dual EGT setup for the datalogit.

 

I think it is GOOD for initial tuning of AFRs, and not overly safe. Within 2 degree of optimum.

First off you can not compare it to a FC 13B map as they run more timing than a simliar ported 13B-REW. Many ported FC 13B maps that I have seen have similar 4000-6000 timing as my non-seq stock port FD map had but less top end timing.

The small AR turbine will hurt high end air flow as compared to lower.

When winter comes, then go out and slowly increase timing as this is when knock will truelly start to show up. I never like to see knock over 20-30 range. A car that has low knock in cold winter will be more safe in summer if the car has a good tune and good IC.

 

Chuck are you refering to my first map i posted or second map? Thanks for everyones advise

 

your second map has some similarities to what ive been running at the track, 15min sessions of a 2 mile roadcourse, with no isses yet.
I run a couple degrees more at the onset of boost, less split, and 91 octane. My AFR's are tuned for 11:0 at anything over 10psi.

Edit: the similarities are mainly in the numbers at peak torque up to redline. I would be comfortable running your second map while you do AFR tuning

 

Alright cool. I feel pretty confident in the second map. I ran it last night and it seemed like an improvement. Thanks for everyones advise and examples. It helps alot.

 

You can bump your timing up to 13 degrees at 15psi and a couple more after peak torque. I typically dont run more than that on a ported motor. A degree more doesnt make a difference in terms of power.

 

alright thanks for everyones help. I made a few small changes and think the map will work quite well for me. I wont be dyno tuning for a lil while still but will update once i do.

What kind of theoretical power differences would someone expect to see between my first map i posted and one similar to the second map, with a bit more advance around 15 psi? Just curious how much of an impact timing makes? especially in the mid range area where the timing was down like 6 degrees on the first map.

 

I know this is an old thread but are the values on the IGT map shown as the split or actual degrees?

 

Split

 

You haven't mentioned what AFR's you are running at each boost level?

The issue with tuning is every mapper will have their own style but in reality you need to map to how your car reacts to the inputs you make.

I have tuned mine to 1.4 bar approx 20.3 psi and running lead ign timing at 10 degrees and above 6200rpm its 11 degrees and above 7krpm another 1 degree. The trailing split is set to 8. Tuned to 10.7 afr with water injection only. I could even go as high as 14 degrees but the gains are much much smaller on pump fuel and not advisable unless you run meth or e85.

Essentially when i was tuning on the dyno, going from 9 degrees to 10 degrees netted me 10hp at the wheels....but when i went to 11...the gains were much smaller like 3whp....so I left my tune at 10 degrees ign advance. You will need to slowly bring up your timing and see if you gain anything...if the gain is too small then probably not worth it.

 

What you're describing is MBT - Minimum Best Torque (there are a bunch of other ways to say the acronym such as Minimum Timing for Best Torque but eh). There're still too many tuners who just ramp up to wherever they're knock limited and ratchet back 2-3 degrees. More than likely why so many rotaries ate **** and died in the 90s/early 2000s.

 

LMAO ate **** and died! Many even now still dying of poor tuning. Sometimes you cant blame the tuner as the owners want the tuners to squeeze out every last hp...just so they can say " I have the POWER!" followed by swift engine failure.

 

Seem to be a wee bit helpful if the tuners actually tunes to the specific application, vice cookie-cutter style... if a very expensive resulting "crumble" at that. **** maybe just learn a little to not cost your customer a financial and emotional nightmare...