thuglike
Active member
Do you or anyone else have any clue why that might be?
The survey was interesting...too bad it was poorly concieved and delivered
EGT getting up there fast? Problem?
- Thread starter Pbguy420
- Start date
- Status
Do you or anyone else have any clue why that might be?
The survey was interesting...too bad it was poorly concieved and delivered
Are you implying the results were not clear, or somehow doctored(lol)?
Big Bore
New member
Very true, the manifold temp rises much, much faster than the dp under acceleration and as you said can and will be 500 deg hotter. I've watched it for 3 years now and I'm comfortable with the idea of using manifold gauge only and using the space on the pod occupied by the dp gauge for something else.
thuglike
Active member
No...
Wasn't it Dennis aka ITP who started it? I think he'd hardly skew the results when he's a dp tuner customer himself, or was at the time.
thuglike
Active member
See answer above Luke
Diezel Dawg
New member
there were two different surveys, correct?
Looks like the survey data is gone, but here is a link to a thread containing some of the info from the most recent survey....
http://www.thedieselgarage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93870
http://www.thedieselgarage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93870
Let's get something out in the open here.....
After looking at many different tunes from many different tuners, I can honestly say that the majority (not all, but a vast majority) of them advance the timing above stock. Even tunes from those who are highly regarded and have stellar reputations on this very board.
With that said, I will not name names, and I will not post up someone else's intellectual property.
How much advance from each tuner is debated. Some only slightly, others a significant amount. And not everyone is going to agree on what is perfect, what is too much, and what is too little.
At the same time, out of all the tunes I have personally seen, none of them had absolutely outrageous timing. Even some older tunes.
However, I have seen tunes that had some significant timing advance, but at the same time some ridiculous amount of fueling. And that's the real problem. Timing by itself won't always break an engine. But couple some decent timing advance along with some massive overfueling, and now you're on the ragged edge.
So while all this debate is going on about timing tables, folks need to understand that it's only half the issue. Let's address the fueling too. And in regards to fueling, I'm not talking about old tunes either. I'm also talking about recent tunes.
Here, I'll start:
This is just one of many examples. The pic below is the stock fuel pulsewidth multiplier table. This table will multiply the calculated fuel injection pulsewidth based on ICP and engine oil temps. This map is designed to increase pulsewidth to compensate for oil temperatures, especially cold weather driving.
Now this is an example of a modified one. I simply created this table as a representation of some that I've seen from other tuners. Note that this is not someone else's exact map, but it's damn near close to quite a few out there:
Notice how high the pulsewidth multiplication goes. What's worse is that it's not basing the additional fueling on RPM's, but rather simply oil temps and ICP. So you could have low RPM's and higher ICP, and just be blindly dumping fuel in by the bucket-full. Now couple that along with some added timing, and you folks can start to get the picture.
It's no wonder that people data log their trucks and watch fuel injection pulsewidth at WOT go beyond 5 or even 6 milliseconds. And then they wonder why their truck smokes so much, has such a touchy throttle pedal, have extremely high EGT's, their ICP takes a nosedive, and their truck sounds like a rattle trap. Then when a rod is spit out..... it's done.
By the way, that pulsewidth multiplier table modified like that... is more common than some folks might think.
And for giggles, here's what I use on my truck:
After looking at many different tunes from many different tuners, I can honestly say that the majority (not all, but a vast majority) of them advance the timing above stock. Even tunes from those who are highly regarded and have stellar reputations on this very board.
With that said, I will not name names, and I will not post up someone else's intellectual property.
How much advance from each tuner is debated. Some only slightly, others a significant amount. And not everyone is going to agree on what is perfect, what is too much, and what is too little.
At the same time, out of all the tunes I have personally seen, none of them had absolutely outrageous timing. Even some older tunes.
However, I have seen tunes that had some significant timing advance, but at the same time some ridiculous amount of fueling. And that's the real problem. Timing by itself won't always break an engine. But couple some decent timing advance along with some massive overfueling, and now you're on the ragged edge.
So while all this debate is going on about timing tables, folks need to understand that it's only half the issue. Let's address the fueling too. And in regards to fueling, I'm not talking about old tunes either. I'm also talking about recent tunes.
Here, I'll start:
This is just one of many examples. The pic below is the stock fuel pulsewidth multiplier table. This table will multiply the calculated fuel injection pulsewidth based on ICP and engine oil temps. This map is designed to increase pulsewidth to compensate for oil temperatures, especially cold weather driving.
Now this is an example of a modified one. I simply created this table as a representation of some that I've seen from other tuners. Note that this is not someone else's exact map, but it's damn near close to quite a few out there:
Notice how high the pulsewidth multiplication goes. What's worse is that it's not basing the additional fueling on RPM's, but rather simply oil temps and ICP. So you could have low RPM's and higher ICP, and just be blindly dumping fuel in by the bucket-full. Now couple that along with some added timing, and you folks can start to get the picture.
It's no wonder that people data log their trucks and watch fuel injection pulsewidth at WOT go beyond 5 or even 6 milliseconds. And then they wonder why their truck smokes so much, has such a touchy throttle pedal, have extremely high EGT's, their ICP takes a nosedive, and their truck sounds like a rattle trap. Then when a rod is spit out..... it's done.
By the way, that pulsewidth multiplier table modified like that... is more common than some folks might think.
And for giggles, here's what I use on my truck:
Big Bore
New member
Add those tunes to a twin HPOP dumping hot thrashed oil back to the reservoir where the EOT sensor resides and I promise you that you will want to drive your truck through the tuners front window or off a cliff.
Charles
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 18, 2011
- Messages
- 2,727
- Reaction score
- 32
My information was 100% correct and 100% accurate with ZERO alteration, or misrepresentation. The timing in my file was 26.5 at 3000rpm and every other factor IDENTICAL, the timing in Jody's was 37.5. Period. Don't even bother claiming that it is untrue. A short jaunt back through threads past will affirm to you quickly that I DO NOT LIE. Period. Nor do I work to decieve anyone.
I don't think that adding 12 and 25.52 makes me a genius. And the only "agenda" I had in this thread was to stop the spread of false information. I posted the actual maps bud. That kind of means you can stop with all the hoorah and step out from behind the curtain. We're all done with that.
You have clarified your level of expertise with these comments. It says PHP Tune because that is the person I payed for my version of PCMX. It could say sniper or minataur or anything else and it wouldn't change one thing about the maps I then opend up with that application.
And the maps I posted were opend up one right after the other, same resdef, same EVERYTHING. I did not change views, I did not change ANYTHING for the sole purpose of making their viewing 100% objective. That application read both of those files exactly the same. His just had 11 degrees more timing at 3000rpm, 3000psi and normal operating oil temp. Fwiw, I actually chose the lower of the two injection offset values in the operating range just to err on the UNbiased side if anything.
And all it takes is for Jody to go show you the exact copy of "heavy tow" that I was running on my 550 for you to see that it is EXACTLY what I posted. He already knows this. You can rest assured that Jody knows what I posted to be 100% true and 100% accurate if he has bothered to pull up the file and check back.
Seriously.
You need to stop typing on a public forum if you want anyone to take you serious. Are you a young kid? If so, then just chillax until your nuts drop.
As for the above, the parameter I referenced is a safety catch that most of us use to ensure that even if everything goes wacky.... EOT sensor spazes out, anything.... that the timing can never go over _____. I specifically stated this to be a safety catch, and that it being 135 in Jody's file meant that it would not stop anything, as 135 might as well be 1350 for all the rods care. The reason I mentioned this was because even with his file itself actually calling for 37+ degrees..... IF, he had set this parameter at some practical value, it would have negated the two maps I posted and stopped the timing from climbing any higher. But he didn't.
It is very obvious that Jody has ranted to you and you have no practical experience aside from what he tells you. If you think you are in the right and I am some rogue moron sent to attack your beloved Jody, think again. Seriously investigate your surroundings bud.
I would urge you to possibly try reading what I wrote about that parameter one time. You obviously didn't the first go-round. I stated that it was the maximum allowable, and that it was used as a safety catch. And I clearly stated that Jody having it at 135 meant that it wouldn't stop anything. It's like a rev limiter set to 20,000rpm. Does that mean I think it will force the engine to 20,000? No. But it damn sure isn't going to limit anything at a point where it might keep rods in the block though is it?
The point in showing the maximum timing parameters was to show that it wasn't negating the two maps I posted. If he had set it to 15, then it would have negated the entire problem, and I would have never posted? Can you understand that? I urge you to try.
It is the only program of his that I have. My own program I paired it with for comparison was at least year or two older! Yet my timing was perfectly sane. Fwiw, the program I showed pulled 635rwhp, so it's not as if it was some lame duck of a program. It was the program that I referenced in my first real conversation with Jody, face to face, when I told him I was running 28* max and he looked at me like I was stupid. As if that was an outlandishly high value. I will not address the maximum allowable timing parameter again as I think I have clarified that sufficiently for you.
There are no beliefs involved. These are numbers stored in a computer memory. They are what they are. I made ever effort to ensure that they were presented as clearly as possible. If his program was fine, trust me, I've got better things to do. I only took time out of my day to upload those screen shots because I do not tolerate misinformation when I have reason to believe it is being dispersed.
You know what the timing WAS though? At 3000rpm, 3000psi and normal operating temp? Since that maximum value was set so HIGH..... the ACTUAL timing for the engine was 37.5*. That what ACTUALLY went down. My map for reference was only 26.5, and in my tow program I actually run on the truck now, it's a mere 24 degrees at the same conditions.
Those are the key takeaways. Not whether or not you can read.
I intend to. And if your mind is open to this subject then at the end of our conversation you will have some very, and I mean very different understanding of quite a number of things. The second I finish this post your phone will be ringing. I don't know where you are, but hopefully the timezone works out, because I have a lot to fix in your mind.
Fwiw, I did get one PM on this subject after I made my initial posts. I did not expect it, but I got one.
Just so that you people understand my level of "bias", or lack thereof, this is the entire PM diologue in full:
My intention is NOT to sell programs, or tuning, or make people switch tuning. My intention is, and ALWAYS has been to make sure people are getting accurate info.
Charles
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 18, 2011
- Messages
- 2,727
- Reaction score
- 32
Well, I did in fact talk to James, and while we had a few rocky sections in the conversation, we got it sorted by the end and I think we both came away with some good. He told me that since he has been working there, which is around 3 years IIRC, maybe 4, that the maximum allowable has in fact been set to very practical values, not unlike, and in some cases the same as what I listed above. We also discussed some values in the base sea level table as well and what he relayed to me was equally sane and practical.
I take this to mean that in terms of injection timing, that things in the DP camp are on track. I did not see any of this myself, but I take his word on what we talked about.
I plan to stop worrying about this now. In all these years this is the first time anyone from that camp has stated actual values that could put a person's mind at ease.
I no longer have cause to suspect that his current files are dangerously timed.
I take this to mean that in terms of injection timing, that things in the DP camp are on track. I did not see any of this myself, but I take his word on what we talked about.
I plan to stop worrying about this now. In all these years this is the first time anyone from that camp has stated actual values that could put a person's mind at ease.
I no longer have cause to suspect that his current files are dangerously timed.
Well Charles... I am surprised about your last post... your coming around 
Here is my whole take on things... and take it for what its worth...DP_tuner has in the past few years rec a bad wrap about timing... funny thing is the programs that have been discussed, as proven here, are old timing tables, and not far off from all the other tuners out there of that time frame. Sure you can argue till your blue in the face about who discovered what table ro perameter first. But it all boils down to there is alot to "find" in these pcms, and in the last few years the advancements have been proven...Hell I remember the days when 500 hp on the dyno was HUGE, and 600 was unheard of... oh thats right these trucks dyno different than the dodges lol..... those were the days....
People it is just like oil systems, advancements have came ALONG ways since even 2-3 years ago. And most anything you run now a days is relitively safe..... unless your trying to make HUGE power and squeeze every last bit of HP out of it... cause your still in uncharted territory.... but a 250/200 hybrid, or a stage 2 truck....pssssshhhhhhhhttttt every tuner has done so many of these trucks they know your setup.....
But lets look at a few things here... egts running hot....
To much fuel......
Not enough air.......
To much timing retard .......whoops did I say that? yeah retard... not advance.... ADVANCE ACTUALLY RUNS COOLER...
Now that is all things equal, Tuner hears you have 250cc injectors... every tuner has his own way of going at this... tuner a can give you max pw, for said injector, and max timing advance, and tell you you need more oil/air to support.....
Tuner b can "detune" the injector asking for half the pw and same timing or less values and send you on your way....most likely to come back someday and ask hey "my buddy has the same setup as me... bigger turbo but that should'nt matter... and he kicks my behind... um is there anything we can do in the tunes...." lol( I don't understand this concept at all why buy a injector then hold it open shorter... to only get say half its capacity out....just get an injector with half the capacity)
Does that mean any tuner is incorrect in their ways.. nope just a different approch...
Pick you pony and ride it..... they are all pretty safe now a days.....
Here is my whole take on things... and take it for what its worth...DP_tuner has in the past few years rec a bad wrap about timing... funny thing is the programs that have been discussed, as proven here, are old timing tables, and not far off from all the other tuners out there of that time frame. Sure you can argue till your blue in the face about who discovered what table ro perameter first. But it all boils down to there is alot to "find" in these pcms, and in the last few years the advancements have been proven...Hell I remember the days when 500 hp on the dyno was HUGE, and 600 was unheard of... oh thats right these trucks dyno different than the dodges lol..... those were the days....
People it is just like oil systems, advancements have came ALONG ways since even 2-3 years ago. And most anything you run now a days is relitively safe..... unless your trying to make HUGE power and squeeze every last bit of HP out of it... cause your still in uncharted territory.... but a 250/200 hybrid, or a stage 2 truck....pssssshhhhhhhhttttt every tuner has done so many of these trucks they know your setup.....
But lets look at a few things here... egts running hot....
To much fuel......
Not enough air.......
To much timing retard .......whoops did I say that? yeah retard... not advance.... ADVANCE ACTUALLY RUNS COOLER...
Now that is all things equal, Tuner hears you have 250cc injectors... every tuner has his own way of going at this... tuner a can give you max pw, for said injector, and max timing advance, and tell you you need more oil/air to support.....
Tuner b can "detune" the injector asking for half the pw and same timing or less values and send you on your way....most likely to come back someday and ask hey "my buddy has the same setup as me... bigger turbo but that should'nt matter... and he kicks my behind... um is there anything we can do in the tunes...." lol( I don't understand this concept at all why buy a injector then hold it open shorter... to only get say half its capacity out....just get an injector with half the capacity)
Does that mean any tuner is incorrect in their ways.. nope just a different approch...
Pick you pony and ride it..... they are all pretty safe now a days.....
PTSUPERD
New member
- Joined
- May 16, 2011
- Messages
- 9,115
- Reaction score
- 0
That said.... and looking at how far off track this thread is from the OP's intention I think this is a good place to close this one.
- Status
