515whp @ 342tq, 27x10.50

[JaredKaragen]

24* base timing... you running some hefty cams? crazy dizzy offset? I see the smoothing to the timing map; I was always a little weary about smoothing/adding that much by means of street tuning [by way of column separation on 2D view] and lastly; LS/V? GSR?

[Vtec6000]

Really nice looking map both ignition and fuel but do you not have big swings in AFR with it like that?

[TopMountGSR]

24* base timing... you running some hefty cams? crazy dizzy offset? I see the smoothing to the timing map; I was always a little weary about smoothing/adding that much by means of street tuning [by way of column separation on 2D view] and lastly; LS/V? GSR?

24 base, as in the timing in the idle region? I felt like it idled better with the added timing, it idled smoother at the same afr and has a slower idle resume off throttle. It has mazworx v1 cams in it, bought them off ShawnR, he went 9s on them. They idle pretty stockish however and the car has no crazy dizzy offset. On customers cars, I never start them out as aggressive as this map is, however, I could get on a whole other level of aggression with this setup and still feel comfortable with reliability. So far I haven't seen any specs on the plugs in the two years this map has been on this car. Its a GSR block with an 89mm LS crank, LS length manley turbo tuff rods, gsr manley 81mm pistons, p&p ITR head, kms chromoly retainers, shimmed junk2 pro springs etc. Any other questions shoot brother! DK

[TopMountGSR]

Really nice looking map both ignition and fuel but do you not have big swings in AFR with it like that?

Like what? With so much timing deducted at peak tq? I don't feel that it needs to have so much timing pulled but I was just staying safe. I've pulled less with a bunch of setups without problems. I do feel like the timing maps will change a bunch once I get more aggressive with it. I will however hold my aggression for c16. Whats funny is that I feel that these timing maps need revised because its not even peak tq were the massive reduction is, but its were it hits so to speak and ask for added fuel. If not, what do you see causing the air fuels to swing? I'm interested.. Thanks, DK

[TopMountGSR]

The more I look at the timing graphs, the more I want to revise them. I would like to just try to remove timing reduction at ~6krpms. I would have to see the knock analyzer while I tried that however. This would change the fuel curve drastically and hopefully smooth the tq and power curves up a bit more. If it upset the tq curve and didn't smooth it more, I would go back to the drawing board. When I set these timing graphs up, I was thinking full spool would come in here causing peak tq. I progress my boost now with rpms intentionally so that pretty much throws that theory out and spool time was later than expected.

[TopMountGSR]

1st one is the orig 'guesstimate'. Would be better suited for a med sized turbo. 2nd progresses with rpms. I've seen lots of really fast big turbo cars go fast with timing maps that resemble these. 3rd has a slight provision for actual peak tq. I think this is the more correct way, and may allow me to add more timing overall using this curve vs the other two. It may need more timing pulled at peak tq however. From everything I have learned in the past, looking all three of these up and down, the 1st is the most aggressive judging by how advanced it is at actual peak tq. I'm hoping the 2nd or 3rd will provide the smoothest tq curve and that they will help bring the power in sooner. I just don't want to induce any added wheel spin too soon. Car is down till we pull the trans again [6th time, 5 open diff explosions, now a shifting issue], once the trans issue is fixed I will strap it back down on the dyne and see which of these timing revisions is beneficial. Car now has a twin disc and dss axles, which now should allow me to max the turbo out on this setup on some good gas. Could lead me into more trans issues, but I think it will be worth it. I have 6 gsr and 4 ls transmissions for this project. There is also some power to be had in cam timing with this car. Currently both are set to -2, -2, lol. I'm just having some issues with 'stuck' cam gears when using loctite. It was my starting point when I built it to cope with the added material removed from head and deck surfaces. Looking back advancing and adding some cam separation could help.

[9400RPMS]

Thx for sharing topmount, glad to see your still active on here and if i have questions i can ask , we're all still learning and just by studing your maps i've learned a good bit, great maps, nice and neat, the way i like them and very informative, keep up the work =)

[TopMountGSR]

Thx for sharing topmount, glad to see your still active on here and if i have questions i can ask , we're all still learning and just by studing your maps i've learned a good bit, great maps, nice and neat, the way i like them and very informative, keep up the work =)

No problem man. I try to help as much as I can. Thanks for the kind words.

[Vtec6000]

Really nice looking map both ignition and fuel but do you not have big swings in AFR with it like that?

Like what? With so much timing deducted at peak tq? I don't feel that it needs to have so much timing pulled but I was just staying safe. I've pulled less with a bunch of setups without problems. I do feel like the timing maps will change a bunch once I get more aggressive with it. I will however hold my aggression for c16. Whats funny is that I feel that these timing maps need revised because its not even peak tq were the massive reduction is, but its were it hits so to speak and ask for added fuel. If not, what do you see causing the air fuels to swing? I'm interested.. Thanks, DK

More in relation to the shape of the fuel curves. Does your air/fuel ratio vary much from your target AFR with the curves like that? I have adopted your way of keeping everything smooth especially the fuel curves and it works very well nice smooth power delivery etc but the AFR's can swing quite a bit i.e I aim for 12.8afr on a NA motor trying to keep everything nice and smooth but in areas ill get 12.4/12.5 or on the higher end maybe 13.1afr whereas if I play with the curve and the fuel curves get somewhat spikey I can get a more consistent AFR reading, might only vary .2 either way. So i'm just curious to know how consistent your AFR's are @WOT I understand from dyno testing there is very little if any difference in power output on a NA motor running 12.5 or 13.0afr just it was something which was commented on by another tuner who done a power run on one of my customers cars, he said it was a little on the rich side around midrange. On a positive note however it was a damn nice dyno sheet real smooth torque curve car was equiped with a k20a2 motor and tuned on a ho**ata kpro Thanks for your time.

[TopMountGSR]

My wot throttle air fuels hold decently constant for being on such a old ecu. I would say they are repeatable within 0.25 of a point, 11.2, 11.1, 11.3, 11.1, 11.2 etc. Its tuned to bottom 11s on pump and mid 12s on 110+, pretty conservative really.

[Vtec6000]

My wot throttle air fuels hold decently constant for being on such a old ecu. I would say they are repeatable within 0.25 of a point, 11.2, 11.1, 11.3, 11.1, 11.2 etc. Its tuned to bottom 11s on pump and mid 12s on 110+, pretty conservative really.

That's pretty consistent

[9400RPMS]

I've always started when coming into boost starting @ 11.8 and dwelling down to like 11.3's towards redline.. depending on ign conditions, i see you do the same thing Pump gas of course, i do tune conservity but not too much..

[TopMountGSR]

My wot throttle air fuels hold decently constant for being on such a old ecu. I would say they are repeatable within 0.25 of a point, 11.2, 11.1, 11.3, 11.1, 11.2 etc. Its tuned to bottom 11s on pump and mid 12s on 110+, pretty conservative really.

That's pretty consistent

Thanks man!

I've always started when coming into boost starting @ 11.8 and dwelling down to like 11.3's towards redline.. depending on ign conditions, i see you do the same thing Pump gas of course, i do tune conservity but not too much..

I generally tune my personal cars very aggressive, but this one can make too much power for the street, so I keep my air fuels conservative at least because on the street it doesn't need to be ran on the edge. Customer cars, it really depends on the season, most pump gas customer setups I shoot for 10.8 - 11.3. I used to tune them leaner but it gives them less room for error so to speak. A lot of customers just stand on it, they never look at the wideband if they even have one. They think, its tuned it'l be alright. So you gotta make it that way for a larger window of time season wise. I have to get very aggressive with the iat high load comps at anything at 32 degrees or below. These iat comps are not the ones I use on customer setups. So far I have figured out how to have ~70 degree iats on the dyno, and go instantly to 30-40 degree iats on the street and it be spot on fueling wise. When I say spot on, I mean it, 10.8xs on the dyne, 10.8xs on the street. All I normally have to do on the street is manipulate boost in the lower gears after a dyno tune. It took me several months to figure that out. DK

[Bugermass]

If you have swings in AFR with a smooth fuel graph you can always add resolution by using the extended RPM tables. Theres enough breakpoints there you should be able to get a pretty darn smooth fuel graph and smooth final AFR..

[TopMountGSR]

If you have swings in AFR with a smooth fuel graph you can always add resolution by using the extended RPM tables. Theres enough breakpoints there you should be able to get a pretty darn smooth fuel graph and smooth final AFR..

Your exactly right, thats what I did in my last timing graph example. I put the break points were I needed them and gave my self more resolution in the areas I planned to be in. You can see in the 3 different examples that the breakpoints have changed a great deal. My question to you Chris is, which of the 3 examples I posted would you prefer for this large turbo car? Care to shed any of your insight on this? Thanks for your time! DK