Got the IPF tune today!

[Matt @ FSP]

Originally Posted by hapisok

is there any reason that Jesse, Arno, and other sources from IPF are NOT offering up independent dyno testing of their tune? what is with all the secrets? any other time there is a product brought to the community, vendors generally don't hesitate to allow 3rd party testing.

Taintedveins: do you have a copy of your logs?

There are independant tests out there as lscamaro stated.. We are doing one IPF tune next Saturday on a LLT with all bolt-ons, we will have before and after results.

[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by Matt @ FSP

There are independant tests out there as lscamaro stated.. We are doing one IPF tune next Saturday on a LLT with all bolt-ons, we will have before and after results.

Thank ya!

[ASH@IPF-TUNING]

Hi !

What will that logic be to post data loggings ?? want to get into trouble ??

There is enough sensitive data in these logfiles .... like vehicle speed ... all clear ?? Your got it ??? :flag2:

what is expected from these data logs ?? showing that the engine is running deadly lean because the fuel consumption is sooo improoved ... nonsens !

Running the engine really lean will cause misfiring in part load driving ... these DFI engines are running as lean as possible at AFR14.7 until they run into the Power enrichment !

this car was set with an aftermarket intake .. so we checked the longtermfueltrim and it was stabil below 10% .. so the ECU had adapted the new intake and is far away from getting a CEL from the AFM Sensor or the ECU adaptation system !

Here is a short summary for those who are interested in the Data logs .. for the US market i added the AFR to the lambda value of the ECU

regards ASH@IPF-TUNING

[Taintedveins]

Originally Posted by ASH@IPF-TUNING

Hi !

What will that logic be to post data loggings ?? want to get into trouble ??

There is enough sensitive data in these logfiles .... like vehicle speed ... all clear ?? Your got it ??? :flag2:

what is expected from these data logs ?? showing that the engine is running deadly lean because the fuel consumption is sooo improoved ... nonsens !

Running the engine really lean will cause misfiring in part load driving ... these DFI engines are running as lean as possible at AFR14.7 until they run into the Power enrichment !

this car was set with an aftermarket intake .. so we checked the longtermfueltrim and it was stabil below 10% .. so the ECU had adapted the new intake and is far away from getting a CEL from the AFM Sensor or the ECU adaptation system !

Here is a short summary for those who are interested in the Data logs .. for the US market i added the AFR to the lambda value of the ECU

regards ASH@IPF-TUNING

Thank you Arno! I appreciate the time it took and how long you were up on Saturday!
The car is running amazingly! Nearly 150 miles since Saturday and it is running exactly. the same.

[hapisok]

Originally Posted by ASH@IPF-TUNING

Hi !

What will that logic be to post data loggings ?? want to get into trouble ??

There is enough sensitive data in these logfiles .... like vehicle speed ... all clear ?? Your got it ??? :flag2:

what is expected from these data logs ?? showing that the engine is running deadly lean because the fuel consumption is sooo improoved ... nonsens !

Running the engine really lean will cause misfiring in part load driving ... these DFI engines are running as lean as possible at AFR14.7 until they run into the Power enrichment !

this car was set with an aftermarket intake .. so we checked the longtermfueltrim and it was stabil below 10% .. so the ECU had adapted the new intake and is far away from getting a CEL from the AFM Sensor or the ECU adaptation system !

Here is a short summary for those who are interested in the Data logs .. for the US market i added the AFR to the lambda value of the ECU

regards

get in trouble for posting logs? that is the silliest thing i've heard .

no, i don't expect to see the "top speed" of some of these logs...not important unless its followed by a 1/4 mi time. but KR, timing adv, burst knock, LTFT's, STFT's, RPM, AFR (if equipped with wideband), intake temp, ambient temp, humidity, engine temp (as we all know heat soak plays a HUGE role in diminishing power). which brings me to another point...how are you acquiring your AFR/lambda through a data log with a narrow band O2 sensor? you really can't claim an accurate AFR, only commanded. unless these are data logs that were done on a dyno where AFR was monitored, and in that case, speed wouldn't be a factor (or unless a wideband O2 is permanently installed for open road testing).

what is the run time/distance between logs? why are the LTFT's still at 7-8% with STFT's at 0% while running in PE mode? that being the case, it doesn't appear that the fuel trims are correctly set as they should be closer to 0 (under 5%) and you are leaving power on the table. but then again, im no tuner so i can't speak intelligently on this subject. just what i've picked up here and there.

do you adjust the sensitivity of the knock sensors? if so, how much do you dumb them down by? is that adjustment only made during data logging for tuning purposes?

some comparative data is what im looking for. its like having an after dyno with nothing to compare it to before.

just some questions for the tuner because yes, i am skeptical. and it would be stupid to not ask questions when it comes to the safety of the driver behind the vehicle. i even ask my calibrator questions, just so that i can understand better what is going on.

what do you set the cruising AFR to? still trying to understand how you are able to get such a high MPG rating from a 14.7 AFR. i've seen mine high (36mpg) before on the highway, but i was running lean at the time with my LTFT's over 20% when switching back and forth between E85 and 93 octane.

im not trying to be an ass or ask you how you do your job...just asking some questions that i have yet to see answers to that i think are important.



btw...thanks for posting the logs.

AFR Info

Here is a chart that I have that should give you some insight into what standards are for lean cruise etc...

9.0:1 BLACK SMOKE (NO POWER)

11.5:1 RICH BEST TORQUE @ WOT

12.2:1 SAFE BEST POWER @ WOT

13.3:1 LEAN BEST TORQUE @ WOT

14.6:1 STOCHIMETRIC AFR ( CHEMICALLY CORRECT )

15.5:1 LEAN CRUISE

16.5:1 BEST FUEL ECONOMY

18.0:1 CARBURETED LEAN LIMIT

22.0:1 EFI LEAN LIMIT

[ASH@IPF-TUNING]

Hello !

here are my comments :

1) the data logging files are PRIVAT-data from our customer and i'm responsible that this data is not causing any trouble !

2) BOSCH ECU at NA-Tuning is running COMMANDED AFR = REAL AFR when the adaptation system in the ECU is activ and the fuel trim is below adaptation limits ( +/- 20% )

3) When the adaptation is fully adapted an CAI with different diameter at the AFM Sensor ... this adaptaion corrects in ALL load ranges in different load cells the load and engine speed depending fuel correction !
the last and highes ADAPTATION Memory cell works in the LLT Camaro from 4500 -6000 RPM and up to 75% load ... so the desired LAMBDA = REAL exhaust Lambda ( AFR ) When sombody tells a diffrent story ...

4) the engine temp and the intake temp were recorded in the LOG ... any other important value we do at the basic tuning on the dyno .

5) When the adaptation is ACTIVE .. you are never running lean at LTFT +20% or rich at -20% ... in the real exhaust you see always LAMBDA = 1
if you would deactivate the adaptation ... THEN you are running lean or rich .. depending where your fuel system is missadjusted !


6) sometimes its MORE economic to run Lambda = 1.00 AFR 14.6 with an optimum ignition advance .. then to run the engine at lambda = 1.12 ARF 15.6 with less ignition advance because of much higher detonation sensivity because of the lean mix !
when you try to run the engine much leaner then Lambda = 1.00 you must switch off several fault codes and adaptation values so its not easy to pass emmissions with that tune .. thats NOTHING we want to put on the customer when he needs MOT or Carb or TÜV with his car in some years !

7) Watch the ign advance during the full load run .. any knock retard would be seen DIRECTLY in the ignition advance values !

discussion desirable !

Greets ASH@IPF-TUNING

[KMPrenger]

Good discussion! I think I follow most of it lol.

[ASH@IPF-TUNING]

Hi everybody !

we are living in a civilized world and any real technical discussion without hate and bashing is really welcome !

when i dont know about some item .. i shut up .. keep my mouth closed and try to find out how it works and try to improove it .. that was my way of work the last 20 years as an automotive electronic development engineer !

after finding out how it works ... i can help in discussions like this !

by the way ... here in europe we have a MASSIVE Bosch ECU setup in the last 10 years ... so we have a real big experiance with Bosch ECUs !

greets ASH@IPF-TUNING

[KMPrenger]

I think with the good results we've seen from the few IPF dynos so far and hopefully one more good one from Matt's shop, the only question remaining on people's minds is whether or not the tune is safe. Hopefully this discussion will help ease people's minds on that subject. I believe that is what hapisok is trying to determine here

[Yellow_Glide]

Thanks Ash! In your responses 5 and 6, would the higher lambda value be a contributor for some systems having issue with the ready state of sensors such as Evap and Catalyst taking a long time to become ready?

[BaylorCamaro]

These last few posts are giving me a lot to process lol. Good info.

[hapisok]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

I think with the good results we've seen from the few IPF dynos so far and hopefully one more good one from Matt's shop, the only question remaining on people's minds is whether or not the tune is safe. Hopefully this discussion will help ease people's minds on that subject. I believe that is what hapisok is trying to determine here

KM...you are dead nuts on at what i am getting at.

anybody can make a tune...but is it safe? the majority of the folks purchasing tunes are not familiar with the in's and out's of these motors, let alone the parameters that encompass tuning and the effect it will have on their motor, much less the longevity of it. nor to what extent does the increase in HP put the motor at risk.

i don't agree with:
2) BOSCH ECU at NA-Tuning is running COMMANDED AFR = REAL AFR when the adaptation system in the ECU is activ and the fuel trim is below adaptation limits ( +/- 20% )

command AFR does not equal REAL AFR. +/- 20% which im guessing your talking about LTFT's? maybe if you said INACTIVE...but +/- 20% is not even close to being good. but then again, my understanding of tuning, especially with the BOSCH ECU and maybe a breakdown in communication could be causing this disagreement. when in PE mode...do LTFT's affect the PE tables? i know on some platforms, positive LTFT's will affect the PE tables where negative LTFT's won't. and some PE tables are affected by both negative and positive LTFT's. how does the Bosch ECU respond to LTFT's?

still not sure how you are figuring a lambda of 1 with a narrow band O2 sensor. and you never answered the question of tuning either via dyno with a wideband O2 sensor or strictly via data logging on the open road. if data loggin via open road, there are numerous variables that play into that other than just providing a WOT pull on the highway. i could easily reach top speed going down hill, but uphill with different loads placed on the engine is a different story.

i know when i first got a tune i put all my faith in the tuner to make sure that i was operating at optimal performance. but when marketing and promises of increased HP and MPG's are the selling point...then yes, i am going to question the means at which they are able to promise such gains. especially when they haven't been seen over the past few years or seem exaggerated. my questioning is probing for answers...not trying to poke holes in your ability to provide a SAFE and EFFECTIVE tune. like i said before, not all tuners are created equal. and if the experience you have with working with the Bosch ECU is what sets you apart from the competition, then great!

i'd still like to see a TRUE independent test...one unaffiliated with either trifecta or IPF to do the comparison. you really can't do a TRUE comparison unless it is on the same dyno and under the same conditions and on the same car. previously i had done a comparison between the RX isolator and MACE insulator...back to back dynos where the ECU was reset to 0 so there were no adaptives learned. the car never moved off the dyno and they were done within 30 min of each other. having one distributor or another do the testing can easily skew the results to the favor of one over the other...not to mention various results from dyno to dyno. do you have anything in the works or have you even offered for a true 3rd party independent testing that will provide unbiased results? testing that will give a no shit...1:1 comparison?

the reason i ask is because after all the searching i've done, everything is a post by an IPF rep. if one tune/software/tuner is better over another...ok...but when its nothing but vendor against vendor, its difficult to access the true quality of one product over the other. there will always be questions when it comes to dyno vs dyno and what not. but when its a straight up heads up dyno comparison on the same vehicle under the same conditions, then there is nothing left to argue. even better yet...1/4 mi comparisons with the same driver and vehicle.

[Nutbutt]

We would all love to see an independent test but likely hood is remote. The cost of doing this will eliminate most of your test patients like me. I don't see anybody giving these tunes away.
My decisions on mods are based on pointed questions directly to the vendors, not in an open forum where airing issues may lead to indirectly hurting one company over another over misunderstood data.
This forum is just another site to accumulate data and for you to sort out facts.

[SNV]

I would use my car but I'm all the way up in NJ haha.