This thread is where you can consolidate any/all discussions of fuel additives - for whatever you are using them for, for whatever you have heard them used for. Please post links/attachments as available to help facilitate discussion & understanding :)
==============================
A brief intro to Ferrous Picrate :)
http://www.fpc1.com/faq.php (http://www.fpc1.com/faq.php)
http://www.fpc1.com/test_reports/public/to%20be%20combined/Fuel%20Technology%20PtyLtd/scan0008.pdf (http://www.fpc1.com/test_reports/public/to%20be%20combined/Fuel%20Technology%20PtyLtd/scan0008.pdf)
Difference between Ferrocene & Ferrous Picrate:
http://www.fpc1.com/sci_ferrocene.php (http://www.fpc1.com/sci_ferrocene.php)
I neglected to mention that ANY METALS in the fuel are bad news long term. We have to add metal deactivation compounds in ACES IV to deal with the normal copper and vanadium that is inherent in the fuels that cause gum, varnish and deposits.
Ferrous Picrate, Ferro organo metallic complexes , any copper, platinum, cerium or rhodium products in any form should be avoided. They cause such problems that we had to independently test ACES for all of these metals as no metals are allowed if you supply a fuel additive to the military for military vehicles:
AL,Sb,Ba,B,Ca,Cr,Cu,Fe,Pb,K,Mg,Mo,Na,Ni,P,Si,Ag,Sn,Zn,Sr,V,Ti,and Cd all below 1 ppm!
The additives that contain these are also acidic and cause problems with your oils as well.
These are the facts even though there may be people here that are presently fans of them!
Regards,
Brian
BND Automotive LLC
440-821-9040
www.bndautomotive.com (http://www.bndautomotive.com)
I went through my first tank of gas with ACES IV in there. After a 30 mile drive right after the fill up I noticed how quiet it was under the hood. I can't hear the HPFP anymore, it just sounds like a typical DOHC engine under the hood now. My second drive i noticed hesitation when applying gas. I was pulling out of a parking lot and hit the gas but didn't move much, just kept idling. After a couple of seconds, the car finally started to accelerate like it should but the drive down the freeway I could feel hesitation and the Instant MPG meter was reading really low.
Later that night my drive to work felt normal and ever since then it has been normal. MPG's are roughly the same as before but it is still nice and quiet under the hood. I'm going on a 1500 mile road trip this weekend so we'll see how she does. I got 27 mpg on a trip to Memphis in July but that has a 1000 ft total elevation drop. OKC to Rochester, MN is a pretty dang flat drive, only 170 ft total elevation drop. Hopefully i'll be getting the same or better MPG
That is so weird....
I went from a E-85 + meth blend to ACES and straight 93 and the car didn't miss a beat.
i never did pull the battery cable or reset the ECU in any way. i am completely stock but other than that one hiccup its been good ever since.
After this wedding happens in 2 weeks I'll be able to get with Torrie and get a tune. I'm looking forward to results you get with the tune, FoMoCo
well, my road trip went without incident and I put over 1600 miles on the car. MPG going to Minnesota was 27.8 going mostly 70 to 80 with the cruise set to 80 in most of Kansas. Winds were calm and it was in the 90's most of the way until dark and then dropped into the 70's and very humid. The way back I got 25.2 MPG but had a pretty stiff headwind. Kansas and Oklahoma there was a good 20 mph wind. I ran whatever premium the gas station happened to have. Most were 91 E10 (Minnesota had 92 E10).
My exhaust tips are staying a lot cleaner so that's another benefit of this ACES IV.
Quote from: FoMoCoSHO on September 03, 2015, 05:05:57 PM
That is so weird....
I went from a E-85 + meth blend to ACES and straight 93 and the car didn't miss a beat.
whats a gallon of that moonshine going for,thanks. Z
Quote from: 92BlackGT on September 03, 2015, 01:48:49 PM
I went through my first tank of gas with ACES IV in there. After a 30 mile drive right after the fill up I noticed how quiet it was under the hood. I can't hear the HPFP anymore, it just sounds like a typical DOHC engine under the hood now. My second drive i noticed hesitation when applying gas. I was pulling out of a parking lot and hit the gas but didn't move much, just kept idling. After a couple of seconds, the car finally started to accelerate like it should but the drive down the freeway I could feel hesitation and the Instant MPG meter was reading really low.
Later that night my drive to work felt normal and ever since then it has been normal. MPG's are roughly the same as before but it is still nice and quiet under the hood. I'm going on a 1500 mile road trip this weekend so we'll see how she does. I got 27 mpg on a trip to Memphis in July but that has a 1000 ft total elevation drop. OKC to Rochester, MN is a pretty dang flat drive, only 170 ft total elevation drop. Hopefully i'll be getting the same or better MPG
I've been thinking about this and it makes me think the ACES may have disloged some sort of injector build up and then it needed a little time to break it up.....
My quick and dirty recap of ACES IV. First, these comments do NOT pertain to my SHO but rather my daily driver 2004 GMC Yukon XL 4x4.
The truck just tipped 100k miles few months ago. I was interested in preserving it. Vehicle has ZERO issues with running, starting, shifting, cooling etc. The only complaint is gas mileage. In which I average roughly 10 mpg city, and 13 mpg highway. Upon initial installation of the ACES I did notice my throttle response was much improved. And although the engine bay was and engine in general was already very quiet, it seemed quieter! I was overdue for trans, coolant and differential changes so I took the opportunity to replace those fluids with the BND brands. Again, I cant quantify any improvement per se, because the truck was already awesome.
I compared a 760 mile trip taken last year in the GMC and an 825 mile trip last week in the GMC. Initially I thought I achieved better mpg as that's what my mileage log showed on last entry screen. But after analyzing numbers, and using averages for trip duration I actually achieved almost 1 mpg LESS using the ACES. 13.872 vs 14.776. I spoke with Brian at BND and the initial thought was I may need to run more since the truck is a high mileage vehicle. My SHO is at 60k miles, so can use this as reference. Brian and I spoke and the thought was emissions test results would really show what the ACES is doing. So if anyone is due for emissions testing, consider getting before and after emissions (exhaust) test. Especially if no access to dyno. I will be using more as a quieter engine bay is more gooder right? The ACES definitely quieted the SHO engine bay. As the SHO is the most noisiest car I have ever owned as far as under the hood "noise".
The return trip in 2014 shows a steep decline in mileage. This is because driving over the "Grapevine" here in California. Which is roughly 40 miles of hill at 5-7% grade.
I just thought about this, the trip last year on the return half, I was pulling a U-Haul trailer. Maybe 4000 lbs loaded. Now Im really stumped.
There are so many damn variables when trying to calculate MPG's so for me, any perceived benefit is just a possible bonus nothing else.
Trip length, terrain, weather, altitude, loaded weight, fuel type, quality, octane (labeled vs actual pumped in), bad mood, construction, red lights, yellow lights, toll booths, LEO's, naggy wife, astral sign, I mean damn I'd just drive myself nuts trying to account for the multitude of variables.
One of my trip monitors has not been reset since I bought the car. Prior to ACES (4Kish miles) I was at a miserly 14 MPG (LOL!) Over the last couple of fill ups with the ACES, I am up to 14.7, WOOHOO! Does that mean I'm getting better mileage? Maybe? Maybe the motor is breaking in? Maybe I've just been a kinder, gentler FoMoCoSHO.....doubtful, LOL!
I'd suspect it will just take some time for ACES to clean up 100K of crap...Having to burn years of deposits is bound to affect FE in a negative way.
For now I would just drive it and try to figure out some way to get a somewhat consistent testing methodology maybe using a specific piece of road, consistent pump, and the built in mileage tool if that vehicle has them. The problem now is the "genie is out of the bottle" so to speak.
If you've been tracking religiously I'm sure some possibly better data will begin to emerge over time. I'd say driving in your normal sphere of influence will yield better data anyway.
Good luck, keep us updated, and try not to drive yourself batshit crazy figuring it out, LOL!
Edit-When I averaged your tank ending MPGs
12.65 Pre ACES
14.64 After ACES
Disclosure- My mental faculties have not 100% returned so my math could be off.
I added the pre aces ending MPG's totals and divided by 5
Did the same for post ACES and divided by 4 (threw out the 0 ending tank)
Quote from: FoMoCoSHO on September 16, 2015, 01:07:42 AM
There are so many damn variables when trying to calculate MPG's so for me, any perceived benefit is just a possible bonus nothing else.
Trip length, terrain, weather, altitude, loaded weight, fuel type, quality, octane (labeled vs actual pumped in), bad mood, construction, red lights, yellow lights, toll booths, LEO's, naggy wife, astral sign, I mean damn I'd just drive myself nuts trying to account for the multitude of variables.
One of my trip monitors has not been reset since I bought the car. Prior to ACES (4Kish miles) I was at a miserly 14 MPG (LOL!) Over the last couple of fill ups with the ACES, I am up to 14.7, WOOHOO! Does that mean I'm getting better mileage? Maybe? Maybe the motor is breaking in? Maybe I've just been a kinder, gentler FoMoCoSHO.....doubtful, LOL!
I'd suspect it will just take some time for ACES to clean up 100K of crap...Having to burn years of deposits is bound to affect FE in a negative way.
For now I would just drive it and try to figure out some way to get a somewhat consistent testing methodology maybe using a specific piece of road, consistent pump, and the built in mileage tool if that vehicle has them. The problem now is the "genie is out of the bottle" so to speak.
If you've been tracking religiously I'm sure some possibly better data will begin to emerge over time. I'd say driving in your normal sphere of influence will yield better data anyway.
Good luck, keep us updated, and try not to drive yourself batshit crazy figuring it out, LOL!
Edit-When I averaged your tank ending MPGs
12.65 Pre ACES
14.64 After ACES
Disclosure- My mental faculties have not 100% returned so my math could be off.
I added the pre aces ending MPG's totals and divided by 5
Did the same for post ACES and divided by 4 (threw out the 0 ending tank)
OK, now all thats funny lol. I love it. But when calculating mileage according to my chart remember I was calculating just for the trip itself. Which was to to allow for a good run in under load. I will look at the rest of the data and compare LONG TERM up to this point. I have very little doubt the ACES isn't helping just trying to quantify it scientifically is challenging for me with my limited resources.
I do not rely on a vehicles ecm to calculate mileage. THAT IS TOTALLY BOGUS TO ME! I record mileage at EVERY fill up and gas stop. So I can get a real world test result for my driving. The long trip was my driving on steroids. Probably averaged 80 mph. Some burst up to maybe 110 mph. Mostly though I just cruised.
You right about cleaning 100k of crap which is why I reordered a gallon of the ACES IV. When I get the gallon in I will make a special 400 mile trip in the SHO to get a good run in with it. But since I already added to ACES to SHO I only wish I had done emissions and/or dyno testing first to see for myself the improvements realized.
Here is my preliminary analysis. Phun with Numbers :D
Quote from: SHOdded on September 16, 2015, 04:54:52 AM
Here is my preliminary analysis. Phun with Numbers :D
Spot on analysis lol.
For my truck, my interest has always been longevity, mpg, and performance. In that order. So the MPG calcs are the only numbers to quantify any realized gain. I will NOT take my 9000 lb truck to the track or dyno. That is not needed for my real world daily driver. Not that kind of vehicle.
For the SHO my priorities will be longevity, performance and mpg. In that order. I need real world test results for real world driving. Not tricks and/or gimmicks. Which is why I do NOT depend on the vehicles ecm "calculated" mpg. Rather actual mileage.
I have mileage collected on my cars for about 5 years. Only time the numbers got a bit out of whack is the times when I changed devices to record the data. I am changing again soon as I HATE my android phone. Going back to iPhone. But trying to compare apples to apples becomes more challenging. No pun intended. As was stated, time of day, quality of gas, mood of significant other, LEO's in area all contributing factors.
"apples to apples" LOL. Data collection, especially over a prolonged period, is a daunting task. The hope is that the "average" of the miscellaneous factors involved follows a straight & predicatable path, and major deviations are duly noted.
OHHHHH MMMMMMM FRIGGINNNN GEEEEEEE.
Since my OBD reader errors last month I think, I had been running my car stock. I left it that way to see if DTC codes or errors reappear in which none of em did. And to re appreciate the 4 plus tune. SO thanks for those who pointed me to a better OBD 2 reader.
That being said, I decided to retune car today. Since I added the ACES IV to the last 2 fill ups, I figured I would try the 93 4 + X tune. (I only have 91 octane in Cali). Wow, this MF! WOW! The 91 vs 93 tune is night and day. My point with mentioning this here is I don't have 93 octane available to me, so I could never get the "BEST" tune that LMS offers. But the ACES allows the car to run it. I do not have the KR pid's working (I tried) to see if any ill effects but the car runs awesome. Way more aggressive tune. Chirping 1-2, 2-3 shifts. Blasts outta the whole. Had mustang GT that tried to play on my way home from New Mexico. I think after I blew by and around him from about 45 mph to 100 mph, he thought different about wanting to play.
I will be speaking with Brian in coming days about his racing formulation. At this point, LMS I don't think has been contacted to do any trials with its, so I want to see if I use the racing version, and NOT tuned for it, will I see any gains? I may need to get Torrie tunes as he appears more apt to tweak tunes for people. THOUGHTS?
Quote from: Dxlnt1 on September 22, 2015, 01:18:47 AM
OHHHHH MMMMMMM FRIGGINNNN GEEEEEEE.
Since my OBD reader errors last month I think, I had been running my car stock. I left it that way to see if DTC codes or errors reappear in which none of em did. And to re appreciate the 4 plus tune. SO thanks for those who pointed me to a better OBD 2 reader.
That being said, I decided to retune car today. Since I added the ACES IV to the last 2 fill ups, I figured I would try the 93 4 + X tune. (I only have 91 octane in Cali). Wow, this MF! WOW! The 91 vs 93 tune is night and day. My point with mentioning this here is I don't have 93 octane available to me, so I could never get the "BEST" tune that LMS offers. But the ACES allows the car to run it. I do not have the KR pid's working (I tried) to see if any ill effects but the car runs awesome. Way more aggressive tune. Chirping 1-2, 2-3 shifts. Blasts outta the whole. Had mustang GT that tried to play on my way home from New Mexico. I think after I blew by and around him from about 45 mph to 100 mph, he thought different about wanting to play.
I will be speaking with Brian in coming days about his racing formulation. At this point, LMS I don't think has been contacted to do any trials with its, so I want to see if I use the racing version, and NOT tuned for it, will I see any gains? I may need to get Torrie tunes as he appears more apt to tweak tunes for people. THOUGHTS?
I have some of the race formula but have been unable to try to test that or anything else....
I have a few different combinations i want to try including E20 with both ACES versions.
But yeah, Torrie will definitely continue to ramp up the power as the data logs show safe conditions.
Maybe we should send him a bottle to tune with on the dyno, lol...
We need to figure out what's going on in your KR pids.
I would be willing to help buy a bottle for him to try out. Hopefully with some semi aggressive tuning, may squeeze another 20-50 hp out?
Would Torrie allow any kind of trade in? I have LMS tunes, But I think I would have to buy new tuner plus tunes to use his tunes. Or can you think I could pay a a "tune" fee just for the tunes and use my existing MyCal programmer?
With the 93 tune the BOV, turbo whistle and exhaust purr are more pronounced. Is that normal?
Quote from: Dxlnt1 on September 22, 2015, 02:18:29 AM
I would be willing to help buy a bottle for him to try out. Hopefully with some semi aggressive tuning, may squeeze another 20-50 hp out?
Would Torrie allow any kind of trade in? I have LMS tunes, But I think I would have to buy new tuner plus tunes to use his tunes. Or can you think I could pay a a "tune" fee just for the tunes and use my existing MyCal programmer?
I don't think he uses the Mycal at all, so yeah IIRC, its about $400 with the X4.
When I bought the 2015, it was $199 since I have the x4 already.
You can always sell the mycal here, but comparisons are always fun especially if you have an extra $400.00 burning a hole in your wallet.
Quote from: Dxlnt1 on September 22, 2015, 02:20:56 AM
With the 93 tune the BOV, turbo whistle and exhaust purr are more pronounced. Is that normal?
Yes, many people have in addition reported hearing a "honk"/duck call type sound with the 4X tune, also with Unleashed's hotter tunes.
I don't believe there is a "trade-in" program, but you have to PM Torrie directly or ask in his subforum (PM is quicker, I think). In any case, you should ask LME to see if they will give you a tune for the effective octane you are running. They will be understandably reluctant as they don't endorse fuel additives in the first place (at least for the EB platform). Call them or PM them or ask the question in their subforum.
What is your goal anyway with the race gas tune? It certainly wouldn't be a DD tune, and it would be an unknown what if anything, it means for the powertrain in this case.
Very interesting info. Clearly the experiment impressed you a lot... I'd be really interested to see the KR numbers on stock vs 91 4x vs 93 4x...dyno and real world would be interesting too...and comparing I'd also be interested in the numbers on winter blend oxygenated gas vs summer blend. Did you run 91 vs 93 octane tunes for your impressions? I have the same problem in AZ .... Stuck with 91 octane at the pump. If it all looks safe in the OBD monitoring it could be a true boon. I have been holding off on the ACES products for this kind of info. As far as the tune, your choice... But if the numbers pan out I'd this could be the reason for me to pull the trigger on ACES since I'm personally not into tune tweaking...due to my laziness... So I'd love it to make an LME tune as strong as this seems to be for you by running 93 v8 instead of 91 v8.
Well I will be trying to figure out the KR pid later today. Going on my "workout" now.
But No I do not have an "extra" $400 laying around but I thought Torrie used the MyCal as well. So how would I get an effective octane rating number to give to LMS for them to modify the tune? And then what exactly would I need to monitor to show that everything is working safely?
As for goals of using racing formula, like you Tom I don't like any mod or add on to look like an add on. Which is partially why I will be dumping the Airraid CAI in the coming months. Just have to dig the factory intake out of the shed. But If I can add the racing formula of ACES, I get a modified tune to take advantage of it then seems my car could be at 450-475 hp with no meth. Detune it a bit for daily driving since that is how car is driven. Not a track car but would love to have track performance on tap. Thus far, I am HAPPY with the 93 tune. I want/need to get the info to verify all is good. But doesn't appear to pulling timing, no knocking or pinging, instant throttle response. So if you only have access to 91 octane my preliminary reports are you are safe to use the 93 octane tune by using the ACES IV. Just my non scientific observation.
Unleashed = SCT, LME = MyCal
You can guesstimate effective octane using info from Brian/BND, then ask for a tune for gas a couple of octane points lower, to give yourself headroom.
But getting yourself setup with Forscan on iDevice or Forscan/Torque Pro on Android is the way most of us datalog currently. ecoboostsho's hard work with Torque PIDs comes in real handy.
Cant get Torque to read the obdlink mx.
Obdlink software can't get it to read the pid
Return the MX WiFi, get the VGate/VLink/iCar WiFi from Amazon. Works without a hitch on Adroid/Apple devices.
http://www.amazon.com/iKKEGOL-Diagnostic-iPhone-Switch-Sleep/dp/B00PFFG1EO (http://www.amazon.com/iKKEGOL-Diagnostic-iPhone-Switch-Sleep/dp/B00PFFG1EO)
The only thing is it takes 1/2 hr to go to "sleep". I usually yank it when done. You can also get a cheapo OBDII port extender if you anticipate using the adapter frequently.
The obd readers from ?????? caused a bunch of errors in dash readings before. So I won't be using anymore of those.
Tom since you only have 91 octane too, and you probably already do some data logging are you willing to load to 93 tune and log it? You won't be disappointed I a can assure you.
You could probably get log results faster than me. I gotta figure out why mine isn't reading. I am returning the mx for replacement to see if I just got a lemon.
My experience with ACES IV:
2 fill up on the SHO, not much to report, I probably have to reset the computer or re-tune to benefit.
3 fill up on the WRX and WOW! It's a 2L engine with a 20G turbo so low RPM was pretty dead on torque but since running ACES IV, the part throotle low RPM "get up and go" is much MUCH improve. Turbo is faster to respond and the tail pipe seems to be cleaning itself. This is all happening in the "close loop" part of the tune, where variable valves timing is in use. When going WOT or higher boost "open loop" tune, not much has changed. So a dyno re-tune for the open-loop should help benefits from the ACES IV, I guess. But at a 10.8 AFR, the tune is too rich anyway.
Running Petro-Canada 94 octane in both cars.
EDIT: forgot to say, the WRX engine is running smoother too. It was already a happy reving well balanced motor (EJ207) so I am impressed!
What ratio of ACES did you use in the SHO & WRX, BigPelo?
1oz for 6 gallon as recommanded by Brian.
Im still trying to get a good read from my obd reader. In a nutshell, if you have Android go bluetooth, if iPhone then WiFi. I chose the WiFi option as I will be dumping my Android soon. Piece of crap in my opinion. But when the reader stay connected, all my readings are good. I think. I reloaded the 91 4plus tune so thats what this is showing.
My last readings with the 93 tune were similar. But in both occasions, the LOR/OAR number does drift a bit. I started at -.7 and within couple miles car was at -1.0 on to -1.2.
I will reload the 93 tune and recheck. In speaking with Brian about the race formula of ACES, his thoughts were I need more time for the ACES IV to become fully impactful. I may also up the ratio to 1:5 for a couple tanks with the 93 tune loaded.
Does anyone with iPad/Iphone have the Ford PID's purchased in DashCommand? Been writing them and I am having issues with their policies. Buy app for $10, then buy manufacturer specify year ($10). But you can't use that for ANY other year. So for me, I have 4 cars. Would cost me $50 total to have PID's for all cars. And if I change cars, all this is out the door and have to buy another module for year of specific vehicle. Are there any other working options for IOS?
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab162/dxlnt1/SHO/Screenshot_2015-10-11-08-18-20_zpswpx8kgud.png)
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab162/dxlnt1/SHO/Screenshot_2015-10-11-08-11-13_zpsvfaowo9a.png)
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab162/dxlnt1/SHO/Screenshot_2015-10-11-08-12-36_zpsuauptkvs.png)
When did that -.9 show up?
OAR shouldn't go below -1 if the formula is correct IDK what that -1.2 is about.....
This was during normal acceleration. There is thread or post elsewhere on this board about the LOR going beyond -1.0. No real plausible explanation. One could set the MAX reading to be -1 and make it all look good. I think the jury is still out on EXACTLY how to interpret the LOR/OAR.
On your recommendation I reloaded the 91 tune and am getting similar numbers vs the 93 tune. But again, my WiFi and Android obd drops connection so I can't do a data log event. Unless there is a way to do it on iPad without breaking the bank.
If you think torque is operating correctly, I would TRY the 93 tune but I would watch OAR and KR. If OAR stays at -1 and KR is good then I wouldn't be concerned at all.
I suspect you are fine with my ACES experiences so far. At the same time I would never suggest shenanigans without some sort of reliable monitoring.
I am comfortable with Cobb and Stratifieds explanation of OAR and they match up with my real world experiences.
A commment you made about possibly not enough octane when -.7 was showing was why I reloaded 91 tune. But with 91 and 93 tunes the LOR never goes higher than -.7 but has gone to -1.0 on 93 tune and -1.2 on 91 tune. Also, I have very little info to work with on the knock sensors raw data and its use and meaning. Those numbers are all over the place so I have no clue how to interpret.
And like you, using the ACES I am NOT seeing any negative performance. No pinging, stutters, flat spots or anything. Just rock solid performance. Just with my tools I cannot scientifically quantify it reliably.
But I love the 93 tune performance over the 91. Just the fans stay on ALL the time. So I may opt for the colder 160 thermostat to help. I think the 93 tune wants everything cooler. I currently have the 170.
P.S.
I see team ACES in your signature. Any explanation? Or are you and I the early users of the ACES?
Quote from: Dxlnt1 on October 11, 2015, 07:41:06 PM
A commment you made about possibly not enough octane when -.7 was showing was why I reloaded 91 tune. But with 91 and 93 tunes the LOR never goes higher than -.7 but has gone to -1.0 on 93 tune and -1.2 on 91 tune. Also, I have very little info to work with on the knock sensors raw data and its use and meaning. Those numbers are all over the place so I have no clue how to interpret.
And like you, using the ACES I am NOT seeing any negative performance. No pinging, stutters, flat spots or anything. Just rock solid performance. Just with my tools I cannot scientifically quantify it reliably.
But I love the 93 tune performance over the 91. Just the fans stay on ALL the time. So I may opt for the colder 160 thermostat to help. I think the 93 tune wants everything cooler. I currently have the 170.
P.S.
I see team ACES in your signature. Any explanation? Or are you and I the early users of the ACES?
Well, if you are changing or adding something to the fuel, seeing a blip in OAR isn't unexpected. If it didn't move back to -1 I'd start to think my tune was a little hot for the available octane. That being said, I haven't seen anything but -1 except 0n the 2015 when it had 87 in the tank to start.
Your 170 should be fine I think they can fix that fan issue in the tune, I feel like others have had the same issue, but that could be incorrect as well.
Yeah on the ACES, us and a couple others being the first guinea pigs.
Screenshot attached of current brew of ACES and an E20 Torrie tune no revisions....yet.
Those max#'s are from a WOT pull just into 3rd.
I'd like to seen your raw knock and KR from a WOT pull as I'm trying to figure it out. I think SHOdded pointed me in the right direction. Each gear has a different threshold but that is after the ECM analyzes and filters the raw data and adjusts based on a noise threshold to eliminate false knock. That being said for WOT numbers a lower max starting point should be better.
fomocosho, Ltft are in the - ?
Sent from my ME173X using Tapatalk
That was at idle.
While driving they are all hover around ZERO so the blend matches my tune nicely.
A couple of things....
My tune is for E20 so lambda in my tune is 13.51:1
Also, one of the claims is the ACES gets more work out of the same fuel so you need less fuel to hit the same AFR. When I was on a straight 93 tune, the trims also went negative so I believe the claim is valid.
Notice that bitchin FRP? So far I've seen zero FRP degradation and I think the ACES helps with fuel volume....Still hits over 2700PSI at times. Once again more work equals less fuel needed so my injectors aren't taxed and I can maintain high pressure even with the corn, at least that's my theory, lol.
As soon as I dump the droid, I should be able to log better Im hoping. Unless I spring for additional bluetooth reader. Which doesn't make me to happy!
Seems like the ACES is the real deal. Once I can reliably log everything, I will be stepping down from 91 octane gas I buy to 89. That SHOULD keep me in range and save me a few bucks at the same time
Reloaded the 93 tune. This is what I am seeing. There weren't any WOT runs but pretty aggressive to about 90 mph.
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab162/dxlnt1/SHO/Screenshot_2015-10-11-21-24-17_zpsu3ahphmv.png)
So with a -4 KR wouldn't that indicate the fuel is great for the tune loaded with plenty of room for more aggression?
First which formula are you using for knock? If negative numbers mean it is adding timing (the original formula) then it all depends on where you are seeing the -4...I typically only see timing added like that at light steady throttle. While that gives you some indication - you need to pay attention to what the KR is doing under heavy/full throttle. It looks like you are seeing up to 3.5 degrees of knock which while not disastrous is a bit high if at heavy throttle. Personally I would be adding some Ethanol if I saw that consistently or I would run a different tune. I also suggest you grab a copy of Forscan for Android and then set it up to actually log those same parameters. That will tell you with much greater accuracy/resolution what your car is doing. I love Torque for my daily gauges, but if you want to know what is really going on you should log it with something capable of recording small time increments. If in the scan you just get a quick spike to 3.5 it is probably okay to just let the car deal with it - however if it stays or builds and the car isn't recovering from that level then you probably either need higher octane or a tune that runs lower timing/boost...Just my opinion though.
The other thing that looks weird to me is that your boost "req" (required?) is calling for boost as high as 20psi?? Yet you only got around 7 or 8 lbs (hard to tell from the screen) of boost on the "actual" gauge - realizing you weren't WOT...? Have you looked for boost leaks or loose hoses on the boost reference controller? Just seems weird to me...Unless the required is off by normal atmospheric pressure which is around 14.5 PSI or so then it would make sense I guess.
Some or a lot of the numbers I dont trust because the Android always dropping connection. So the until I get that resolved, I am only using the information as trends. Have to replace wifi scanner for bluetooth I guess
I wouldn't be concerned with blips to 3.5.
At 3.5 you are well with the ECM's ability to deal with impending knock.
If you were seeing 4-7 consistently then I would reload the 91 tune.
The ECM is always looking to advance up to the knock threshold then it will retard and start the process over. Especially not surprising because you've loaded a fresh tune.
You will never be KR free and if you are then your tune is probably leaving power on the table, at least in spots.
And then there's false knock.....I was getting a bunch of KR on wot downshifts only so I had Torrie soften them a tad and it went away. Your knock sensor is a microphone so changing things like shift pressures can induce noise into the freq range the sensor is looking for.
Personally I prefer the cyl 1 ignition advance pid. Same data but it shows finer detail and it shows advance as positive and retard as negative which seems more user friendly to my brain.
I think the KR pid was updated for that....I need to DL the updated file and clean up my pids.
EBSHO is right, there is something off with the requested boost number as LME doesn't run that high.
I would ask the folks at scantool.net to swap your pos wifi for a bluetooth free of charge.
I just want to know how you are able to drive without WOT blasts, lol....
Im returning the obdlink. And ordering a wifi and bluetooth reader. And still save a couple bucks. So then I should be able to get better data.
Again, I don't really trust the desired boost or commanded AFR numbers as they take a bit to load. And when they populate if Android loses connection then its just chance as to where it lands. So again, just look at my data as trends and NOT absolute numbers yet.
I am considering dishing out the funds for DashCommand on iPhone but that may be too rich for my blood.
Dashcommand is great on the stock dashboards but lags just like Torque when you make custom gauges.
Making gauges is a simpler process in Torque but you sacrifice some tweaking that DC offers.
Much more support for Torque in the forum as well.
DC charges for PIDS made freely available by Torque and its users.
Think I found setting in graphing that speeds up data refresh. Still seems obi disconnecting and/or not reading at times but more consistent. This pic is me cruising around 75 mph with cruise set on 93 tune.
Under load, the AFR stays around 14.1-14.9. LOR is locked in at -1.0. The KR is almost ALWAYS at 0 or negative number. It goes positive upon deceleration.
So I am pretty confidant the ACES is truly helping. In my coming fill ups, I will be using 89 octane gas. But I will reload the 91 tune to be safe and test it out for a bit before reloading the 93 tune.
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab162/dxlnt1/SHO/Screenshot_2015-10-18-22-22-56_zpsoikhli3d.png)
A long log file attached
What concerns me from the log is the KR events last for seconds at a time, mostly on decel, but also on accel (particularly hard accel). Check for codes?
Can you add lambda data for both banks, also O2 sensor data? Let's see if the sensors are flatspotting (though AFR measured looks ok to me).
Fuel is 91+ACES, with 93 tune, correct? ACES 1 oz per 6 gallon ratio?
Which OBD adapter are you using currently?
A few of things....
You need to verify which KR formula you are using.....
Get rid of the GPS data when logging, just wasting processing power...
When data logging a WOT pull 1st through as far as you can stomach in 3rd would be helpful...
I see enough goofiness in there, I think there is a lot of bad data and dropouts going on, look at lines 879-904, there is some data that doesn't jive when you look at RPM VS Speed. I noticed it as well at the very beginning of the log (KR activity at idle?)where there is clearly an RPM dropout. The only thing I ever see dropout in torque is actual AFR goes to zero once in a while. Impossible but enough for me to know Torque is not reliable for logging.
Your DSD boost is all whacked out as well...
Something is amiss, IDK if its your adapter or Torque is corrupted but there's something going on and I don't trust those numbers.
Havent been able to get a WOT pull as I just got the stupid thing semi reliable. Waiting for a replacement bluetooth reader to use with the Android for now. The data dropouts have been my complaint with this readed from day 1 so like you its a little unreliable. But the dropouts are comparatively non existent now. Not completely tho. The desired boost, not sure on it. But because of the dropouts in the past I never trusted it. However, it does appear to track much better since I changed the refresh rate.
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab162/dxlnt1/SHO/Screenshot_2015-10-19-08-06-01_zpsi4gdvhxv.png)
(http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab162/dxlnt1/SHO/Screenshot_2015-10-19-08-05-28_zpsv1dyu0h6.png)
Quick question. When I installed downpipes, LMS turned off my rear O2 sensor as a precation. Turns out I did not need to have it off. But all my tunes now have the rear sensor off. Will that affect any of the reads, PID info results or anything else that monitors performance for what I am attempting?
Since you have catted downpipes, it's should be ok to have the rear O2s turned back on. I am sure they would not be turned off if the tuner thought they really needed information from them to keep the car running well. Since the tune is built around not using the rear O2 sensor, it should not materially affect the datalogs if the cats are doing their job properly. Right now, that is being inferred from the front O2s, which again, should normally not be an issue. Codes should still be set properly, if the tuner is not end-running those, which I am sure LME is not.
Only one way to find out :) If you are logging the O2 sensors, you SHOULD have 'em all turned on. That would give you full diags if needed.
I spoke to Brian about 2 weeks ago. Ordered a refill then.
My update is, I am still waiting to realize full potential of ACES IV in my truck. After another 600 mile trip, preliminary results are my truck went from roughly 10-12 mpg to 13-15. I don't have exact numbers as my sister took truck so I was not present to log all the data. But starting and ending mileage shows 15 mpg based on her trip info relayed to me. I will be following up
In the SHO the ACES is allowing me to run the 93 octane tune. I am not seeing any negative effects. With bad gas that I filled with I was getting spikes on KR up to 7. Since burning it out those spikes only go to 4. The KR spikes only come upon hard deceleration. While accelerating I have seen upwards of -4.0.
Im not sure if winter blend fuel is starting to play a bigger role but all other areas I watch are good. LOR -.7 to -1.0, AFR 14.3 - 14.7. I am trying to make sense of the LTFT and STFT. These numbers are all over the place. So can't quantify that info yet.
As for my rear O2 sensors, Anthony from LMS chimed in on email I sent. Turns out there server never updated my tune. So while I had thought and believed the sensors were turned off, that update was never sent. So I am back on the original 91 plus X and 93x tunes with ALL sensors on.
My BUTT dyno is great. My only concern is my fans run full speed seemingly ALL the time. Does anyone else have that on the 93 tune?
The fans running more is key to keeping the engine running cooler & increasing the fan's lifespan. The "X" tune turns them on earlier and keeps them on longer. As far as the spikes, have you noted the engine temps at the time they occur? It might just be that you DO need the 160 TStat from LME to let the 93 tune do its' job right.
My fans run constantly...now that the weather has cooled, when I coast to a stop the temps will drop enough to turn off the fans...but not for long
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
I would also check your coolant level,could be low on coolant,BTW hows the temp gauge??Does it fluctuate when driving. Z
Temp gauge normal. Generally stays less than half. Torque reading normally 180-190. This with 170 thermostat. Fans kick on after cold engine has been running maybe 1-2 minutes. Temperature barely registers on temp gage at that moment.
Coolant level was a little low so I topped off. Will see later if that makes a difference.
I thought of replacing the thermostat for 160 but someone here hinted that it would not make much difference. Im ok with fans running more frequently as they did even with the 91 tune. But they seem to be on FULL SPEED all the time. SO seems maybe LMS has setting to low. This may cause me to inquire with Bryan again about his cooling products. Supposedly they remove more heat from engine so that may also be a way to calm things down.