Pettit Super Charger Owners
#4576
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kane
But you're still wrong joff
![Lol](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/lol.gif)
Originally Posted by Kane
that his increased mass of air could be a result of temperature / elevation / timing / etc... and that the change from old to new is valid... even if the 400g/s is not 100% accurate.
Lets say baseline (-80g/s) MAF reading was done at sea level maybe at around 60degF.
80g/s extra air (331g/s -> 411g/s) ends up being about 24% more air density. Now, lets see how much the temperature would have to drop at the same altitude/humidity to realize this delta.
Density of dry winter air at sea level at 60degF(15C/288K) = 1.206 kg/m^3
Okay -- so this + 24% is = 1.496 kg/m^3
Air would have to change density to 1.496 kg/m^3 to accomodate a +80 g/s extra flow rate.
What temperature is that? ... solving for T in 1.496 = 100000 / ( T * 287.05) =
-42 degrees fahrenheit. Thats damn cold. Over a 100degF advantage in ambient temps would be required to accomodate that flow difference! Did it get that cold in lower Alabama yesterday yambo?
You can do the math for elevation. Keep in mind yambo seems to be in lower Alabama and the current best flow I think was taken in Florida.
Looking forward to hearing what inconsequential detail I left out this time...
#4578
Dongbag extrordinare
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Away from the fruits of my labor
Posts: 1,090
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on guys. Keep it civil so we can all learn something here.
I don't know if it means anything, but it was less than 40 degrees outside when I recorded those #s.
I don't know if it means anything, but it was less than 40 degrees outside when I recorded those #s.
#4579
Also, did you notice a gain while tunning or on a colder day. was there an immediate change in maf when you dumped the base tune from Pettit to the AP, I think I remember Jeff saying somthing about he should do that because it was the rite thing to do, he hadent done it yet.
#4580
DEVILMAN
iTrader: (1)
Check this out:
https://www.rx8club.com/showpost.php...&postcount=162
Had fun driving back home from Juan's (aka Smooth Jazz Rotary Yoda) Saturday night. The Sunday morning traditional drive to get fresh baked bread was even more fun. I can't wait to see what this car can do after a tune.
https://www.rx8club.com/showpost.php...&postcount=162
Had fun driving back home from Juan's (aka Smooth Jazz Rotary Yoda) Saturday night. The Sunday morning traditional drive to get fresh baked bread was even more fun. I can't wait to see what this car can do after a tune.
#4582
DEVILMAN
iTrader: (1)
![Lol2](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/lol2.gif)
I'm actually using modded yellows, matched at 570 ccs each. I'm getting 11.0-11.4 AFRs, so It'll definitely need a retune. I also need to retune my driving style.
#4584
whines all the way home
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Towson/Baltimore, MD
Posts: 7,402
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Dont forget about these, I sent Pettit a brand new flow pan a month ago Cam and Moon are now working out all the kinks included a electronically controlled valve so I can cut the flow in the winter...
![](http://f.imagehost.org/0374/cooling_20solution2.jpg)
![](http://f.imagehost.org/0523/cooling_20solution3.jpg)
![](http://f.imagehost.org/0374/cooling_20solution2.jpg)
![](http://f.imagehost.org/0523/cooling_20solution3.jpg)
![](http://f.imagehost.org/0719/cooling_20solution6.jpg)
#4585
Thread jack- Have you ever run out of gas and either pushed your car or costed to the next gas station, well!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z985xdXW-3w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z985xdXW-3w
#4586
Illudium Q-36 Space Moderator
iTrader: (1)
I was originally not sure how to take Joffs last post; since I kinda wanted to get my Irish up... which is stupid.
Those that know me personally I think can atest to the fact that ego doesn't really drive my life (or they can all think I am a pretentious a-hole; you never know); and I could rather care less if I am thought badly of someone I will never likely meet... but what I do care about is the people who are trying to get into this stuff keep making mistakes because those that know WTF is going on are too lazy to speak clearly in a public forum... I have an FI-ed car... I don't need myself to tell myself how to build or tune it. But I want everyone to have as much fun as I do; and if I can get peoples head around the physics and math involved then maybe a few more will.
So - I am going to assume among all the cross talk we missed the actual timeline and the core of the argument in order for me to be called out for being a stupid, fanboi seeking individual... I have re-capped the issues in the assumption that I was misunderstood.
so a Delta from 330g/s to 400g/s.... but we now know things were scaled; kinda of a mute point anyway. But this started it all. An 18%-20% change due to timing / tuning and air temps???? Yeah that would be freaking Impossible.....![Banghead](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/banghead.gif)
My original statement... that is the entire post; no other "turbo bullshit" was in there. I am not Jeff.
Now read my info....
So now we can go back to the PPO2 argument et al.... if you are bored. Or you can skip to the part where you agree with me....
So ultimately.... what you are TRYING to say is this...
So once more... no $100 for you.
If anyone doesn't understand what it is I am trying to say please let me know. If you disagree with my information show me the math so I can refine my thoughts.... if you just want to be a toolbag; then I'm gonna ignore you. If you wanna be an e-thug then don't beat around the bush... just call me a homo and we can skip to the end of the argument.
Those that know me personally I think can atest to the fact that ego doesn't really drive my life (or they can all think I am a pretentious a-hole; you never know); and I could rather care less if I am thought badly of someone I will never likely meet... but what I do care about is the people who are trying to get into this stuff keep making mistakes because those that know WTF is going on are too lazy to speak clearly in a public forum... I have an FI-ed car... I don't need myself to tell myself how to build or tune it. But I want everyone to have as much fun as I do; and if I can get peoples head around the physics and math involved then maybe a few more will.
So - I am going to assume among all the cross talk we missed the actual timeline and the core of the argument in order for me to be called out for being a stupid, fanboi seeking individual... I have re-capped the issues in the assumption that I was misunderstood.
I am not going to argue with you. But just so you have something else to think about, I consistently saw 330g/s with my tune from pettit on stock pulleys. Search the internet, or whatever source you wish, and you will find examples of cars with @ the same amount of boost making 60% gains or more over stock.
-Yambo
-Yambo
![Banghead](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/banghead.gif)
I'm pretty sure morkusyambo's higher MAF readings are due to the fact he rescaled his MAF voltage to g/s table with the accessport. This is a kludge I'm told you're forced into with tuning on the AP. Its not that he magically unlocked significantly more boost or flow with simple fuel/ignition tuning -- thats just silly. - 18%-20% More (a lot but not impossible - but it diesn't matter anyway cause I never said flow accounted for all of the change anyway)......I agree with some of what you are saying... and that was why I asked more than once if the intake was changed or tuned. But so far I haven't done anything except the bold line above.
The unmodified MAF table doesn't even have voltage -> flow mappings above (IIRC) 365 g/s (approx 4.7 volts) You can change/add entries into the interpolation table for voltage/MAF pairs above 4.7V/365g by extrapolating the curve, but its anybody's guess what the real MAF values for voltages above 4.7V really are in stock diameter MAF housings. Even if you did have access to calibrated flow bench equipment to extend the voltage -> flow table, my experience with other types of sensors is that when you get close to the limits of the sensor, they become wildly inconsistant and will vary from sensor to sensor so reports of any readings above 4.7V/365g should be taken with a grain of salt.
In light of this fact, what everybody probably should be comparing instead of MAF numbers is MAF sensor voltages in stock diameter housings. That is a great idea - if everyone used the stock scale....
Thinking in terms of flow versus pressure is a compromise the turbo folks bad at math make because of inaccurate pressure measurement. (The statement I called out) Turbo's create variable exhaust backpressure that not only can impede power, but it re-expands in the carry-over volume from the exhaust -> intake cycle and fights boost in the manifold. This, combined with the aerodynamics of the sensor placement, seems to me whats making turbo tuners distrustful of boost measurement. The exhaust backpressure in a supercharger setup is 1) much less and 2)more predictable and boost tracks with MAF much better than on a turbo from the logs I've seen.
The unmodified MAF table doesn't even have voltage -> flow mappings above (IIRC) 365 g/s (approx 4.7 volts) You can change/add entries into the interpolation table for voltage/MAF pairs above 4.7V/365g by extrapolating the curve, but its anybody's guess what the real MAF values for voltages above 4.7V really are in stock diameter MAF housings. Even if you did have access to calibrated flow bench equipment to extend the voltage -> flow table, my experience with other types of sensors is that when you get close to the limits of the sensor, they become wildly inconsistant and will vary from sensor to sensor so reports of any readings above 4.7V/365g should be taken with a grain of salt.
In light of this fact, what everybody probably should be comparing instead of MAF numbers is MAF sensor voltages in stock diameter housings. That is a great idea - if everyone used the stock scale....
Thinking in terms of flow versus pressure is a compromise the turbo folks bad at math make because of inaccurate pressure measurement. (The statement I called out) Turbo's create variable exhaust backpressure that not only can impede power, but it re-expands in the carry-over volume from the exhaust -> intake cycle and fights boost in the manifold. This, combined with the aerodynamics of the sensor placement, seems to me whats making turbo tuners distrustful of boost measurement. The exhaust backpressure in a supercharger setup is 1) much less and 2)more predictable and boost tracks with MAF much better than on a turbo from the logs I've seen.
That is why I go off of fuel.
ALL of these measurements are relative; even fuel is since injectors have a variance and not everyone get's theirs flow tested. But I find the fuel volume to be the most accurate for tuning.
IE - if you flow 1 lb/min of fuel and your AFR's are 10:1 then you can be pretty sure your moving 10 lb/min of air.
The problem with the AP is that is doesn't read injector durations directly... I am still trying to figure out if we can work around that.
As for the flow vs pressure thing....
Um, no - a) we have no port overlap (my point here was that since we don't have a ton of air reversion - variable backpressure isn't a huge deal unless proved otherwise... but still not the original argument....) b) if you can prove that 10 PSI of pressure is the same flow rate regardless of other variables - I'll give you $100. There you go - my entire "argumentative" sensitive turbo gayness statement... and I am still right.
I may not be that good at math; but I have forgotten more about air pressure than most people will ever know.
ALL of these measurements are relative; even fuel is since injectors have a variance and not everyone get's theirs flow tested. But I find the fuel volume to be the most accurate for tuning.
IE - if you flow 1 lb/min of fuel and your AFR's are 10:1 then you can be pretty sure your moving 10 lb/min of air.
The problem with the AP is that is doesn't read injector durations directly... I am still trying to figure out if we can work around that.
As for the flow vs pressure thing....
Um, no - a) we have no port overlap (my point here was that since we don't have a ton of air reversion - variable backpressure isn't a huge deal unless proved otherwise... but still not the original argument....) b) if you can prove that 10 PSI of pressure is the same flow rate regardless of other variables - I'll give you $100. There you go - my entire "argumentative" sensitive turbo gayness statement... and I am still right.
I may not be that good at math; but I have forgotten more about air pressure than most people will ever know.
Once again; Flow is king (when I say flow I think PPO2; why cause it is all that really matters anyway; and I am a diver and explosives expert by trade...so it works for me).
I can say that (without any other information) 40 lb/min of air is always greater than 39 lb/min of air.... I need no more information. When you only look at PSI; you will always have to qualify that information. I am not sure how much more succinct I can be.
I can say that (without any other information) 40 lb/min of air is always greater than 39 lb/min of air.... I need no more information. When you only look at PSI; you will always have to qualify that information. I am not sure how much more succinct I can be.
If anyone doesn't understand what it is I am trying to say please let me know. If you disagree with my information show me the math so I can refine my thoughts.... if you just want to be a toolbag; then I'm gonna ignore you. If you wanna be an e-thug then don't beat around the bush... just call me a homo and we can skip to the end of the argument.
#4591
Not having been to Flordia in 50 or so years, I don't remember the high temps there during the summer and the road surface temps. I think it's a great idea, looks good but I'm not sure it would work here in Vegas during the summer. The heat reflecting off the road surface is too great. During the really hot days, the asphalt is soft it's so hot (trucks can leave impressions of their weight at intersections). There would be no water in the air to aid cooling. My first impression would be that it would aid heating not cooling (in the summer). I understand heat transfer and if one of you can explain how this would not do the opposite of what is intended I will listen very closely.
#4592
DEVILMAN
iTrader: (1)
I would think that it would work even in Vegas, as long as your not sitting idle for long periods of time. Those radiators are oriented parallel to the ground, so as your moving, I believe both sides are getting blasted by the air, but it favors the air from above, as I think they have some plastic channeling the air downwards into the radiators. It wouldn't work as well, given the lack of humidity, but I still think it would help. Plus you have a greater volume of coolant, that probably helps some too.
#4593
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are not a homo, stupid, or a toolbag (whatever that is) -- you're just fun. People take internet arguments so seriously around here. It will soon be a lost sport I fear -- sort of like how many sci-fi utopian visions imply we will ban all sports someday because everybody gets so emotionally hurt when the other team scores. At the end of a game, winners do not call the losers homos and the losers do not seek vengeance outside the arena -- they shake hands and say "good game"
In my experience, people that go on a soapbox about how ego doesn't drive their life -- well -- ego usually drives their life, and they just don't know it yet. Theres really nothing wrong with it as long as you are conscious of it.
Back to that $100 huh? I thought we were done with this. I did have a $100 challenge for you too ya know. Good argument tactic though -- it showed that you were very motivated by ego to prove me wrong and wanted to bring the full brunt of your credibility to the party, which made all this more fun.
Is this the point of this post? To ask if everybody understands? You are so keen on playing the teacher role here aren't you. Everybody understands flow vs. pressure here (its not rocket science) and that was never the debate, the debate was explaining morkusyambo's MAF readings.
If anything, in explaining the MAF readings, I was bringing up to the class a related discrepancy between flow and constant pressure, volume and temperature for turbo tuners. Normally -- in a classroom setting -- only the teacher is allowed to say when we're going to the next chapter and any student saying so is viewed as subordinate. Maybe thats why you raised the $100 challenge -- a last resort argument to regain control over the class from a troublemaker student on his first day at a new school.
I apologize to thread readers for this off-topic post (I really thought Kane was done with this). I talked to Cam at 7stock about that floorpan radiator setup he was cooking up -- very similar as a sort of hybrid V-mount setup which is very common and effective on FDs. Its great to see it real -- any idea when he's thinking on selling it? Is the floorpan still the same plastic piece or was that new too?
Originally Posted by Kane
So once more... no $100 for you.
Originally Posted by Kane
If anyone doesn't understand what it is I am trying to say please let me know.
If anything, in explaining the MAF readings, I was bringing up to the class a related discrepancy between flow and constant pressure, volume and temperature for turbo tuners. Normally -- in a classroom setting -- only the teacher is allowed to say when we're going to the next chapter and any student saying so is viewed as subordinate. Maybe thats why you raised the $100 challenge -- a last resort argument to regain control over the class from a troublemaker student on his first day at a new school.
I apologize to thread readers for this off-topic post (I really thought Kane was done with this). I talked to Cam at 7stock about that floorpan radiator setup he was cooking up -- very similar as a sort of hybrid V-mount setup which is very common and effective on FDs. Its great to see it real -- any idea when he's thinking on selling it? Is the floorpan still the same plastic piece or was that new too?
#4595
whines all the way home
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Towson/Baltimore, MD
Posts: 7,402
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
yup, notice the top pic, this is where Cam and Moon are experimenting with how much air flow to direct down through the assembly with different sized scoops... also the final item upon my request was a way to deactivate it during winter(up here its cold) so at first they discussed a manual valve, now on the sketchboard is a electronically controlled valve that could have a switch in the cockpit...
#4596
Registered
iTrader: (3)
for those that are unaware this system is feed through a non thermostatically controlled supply. Its the return heater hose. It is routed back through the radiator side gap to feed into the thermostat housing as the heater hose normally would.
The electronically controlled thermostat yall are speaking of would affect the heater as the heater would not have any flow until it opens.
I have ran mine (with the stock thermostat) when ambient is at 30F and it took only maybe 3 mins to warm up to 140F. I warmed the car for approx 2 mins idling after cranking and then 1 min of very low load driving(not over 3K). It did fully warm to 180F (coolant and oil) with in 5-7 miles at approx 45mph.
Northen folks may want more warming ability--but for the southeast its not needed.
OD
The electronically controlled thermostat yall are speaking of would affect the heater as the heater would not have any flow until it opens.
I have ran mine (with the stock thermostat) when ambient is at 30F and it took only maybe 3 mins to warm up to 140F. I warmed the car for approx 2 mins idling after cranking and then 1 min of very low load driving(not over 3K). It did fully warm to 180F (coolant and oil) with in 5-7 miles at approx 45mph.
Northen folks may want more warming ability--but for the southeast its not needed.
OD
#4597
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After beating the **** out of it the highest temp I saw was 208F. I think I can survive an autocross event this summer, but we'll see. By then I will probably have the JuanSport supplemental radiator mod. ![Lol2](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/lol2.gif)
I'm actually using modded yellows, matched at 570 ccs each. I'm getting 11.0-11.4 AFRs, so It'll definitely need a retune. I also need to retune my driving style.
![Lol2](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/lol2.gif)
I'm actually using modded yellows, matched at 570 ccs each. I'm getting 11.0-11.4 AFRs, so It'll definitely need a retune. I also need to retune my driving style.
#4598
DEVILMAN
iTrader: (1)
From the original Pettit setup, only bigger intercooler reservoire with a rerouted return hose (away from the alternator), and water/methanol injection. I'm sure 208F is not where I'd be in the heat of the Florida summer if I drive it hard, as I'm now running signifcantly more boost. I will definitely get the extra heat exchangers before this summer.
I autocrossed June/July/August/September of last year at least once each month (with only 8-9 lbs of boost), and my engine still pulls 19 inHG of vacuum at normal operating temperatures.
I autocrossed June/July/August/September of last year at least once each month (with only 8-9 lbs of boost), and my engine still pulls 19 inHG of vacuum at normal operating temperatures.
Last edited by Bastage; 02-03-2009 at 11:19 AM.
#4599
Dongbag extrordinare
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Away from the fruits of my labor
Posts: 1,090
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I'm still not sure what to make of my MAF readings, but I created my own tune with the AP(took me a long time) and I am enjoying it. If Joff, or anyone else with an AP wants to try it, let me know and i'll send you the map. My disclaimer is that it is still a work in progress, and is VERY aggressive in the bottom 2/3 of the powerband. Use at your own risk. I take no responsibility for what happens.
-Yambo
-Yambo
#4600
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I'm still not sure what to make of my MAF readings, but I created my own tune with the AP(took me a long time) and I am enjoying it. If Joff, or anyone else with an AP wants to try it, let me know and i'll send you the map. My disclaimer is that it is still a work in progress, and is VERY aggressive in the bottom 2/3 of the powerband. Use at your own risk. I take no responsibility for what happens.
-Yambo
-Yambo
Basically, what you're doing is calibrating out fuel system inconsitencies with your MAF -- not the other way around (calibrating your MAF with your O2 sensor and fuel injectors) Your MAF in its stock calibration is as good as Mazda originally designed in -- hard to improve on that.
If you wouldn't mind, please send me your tune to joff@embeddedARM.com -- I'd very much like to see it.