You are trying to run before you can walk.
You don't have any idea how the engine works inside but you try to tune a complex factory ECU.

The stuff you wrote just shows your blissful ignorance - and I pointed it out.
There are plenty of books about engines and tuning I recommend reading them - I did.

He may be mean but he isn't wrong..

You keep on getting told to read up on how engines work and you keep on ignoring the advice then complain people won't help you.....

Here's a couple of questions for you to ponder.

What factors affect the ignition advance you can run?

What happens when you advance or retard ignition timing?

Ey man read the whole thread..

This was my question

"Im looking for logging methods on how to calibrate timing on E85..  When i tuned this engine on 98okt I logged and looked for timing retard and lowered ign when i ran into knock. I also listened to knock but with E85 it difficult"..


vwaudiguy Gave me a good answer wich confirmed my thoughts and doubts that I had. Thank you man for being helpfull!

 

ok:)

I´ll have been calibrating for some days now. It now pulls really good around 1.4bar and EGT´s are no concern. I want up to 2.2bar..  I can post what i have so far with some logs later today when i am on my tuning computer..

If you don't have access to a dyno and you have a straight, flat, SAFE bit of road, you can try this:

I'm not saying this will work or be reliable, but could be a last resort kind of thing. Any wind or variation in how you start your runs will all but nullify your results. Other assumptions: same gear, no wheel spin, fueling and EGTs are sorted.

Lower your overall timing well below what you know to be good, noticeable power (within reason). Do several identical runs to get a baseline. Add an extra column next to RPM, then subtract the previous row RPM from current row RPM to get the RPM difference for each row. Better yet, I believe there is a RAM variable for diff in RPM you can log. Graph rl, RPM, RPM difference, and timing out by time (x-axis) or just graph rl, RPM, and timing by RPM. The latter will not require fooling around with resetting the timestamp per run. To graph by time you have to zero out time at the precise beginning of ever run in the data (add extra Timestamp column), so that each run lines up on the same graph. Here is where you'll find out if this method is even possible by how consistent or not consistent your results are between runs. Assuming they are somewhat consistent, then continue.

Logging at least RPM,rl_l, and timing out, bump timing in a small, 1-2 node rpm area you know gets touched during your runs. Bump it a noticeable amount (again within reason). Then do a few more runs. Here is another point where you'll find out if this method is doable. If you can clear see a bump in the RPM difference lines around the RPM area where you made your change, then you might be able to use this method.

Now just continue to adjust, run, log, graph until the RPM difference lines no longer increase (or less of an increase) for a timing increase. Then back timing off a little at that point.

Simplified example:


With RL logged, you can extrapolate where timing changes had an effect. You could play around with RPM diff by diff'ing the row after or the row before to see which way matches more closely with your changes.

Looking at the two graphs, it would seem graphing by RPM gives a false negative after a bump in power. So, maybe graphing by time with the extra data conditioning step is better.

This is all theoretical and may not work at all. Maybe difference in power via RPM difference isn't big enough to distinguish from normal variations between runs.  I haven't tried it.