harvey

iTrader: (48)

Andy :
At a rolling road day or power run only, what a totally ridiculous statement.


Paul : So it looks like we agree, a combination of road and roller is the way to go and that is exactly what I have been saying since my first post. Most of the arguements against are against rollers only and the case against roller and road combined is rather tenuos at best.


Sorry Paul but Andy Forrest is specifically referring to a car that I was involved in that he mapped and gave a figure as 351 bhp.
By some quirk, it then ended up in Plymouth where it went on a Rolling Road Day and gave a disappointing 317/319 bhp, or similar figures on two runs with AFRs of 12.1:1
This was a rolling road day run only. Obviously no mapping oor tinkering.

The same car was then run at Steve Simpson Motor Sport as the owner was concerned and produced 322 and 323 bhp. AFRs were very rich. This was a power run only at the owners request.

As far as I know, Steve Simpson at this present time, does not have Ecutek mapping facilities.

AFRs were then checked elsewhere, a couple of days later, on the road only and found to be 12.1:1

The car was returned to Steve Simpson Motor Sport for investigation. The owners main concern was the AFRs in piston nipping teritory. The runs on the rollers showed AFRs of 12.1:1. The reason for the rich mixture the week before was not identified as it no longer existed but may have been a safe map setting or something else. Worryingly there was DET around 4000 rpm and again at 5200rpm.
The car was then run on the open road with the same AFRs and DET at EXACTLY the same points.
The rolling road and open road runs were data logged and I understand are virtually identical. I further understand from the owner that he obtained the data log information from Steve Simpson and sent it to Andy Forrest at his request. This is despite what Andy Forrest has had to say about Steve Simpson and rolling roads.

I hope this clarifies the matter for you.

Good luck with your Dastek rolling road.

Alan Jeffery

Nice to see everybody seems to agree with our interpretation there!

Andy.F

Harvey

I can't believe you are throwing mud yet again You have half a story and you set off on one suggesting I map cars that run too lean.

I realise that since I have publically disagreed with you specifically with regard to Sigma v Apexi ECU's, it has become your mission to discredit me.
More of that here - https://www.scoobynet.com/general-te...ap-advice.html
Well at least in the short term it takes the pressure off Mark Aigin, Pat Herbon, Simon Roe, Stuart Newby and who ever else has crossed your path in the past.....sad.


Andy

ZEN Performance

I've never been one to follow the crowd.

Andy.F

I think Paul is going with the dyno I would recommend It also happens to tie up nicely with Ecutek Roaddyno outputs.

Happy Days at Dastek - Subaru Impreza Drivers Club Forums

harvey

iTrader: (48)

"Throwing Mud". My statement above is factually correct and can be verified by the owner of the vehicle in question.
I am not suggesting anything. I am making a statement of fact. All very easy to corroborate, in full, even historically.
I do not have half a story. I have the full facts with which you are clearly very uncomfortable.

This has nothing to do with Sigma or Apexi ECUs but for the record and contrary to what you have said, any comments I have made regards the Apexi ECU have been factual and you will see that I have stated on more than one occasion that the Apexi ECU serves a purpose and has a position in the market place. However, that has no bearing on this thread.

Stick with the facts and do not try to spin or deflect from the truth. You selectively answer the bits that suit you.
You have been given the data logs from both the rollers and the open road runs. This is despite the slagging you have given Steve Simpson in the past.
You have the history above starting with the run at Plymouth. QED.

Andy.F

Did you know the air flow meter was reading lower than when mapped and as a result IDC's are down ? Probably not.
Not that anyone else will be interested but for your information, the owner is delighted with the cars performance on the road and has also said the power figures given out by the R/R do not bother him. He has however got valid concerns as to why his AFR is now running so lean. As neither you or Steve are in a position to do anything about this then I am trying to sort it out for him. I'm not sure what benefit you providing a running update has ?

Incorrect. I have been supplied logs from only the road runs, not the rollers, even then two of the most important parameters were not recorded. Boost and wastegate duty, what was the point of that ? As I said previously half a story is useless.
As for the power runs the car done at Plymouth, it did not achieve the boost it does on the road.
I really don't know why I bother trying to justify this sort of thing to you.

dynamix

iTrader: (3)

Paul - great news that you are getting rollers over there. I am sure we will be in touch to sort out a RR day after they have been installed

I think with your background in road mapping it will help you to work with the dyno for selective parts of the mapping process and add a lot to the overall services down there.

500

Being an outsider looking in, I strongly feel that mapping a car on the rollers will help with certain aspects of mapping the car, but real world conditions will not be able to be fully replicated on the rollers, no matter how much the small business expense.

I dont see why people have to turn this into a heated debate over matters that should be delt with off a public forum.

Alan Jeffery

500 .. you'd want to miss all the fun?

I see Zen are opting for the Scottish play.. ( don't mention the name ! )

Alan Jeffery

Re "Happy days " graph.. 37 bhp loss between flywheel and transmission... remarkably efficient for four wheel drive!

Jolly Green Monster

iTrader: (4)

lmfao.. well said!

Simon

harvey

iTrader: (48)

Andy F : I think when you enter a debate, in this case, for or against remapping on the open road or rolling road you have to expect people to present information to back up their position. In so doing they are not "throwing muck", providing they have good reason to believe the information and are honest in its presentation.
It is especially unsatisfactory to make allegations of "mud slinging" when it was you who opened up that particular angle of the debate.

Surely you are not suggesting that you can put your view but those with a contrary position are not at liberty to present their case.

You were simply given information that showed how wrong your statement was.

DynoDynamics claim that, operated properly, their equipment is capable of giving comparable results anywhere in the world, never mind from one end of England to the other. Are you calling into question the statement of a well respected, world wide manufacturer with substantial research and technical ability?

You further claimed that rolling roads could not replicate on road conditions sufficiently to give accurate AFRs and what was said in previous post(s) was challenged. Therefore the facts relating to a current car, that is a good example of why a combination of road and rolling road mapping is valid, was given by me.
I have already stated, openly and honestly that some MAF sensor eqipped cars, only Classics that I am aware of so far, may not produce representative results on the rollers. I presented that information at an early stage, to aid an informed debate. It is the truth and to me it simply means that there has to be a degree of caution as to rolling road results that are suspicious if not verified on the open road or vice versa when talking about AFRs.

Do you remember saying this:

You also said this:

I realise you are uncomfortable with this but Steve Simpson and I have stated the facts as we know them to be. Steve has run this car on his rollers twice and on the road once. I conducted totally independant AFR checks on the open road at the owners request. Remember that I was involved in this car from the beginning and the Jeffries ran it on their rollers at an RR Day once which is where the 12.1:1 AFRs were found. Steve found DET at 4000 and 5200 rpm ON THE ROLLERS and ON THE OPEN ROAD and surprise surprise the AFRs were 12.1:1 on both.

In fact you were given both open road and rolling road data logs. It is interesting you are unable to differentiate between them.
Whatever additional information you require will be a matter of record and I expect that steve will provide this if you ask for it.
I recall that Steve made an offer to you previously to use his rollers, referred to on here somewhere. his purpose was to show you just what a modern dyno set up was capable of and help dispell some of the misconceptions you appear to have.

As regards :Exactly correct.

He is NOT delighted with DET at 4000 rpm and 5200 rpm and 12.1:1 AFRs that were discovered at a rolling road day and subsequently verified on other rollers and two separate on road AFR checks.

dynamix

iTrader: (3)

guys - just leave it now - this is boring

lunar tick

iTrader: (2)

For spectators of this debate, I should add the car currently being discussed is mine. Just to clarify a couple of things:

Harvey - I only sent Andy the road datalogs because I know he strongly believes that data collected on the RR would not be representative of that collected on the open road. As it turned out, on this car, in this instance, the two data sets were very similar

Andy - I was very happy with the car when it was mapped back in August, save for the boost surging between 3-4K rpm in 5th and 6th, which I subsequently contacted you about. I do believe that the absolute dyno power figures achieved on a car are less important than the way it drives. However, I was naturally a little suprised when on 3 recent separate dyno runs, it recorded around 30bhp less that the road dyno figure achieved in August, not withstanding all the arguments for and against RR power testing . But of course, my main concern now is the lean AFR/det issue; to find out how it has come about and to make the necessary adjustments so that I can continue to enjoy the full potential of the car safely.

I'm sure these issues will be resolved very soon, and in the meantime, I think it would be good if there was an outbreak of peace . This has for the most part been a wonderfully informative thread and it would be a shame if the merits or otherwise of RR/road mapping became a side issue. Once the current problems have been resolved with my car, I will be more than happy to post details for those who are interested.
Andrew

jaytc2003

iTrader: (1)

well said Andrew, to many threads these days getting personal and potentially libellous, totally detracting from the original post.

rigga

iTrader: (4)

Harvey you are doing yourself no favours with these constant digs at mappers on here,you seem to have a grudge against several guys which you bring to the surface at every oppotunity,your post on the thames valley motorsport thread alluding that an amature mapper like yourself should not be teaching the proffesionals speaks volumes about your self..... if you are trying to belittle some folk in order to increase your profile then you are going the wrong way about it...... any problems between yourself and Andy or anyone else for that matter should not be a distraction from the thread,however you think its linked,these matters should not be aired in public like this....... this has been a very informative read with good contributiions from many,shame its gone the way of so many others that you post in.

martin

Maddog

Harvey. What is your involvement with lunar ticks car?
You keep making references to this, so one can assume you've helped lunar tick on his tuning experiences with his car and /or carried out work for him?

With that in mind, it would be reasonable to assume you advised lunar tick to either use Andy for mapping or advised having his car mapped by someone else, in which case, you will have given your reasons for doing so?

As it stands lunar tick opted to use Andy to map his car which if Andy was professional enough, would have left the car in such a condition that it would remain safe and be useable for the purposes the owner intended to put it through.
However..

Since the time of mapping there would appear to have been a problem which has surfaced on lunar ticks car, namely AFR's have went awol. A fault which was only noticed on a rolling road day. Up until that point everyone was blissfully unaware of an issue.

With 12 whatever to 1 AFR, i'm not surprised there would be the possibility of det, but so what? Are you saying Andy mapped it at 12:1 and disputes that there's anything wrong with lunar ticks car? so you and Steve Simpson checked lunar ticks car out and proved that the car was running lean and so the car had been mapped badly? (cause it was done on the road?)

lunar tick

iTrader: (2)

Maddog - I can answer this for you. I did some research and talked to a number of people before deciding which mods would give me the increase in power I was seeking. After recommendations from others on here, I approached Andy F to do the mapping and Harvey for the ported headers, up-pipe, Walboro fuel and FMIC with CAI.

I approached each of these people independently - not one on the recommendation of the other. At the time of booking in the work, neither knew I had booked the other.

I don't want to be drawn into any dispute between tuning professionals, but I feel it's only fair to add that Harvey has subsequently spent a considerable amount of (unpaid) time helping me to identify the current situation with my car. I believe he has done this purely out of enthusiasm and interest. He stood (and stands) to gain no financial advantage by this and not once during this period did he comment on Andy F's mapping.

As I said, Im currently taking steps to resolve the situation and I will happily make available my findings once things are resolved. In the meantime, I don't think it's productive for anyone involved to have accusations flying around

Maddog

I didn't realise Harvey was now a tuning company, i always thought he was just an enthusiast, just like youself and 99.9% of members on here.

That may explain some of the differences of opinion both parties have expressed.

Hope you get your issue sorted lunar tick, though if it were me i'd be in touch with Andy to see if he can shed light on either a solution or rectify the fault since it was fine (i assume) when it left his hands. It seems like the issue is a faulty maf sensor to me, though i don't know anything about your car, so heed the advice of those that charge you for the rectification.

Remember the quote "to many cooks....".
Conflicting advice can sometimes cause frustration and an empty wallet!!

All the best.

WRX265

Hi Fellas,
Good debate, sorry to read some people starting to slag others off. Feel sorry for the guy who started this thread by asking the un askable. I had my car mapped by Pete at Prosport. They were recomended to me by other Subaru owners and I am pleased with the results. I don't brag down the pub about the figures My car put out. I am the one who drives it. And would recomend Prosport to anyone. One last thing. Lets not get to personal about all this?

All the best to all Rob

Andy.F

Thanks for clarifying that Andrew Having the whole story helps identify the real issue from the, er....... well the less said the better
Certainly the next step would be to identify what has caused the airflow meter voltage to drop ? The resulting lean fuel mixture will indeed promote det at full load.
This could, as someone mentioned, be maf damage caused by the Blitz filter you have on (not one I recommend with 99 onwards mafs) or it could be a number of things such as a BOV issue, air leak, damaged cat etc.
(what make is the cat and what is it rated at btw ? )
Any one of the above could also explain why the car only made 1.1 bar of boost v a target of 1.35 bar at full rpm whilst on the rollers in Plymouth ? It is however possible thats just the roller loading not replicating road loads.
On the Plymouth runs the AFR was 12.0:1 at peak torque and 11.6:1 at peak rpm, this is approx 0.5 leaner than it was mapped, Martyn wouldn't however have known what AFR it was mapped to and as there was no det present at that time, there was no cause for alarm.
You are now saying it is running at 12.2:1 throughout the rpm range and detting so something is clearly deteriorating.
It would be very useful to see the power/torque/afr and boost curves from Steves runs at TEG if you have them, especially the ones that you say were running a very rich AFR sounds like a dyno sensor issue to me as the ECU would have cut boost to 0.6bar long before changing to the richer high det maps and this would be seen clearly on the graphs.

It may also be wise to fit a new front O2 sensor as the road test datalogs Steve supplied show 11.2:1 throughout the power run from the onboard wideband sensor ?? The ECU makes some important decisions on short and long fuel trim during open and closed loop operation based on this sensors input. It will also set a CEL if it measures lean running during high load operation, your sensor is apparently not seeing this so you are lacking an important safety feature.

The main thing is, I really need to see the car asap to properly diagnose your problem.

Andy

Alan Jeffery

We keep hearing the one about dynos not loading the cars up enough to achieve peak boost.
Not so! We can load up enough to stop the engine in its tracks, and have the tendency to apply full load at low rpm before applying ramp. We don't see any more boost on a road test, and in any event, the boost in practice will wander all over the place due to varying loads experienced "in real life".
The time scale for a full throttle run in shoot 44 pretty much mimics the average time taken out there on the tarmac. There is little point in taking 20 seconds to test a 10 second car!


None of the above is detriment to the good advice Andy just gave the Man!

ZEN Performance

I frequently come accross cars that do not make the same boost on the rollers as it does on the road. The problem with many dyno load profiles is that they are with respect to time, this means that the rate of acceleration is the same regardless of the torque or speed. This means that many RR power runs see lots of load during spoolup, and often hit peak boost or even overboost. What should be happening though is that the rate should increase significantly as boost rises, which would often quell the annoying overboost. Then further on during the run, dynos can either finish quicker than they should, where the rate is constant despite the available torque dropping, and equivalent drag rising. OR they can be the other way, and have the dyno trying to catch up with the rate change and suddenly put the rate to almost zero to try and complete the run in target time.

SO maybe you can configure your dyno to give a nice road like load, but then you need to look at the gear. Running a car in 3rd gear to keep wheel speed down, but making the car run like it was in 5th gear is not ideal. In paticular where cars have gear dependant boost compensations, and in the case of running a car in 3rd with a 5th gear load profile, would see overboost and spiking.

Trying to replicate specific conditions such as drag racing or top speed runs is also a foolish endeavour for most cars, unless of course you actually want to run in a specific manner, with the best performance available. But this is equally true for road mapping. You can gain performance and reduced ETs with very agressive mapping that you couldn't get away with on the open road. Newer, more complex ECUs will allow a wider range of operating modes to be covered with a single map, but you can't map a car only on the drag strip (one extreme) and expect it to be suitable for most conditions.

Many (most if not all) of the countrys leading dyno installs do not address these issues and more besides. In time, with development of control software and testing procedures, I think the dyno will become the place to map cars. We are a long way off now, and we not going to get any closer by staying on the roads.

Paul

Bob Rawle

Oh for heavens sake ... Alan that last post is so far away from reality to be in the next galaxy. Shoot 44 is nowhere near the accel rate of the majority of remapped cars and to imply that a constant accelleration rate over the rpm range is "real" is, well it just is ...
All you who are wondering, get your car on a flat straight level road, start in say third for a 5 speeder and say 4th for a six speeder, rpm at 1800 rpm then give it wot, log the time from 30-50, 40-60, 50-70,60-80, 70-90 mph ... if Alans right all those increments will have exactly the same time ... which they won't of course. For example ... MY99 with TD04, decat, panel filter, Walbro tested over last weekend made :-
40-60 2.4s
50-70 2.4s
60-80 2.8s

Run in third, pretty good for a TD04.

Similar spec car run at the beggining of the weekend and suffering from plug problems ... also in third

40-60 3.0s
50-70 3.1s
60-80 3.6s


Pick a private road of course.

Bob

Andy.F

Alan

I know you can lock the rpm or you can let it rise at any fixed rate you like.
The graph I posted way back in post no 221 displays how on the road a car accelerates at a variable rate, not a fixed one. Typically the rpm rise rate (acceleration) will double between 2500 and 4500 rpm then reduce by 30% towards peak rpm
This has the effect on the road of making the boost rise earlier, peak less and hold longer at the top as the acceleration rate slows again. Here it is again.





Now Pat says road load simulation is an option on the DD rolling road, that could be something worth following up !
When I ran the NOS at Dastek a few years back we done an inertia only run but with the high power/torque it was over extremely fast !
I do recall that the MAHA at Star performance could simulate a road load acceleration run. You entered details of the gearing and the weight of the car....... then done a standing start 0-130mph (mine was an early RA)thrashing it up through the gears at WOT quite awesome to watch ! At the end of it you got a fairly accurate 0-130mph time print out.
This to me meant much more than a bhp figure as it encompased the whole package, high power lag monsters were slower than a well balanced package, it also showed the benefit of a wide power curve rather than one focussed on peak figures.
I wonder if the one Clive is selling can do that ?
Rolling Road For Sale
I might just be interested

Andy

dynamix

iTrader: (3)

I can personally vouch for Clive's rollers having been on there a couple of times now and each time produced similar figures to those from a Ecutek DD run (or rather an average of runs as each has small variations) - looks like a bargain price.

I wonder what he is upgrading to though

The Chief

Well you technical guru's are baffling me here but i'll just say this.

We've been having our own little and shorter debate on our Smacs forum discussing the pros and cons of road vs RR mapping, being the owner of a fairly low powered Subaru and having about as much technical now-how as a feckin' plank i've still found this thread fascinating.

To someone who knows 'nowt' the Road biased mappers have won me over and i am glad i chose Andy Forrest to map my car last year.

I chose Andy due to his experience and him being an old fart (no offence mate)

And the main thing - word of mouth.

This says a lot too me, he didn't give me any bullsh*t or any slick marketing promising me massive horsepower, what he promised he delivered, a nice fast useable road car that wont blow up (so far)

I feel too many people stick theirs on the rollers just for bragging rights forever chasing a higher figure that they can boast about in the pub or on here.

Well ***** to that, i dont know what mine is pushing, could be 260/270/280 i'm not that bothered to tell you the truth. what came back to me was a car that is lovely to drive nice and torquey if a bit breathless at top end (that'll be the TD-04 for you)


This thread will go on and on- some people will never agree with road mapping, others swear by it. each to their own but i was extremley happy with my results - even if i cant boast its pushing 500bhp down the pub.

sjwent

All,

Having had my car (Apexi ECU) dyno'ed recently and seeing the max knock levels double (up to 35 - (but no detonation)) and being told this was normal on the rollers (on the road knock never goes above 15). I must assume that rollers create an artificial environment in which the car does not perform as well as it does on the road. Is this because of the reduced airflow and cooling ?

Questions
Why are knock levels higher on the rollers ?
How are power/ torque readings obtained on the road ?

Cheers

andythejock01wrx

Won't get into the technical arguments (because I can't !).

What I will say is that anyone that has posted on Scoobynet over a period of time will agree that there are many, many of Andy F's satisfied customers on the site ( I should know, I'm one of them !).

Andy Mc