My own tune results so far...60-80 mph times

PowerPerLiter

Specific Output
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Threads
59
Messages
1,404
Reaction score
1,302
Location
Midwest
Vehicle(s)
2020 Si Coupe 91 Talon TSI AWD 6262 280's N20 and 87 Buick Regal T 6776bb built N20
Using my own personal custom tune...
60-80mph
~2.8-3.0~ seconds
Only ~20 psi boost
5-7 degrees of ignition advance up top
93 pump gas
3rd gear pull starting at 40 mph gives you a good yard stick against other cars you can search.

Anywhere around 3 seconds is side by side with a 2011- ish Bmw M3 that's tuned with bolt ons. Full bolt on and tuned subaru's are 3.4 to 3.1 roughly. Pictures have the time stamps and the data.....


Honda Civic 10th gen My own tune results so far...60-80 mph times 20190415_223342


Honda Civic 10th gen My own tune results so far...60-80 mph times 20190415_223309
 

charleswrivers

Senior Member
First Name
Charles
Joined
Nov 3, 2017
Threads
43
Messages
3,736
Reaction score
4,468
Location
Kingsland, GA
Vehicle(s)
'14 Odyssey, '94 300zx, 2001 F-150
Vehicle Showcase
1
Country flag
Using my own personal custom tune...
60-80mph
~2.8-3.0~ seconds
Only ~20 psi boost
5-7 degrees of ignition advance up top
93 pump gas
3rd gear pull starting at 40 mph gives you a good yard stick against other cars you can search.

Anywhere around 3 seconds is side by side with a 2011- ish Bmw M3 that's tuned with bolt ons. Full bolt on and tuned subaru's are 3.4 to 3.1 roughly. Pictures have the time stamps and the data.....


20190415_223342.jpg


20190415_223309.jpg
That's with going into the timing tables and adding +5 to +7 units from, what... 4000+ RPM? Just trying to think about what you did. I'd added +1 or +2 back when I was messing around with maps from 4000 on (maybe it was 3500). I was running 23# though... though I'd also gotten rid of the boost taper. I had seen the ethanol tables added a maximum of +5 and figured +5 was shooting for the moon on 93. TSP Stage 1 became a thing so I stopped playing. I'm not sure how much timing advance they add... but I know 24.5# is peak boost... and they punt Honda's premium recommendation and call it a requirement. I have to assume they have all the timing they can pretty much add and may end up sacrificing the margin K.cont provides from knock when running 87 and 89 and driving hard.

It does look pretty impressive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Myx
OP
OP
PowerPerLiter

PowerPerLiter

Specific Output
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Threads
59
Messages
1,404
Reaction score
1,302
Location
Midwest
Vehicle(s)
2020 Si Coupe 91 Talon TSI AWD 6262 280's N20 and 87 Buick Regal T 6776bb built N20
I would love to add boost but even where its at (with dramatic taper as well) I would be afraid to add anymore power to the top end with the stock clutch. Its pulling incredibly hard for "as advertised" factory boost pressure. There is a combination of stuff I did that is making it work I believe aside from a different timing table...


1) Im running the boost at a level that is still very efficient and not as "taxing" on the hardware to run the mid 20's boost pressures. What prompted this "attempt" was while reviewing data as much as I have with the various maps, I realized that anything above 21-22psi would rarely reach commanded boost targets. From tuning other vehicle setups with modern computers I have always went for the "commands should always match the results". I suspected the turbo was really struggling to provide the higher commanded boost levels which can also affect other areas of the controls, such as variable cam control. If the computer doesnt have the turbo sizing to provide a commanded boost pressure it will adjust cam angles and other parameters to assist in achieving the command (this is theory based on what I can see and know about our computers-it is a guess due to the lack of shared technical knowledge within this platform-but I suspect it to be true)

2) Knock Airflow Limit tweaking- An available function that I was unsure what to do with (again no detailed information available anywhere I could find). Through deductive reasoning and comparison of the provided canned tunes I have a theory on this as well. This table (using hondata) controls the maximum allowable "cylinder fill" and places a cap so to speak of allowable air-charge within the cylinder, which seems to affect not only boost pressure but allowable timing advance. You have to remember how much all these areas work together with each other for the desired "torque command" we are telling the system to achieve.

3) I obsessively dialed in (and still working on it) the intake I am running. The stock trims were always within range but the pursuit of perfection made me dial this in to where long term trim bounces no higher than .78 +/- away from 0% (unless an extreme weather/ density altitude change happens with atmosphere).

4) The boost target map I made is definitely a 1 off. I lowered below stock boost command A LOT in the lower areas (referencing my then boost by gear setup) and as smoothly as possible brought in boost up to a 21 psi peak target very briefly (there is a sweet spot of the rev range the turbo is super efficient in) and immediately started the taper after this peak (which also ends lower than factory). This allows the computer to recognize I dont want all the hot air its sending while in the high rev range and it will bring in more timing conversely to meet the torque command.

These are all my own theories so take it with a grain of salt.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Myx


charleswrivers

Senior Member
First Name
Charles
Joined
Nov 3, 2017
Threads
43
Messages
3,736
Reaction score
4,468
Location
Kingsland, GA
Vehicle(s)
'14 Odyssey, '94 300zx, 2001 F-150
Vehicle Showcase
1
Country flag
I would love to add boost but even where its at (with dramatic taper as well) I would be afraid to add anymore power to the top end with the stock clutch. Its pulling incredibly hard for "as advertised" factory boost pressure. There is a combination of stuff I did that is making it work I believe aside from a different timing table...


1) Im running the boost at a level that is still very efficient and not as "taxing" on the hardware to run the mid 20's boost pressures. What prompted this "attempt" was whilst reviewing data as much as I have with the various canned tunes and even my other personalized maps, I realized that anything above 21-22psi would rarely reach commanded boost targets. From tuning other vehicle setups with modern computers I have always went for the "commands should always match the results". I suspected the turbo was really struggling to provide the higher commanded boost levels which can also affect other areas of the controls, such as variable cam control. If the computer doesnt have the turbo to provide a commanded boost pressure it will adjust cam angles and other parameters to assist in achieving the command (this is theory based on what I can see and know about our computers-it is a guess due to the lack of shared technical knowledge within this platform-but I suspect it to be true)

2) Knock Airflow Limit tweaking- An available function that I was unsure what to do with (again no detailed information available anywhere I could find). Through deductive reasoning and comparison of the provided canned tunes I have a theory on this as well. This table (using hondata) controls the maximum allowable "cylinder fill" and places a cap so to speak of allowable aircharge within the cylinder, which seems to affect not only boost pressure but allowable timing advance. You have to remember how much all these areas work together with each other for the desired "torque command" we are telling the system to achieve.

3) I obsessively dialed in (and still working on it) the mishimoto sri I am running. The stock trims were always within range but the pursuit of perfection made me dial this in to where long term trim bounces no higher than .78 +/- away from 0% (unless an extreme weather/ density altitude change happens with atmosphere).

4) The boost target map I made is definitely a 1 off. I lowered below stock boost command ALOT in the lower areas (referencing my then boost by gear setup) and as smoothly as possible brought in boost up to a 21 psi peak target very briefly (there is a sweet spot of the rev range the turbo is super efficient in) and immediately started the taper after this peak (which also ends lower than factory). This allows the computer to recognize I dont want all the hot air its sending while in the high rev range and it will bring in more timing conversely to meet the torque command.

These are all my own theories so take it with a grain of salt.
Your theories are pretty sound. I don't have a Hondata but do follow you on the cylinder fill. I'd followed some Hondata centric threads and kind of got an idea of what it does.

I do know once you push that little turbo hard, you certainly can't pick a lot of boost and a lot of timing on 93 octane. Some threads touted running less boost and a good deal more timing (like yourself). I was doing 23#, virtually no taper until 6000 RPM (I think Ktuners taper started at like 5200... I can't remember anymore) and then went back to 21# approaching redline. For mine, +2 across 4000+ RPM is all the timing I shot for. I was holding .49 k.cont through spirited driving with that. I would like to think there was a little more room to play with using 93 octane (91 isn't a thing where I'm at). I just never got around to it when the TSP Stage 1 came out. Still rocking a stock clutch with no issues for over a year and 10k tunes miles, over half on the TSP... so there's hope for the stock clutches yet. I wasnt too concerned about trying to maximize torque for any little bit still be be gained past 4000 RPM... as it was past peak and falling pretty linearly at that point. Anything to hold it flat was good in my book. All of my off-site reading pointed to adding the ignition timing after the torque peak subsides and using it in place of more boost once the turbo was tapped out. When the turbo is tapped out seems to be a little up in the air. Looking at some of the dynos, I'd assume not far beyond where you're at... but then we got folks exceeding 23# and... well... I do like having that claimed 237 whp. It has a pile of top end it never had on the earlier 23# basemap even with a smidge of extra timing .

I do see constistently 24# with a 25# flicker with no apparent taper on the TSP Stage 1 at high RPMs... not that there may be one well up there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Myx
OP
OP
PowerPerLiter

PowerPerLiter

Specific Output
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Threads
59
Messages
1,404
Reaction score
1,302
Location
Midwest
Vehicle(s)
2020 Si Coupe 91 Talon TSI AWD 6262 280's N20 and 87 Buick Regal T 6776bb built N20
There is quite a bit of magic voodoo information going on that I know could be provided by others but I see now why its paid for information, for the most part. I think Im just willing to "risk it" to test my suspicions.

I have never completely tried to hold 25psi (MAP reading, not turbo outlet pressure) with my car but when I realized how much command overage I would have had to give it I started looking for a more reliable solution for my top end hunt. Especially with summer coming up I didnt want to think about IAT as much as I would with overclocking the turbo. Does your 24.5-25 reading come from the cluster or is that a logged MAP reading? Just curious....

I cant wait to put a clutch in the car. Then I would feel confident in a good bit more boost in the low-middle rev sections. If I through it back up to even 23 right now in this setup it would blow right through the clutch.
 
Last edited:

charleswrivers

Senior Member
First Name
Charles
Joined
Nov 3, 2017
Threads
43
Messages
3,736
Reaction score
4,468
Location
Kingsland, GA
Vehicle(s)
'14 Odyssey, '94 300zx, 2001 F-150
Vehicle Showcase
1
Country flag
There is quite a bit of magic voodoo information going on that I know could be provided by others but I see now why its paid for information, for the most part. I think Im just willing to "risk it" to test my suspicions.

I have never completely tried to hold 25psi (MAP reading, not turbo outlet pressure) with my car but when I realized how much command overage I would have had to give it I started looking for a more reliable solution for my top end hunt. Especially with summer coming up I didnt want to think about IAT as much as I would with overclocking the turbo. Does your 24.5-25 reading come from the cluster or is that a logged MAP reading? Just curious....
I see 24 with 25 flickering on my cluster. 24.5 is the stated peak target. Again... no idea if it has a taper but I haven't noticed one. The taper was noticable on the 23# basemap.
 
OP
OP
PowerPerLiter

PowerPerLiter

Specific Output
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Threads
59
Messages
1,404
Reaction score
1,302
Location
Midwest
Vehicle(s)
2020 Si Coupe 91 Talon TSI AWD 6262 280's N20 and 87 Buick Regal T 6776bb built N20
Gotcha. Id love to try it but feel it would be a waste at this point while Im still on hondata. When/if I ever get around to buying a ktuner unit (which I will at some point just because I want to dive into it as well) I will have a TSP on it to check it out.

I went a bit more dramatic with the taper on mine (like down to 11ish psi) to try and alleviate backpressure through the volute of the hot-side of the turbo from opening the wastegate more aggressively as it approaches fuel cut. Seems to be working well thus far and if you notice in those two still shots the map reading remains consistent even with the boost command dropping quickly (opening the gate). Thought that was a neat result. Lol
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
PowerPerLiter

PowerPerLiter

Specific Output
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Threads
59
Messages
1,404
Reaction score
1,302
Location
Midwest
Vehicle(s)
2020 Si Coupe 91 Talon TSI AWD 6262 280's N20 and 87 Buick Regal T 6776bb built N20
I'll judge it when/ if I get to the track ultimately. This is all ricer math at this point.... but dam it's running great....lol
 


charleswrivers

Senior Member
First Name
Charles
Joined
Nov 3, 2017
Threads
43
Messages
3,736
Reaction score
4,468
Location
Kingsland, GA
Vehicle(s)
'14 Odyssey, '94 300zx, 2001 F-150
Vehicle Showcase
1
Country flag
I'll judge it when/ if I get to the track ultimately. This is all ricer math at this point.... but dam it's running great....lol
If you're happy, that's what matters most. So far as ricer math is concerned... the difference between 23# basemap and 23# basemap plus ethanol is about 50 whp. The ethanol map adds a maximum +5 to ignition timing. Discounting the effects of cooling the intake charge... one could assume the ignition advance would be causing a ~10 whp gain if it were linear (and I don't think it is... everything I read was it makes smaller and smaller improvements until it essentially does nothing at all... then power actually starts to drop as the flame front is meeting the piston essentially at TDC, which is not good for power at all. Try jumping off something and landing with your knees locked!). Still timing seems to be the key to a good bit of the power the car has. A taper to 11# is pretty wild... and excessive timing may not be good... but 1) Hopefully k.cont protects as intended and 2) running low boost may rob some power that would otherwise be there... but it shouldn't hurt a thing. You might try in subsequent data logs to add a pound here and there and monitor K.cont. You probably have a bit of power to gain back... even if it's at the expense of a little timing.
 
OP
OP
PowerPerLiter

PowerPerLiter

Specific Output
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Threads
59
Messages
1,404
Reaction score
1,302
Location
Midwest
Vehicle(s)
2020 Si Coupe 91 Talon TSI AWD 6262 280's N20 and 87 Buick Regal T 6776bb built N20
If you're happy, that's what matters most. So far as ricer math is concerned... the difference between 23# basemap and 23# basemap plus ethanol is about 50 whp. The ethanol map adds a maximum +5 to ignition timing. Discounting the effects of cooling the intake charge... one could assume the ignition advance would be causing a ~10 whp gain if it were linear (and I don't think it is... everything I read was it makes smaller and smaller improvements until it essentially does nothing at all... then power actually starts to drop as the flame front is meeting the piston essentially at TDC, which is not good for power at all. Try jumping off something and landing with your knees locked!). Still timing seems to be the key to a good bit of the power the car has. A taper to 11# is pretty wild... and excessive timing may not be good... but 1) Hopefully k.cont protects as intended and 2) running low boost may rob some power that would otherwise be there... but it shouldn't hurt a thing. You might try in subsequent data logs to add a pound here and there and monitor K.cont. You probably have a bit of power to gain back... even if it's at the expense of a little timing.

Agreed as ultimately the air charge is the displacement. I'll daily it for another 5k if I make it that long and start adding a little bit of boost to see what happens.
 
OP
OP
PowerPerLiter

PowerPerLiter

Specific Output
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Threads
59
Messages
1,404
Reaction score
1,302
Location
Midwest
Vehicle(s)
2020 Si Coupe 91 Talon TSI AWD 6262 280's N20 and 87 Buick Regal T 6776bb built N20
Honda Civic 10th gen My own tune results so far...60-80 mph times 20190418_215309



The highlighted red areas is actually from adding 1psi roughly. I may just throw this in it. Only 1 psi bump within the red margins making max target 22.461. The struggle will be figuring out whether the knock airflow limit table will actually take timing away as I start throwing boost at it. I know the other algorithms will anyway to correlate with the added air but Im going to see if I can avoid editing the ignition tables more than they are.

I think if I end up back up to 23 psi it would settle nicely around +3 - +4 degrees ignition on top.

I love this mapping and its linear "ness".



Im finishing up a KPRO file for K20a2 full bolt on EK hatch for a friend of mine and Ill tell you its hard not to start really pooring the coal to mine after messing with that K....and our clutch feels like its failing compared to even his factory clutch. I missed the mechanical nature of something like that.

Both mine and his are running nearly identical 60-80 times but he has a shift in his, would be an interesting race.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Myx
OP
OP
PowerPerLiter

PowerPerLiter

Specific Output
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Threads
59
Messages
1,404
Reaction score
1,302
Location
Midwest
Vehicle(s)
2020 Si Coupe 91 Talon TSI AWD 6262 280's N20 and 87 Buick Regal T 6776bb built N20
Honda Civic 10th gen My own tune results so far...60-80 mph times Screenshot_20190419-114342_Hondata


Screenshot just to see how long term trim was doing during warm up a few hours ago...even with a 20-25* drop in the weather
 

Myx

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2016
Threads
79
Messages
2,166
Reaction score
2,042
Location
Delaware
Vehicle(s)
2018 Honda Civic EX (Hatchback/CVT)
Vehicle Showcase
1
Country flag
Great thread! Thanks for the invaluable info guys. Reading this after a long day of work (13hrs) and 2hrs in the gym though. Can't hold eyelids open. :banghead: Can't retain info. :what::doh:
Sponsored

 


 


Top