Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Benvo
Do you tune ECU's?
Do you know how minimum ignition maps work on this particular DME family?
Do you know about target based systems, and how this works in conjunction with minimum timing maps when you change the targeted timing?
I wouldn't make statements that the "DME is operating at the speed of sound" when that is not of relevance in this particular case. I could go into processor architecture here, but that's a whole different case. And were talking about faster than the speed of sound.. these are electrical signals.
There are so many different adaptations - over 20 of them. Do you think that the DME can pull timing infinitely? It can't. It will to a certain point.
If you go from higher octane to lower octane, there is a chance it will ping until it makes corrections to prevent it from happening.
On some E46 M3's we REMOVE timing from stock in certain areas due to the factory timing maps being too far advanced in certain areas for 91 octane piss water fuel.
|
No, I don't tune ECUs. Have you recurved a distributor? That might date me a bit.
The speed of sound is a joking reference to the acoustic sensors that listen for knock. Yes, I understand that the processor is using electrical signals, once the acoustic sensors hear the onset of knock.
No, the DME can not adjust timing infinitely. But on these engines (not S54s, with much higher specific outputs, but rather these engines in X5s) I have not heard pinging.
The OP also referenced hearing knocking sounds on startup, using 91. Given that these engines can run well on 89, and often 87, pinging or knocking on 91 suggests that the fuel isn't really 91. All that takes is a fault in the blending system inside the gas station pump. And startup noises aren't likely to be pinging anyway.
Yes, I understand the consequences of crap fuel. See post #2.
Before going further, let's agree that fuel varies a lot geographically. In my area, the fuel is very good. Yours may not be. And the label on the pump is just that, simply a label. It may or may not represent what is coming out the nozzle.
My X5 3.0 operated great on 89 AKI. No change in fuel economy from 91 or 94, measured over several tanks and various elevations and temperatures, by calculating (not relying on the OBD). That suggests to me that the timing was not being retarded, and so with my local fuel, in my driving conditions, there was absolutely no reason to buy more than 89 AKI. 87 AKI was OK, but occasionally I noticed driveabilty issues. But no ping, ever. And yes, I know what pinging is, all the way back from SU carbs, the onset of emissions controls in US vehicles in the early 70s, and so on.
I know your followup question was directed at MD, but I would point out that if there is no discernible difference in performance (and efficiency) then yes, one should run 87 all the time. The correct fuel is the lowest AKI (let's stop calling it octane, since motor fuel doesn't necessarily have any actual octane in it) that doesn't cause knock, or with these control strategies, performance degradation. This recommendation is leaving aside the effects of higher concentrations of detergents in higher grades of fuel, differing amounts of ethanol crap in different grades of fuel, etc.
I don't agree that means that one isn't loading the engine up enough. The engine is there to serve the driver; the driver is not there to serve the engine. IMO.
Thanks for the post. It is good to have an engine discussion again; we had gone awhile with a lot of wheel spacer, window tint, and similar threads.
Jeff