Have another drink Loren and keep going..don't get discouraged, you have a gentleman's wager to honor and prove your point.

http://images.reachsite.com/39207ab8...5779.PNG?gen=1

Are there any particular reasons why the tuner/chippers wouldn't integrate knock sensing capabilities with the package? How would one go about installing such sensing hardware? Is it that difficult, on the software side?

Best!

Doyle

Also , it's unfortunate that when presented with facts of many,many years of real life experience tuning internal combustion engines that the OP cannot see past the smokey haze in his safe little bubble of ignorance. There is no value to further discussion because no one wants to discuss what is inside your ***hole.

Is it odd given the wealth of knowledge on this board that no one backs you up, loren?

There is a reason.

dshepp, check these guys out: J&S Electronics SafeGuard Indivdual Cylinder Knock Control

I don't need to reread the initial post, your motive is create ***** storm. Again. Yawn.

LOL - that is funny stuff right there. Loren, as far as I can tell, you haven't actually posted any actual facts. You posted your opinions, and some fake facts.

Your opening post was an attack, so that makes your post here double-funny! Good one, man.

Okay guys, I've never dyno'd my race car.

-But-

Swapped Motronic boxes- Same car, same track, same driver (me), same temp and humidity, same tires, same gas, yada yada....

Just a quick stop in the pits, swap boxes, head back out.

The result?

The aftermarket chip beat the stock chip by 1.5 seconds per lap.

Some would call that "Significant"
In racing, we call that "Eternity"

Is the stopwatch (okay, transponder) facts, or just an opinion?

Only $XXX for 1.5 seconds a lap? I'm guessing you would be first in line for that kind of deal the next time it was offered!

I am not sure as to why you would attack everyone who builds or modifies their car using tuner companies and their products.
You have tested and proven that the tweaks you know about work or fail as your test data back up.
So why not publish that with the intent to help.

I personally have worked developing engines far beyond what the manufacturer intended. This was not as simple as turning the distributor or re chipping the computer. There were many failures, However the main progress for the development was technology.

Technology with fuels, Metals, way's of doing things, injectors, ECU's, sampling rates for lambda, etc etc.... all help improve performance. And it has changed a lot since the build of the engines we did.

The team I worked for spent a lot of money doing so. Way more than most back yard builders would invest.

Most people who invest their money with a tuner get what they pay for.

More than they had!

Thanx!!!!! Great reads.

Doyle

8 Jan 2010 Ray Stewart rides the wall Huntly Placemakers Speedway NZ Super Saloon Champs - YouTube

Just to give an example.... The car that is leading this Super saloon race is 4 cylinder (fj20). It is running against 800+ HP methanol injected V8's. Yes it has similar HP, the trick is to get low rpm torque, running single gear when racing a 4cyl engine in a true power class took a few years but we got there. Shame in this race Ray hits the wall.

In my short time on this board,
 

I have observed if you present an alternative view or have a differing viewpoint, then you will ultimately be personally attacked for your beliefs. It is not right, but that is just the way it is on the bird. Why waste your time arguing with a group who will never accept your point of view? To prove your point, you should present all of this via scientific experiments (videotaped preferably) and not just throw out a graph. Even I could throw out a graph or chart that says whatever I want it to say. You need to do more than that to prove your point and your research. Otherwise, these folks will never accept what you have to offer. Just my two cents, take it for whatever it is worth.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/wat.gif

People are very rarely attacked merely for what they believe. It is when they try and tell other folks *they* are wrong for what *they* believe - that's when the fireworks start.

Loren has a very serious credibility problem. He wants to try and tell folks who have empirical evidence that the data they possess is false. And if that's not bad enough, he's trying to claim that somehow his (not-shown) data is correct. If his beliefs are borne out by actual facts, then he will gain credibility. Not enough to attack folks who do not believe as he does, but enough to support his opinion.

Please do not conflate facts with opinion. Nor conflate simplistic logic with actual verified facts. Re-read Loren's posts with your own quote (above) in mind, and tell me it doesn't equally condemn Loren's approach to this whole business.

Also, please don't think that somehow Pelican is unique in how it approaches unproven claims. Pretty much ANY enthusiast group will not accept challenges to orthodoxy without fairly serious proof. After all, long-standing standard operating procedure doesn't arise from the ether - it comes from hard-won experience. Data, if you will.

HA! .. :D

You believe that? What an idiot!

...is the typical response. ;) (some use a different tone, but the attack is still there)

Rarely. It *does* happen. But usually, the opening salvo is from the folks offering dissent from the current orthodoxy. And *usually* it comes when they are asked to present actual facts.

It's not like I haven't seen the very same thing in 20 different venues over 20 years on the intardnet. Just watch - you'll see.

Steve and others indicate max. hp is made near 12.6AFR.
It has been said 3.2 cars run rich at WOT and high rpms. I hooked up a high bandwidth O2 and got readings in the 10's also confirmed with a dyno run.
If we combine these two anecdotal statements, one could assume some added hp is available, exactly how much, not sure. If that is 5hp or 10hp, that's an improvement, it is worth that to you or not.
The contrary conclusion related to reliability - if the factory did this to save the cat at sustained high speeds, if true, that could be a consideration.
Possibly the tread at this point, is beyond what I'm saying.
If I had the time/money I would get a SW chip programmed when he is watching the dyno results.

This was my point
 

My point is lorenfb should scientifically show his data and conduct tests to back up his claims, nothing more. http://forums.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/wat.gif

That's not what Steve's dyno runs show. It's 13:1 or slightly leaner. That is the same that I saw on my race bike, both 600cc and 1000cc, engines.

Scott

This is true for most NA gasoline engines with reasonably well designed cylinder heads.

Loren,

The facts always seem to get lost in your replies. So lets play a little game of question and answer to clear things up.

What year was the 3.2 911?

Were you actually present during the dyno runs?

What dyno was used?

Did you do the tuning, or someone else?

Who paid for the session, the car owner or you?

Surely you have some pics, a reciept or something to show you were there?

Why is it that you have not responded to Steve W's 100K challenge? I understand that is a large sum, but he may even do it for $100.00.