home register FAQ memberlist calendar

Go Back   Turbobricks Forums > Mechanical > performance & modifications > aftermarket engine management

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-29-2020, 09:42 AM   #1
oldschoolvolvo
Board Member
 
oldschoolvolvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Lancaster, PA
Question Microsquirt for n/a 16v?

Looking for some feedback…considering doing a standalone conversion on my n/a 16v setup.

Is it reasonable to expect a noticeable change/improvement in the performance of the engine by changing to standalone vs. existing LH management? No other variables changed.

Car runs well as-is IMO, but if there is a tangible benefit to converting to standalone I’d like to pursue it.

In other words, how much can you improve the performance of the engine by only optimizing the tune? Is it a pursuit of diminishing returns on a n/a setup?

Current engine management is LH2.4 (B234) + EZ-117K (sbabbs B234 clone EZK box).

Standalone hardware would likely be microsquirt.
__________________
-Mike
1998 V70 T5
1979 242 DL 16v

|Feedback|
oldschoolvolvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2020, 11:03 AM   #2
OttoB
Board Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: E(Seattle!Vancouver! San Francisco!LA!) Helsinski
Default

I don't have that much hands on experience with this, but I would guess that neglecting emissions may improve performance a bit. To allow run engine with richer mixture and more advance might give little more ummph.
Ignition timing is very effective way control exhaust gas temperature, which is needed to keep catalysator "ON".

But if you make some changes to your engine, then definitely tuning is needed.
OttoB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2020, 03:38 PM   #3
culberro
Ronald Culberbone III
 
culberro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Portland, OR
Default

Main benefits to uS over LH: You can adjust accel enrichment, lean it out a bit, and adjust the timing table.

That being said, you're not going to see a lot of HP/Torque change unless you start modifying the engine. You might be able to pick up 5-10hp, but that's about it honestly.
__________________
Cult Person. Pissing in your Kool-Aid.
culberro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2020, 09:20 AM   #4
oldschoolvolvo
Board Member
 
oldschoolvolvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Lancaster, PA
Default

Thanks, that's about what I figured. Not worth it (IMO) for a basically stock setup.
oldschoolvolvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2020, 11:57 AM   #5
Dirty Rick
Board Member
 
Dirty Rick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Cornholio, OR
Default

The other benefits are,
adjustable rev limiter,
Launch control,
Flat shifting,
adjustable idle speed control,
electric fan control,
table switching,
nitrous control,
Idle advance control,
AC idle up,
Knock sensor?,
Flex fuel,
Baro correction,
Logging with an attached computer,
You can switch tunes or make any changes in a minute.
__________________
I don't know who I am when I am somebody else.
Dirty Rick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2020, 04:08 PM   #6
culberro
Ronald Culberbone III
 
culberro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Portland, OR
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Rick View Post
The other benefits are,
adjustable rev limiter,
Launch control,
Flat shifting,
adjustable idle speed control,
electric fan control,
table switching,
nitrous control,
Idle advance control,
AC idle up,
Knock sensor?,
Flex fuel,
Baro correction,
Logging with an attached computer,
You can switch tunes or make any changes in a minute.
Microsquirt has only about half of those features you mentioned.
culberro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2020, 04:41 PM   #7
Dirty Rick
Board Member
 
Dirty Rick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Cornholio, OR
Default

That's why I don't like MicroSquirts,

MS2 or better.....
Dirty Rick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2020, 01:22 AM   #8
zhor
Board Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Default

many brands of the standalone box around here.

The major advantage that effect to power and LH can't do are
-Injection angle
-Direct coil on plug
-Accelerate enrichment

thses are main point that you will gain power because

LH - inject every rev of crank, means 2 times per one spark, so it doesn't care about Injection angle. you will lose some Volumetric Eff. and not so precise AF control from the vapor of fuel that injected in not proper time and stuck around port and back of intake valve. Better VE and AF control are the most advantage point of stanalone.

LH - use distributor. direct coil more stable in high rev. less misfire , more power.

LH - Don't have TPS, it have only Idel and Full throttle switch mount on the throttle. so you cant do the function of fuel enrichment.

but.

LH - have a very forgivable system that we call "Adaptive" you can run it with nearly 30 yaers old system, how do you think its true?
zhor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2020, 07:04 AM   #9
OttoB
Board Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: E(Seattle!Vancouver! San Francisco!LA!) Helsinski
Default

Injection timing has "nothing" to do with performance. With right sized injectors duty cycle is around 70-90%, so basically it is open most of the time.

On lower engine speed it got positive effect on HC-emissions when fuel is injected on hot closed intake valve. Fuel evaporates better and combustion is more complete.
OttoB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2020, 12:32 AM   #10
zhor
Board Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OttoB View Post
Injection timing has "nothing" to do with performance. With right sized injectors duty cycle is around 70-90%, so basically it is open most of the time.

On lower engine speed it got positive effect on HC-emissions when fuel is injected on hot closed intake valve. Fuel evaporates better and combustion is more complete.
The Injection angle is not the injection timing.

injection angle means angle of crank that injector starts or stop to inject.
Concept is you should inject only when intake valve open. because fuel mist have alot less volume than fuel vapor, air+mist(that was kicked with 3 bar pressure!!!) can induce to cylinder more than air+ fuel vapor, you will get better VE on part load.
You will get better control of AF in every cylinder too, because you have no idea how much fuel vaperized in each cylinder,
let say cylinder #1 with #2 if you inject as the same angle and same timing
if correct angle for a cylinder #1, so that means it wrong for #2 so you got alot of vapor, that mean air in #2 is push back and get in less than #1,
So, you got uneven AF and, then fuel trim read average value show you got rich so it reduce timming, then you will get knock on #1.

but with this concept, you will get fuel vaporize issue instead. HC will get high.
So manufacture solve by design 8/9/12/14 hole disc type injector that gives you very very small mist. that why modern port injection engine change to use the multi-hole injector.

but intake valve open very soon, that means you have only 220-260 degree of crank as your camshaft duty. that means if your cam and head have flow as 240 crank degree (maybe advertise @260) you have only 240/720= 33% of injector duty.

when you need more injection timing than 33% you need to sacrifice this phenomenal,
But with the correct angle, you still get a better result from mist pressure push intake in valve open period.
So some ECU can set start point some can set stop point.

for full load
Injection angle has less effect.
if you set drag car, you can neglect it.
have fun
zhor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2020, 01:44 AM   #11
OttoB
Board Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: E(Seattle!Vancouver! San Francisco!LA!) Helsinski
Default

Sorry but no.

Why you want to get higher VE on part-load? There is a throttle plate reducing VE for a reason. Where you get this theory?
OttoB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2020, 02:10 AM   #12
zhor
Board Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Default

please do not confuse
part load doesn't really mean only part throttle.
and also
Injection angle is not Injection Timing.

you can search for " Intake Port Phenomena in a Spark-Ignition Engine "
many theories and experiments. include CFD

the important thing is standalone CAN CONTROL A/F better from VE was improved and equal.
so you got higher COV, less missfire so you gain more power.

I just share my point of view,
sorry if it not the same as your experience,
I don't want to fight, Covid19 is enough.

World change every day, new things comes around us.
but Fact is Fact.
zhor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2020, 04:55 AM   #13
OttoB
Board Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: E(Seattle!Vancouver! San Francisco!LA!) Helsinski
Default

What is COV?
OttoB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2020, 12:58 PM   #14
culberro
Ronald Culberbone III
 
culberro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Portland, OR
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zhor View Post
please do not confuse
part load doesn't really mean only part throttle.
How are you defining load? MAP over atmospheric pressure (baro)?
I think you're getting pedantic here though.

Quote:
Injection angle is not Injection Timing.

you can search for " Intake Port Phenomena in a Spark-Ignition Engine "
many theories and experiments. include CFD
I 100% do not trust anyone's CFD if it is not backed up by physical testing.
I trust it even less if it's using Solidworks. SW CFD package is basically MS Painting in flow lines, and with the accuracy of a toddler and an etch-a-sketch

Quote:
the important thing is standalone CAN CONTROL A/F better from VE was improved and equal.
so you got higher COV, less missfire so you gain more power.
There are a lot of things that play into COV (coefficient of variation with respect to IMEP).
Tuning is only a small part of that.

Quote:
I just share my point of view,
Thanks

Quote:
World change every day, new things comes around us.
but Fact is Fact.
Facts are not facts, especially with respect to science. Science changes as we learn more. Engine theories from the 1960s were disproved and changed in the 1970s, and so one and so one.
The research I did 10 years ago is already old news and archived in a basement somewhere, with my papers gathering dust.

Math is pretty stable throughout time though.
Time for some work from home beers
culberro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2020, 10:56 PM   #15
zhor
Board Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Default

thing that explained was the thing I learned 20 years ago,
on my age,
Homogeneous charge is not so mentioned, just a little in emission and knock limit.
BUT the satisfied charge or nickname is lern-burn technic was major topic.
because 80% of ICE. runing on part load, the intake phenomenal totally difference from full load. it so complicate to understand it behavior. many conflicts in research found all the time because we still don't know about it,
GDI is my topic on that time, so i lern and test a lot about intake phenomenal and fuel atomization and vaporized that effect to IMEP and COV.


now a day, I'm older.
many things change.
ICE nearly replace with EV.
you don't need to trust CFD, it proved themself without your trust.
You saw very complicate plastic intake, with multihole injectors with powerful ECU,
that can control Stoic AF exact only at sparkplug tip on part load with 0.98-0.99 COV with very low fuel consumption, also give you the best performance on full load too...
How can you do it without simulation research with good verification?

For full load, things still not go that fast.
Homogeneous charge play on this time and seem we already well known about it since 90th.
So the 30-year engine with good head and block design still can beat with a modern engine.
Just Knock limit and abit of heat transfer(also from FEA.) that modern engine has an advantage.

on my opinion.
RED Block is a good one. 8V is simple and good head to play with, 16V is more serious head and much more fun.
if you want to daily use it standalone with multihole injector are recommended
but for drag or race,
you can stand alone or re-chipped LH with big pin type injector.
the result is not that much, if you don't need the trick, lanch control..ect,

have fun.
zhor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2020, 12:39 AM   #16
cosbySweater
Board Member
 
cosbySweater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Monterey/Falun
Default

100% not worth it on a stock n/a setup. If it runs and drives well and doesn't get terrible mileage. Microsquirt is not worth the hassle imo
__________________
1979 Volvo 244DL 5.3/4l80e,8.8,Ms3x goldbox ecu and Mircrosquirt tcu, GTX4202r, 226/230 turbo cam, tbss intake, 11.0@128mph 9psi, 3600lbs with driver
1974 AMC Gremlin, lq4, 7875 billet, ss2 cam, 80e, 3600 stall converter, Holley Terminator x
1995 Porsche 993
2013 VW Passat TDI
Quote:
Originally Posted by bricktop420 View Post
Thank you very much everybody... i now feel sufficiently retarded and will go cry in the corner...
cosbySweater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2020, 06:39 AM   #17
FreeEMSFred
Board Member
 
FreeEMSFred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kiwiland
Default

I don't know what anyone else said / I didn't read above at all, but:

I have two bone stock B234F engined cars:

90 740 GLE AW72L 4.1 rear
88 240 GL AW72L 3.73 rear

They both could probably do with new plugs, but:

240 has FreeEMS, no airbox/airfilter so is noisy, pseudo wasted spark with toyota COPs and an untuned flat 75 or 80% VE table that's a bit lean around peak torque but I just run 98 RON fuel in it and it doesn't ping like that. Algorithms are good enough to daily like this.

Comparing the two:

240 is more responsive / strong down low and feels strong through mid range despite tall diff
740 can be hesitant when cold and at lower RPMs but sings well through to 6k hard cut
240 can rev a bit higher, but the valve springs are border line at 6000 anyway, so not much and you have to hold the box from shifting to achieve it
240 starts immediately with my code, but YMMV on megasquirt...
740 starts fine, but not as quickly because OEM was primitive/crap
240 has no idle valve or control so must be warmed up manually with the gas pedal and/or while driving
740 idles a little low cold, initially, but settles fairly quickly, idle valve probably dirty/sticky/etc

240 is running some crusty old firmware from ages ago without:

1) any accel enrichment - so lean pops audible if you stab it suddenly at the wrong time but hesitation minimal due to base algorithms and design

2) new precision smooth RPM code I intricately designed and developed but never widely rolled out - in practice this doesn't matter much, but knowing it's accurate to 0.5 RPM to 4000 RPM and < 1RPM to redline is nice compared to eg MS1 that is at best accurate to 100RPM

various other enhancements that I can't recall right now. Basically I'm dog fooding and I've been dailying the car with no wideband and no tune for a little over 2 years now without major complaints (gas mileage is okay, 350km/tank vs 400/tank in the OEM car). No fouled plugs or any other issues. Had it to about 100mph when I didn't have a 4th gear with OD wire cut. Probably haven't had the 740 higher but have taken the 740 to a drag event and drift event. YT clip of B234F donuts on tail of drag strip at drift day here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ds3wSdXyf9Q

My plans are to develop an NA tune in the car for my lighter 360 hatchback including cams and ITBs and then swap that gear into the smaller car and develop a mild turbo setup for my 240 wagon in this, then swap that out and not sure after that, maybe the BMW V12 I intended to put in it. A standalone gives you options to expand, but the differences are NOT worth it unless you're swapping chassis like I was. No room for that dizzy, no factory EFI loom or pump etc, custom loom by me.

To get OEM like driveability and economy and power will take you quite a bit of work and any gains will be minimal, eg less than 10% or so. IE, not worth it unless you have plans like I do to make more power and or aspirate differently. If you had a manual being able to get valve springs into it and raise the rev limit with some mild cams would be totally worth it.

My 2c.
FreeEMSFred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2020, 06:50 AM   #18
FreeEMSFred
Board Member
 
FreeEMSFred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kiwiland
Default

I see someone complaining about distributor ignition above.

I *hate* dizzies, for a LOT of reasons, but:

If:
  • NA (not turbo/super)
  • 4 cylinder
  • 8000-9000 RPM or less
  • appropriate coil with fast dwell characteristics, AKA a modern coil, not oil filled can
  • good condition leads
  • good condition rotor/cap

Then:

It's totally fine. Until some moisture gets inside the cap

Dizzies are often hard to package in RWD setups so often they get ditched for that reason alone - that's mostly why I changed to Toyota cops firing twice per cycle.

Those COP units are pretty sensitive though, I had wrong dwell settings on first start and it lost a coil within about 2 minutes. Fixed it and replaced the coil and more than 2 years later no faults despite double fire, with once being into highly ionized exhaust gas AKA a near dead short. In fact, I still haven't bolted them in, so they're rattling around in there trying to vibrate to death
FreeEMSFred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2020, 08:25 AM   #19
OttoB
Board Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: E(Seattle!Vancouver! San Francisco!LA!) Helsinski
Default

COV=coefficient of variation with respect to IMEP

Thank for that.
OttoB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2020, 01:09 PM   #20
culberro
Ronald Culberbone III
 
culberro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Portland, OR
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zhor View Post
thing that explained was the thing I learned 20 years ago,

...

have fun.
It would be fun to talk engines and drink beers sometime
culberro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2020, 02:41 PM   #21
OttoB
Board Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: E(Seattle!Vancouver! San Francisco!LA!) Helsinski
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by culberro View Post
It would be fun to talk engines and drink beers sometime
May I join? I have several good stories between simulation guys and us who are doing experimental engine research.
OttoB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2020, 03:37 PM   #22
culberro
Ronald Culberbone III
 
culberro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Portland, OR
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OttoB View Post
May I join? I have several good stories between simulation guys and us who are doing experimental engine research.
Of course!
culberro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2020, 09:57 AM   #23
zhor
Board Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Default

may i joint?.
But I don't have beer anymore.
it's all empty since the second day of covid social distancing.....

for mechanic side, we do as rule of thumb.
yeeha If we want more power on b234, just turbo it,
If too long intake hit brake booster?, cut it or made new intake, and yes!!! it work!!!...for sure, so easy.
And we curious why engineer in very big company doesn't do as we did,
Are they dumper than us?

fortunately I’m mechanic and also be researcher.

If you want to turbo it, researcher start from ignition mechanism(X0-X10-X90) I need to know how X10 fire ball shape after boost look like (x10 is time from start ignition to 10% of mass of intake was burnt this period consume a lot of time) to calculate the time to burnt the rest of it (X90). If ball grow big enough and able to propagate to all, that’s OK.
But under boost, flow is very high, compare with NA engine, if head generate too much tumble (always happen with too low angle port, large intake to exhaust valve angle) then x10 ball was too cone shape and may extinguish, in some case I got too high port (8v with rise upper port to high), you may get reverse tumble with wrong swirl direction and blow the X10 fireball to intake valve that have very low temp, so you will get also extinguish from heat absorption to wall, then misfire, and the next cycle, you will get knock from remaining of last cycle, if it too strong, you will lose your ringland and maybe rods.
Because of that
some engine totally can’t boost , some can but not too much,
but some like our brick engine, do what ever you want…
actually 8V port need more complicate desigh because you need to play with swirl and tumble. for 16V tumble is main point swirl is not so magin.

when you do something and you found it real good, that means you are scarifying something to boost up another thing.
Thing that researcher always fight with mechanics is Global and Local thinking.

Yes, you ever ask me how do I define part load and full load….
Until Now. I think you understand how do I think.

Fun to talk with all.
I feel like old man told old story….
zhor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:09 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.