What's your 2 step sound like?

[roachjuice]

Just wondering what everyones 2 step sounds like and what it's set on? Mine sounds like it bounces between the 2 rpm limits slowly. Not like a normal 2 step. Is there anyway to make it bounce a little faster? Maybe set the 2 limits fairly close? Right now it's set on lower 3300 and upper 3500.

---------- Post added at 05:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:50 AM ----------

See I want it more like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tc0kdXGobHg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[rx2mazda]

24 seconds in. I think I have it set at 4500 and 4200.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsh2BT3bfLI

[Force Fed Mopar]

Mine bounced slow at 3500 also.

[bakes]

I set the Rpm very close (50rpm or less)and it's very fast and i will build up to 15 psi boost in nuetral in about 4-5 secs note : i also have the anti lag turned on.
No Vids as the car is apart.

[dds78910]

24 seconds in. I think I have it set at 4500 and 4200.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsh2BT3bfLI

I really like the Red snowflakes on the GLH!

[ShelGame]

Just wondering what everyones 2 step sounds like and what it's set on? Mine sounds like it bounces between the 2 rpm limits slowly. Not like a normal 2 step. Is there anyway to make it bounce a little faster? Maybe set the 2 limits fairly close? Right now it's set on lower 3300 and upper 3500.

---------- Post added at 05:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:50 AM ----------

See I want it more like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tc0kdXGobHg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I usually set them to the same value, but it's still slow. That's becuase our ECU uses a fuel cut, not a spark cut. I've tried getting a spark cut to work, but no luck so far.

[roachjuice]

ok I'll try setting it higher and closer together. I cant look at your vid right now carroll (on iPhone right now) but I've seen it before. I'm using d cal right now and version 8 turbonator. I couldn't find a link to 9 or 10. And I can seem to make a calx file to adjust it in chem. In d cal it has hex and it doesnt say what rpm it sets at.

[ShelGame]

For the LM, divide the 30,000,000 by the rpm you want to set the rev limiter to.

For example:

4500rpm --> 30,000,000/4500 = 6667 (decimal), or 1A0A (hex)

[roachjuice]

For the LM, divide the 30,000,000 by the rpm you want to set the rev limiter to.

For example:

4500rpm --> 30,000,000/4500 = 6667 (decimal), or 1A0A (hex) ah ok. Sweet I'll try that. I've also read somewhere that 2 step limiters are hard on turbos and exhaust systems. Anyone ever heard of this?

[speedfreek500]

Yes they are hard on turbos's i was told and made sence.The timing gets retarted and shoots fireballs out when in use because it sparks when the exhaust valve is open.Here is my glh omni with msd 6al with a 3 step rev limiter set at 2800.The timing was set around 8 because i didnt have a timing light and my brother and i were half in the bag LOL!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmFQsnX1cYE

[roachjuice]

ok i adjusted the limiter. works faster now. now do i add more anti lag retard to it? i can get about 5psi @ 4300 in netural. which is plenty for me. i have the anti lag set at 13psi and i think 8 degree
iphone video. sorry about the quality.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hi6ZWwZMZdw

[1966 dart wagon]

nice videos. I'd post one of my own but my car is down for the winter

[roachjuice]

I usually set them to the same value, but it's still slow. That's becuase our ECU uses a fuel cut, not a spark cut. I've tried getting a spark cut to work, but no luck so far.
is it a signal from the hep i assume? i had a wild idea but i doubt it would work. maybe there is an electronic device kinda like a hobbs switch like thing and when it reaches a certain rpm or in this case volt or whatever, it cuts. so what you would do is splice into the hep connector and "T" it there. dunno. maybe im just thinking crazy and cheap lol. but hey the 2 step works awesome. i could never get the speed on off to work. so i used the cruise on off switch. but the omni didnt come with a cruise so i wired in a switch and applied 12v (i think) to it and added a wire to the lm where the cruise on off usually is on a tona. walah it works. i really wanna put a clutch switch in the works too like a momentary switch so i can flip a switch and the 12v is active but until i hit the clutch and hold it and it would be active. you have done SO much more that what i can ever have done with an ecu. if it werent for people like you we wouldnt have awesome cals and tuning software to mess with. hell im happy i can properly tune my car with version 8 turbonator lol.

[GLHNSLHT2]

According to the wideband you have no fuel.

[turbovanman²]

ah ok. Sweet I'll try that. I've also read somewhere that 2 step limiters are hard on turbos and exhaust systems. Anyone ever heard of this?

I was also told they are hard on rod bearings.

[OmniLuvr]

According to the wideband you have no fuel

no, according to the wideband, he has a lot of oxygen ;)

[BadAssPerformance]

Hard to hear over the chainsaw in the other lane, but here is mine ~5200RPM


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0082Pil0XE

[roachjuice]

no, according to the wideband, he has a lot of oxygen ;)
lol right you are. like i said in the video. it will do that crap till i go drive it and put some boost on it. the it will be butter. ill get video of that too.

[ShelGame]

According to the wideband you have no fuel.

The rev limiter (and therefore, 2-step, and OB cuout, and the speed limiter) all cut fuel to limit the RPM. Not reduce fuel, it's actually turned off and on to maintain RPM. So, it's not surprising that the A/F gauge shows lean...[COLOR="Silver"]

---------- Post added at 08:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:45 PM ----------

EDIT: Ohhh, you meant after. Not sure what's up with that...

[roachjuice]

The rev limiter (and therefore, 2-step, and OB cuout, and the speed limiter) all cut fuel to limit the RPM. Not reduce fuel, it's actually turned off and on to maintain RPM. So, it's not surprising that the A/F gauge shows lean...[COLOR="Silver"]

---------- Post added at 08:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:45 PM ----------

EDIT: Ohhh, you meant after. Not sure what's up with that... ha yea no clue either. its ALWAYS been lean on idle. i have tried EVERYTHING to make it idle at 14:7 or even close to that. no luck. maybe not doing something right? when its warm it actually idles good. but still doesnt read anything on the af.

[GLHNSLHT2]

What's the range of that AEM gauge? My car idles like hell at anything over 17.5:1 but will read all the way to 20:1. It was doing that when I put on the ported big flowing top end. I just bumped the baseline fuel table up 50% at idle vacuum. Cleaned it right up.

[roachjuice]

ah ok. i think it goes to 18? ill try that.

[black86glhs]

With or without tap shoes????????



:drum:

[Ondonti]

You just are not going to get the same sound of a spark pull with fuel cut. Spark pull is dumping a decent amount of unburned gas into the exhaust manifold which tends to light up when it gets near or at the turbo. This way you create exhaust flow and heat without spinning the motor up faster.

Changing the amount of timing retard will change how much raw fuel escapes the cylinder.

If the OEM type cals are letting you retard timing, I would retard timing as much as possible. This will mean you get more unburnt fuel into the exhaust manifold and need less fuel cut to maintain RPM.


Now when it comes to being nice to your engine, That unburned fuel tends to superheat the turbo more then when you are actually driving down the track.
Back in the 80's they had lots of turbo failures in F1 because they were constantly dumping fuel into the manifolds and Ferrari was actually introducing oxygen directly into the exhaust instead of fuel. Crazy amounts of heat at the turbo. Because of them there are higher quality turbine housings and wheels available for big dollar racers (not for us).

I don't know how worried I am about rod bearings on a limiter. I saw an article posted by a machine shop that Directconnection shared a link to but I really disagree with that article. Guy had no real proof, just opinion. The writer claimed all sorts of reasons, mostly based on harmonics, and sitting at the same RPM for a long period of time, even at low rpms. I really really really don't buy that. When it comes to spark retard to maintain RPM, what is the difference between Cruising at an rpm and limiting at an rpm? Why would free reving be causing nasty harmonics? It can't be the load on the engine, or anytime you are between decel and accell you are toasting your motor by his argument.
Harmonics might be causing the failures, but that doesn't mean the rev limiter is causing these harmonics. Things like valve spring harmonics are RPM specific. You put your rev limiter at the rpm your valvesprings resonate at. Does it really have to do with the rev limiter, or your intelligence...?

Some will say that a high rev limiter is bad for the rod caps, because you don't have cylinder pressure fighting against the piston, but even when you do have cylinder pressure against the piston, its only every other rotation! So If the rod will survive Millions of cycles at high rpm under load, it will still survive millions of cycles on a limiter. If you have a good rod, I wouldn't even think about it.

[22shelby]

here is mine, MSD module wuth a MSD RPM selector.... and on an auto....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjMhB4SUTQc

[speedfreek500]

here is mine, MSD module wuth a MSD RPM selector.... and on an auto....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjMhB4SUTQc


LOl wow look at all the people around the starting line!They dont even let people with in 15feet from the track when they run cars here in alberta,that kinda looks like a rally car race where everybody stands beside the track and watch.Your car sounds great too,what rpm is that at?

[22shelby]

3400, with no timing retard.... anti lag is not necessary... yeah at RSD they usally stop to clear the people off the start line...unfortunately, the camaro was an old lt1/ thats been LS1 swapped, ls6 heads, cam, spray'n on a higher stall converter, that race cost me 100 bucks...