Let me start off by saying that I am in no way affiliated with Quadzilla or Diesel Auto Power. I was simply asked to test the new updates because I have big injectors, I'm familiar with the Quad, and I know the person doing all of the tuning. This person wishes to remain anonymous, so it will stay that way.

On to the good stuff!!!

So what is V2? Basically it's a way to gain more control over the tuning parameters, with an emphasis on CLEAN POWER. I've got big injectors, and I've driven my own truck enough that I can drive it virtually smoke free, but I have to be very careful with the right petal (even when set to stock)

Here are the custom tuning parameters:

Alright, let's start with the power levels: 
0=stock
1=Power Percent (Explained later)
2=Fuel mileage (Same as the old number 1)
3=can-bus only (Same as old number 2)
4=can-bus + wiretap (same as old number 3)
and so on to the maximum level set is reached.

So, as you can see the first 8 parameters (through "TPS CAN Minimum") are the same as they've always been. They will function just like they used to.

The next two have to do with wiretap fueling. The "Boost Pump Scaling" gives the %specified of called for wiretap fueling if the boost is below the "boost pump low limit"
As an example:(Let's say it's set on level 10) In the pictures you can see I have the scaling set to 0% until 15psi. This means I'll get zero wiretap fueling until I hit 15psi of boost. If it was set at 50% I would get 600us of wiretap before 15psi. 
This greatly reduces the amount of smoke output without reducing your peak power.

Next we have Power Percent. This is the "new" level one! Here we have the percentage of stock power called for at all times. This is perfect to use for emissions testing, letting the wife/kids drive etc. This is also another way to reduce smoke if you're wanting to be really clean. 

Next is boost scaling. This is the same as it used to be. Just a smoothing feature.

Next we have PSI% listed 0-17 in increments of 1. This feature allows you to set the amount of stock power based on boost. It allows you to ramp up the power from 0-17psi, effectively reducing smoke and making the truck more driveable.

 

Now for my experience with testing.

 

Level 1: With my truck stock, I can floor it at any time and create quite a cloud of smoke. You'd swear I have a tuner cranked, but it's not. With my truck set to 70%, I can floor it while doing 55mph in 6th and get as big of a puff as a stock 24V. Meanwhile it'll pull about 34psi @ 2000rpm and 40psi by 2500rpm.  It does make the truck a little doggy, but I could adjust the percentage up as I saw fit and still keep smoke to a minimum. This would be perfect if someone were to borrow my truck (never going to happen but you get the point) They could try to hotrod it as much as they want but won't be able to. I do think this would make emissions a breeze to pass, and it could be used as a safety device to keep the truck from being stolen. Essentially you can set it to 1% and the truck would only idle.

 

Now for the PSI%: With the power level turned up around 1500rpm I can stab the throttle (0psi of boost) and get nothing more than a slight haze until the boost picks up and the quad starts fueling hard. Spool is still excellent under these conditions, I just need to work on my top-end fuel command to reduce the smoke up there. This has made the biggest difference in CLEAN power. The quad is essentially rolling into the throttle for you as the boost comes up so you don't cloud the highway when you get on it. 

Now the "Boost pump scaling" and "boost pump low limit": The wiretap fueling is essentially it's "own" programmer. It doesn't follow the rules of the can-bus fueling. This was taking effect in my description above because it doesn't wiretap fuel for me until 15psi of boost. Thus why it's only a haze until 15psi.

 

Now, what I'm not quite happy with yet. Off idle, if I stab the throttle on level 1 I get a puff of smoke. I am told this is because of where the quad takes over and starts controlling things. It's being worked on and should be fixed soon. Other than that I'm very happy! I do have only 20 miles or so of testing, but this does look very promising. I'll be putting 50 miles on in the morning and 50 miles in the afternoon, so I'll have more info then.

Any questions post em up and I'll do my best to answer them. The future of clean power for 24V's looks promising  

Edited February 13, 20178 yr by Me78569
Changed the title for SEO reasons

55 minutes ago, AH64ID said:

 

 

I have seen the higher MM3 reference in the some maps, but that's not going to correlate to 100% load. IIRC I have mm3 references in my tune over 200, but OEM limits fueling to 132mm3. Most of the CR tables run up to 145 mm3, which is why a stock CR will only peak at 91-92% load. There is more fuel available but the ECM is hitting a limiter. 

 

I don't have my tuning computer with me today, but I'll try to remember to bring it tomorrow and let you know what I find for load to mm3 correlation. 

 

I know we did a thread a while ago about valve cover mm3 value but I cannot find it. It may not mean that value is 100% load, but it's going to be close. 

Good info.  I would be curious to know.   We know that hole exists in the ~%25 load region of the map because of the data logs we have pulled out.

 

 

 

55 minutes ago, AH64ID said:

 

 

Proper timing is like fuzzy math. There are different proper timing values for many things, it's why custom tuning is so popular. Box tunes use a couple (with things like Smarty Revo) timing tables and we find what works best. Custom tuning lets us tune for specific mods and use. 

 

Proper timing on a street tune will be different than proper timing on a tow tune on the same truck without any hardware changes. 

 

When I work on a timing map I look at things like the ratio of fuel BTDC:ATDC and when the injector closes ATDC. But I also have to look at rpms, load, mods, and use. This is why I can drop timing with larger injectors, but it's the secondary effect. The primary effect is that I was able to shorten duration for the same amount of fuel. With a shorter duration I don't need as much timing to have my injector close at my ATDC goal. Less timing and a shorter faster injection event are good! With modern tuning I now recommend slightly larger injectors than I would have 5 years ago. 

 

The empty cruise profile is the only place where it's a little different and we use a lot of timing, relative to quantity, to get some efficiency. If we tried that much relative timing with WOT fuel we would have some serious engine issues. 

 

If you're trying to squeeze every hp out of a motor then we dyno tune. By running the truck on the dyno we are able to advance timing until the power production peaks. Once it starts to go back down, too much timing, we back it off to peak and there is the max advance we should run. This will of course vary per rpm and fuel quantity. 

 

Way too much or too little timing should be visible in the exhaust, on the gauges, or audible. 

 

 

Fuzzy math is a great way to put it.  

 

@Mopar1973Man 
I did some more testing today and I can say that if I over advance the truck, say 22* at 55 mph / 1500 rpm I can physically feel the truck needing more fuel / tps input to keep going.  It feels as if the truck is being held back etc.      Its feels very similar to how the truck felt when I was tuning the turbo, too small a vein position and the truck would bog, to much and it would bog, but htere was a happy spot in the middle.  

5 minutes ago, Me78569 said:

Good info.  I would be curious to know.   We know that hole exists in the ~%25 load region of the map because of the data logs we have pulled out.

 

Fuzzy math is a great way to put it.  

 

@Mopar1973Man 
I did some more testing today and I can say that if I over advance the truck, say 22* at 55 mph / 1500 rpm I can physically feel the truck needing more fuel / tps input to keep going.  It feels as if the truck is being held back etc.      Its feels very similar to how the truck felt when I was tuning the turbo, too small a vein position and the truck would bog, to much and it would bog, but htere was a happy spot in the middle.  

 

 

So you're saying if I over advance for sure I would see higher load numbers from the engine? I'm going to assume that excess retarding will do the same in adding more engine load and EGT's go higher.

Yes, I went out and jacked up timing higher than I know I should and I physically felt the truck "bog" or "lul"  it felt held back as if you added #1000 into the bed on the fly.  I did not notice and increase in EGT's at this point though.

yes to little timing will cause the flame front to move later into the stroke and egt's should come up.  I don't know if load will increase or not, but EGTs should climb.  

I am quite certain that 20-25% load is not ~70 mm3. 70mm3 will be closer to 50-70% load. 

 

How much timing are you seeing pulled at 20-25% load? And at what rpm?

 

That feeling is called negative torque. Too much fuel is igniting BTDC and the other cyliders are having to work harder to get the firing cylinder from the compression stroke to the power stroke. It's also creating a TON of cylinder pressure and is very hard the head bolts/gasket. EGT's may even decrease because the cylinder has a lot more time to absorb the heat. 

 

Too little cruise timing will increase load and EGT's and decrease economy as well. 

7 minutes ago, AH64ID said:

I am quite certain that 20-25% load is not ~70 mm3. 70mm3 will be closer to 50-70% load. 

 

How much timing are you seeing pulled at 20-25% load? And at what rpm?

 

I see timing drop from ~17* - 18* down to 11-12* depending on rpm,  It seems like a lot of change happens in the 1500 rpm area and ~%25 throttle area.  

 

Sub 1500 timing seems to be higher

Now keep in mind 98.5-00 trucks don't report actual engine load across canbus, so my numbers are a % of total fueling possible.  01-02 do report engine load.   The canbus fueling is always a value from 0-4095 4095 is %100 of possible fuel. 

 

So data overload

 

@Mopar1973Man Here's that low rpm blip in timing I was talking about.  Note the 16* of timing before 1500 rpm

Here's a long slow pull in first,

heres a semi stable rpm, with an decrease in tps then an increase 


Another semi stable rpm 



Here's some TPS change situtations


Here's an increase in tps / load as rpms climb to above 1500 and timing drops


Here's cruise state to higher tps input 


some TPS changes



You can see some of that Transition from "cruise" to "performance" in the stock maps

 

 

 

I am very likely reading the UDC stuff wrong.  

 

Full Logs attached

iQuad-2017-09-12-11.30.16345023781.csv

iQuad-2017-09-12-11.22.47-2035407688.csv


Let  me know if you want to see a specific situtation.  

5 minutes ago, Me78569 said:

I see timing drop from ~17* - 18* down to 11-12* depending on rpm,  It seems like a lot of change happens in the 1500 rpm area and ~%25 throttle area.  

 

Sub 1500 timing seems to be higher

Now keep in mind 98.5-00 trucks don't report actual engine load across canbus, so my numbers are a % of total fueling possible.  01-02 do report engine load.   The canbus fueling is always a value from 0-4095 4095 is %100 of possible fuel. 

 

So data overload

 

 

That's a descent drop, and more than we are seeing in the above table. That's also a common drop area based on getting out of the cruise area and into the "spool/work" area. 

 

I'll have to dig around UDC again....

 

 

A quick look at UDC Pro tells me that max mm3 is between 115-120mm3. That's on a 2002 SO, and HO manual trans federal tune. 

 

 

So the timing hole should be in the %50 fuel region?

 

Can you explain the difference in the 2 timing tables?  Is it using one or the other or both at all times?

11 hours ago, Me78569 said:

So the timing hole should be in the %50 fuel region?

 

Can you explain the difference in the 2 timing tables?  Is it using one or the other or both at all times?

 

It looks like it. What year are you looking at with the UDC table listed above? 2002 shows a much bigger drop. 

 

The difference is labeled as steady state and transient. I understand that to be constant rpm vs increasing/decreasing rpms. I am not sure of the threshold to get into the difference thou.  

I was looking at an 01 I guess,

 

 

Here's the 00 maps to match my truck

trans

 

steady

 

 

That timing "cliff" is right at 25 mm3 so that matches what I see better.  Man I love learning stuff.

Edited September 13, 20177 yr by Me78569

46 minutes ago, Me78569 said:

 

That timing "cliff" is right at 25 mm3 so that matches what I see better.  Man I love learning stuff.

 

Right where it needs to be. This  is where the timing would be too great if it didn't drop off and too much negative torque would develop and reduce power and increase strain inside the cylinder. 

 

 

6 minutes ago, AH64ID said:

 

Right where it needs to be. This  is where the timing would be too great if it didn't drop off and too much negative torque would develop and reduce power and increase strain inside the cylinder. 

 

 

 

So would you keep timing pulled in that area regardless of boost?   

 

Should timing come back up once boost is up?  

 

IE: say that somehow RPM's don't change, but you go from high load no boost to high load high boost.

 

I would think it should since as boost comes up so does charge temp and pressure, resulting in a faster combustion?  

 

 

20 minutes ago, Me78569 said:

 

So would you keep timing pulled in that area regardless of boost?   

 

Should timing come back up once boost is up?  

 

IE: say that somehow RPM's don't change, but you go from high load no boost to high load high boost.

 

I would think it should since as boost comes up so does charge temp and pressure, resulting in a faster combustion?  

 

 

 

 

Boost plays very little into timing adjustments in the CR world, even on stock tunes. Really the boost adjust table is just there for HIGH altitude going from coast to mid fuel and once boost is above 1-2 psi the boost adjust table is 0. 

 

As boost comes up the ignition delay is reduced, due to higher intake volumes and temperatures, so you get the effects of timing advance without advancing the timing.... make sense? So no, I wouldn't adjust timing based on boost unless you're running a HUGE single turbo and can't get it to spool. Which begs the question, does Quad allow for it? It's not an OEM table that exists in UDC Pro. 

 

The timing drops off because there isn't the fuel to support the timing. It works in cruise because the fuel quantity is so low that the ignition delay is longer. As fuel is increased the ignition delay is decreased and timing needs to drop to keep peak cylinder pressure at ~12-15° ATDC. 

Edited September 13, 20177 yr by AH64ID

 

19 minutes ago, AH64ID said:

As boost comes up the ignition delay is reduced, due to higher intake volumes and temperatures, so you get the effects of timing advance without advancing the timing.... make sense? So no, I wouldn't adjust timing based on boost unless you're running a HUGE single turbo and can't get it to spool. Which begs the question, does Quad allow for it? It's not an OEM table that exists in UDC Pro. 

 

The only setting I know of that is close would be "low boost timing reduct" which retards timing on high TPS, low boost moments. Then the fuel load timing which retards timing in low engine loads periods. 

 

From the Tunning page...

Quote

LOW PSI TIMING REDUCT
Default: 2

Variable to allow for the user to set a max amount of timing to pull when TPS is high and boost is low.  Pulling timing will assist in spooling the turbo.

 

 

Quote

MAX LOAD TIMING OFFSET
Default: 3

This is a setting that allows up to 3* of RPM timing to be based on load.  This allows you to tune timing based on a bilinear calculation based on load and rpm.  This setting does not increase your max timing, rather it puts weight on Load. 

IE: if your rpm was 2000 and your max timing for 2000 was set at 19*, your load timing was set at 3* and you are at 50% throttle, then you would get ~50% of load timing ( 1.5*) which would put your current timing at 18.5* ( 19* max - 1.5* = 18.5*).  Where as if you were at 100% throttle then you would get the full 19* of timing at 2000 RPM. To extend the example a 30% load, would give you 30% of 3* = .9* so at 2000 rpm you would have 17.9* of timing if load was at 30%.

3

 

Edited September 13, 20177 yr by Mopar1973Man

I can't imagine that most users need to mess with the low boost timing reduct, but it's hard to say. 

 

The max load timing offset seems odd, so with Quad do you not have a 3 axis map for setting timing?

 

i.e. rpms, load, and timing?

The Quadzilla allows you to set a * of timing pull when TPS goes high and boost is low in an effort to spool the turbo.    This is a seperate map within the Quadzilla being %100 pull of the define timing * at 0psi and 100 throttle.  then as boost comes up or TPS reduces that % drops off pulling less timing.    This pull can be applied at any point the base timing map if boost is low and throttle is high, typically you would only see this low in the map.  you can see 2 data logs one with timing reduction set at 5* and one at 0*

 

 

 

The main timing calc is all based on the desired timing at given rpm interval.  This would be in a perfect world if duration was at %100 and boost was up you would get the given * of timing at that rpm.  Effectively building one axis of the timing map.  So at WOT %100 load you will get no more timing, in *, at each rpm than the below setting.  So this image would give 15* across the entire rpm band.

 

 

The other axis of the map is built on the fly, using variables to pull or push timing based on load.  

 

Light throttle / Load timing allows you to increase timing above the above desired amount IF load is below the user defined limit, typically %30 load.  The amount of timing added increases as load decreases, so you would get the most added timing at 0% load and less added timing as load increases.  As soon as you hit the user defined limited then the Quad stops taking this variable into account and uses fuel load timing to pull timing down from the above equalizer.

 

So "fuel load timing" allows you to define how much timing of the base curve is controlled by load or % of fuel used,  so at less load it will pull more of the timing from the base curve in the equalizer above.  As load increase to %100 then timing increases to the defined amount in hte equalizer above.   the total amount pulled possible would be fuel load timing. 

 

 

the Quadzilla does not use OEM timing at all after coolant temps reach ~140*f

 

Examples

 

RPM Timing

 

1500: 17

2000: 20

2500: 23

3000: 26

Max:  28

 

fuel load:3*

Light Throttle: 2*

light throttle load limit: %30

high throttle reduct: 1*

 

 

Conditions:

1500 rpm

load = %15 

 

Total timing is 17* + ((%100-15%) load x 2*)  = 18.7*

 

Conditions:

1500 rpm

load = %40

 

total timing is 17* - ((%100-%40) x 3*) = 15.2*

 

 

 

 

Lol clear as mud?

 

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, Me78569 said:

 

 

 

 

Lol clear as mud?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Haha, yep. 

 

Seems simple enough to make it more complicated :-)

 

No wonder UDC Pro looks busy.

5 minutes ago, Me78569 said:

Examples

 

RPM Timing

 

1500: 17

2000: 20

2500: 23

3000: 26

Max:  28

 

fuel load:3*

Light Throttle: 2*

light throttle load limit: %30

high throttle reduct: 1*

 

 

Conditions:

1500 rpm

load = %15 

 

Total timing is 17* + ((%100-15%) load x 2*)  = 18.7*

 

Conditions:

1500 rpm

load = %40

 

total timing is 17* - ((%100-%40) x 3*) = 15.2*

 

This makes way more sense to me seeing the math than your long speech above. See the math formula and being able to plug values into the variables and see changes it way easier to understand. 

It is defiantly easier to understand, but not enough variables based on my CR tuning experiences. 

Comes down to a happy medium between user tunablity and complete control. 

 

really to the limits of what a piggy back system can do, and other than UDC pro more control that what we had prior to ~2 years ago haha.

 

I have already seen a number of issues related to old trucks and the sensor inputs.  IE: the data stream from the ECM not having reliable data to tune based on.  

Edited September 13, 20177 yr by Me78569