Requesting Spark Advance Advice CI vs Al Heads - Third Generation F-Body Message Boards


DIY PROM Do It Yourself PROM chip burning help. No PROM begging. No PROMs for sale. No commercial exchange. Not a referral service.

Requesting Spark Advance Advice CI vs Al Heads

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-04-2018, 11:25 PM   #1
AAG
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Posts: 22
Car: 1985 California Camaro IROCZ28
Engine: TPI'd LM1 350ci with ZZ4 alum heads
Transmission: 700R4 with HD shift kit
Axle/Gears: 3.42:1

Requesting Spark Advance Advice CI vs Al Heads

Greetings, TGO This time, Im requesting spark advance tuning advice from the assembled intelligensia. In my one-owner 85 Camaro IROCZ28, Ive a FT-camd, LM1 350ci block sporting a pair of ZZ4 aluminum heads to which an L98 intake manifold is bolted. The TPI intake and fuel injection are stock to the 85. The 85 ECM is the stock 6870 and the mask is $1F_updated. While the engine builder installed a Hypertech Thermomaster 155332 PROM, theres room for improvement IMO. In pouring over various threads in fora on spark advance cast iron heads vs aluminum heads, Ive compared the SA tables between the 85 Camaro (HLK bin) and the 85 Corvette (HLH bin), both sporting CI heads at the time (delta #s in red signify higher SA in the Corvette) please see the 1st attachment.

In a similar fashion, Ive compared the SA tables between the same FT-camd 85 305 (HLK bin) and a rocker-camd 88 350 (ABTT bin) Corvette please see the 2nd attachment.

In both cases, the SA tables in the HLH and ABTT bins are higher than a CI head-equipped 305. While I get that Al heads can handle more SA over CI heads, it appears that AI heads over a rocker cam can handle even more SA that Al heads over an FT cam does my understanding make sense?

Questions:

a) Since Ive ZZ4 Al heads over an FT cam and I figure the Hypertech PROMs SA table to be not much different than the stock HLK bin, would it be reasonable to import the HLH SA table as a 1st step to increase power in the mid-range?

b) Since Ive a 6870 ECM and the $1F_updated mask does not make available knock counts in the datastream, would I be wasting my time on this exercise?
Attached Thumbnails
-delta-sa-table_85hlk-f   -delta-sa-table_85hlk-f  
AAG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2018, 12:23 AM   #2
Supreme Member
iTrader: (20)
 
Orr89RocZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 23,102
Car: 89 Iroc-z
Engine: Twin Turbo 401
Transmission: TH400
Axle/Gears: 4th gen 12 bolt 3.42


Re: Requesting Spark Advance Advice CI vs Al Heads

Couple things to note here

87+ L98's and Lb9 tpi engines received roller lifter cam types. Not rocker cam. Just wanted to clarify that.

Second, cam type doesnt matter that much. What matters is cam specs and how that relates to your compression ratio, both static and the actual valve closing point compression aka dynamic compression

Next is combustion chamber design.

These are the main things that determine what an engine wants for timing given a specific fuel.

Zz4 heads are basically corvette aluminum L98 heads. These heads for some reason do not seem to have real fast burn chambers. They seem lazy and actually tolerate alot more timing. Gm actually gave them alot more timing than the iron headed f body motors

Also last note, those are main spark tables but they do not include timing addition from power enrichment mode. Fbody and vettes can have different values for pe mode timing so cant directly compare the two main tables until you look at the pe table, and also the coolant temp based timing adders and subtractors

Using the vette based timing table is advised but i would pull a few degrees to start and work it up slowly, datalogging to see how it goes. Its really kinda hard to determine optimal timig for cruise and part throttle. Kinda have to monitor throttle position, intake vacuum, rpm, load variable, and gas mileage to see if its being most efficient

Wot is done on the dyno
Orr89RocZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2018, 09:24 PM   #3
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chasing Electrons
Posts: 16,715
Car: check
Engine: check
Transmission: check


Re: Requesting Spark Advance Advice CI vs Al Heads

Those heads are typically in the area of 28* BTDC once at WOT with RPM and load. They can like more SA in lower gears (less load).

Set up the lower end of the SA table for driveability. Then as Orr mentioned get the WOT areas via a dyno or track.

RBob.
RBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2018, 05:00 AM   #4
AAG
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Posts: 22
Car: 1985 California Camaro IROCZ28
Engine: TPI'd LM1 350ci with ZZ4 alum heads
Transmission: 700R4 with HD shift kit
Axle/Gears: 3.42:1

Re: Requesting Spark Advance Advice CI vs Al Heads

Many thanks, RBob and Orr89RocZ, for your suggestions and I apologize for my tardy reply as I've been wrestling with internet trollers here in the PRC.

Orr89RocZ - Thanks for the correction roller vs rocker. For certain, an inaccurate choice of words on my part.

Upon my return from business travel and no longer annoyed by PRC internet trollers watching every key stroke for seditious language, I've a few follow-on questions.
AAG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2018, 07:09 PM   #5
AAG
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Posts: 22
Car: 1985 California Camaro IROCZ28
Engine: TPI'd LM1 350ci with ZZ4 alum heads
Transmission: 700R4 with HD shift kit
Axle/Gears: 3.42:1

Re: Requesting Spark Advance Advice CI vs Al Heads

Good afternoon and, now that I've safely returned from the PRC, I've two follow-on questions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr89RocZ View Post
Second, cam type doesnt matter that much. What matters is cam specs and how that relates to your compression ratio, both static and the actual valve closing point compression aka dynamic compression.
Orr89RocZ - If useful to this thread, the FT cam specs in my 350 are: Intake 194/0.383" lift, Exhaust 202/0.401" lift, and 112 lobe separation (it's a GM pn 12364051).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orr89RocZ View Post
Using the vette based timing table is advised but i would pull a few degrees to start and work it up slowly, datalogging to see how it goes. Its really kinda hard to determine optimal timig for cruise and part throttle. Kinda have to monitor throttle position, intake vacuum, rpm, load variable, and gas mileage to see if its being most efficient.
You also mentioned that you would "...pull a few degrees to start and work it up slowly, datalogging..." Since I'm extremely inexperienced when it comes to tuning, does "pulling timing out" refer to adding or subtracting, say, 3-5 degrees of SA uniformly across the entire table or only at part throttle and cruise?

Secondly and referring to a generic RPM-LV8 table map like those above, how would I compartmentalize the table for part throttle, cruise, and WOT? Idle's easy, I reckon...
AAG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2018, 07:45 PM   #6
Supreme Member
iTrader: (20)
 
Orr89RocZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 23,102
Car: 89 Iroc-z
Engine: Twin Turbo 401
Transmission: TH400
Axle/Gears: 4th gen 12 bolt 3.42


Re: Requesting Spark Advance Advice CI vs Al Heads

Thats a small cam so you'll have higher cylinder pressure. It will want less timing in general.

Pulling timing out means subtracting some. I would do it across the table for now. Slowly working into wide open throttle

Idle LV8 usually 40-60 depending on cam. Small cam it will be less. High rpm deceleration can be 32-40.

Light part throttle 60-112

Half throttle stuff 120-160. Wot 190 and up depending on how powerful motor is. Stock L98 is usually 190-210 ish. Big hp stuff will near max out at 248-255 or whatever the limit is.
Orr89RocZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 02:38 PM   #7
AAG
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Posts: 22
Car: 1985 California Camaro IROCZ28
Engine: TPI'd LM1 350ci with ZZ4 alum heads
Transmission: 700R4 with HD shift kit
Axle/Gears: 3.42:1

Re: Requesting Spark Advance Advice CI vs Al Heads

Many thanks, Orr89RocZ, for your reply. I'll take yours and RBob's suggestions, what other information I've been able to glean from other similar threads on this forum, and mock up an initial SA table.

Even though I've a '6870 ECM and using a $1F_updated mask, I managed to find all the SA-related scalars and tables from the bin. In addition to the base SA vs RPM vs LV8 table, here are the other bits:

- Scalar: Max Knock Retard Spark (not in WOT) = 17.93*
- Scalar: Min Coolant Temp to Enable Knock Control = 40.25C
- Scalar: Max SA Limit = 41.84*
- Scalar: Coolant Compensation Spark Table Bian = 20*
- Scalar: HW Mode Spark LV8 Disable Threshold = 255 counts
- Scalar: HW Spark Coolant Temp Disable Threshold = 63.5C
- Scalar: HW Mode Spark RPM Disable Threshold = 800 RPM
- Max Knock Retard vs RPM (in WOT)
- PE Spark vs AFR
- Coolant Compensation Spark vs Load (LV8)
- HW Mode SA vs Load (LV8)
- TCC Locked Spark Retard vs RPM vs Load (LV8)
- Knock Retard Attack Rate vs RPM
- Knock Retard Recovery Rate vs RPM
- Time Out Spark vs Coolant Temp
- Spark Time Out Decay Rate vs Coolant Temp
- Spark Time Out Decay Delay vs Coolant Temp
- SA Correction vs MAT

If anyone on this thread has insight on how the SA logic operates based on these scalars and tables, I'd appreciate any tips and suggestions on how to interpret and then implement what I've learned. Flow charts would be wicked useful.
AAG is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Requesting buying advice oceanax13 TBI 3 06-16-2010 03:15 AM
PE spark advance verses Main spark table r_wells1 DIY PROM 8 03-12-2006 12:55 AM
Requesting advice from TBI dudes knoxbonnie DIY PROM 8 07-21-2003 09:05 PM
Spark Advance Vs. Spark Retard ptc92rs DIY PROM 2 10-24-2001 02:14 AM
I know this is requesting "old" news, but..... FrankieRider2 Car Audio 4 09-30-2000 05:40 PM


Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards >

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Advertising
Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory

1982 Camaro '82 || 1983 Camaro '83 || 1984 Camaro '84 || 1985 Camaro '85 || 1986 Camaro '86 || 1987 Camaro '87 || 1988 Camaro '88 || 1989 Camaro '89 || 1990 Camaro '90 || 1991 Camaro '91 || 1992 Camaro '92


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:57 PM.


All content copyright 1997 - 2014 ThirdGen.org. All rights reserved. No part of this website may be reproduced without the expressed, documented, and written consent of ThirdGen.org's Administrators. We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: