I would agree. STICKY!

 

My 2 cents added...

0 degree split would leave no moisture in the motor after reving to 8500-9000 rpm (risky). But 0 degree split is good for the bottom end idle as to not fouling the plugs.

The car will definately pull alot harder, however, the AFR`s have to be on the money. i usually run lean down stairs (AFR`s 13.0-14.0) until about 5500-6000 rpm then i would fatten it up and bring in the split of 8, 8, 10, 10, 10, degrees up to 9000rpm in 500 rpm incroments.

Very clean transition, make sure that you`re using 103+ octane.


Andre

 

THIS IS SO TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!! take it from me been there done that, I'm stayin w/ haltech, but I'm gonna run w/ the hall effect sensor since this would fix the timing issues, and will be running the e-11 so i can run FULL SEQ (ign) (fuel) as for the split 10 accross the board w/ the e6k that was good for 540 whp.

 

I'm running a MoTeC M8 and my roomate is as well. There are 4 ignition outputs. We are both running 20B's so thats 6 plugs. Now, if we ran output 1,2,3 for trailing coils (rotors 1,2,3) and then ran the leading on channel 4 as wasted spark, theoretically we should be able to run split timing based on that correct? if not, then we would just run all leading and trailing the same. If not, we would have to run no split and be dead on for AFR's. Any input from anyone?

thanks

neil

 

Isn't that supposed to be the other way around ? , I mean , in vacuum and low load , a wider split will give more stable idle , better emissions and lower egt and coolant temps ? . I have mine set up wit the split at 12 deg in vacuum and it gradually drops down to 5 deg by 10 psi of boost . Also anyone know how asccurate Autronics timing is ?, would it be safe to run zero split on an SM2 ?

 

Ttt

 

The smc should run zero split with no problem. I would put it on a scope and make sure your trigger signals arn't noisy though...

 

This is refering to running no split on an E6K. I recently emailed Haltech in AU the question: "Is it possible for the trailing to fire before the leading?"

and Matt Wright replied: "Because the trailing timing calculation is based on the leading the trailing will never fire before the trailing."

It seems like firing these as close to one another as possible (small or zero split) would be good for reducing detonation.

Here's my logic: As soon as the first flame front ignites the pressures and temperatures begin to rise dramaticly, causing the combustion chamber to become more and more octane dependant to not spontaneously combust(detonation). This is especaily true for the long (increases time to burn), high quench-to-volume (decreases velocity, therefore increases time to burn) chamber of the rotary. By firing the plugs together(or very close). The total time for the mixture to be in "detonation-causing" conditions is reduced (by having two flame fronts traveling to cover the same area).

any input?

Justin

 

the e8 has sequential spark mode.

how about you run l1/t1 on the l1 signal..same with the l2.

that should fire leading and trailing at the same time without any possibility of trailing firing first.

 

not many people realize that. And they will say x brand can do and y brand can't.
In reality if you wire that way any computer can do it, But people rather say Haltech can't and my computer can...

 

that's what i though. i might try that, but i dunno how it would effect fuel economy in the vacuum areas.

 

So, can someone come up with a table?
0-1000rpm ;15degs split
2000-5000rpm ;8 degs split
5000-9000rpm ;10 degs split.....

now apperently this is wrong... in fact i did detonate and blow my engine!

How about someone with the info posts a table with STOCK split, rpm vs boost in comparison to a tuned map.

I know some say this is a tuning secret, but i figure from what i saw recently that the stock fd run 0 split on boost. racing beat recommend 0 split on boost.... so.....

Thanks alot to you guys for such an informative topic. I agree make it a sticky since there is valuable information on this thread.

I run a Wolf 3d, and i shouldnt have any problems to fire at 0 split since the split is also calculated on the lead spark...

Please folks, do consider typing a quick table to compare and contrast...

Thanks and Regards

George

 

I believe the haltech waste sparks the leading.

I thought of a variation of what you have said here. Just disconnect the leading coil (are there any negitive consequnces to doing this?), set the split to "0" and run both l1/t1 off the t1 coil and the l2/t2 off the t2 signal.

Has anyone tried this?

Justin

 

Who told you this was wrong. Seems pretty decent to me.

I run 15 degree split at idle, 5 degree split in the cruising vacuum areas (2500 to 3500 rpm), and from 5-15 degree split between 0psi and 15psi under boost.

 

... So whats the story with the no split.....

Hey guys...... come up with your tables and your split setup....

 

12 degree negative split at the highest vacuum point linearised to 0 @2-3", then ramps up to 4* @2psi, then basically adds one degree more split for every 2 psi.

 

What do you mean by negative split? You can only have 12 deg of split AFTER the leading has fired....

 

In theory, 0 split makes the most power, at least in non-turbo applications. But certainly, you want to add split as you increase boost. From what I gather, running little or no split under high boost would be pretty dangerous.

Some EMS allow negative split. T can fire before the L!!
Apparently Mazda runs negative split on the RX-8 in certain areas of their map, for better fuel economy/emissions(?). People on the forum here have been experimenting with it. There is a thread about it somewhere.

 

unless you know how to make it not dangerous

 

nope, my trailing fire first under vacuum

 

How much of a neg split do you run? And why?

 

What's the secret?

 

possible this thread stoped here???

Come on guys..... more input