fast951

Thank you ross255, another happy customer!

fast951

Andrew, I have been swamped with emails asking me to compare the Vitesse MAF to yours. Perhaps few questions here will clarify things. Please don't take my questions as something negative, not my intentions.

- Why is it that your MAF cares about the boost you run? Is it because you are using the AFM chip and an external signal massager to make the MAF look like the AFM to the DME?
- If someone installs the 1.2bar setup, but they run less boost wouldn't the car run rich?
- How about if a non-stock turbo is used, or a better flowing head, overboost protection will not be accurate, no?
- If you reprogram the KLR, why do you need the WG shims? (assuming you control boost with the KLR through the CV). We all know that the factory WG ivaries greatly from one unit to the next due the the condition of the spring. Shimming the WG will yield different boost curve on different cars. So if the chip requires a certain boost curve, how would you address the inconsistency in the WG?

Pauerman

Please don't take this the wrong way, I do not mean to be confrontational with my comments.

It is my opinion that if these specific questions were directed to you about your MAF product, you would decline any answer as it may reveal or give insight as to the framwork of your Motronic programming.

If a regular member asked thes questions I think the tone would come off a little differently, but coming from another Sponsor is this really fair?

fast951

Pauerman, I always answer questions. However when people ask me to compare my product to someone else's, I try to gather information. I'm not asking details of how things are programmed. I was just asking info and everything i asked he already discussed to some pointe or the other. If Andrew wishes not to respond, that is fine too.

Now talking about sponsors, I am a sponsor so is Andrew. Since you try to sell things on the side for your side business, and since you are not a sponsor, you should remove the link to your website from your signature. The moderator will be notified as well.

Pauerman

BTW - that's my email address not a link to any website.

If you think that I'm the only user here that links their e-mail through their signature, I suggest you take a closer look Mr. Policeman.

If you are looking to "gather information" cause you're feilding many email inquiries, why not PM Andrew instead of putting him on the spot to essentially defend his product against yours?

fast951

From my experience with Andrew, he's a straight shooter. Asking questions regarding his product is not putting him on the spot. I'm sure he feels the same way.

Why does asking questions bothers you? If you have a problem with me, come on out..

Pauerman

I have no problem with you nor am I trying to pick a fight. I was simply making an observation and asked a fair question - nothing more, nothing less.

Seems to me, like you want to lure me into pissing contest - siting sponser rules and threats of reporting me to the moderators. I've done nothing wrong here John, so back off.

promax_motorsport

Hi John,

No problem answering your questions - I'll deal with them in the order they were asked.

[1] Why is it that your MAF cares about the boost you run? Is it because you are using the AFM chip and an external signal massager to make the MAF look like the AFM to the DME?

The SciVision MAF is not concerned about boost levels. It will be equally happy in a 1.5 bar set-up as it is on a factory 0.75 bar set-up. Boost will need to match the capabilities of the DME fuel map where a car has Manual Boost Control. For a car running Electronic Boost Control (the factory EBC using the KLR and cyling valve) - providing this is monitored using the KLR sensor (standard is 1.0 bar), fuel delivery will scale according to boost. We are introducing a mod to the KLR for those wanting more than 1.0 bar of boost but still under the controll of the factory electronics. The software currently offered with the MAF (optional) is deisgned to work with the maximum limits of the standard KLR.

[2] If someone installs the 1.2bar setup, but they run less boost wouldn't the car run rich?

If the SciVision 1.2 bar set-up is used (not yet released), turning the boost down will result in the fuel being scaled down too as the KLR sensor will see less boost. On an MBC equipped car (where the KLR and cyling valve are not used), it would be too rich at WOT.

[3] How about if a non-stock turbo is used, or a better flowing head, overboost protection will not be accurate, no?

Overboost is driven by knock detection using the factory knock sensors, hence it matters not what turbo or cylinder head is in use. Overboost parameters are changed in the SciVision software for both 1.0 bar and 1.2 bar solutions.

[4] If you reprogram the KLR, why do you need the WG shims? (assuming you control boost with the KLR through the CV). We all know that the factory WG ivaries greatly from one unit to the next due the the condition of the spring. Shimming the WG will yield different boost curve on different cars. So if the chip requires a certain boost curve, how would you address the inconsistency in the WG

The wastegate shims are not needed, they are optional. If the spring rate of the wastegate is poor - the shims may be needed as exhaust gas pressure will overcome the spring resistance and push the wastegate valve open. If the wastegate has a stiffer spring (or some pre-load), the routed air pressure signal can still open it when needed. You are quite correct in that Wastegates do vary - even a weak wastegate will allow high mid-range boost. However, to hold the required maximum boost to the redline requires that wastegate control be determined by the KLR switching the cycling valve to open it (rather than exhaust pressure pushing it open at high rpm).

Hope that answers the questions. Have a good evening all!

Regards,
Andrew
www.promaxmotorsport.com

ivai

Quick question Andrew,

You mention in a couple places that if you use a Manual Boost Control, it will "care" about how much boost you run, but if you use an Electronic Boost Control, that it won't.

Do aftermarket Electronic Boost Controllers fall under the category of "Manual Boost Control" in this case? They don't talk to the KLR anymore than a Manual Boost Controller does, right?

I'm just looking to specify further between when your MAF cares and when it doesn't care about what boost you're running.

promax_motorsport

See my last post, hopefully that will explain a little more also.

It all depends whther you retain the factory electronic boost control set-up. With factory EBC you have knock detection and overboost protection (again induced by knock). Hence, any changes to hardware can be accomodated (to a point).

If using Manual Boost Control (i.e. not using the KLR and cycling valve), the DME is then responsible entirely and the fuel and ignition maps would then need to be programmed to suit the car (of mods are made).

On cars that use MBC, we specify a DME chip to suit the set-up (exmaple, 55# injectors, 75#/10 turbo, 1.3 bar boost, Tial 46mm and modified head will need a different map compared to a car with just K26/8, 1.0 bar and DPW).

We will soon launch SciVision's 1.2 bar software with a 1.5 sensor upgrade for the KLR - this will enable the software to automatically support different combinations of hardware (there will of course still be some limitations).

As ignition advance has such an effect on performance, I prefer to re-map the DME after changes have been made to a car with MBC. For example, if moving to higher boost (assuming the engine and exhaust can handle it), the timing advance will need to be less so in places. Sometimes, reducing boost and increasing advance can increase power.

Let me know if you need any further explanation.

Regards,
Andrew
www.promaxmotorsport.com

fast951

You made your observation and I made mine!

fast951

Andrew, Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions. Some of which still unanswered for me.. Maybe it's just late.. Perhaps when you get a minute you can answer. Again, these are questions that I was asked, but I feel you will answer best.

- Do you use a AFM chip with an external signal massager or do you have a MAF code where the transfer function is inside the code?

- Are you saying the KLR (after measuring boost) will alter the fuel delivery which is a function of the DME?

- According to you, your system detects boost (function of KLR) and will alter the fueling accordingly. If that is the case, what would happen if you have a large turbo, which flows lots of air at 1 bar boost. Yet the K26/6 flows less air at the "SAME" 1bar boost.. Fueling is different for the two. Or are you saying that you assume the turbo is always a K26?

- Would you please elaborate the relatioship between overboost protection and knock. You say that overboost protection is triggered by knock.

Thanks

Buckaroo Banzi

Has anyone seen the write up on the Promax system in the 911 magazine?

From my quick read they dynoed it before and after the install and it only showed a net increase of 2-4 hP?

any comments on the article?

Andial951

well at the risk of coming under fire by a favored Rennlist vendor and his "loyal followers" I will go ahead and say that I dont understand whats going on here. John if people are asking you questions about the Scivision MAF then why not ask these people to forward their questions to Andrew? Why come out in this thread and ask these questions? As far as I can tell Andrew has always been very straight forward and very willing to answer questions so why wouldnt these people just start their own thread or ask these questions direct to Andrew?

This is just my opinion and maybe I am in the minority but it just doesnt look right when one vendor starts asking questions about another vendors products and states he is asking on behalf of others. It just doesnt look good.

John I know your a stand up guy with excellent products but this thread is making you look bad (again just my opinion) and makes it seem to me like you are threatened by ProMax's products and are trying to make his product look inferior to yours......which I just cant see why you would do since your products have such an excellent following and your customer's excellent results have spoken for themslevs.

Pauerman

Great observation! Obviously I'm not the only one who views it this way. Too bad the thread had to take a stupid tangent about Sponsors and moderators to get to this point.