You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
AMS1000 operation for dummies
- Thread starter Alky V6
- Start date
Just use the lightest spring you can find for your particular gate - say a 2-3# spring. It would be light enough to give the AMS almost 100% control but still enough to keep the gate closed when needed.
Turbosmarts lightest spring is a 5lb, can I use another brand?
You can use whatever spring that will fit within the confines of your wastegate.Turbosmarts lightest spring is a 5lb, can I use another brand?
With the latest launch tuneup, it's allowing me to ramp up the boost starting at a higher starting point and get it in quicker. The 1-2 shift is taking a lot more power with the harder launches.
I'm changing boost controller settings from;
0.00, 0.01, 2.30, 0.01, 0.30, 2.11
0, 3, 48, 8, 1, 1
20, 26, 27, 30.4, 31, 32
for the next time out to;
0.00, 0.50, 0.75, 0.80, 0.80, 3.20
0, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2
27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 32
A much smoother ramp up of the boost.
Boost will reach max setting just before half track.
32 should net 30-31 psi boost pressure.
The BOV staging setting will be increased 3 psi. This should net a launch boost target of around 15-16 psi.
I'm changing boost controller settings from;
0.00, 0.01, 2.30, 0.01, 0.30, 2.11
0, 3, 48, 8, 1, 1
20, 26, 27, 30.4, 31, 32
for the next time out to;
0.00, 0.50, 0.75, 0.80, 0.80, 3.20
0, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2
27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 32
A much smoother ramp up of the boost.
Boost will reach max setting just before half track.
32 should net 30-31 psi boost pressure.
The BOV staging setting will be increased 3 psi. This should net a launch boost target of around 15-16 psi.
I'm going to set the launch boost level lower using 4 psi less on the control pressures (launch and initial boost controller setting) and have the the boost ramp up through first gear and level out for a short time (.4 sec) for the 1-2 shift. I also need to do a better job of timing when the 1-2 shift is occurring during the control pressure curve. I had the boost beginning to rise too soon into the 1-2 shift, causing some tire slippage through 2nd gear.
That's a very good tip. After Pinks I may look into setting it up that way.with an AMS 1000 you can set it up to use GPS (gear position selection) rather than time based control.
Might be a better way if you can set up 2 micro switches to your shifter.
This way it will always hit at the correct time regardless
The latest controller settings for Pinks.
0.00, 0.05, 1.55, 0.40, 1.45, 2.20
0, 4, 5, 2, 1, 1
22, 26, 25, 27.9, 30.1, 31.7
Tamed down a little to hopefully keep traction problems out of the picture.
Couple of questions:
Does the old fast system have the capabilities to turn on the system like the XFI?
Since the AMS seems like it can not be used in a constant on for street use would changing WG springs to a higher rate spring be used to dial in a desired level of boost for street use? Then use the controller for stip only use with that spring rate?
Trying to fiqure how to run the 1000 on the street and strip with CO2 or NO2.
Does the old fast system have the capabilities to turn on the system like the XFI?
Since the AMS seems like it can not be used in a constant on for street use would changing WG springs to a higher rate spring be used to dial in a desired level of boost for street use? Then use the controller for stip only use with that spring rate?
Trying to fiqure how to run the 1000 on the street and strip with CO2 or NO2.
I don't remember if the FAST Classic system has the capability to switch outputs by user inputs - I don't think it does.
You can use a Hobbs switch to activate the AMS or a WOT micro switch.
The ideal street/strip setup for the AMS is to run the heaviest spring you can stand for street use. In better words, if you know you can live with a 15psi minimum for the street, use a 15# base spring and let the AMS increase it from there.
The other alternative is to use the above method for street use - which would consume less CO2 - and then change to a lighter spring for strip use so you can have a wider range of control.
You can use a Hobbs switch to activate the AMS or a WOT micro switch.
The ideal street/strip setup for the AMS is to run the heaviest spring you can stand for street use. In better words, if you know you can live with a 15psi minimum for the street, use a 15# base spring and let the AMS increase it from there.
The other alternative is to use the above method for street use - which would consume less CO2 - and then change to a lighter spring for strip use so you can have a wider range of control.
The controller settings for the last and best pass of 11/20/10 Pinks All Out ended up being:
0.00, 0.05, 1.45, 0.40, 1.15, 1.80
0, 4, 5, 2, 2, 2
22, 26, 23, 27.9, 29, 29.4
Max boost obtained 5.05 seconds into the run.
Launch setting (wastegate) 19
Aux channel launch setting (BOV) 6. This is down from previous. The launch pad of the track was bad and I needed to tune down the engine at the launch in an attempt to gain traction for the launch. I had this one pass left to get it right. In the two previous runs, the tires blew away at the launch.
The wheelie bars were also raised from my normal 2-4 turn setting to 14 turns. I felt they were unloading the tires too much for the amount of traction that was available at this track.
I had to lower the top end control pressure setting from previous because during the weekend, as I increased fueling to the top end, the boost kept increasing. I lowered the top end control numbers in a feeble attempt to bring the boost back down at the top end. The motor was simply swallowing up the extra fueling and turning it into power and more boost. Nice to have those kinds of problems.
The boost drop timing for the 1-2 shift was perfect with these settings.
For the next time out, the rate for stage 2 will be increased from 4 to 19 in an attempt to get the boost to ramp up quicker just after the hit at the launch. See if I can carry the wheels just a little longer.
0.00, 0.05, 1.45, 0.40, 1.15, 1.80
0, 4, 5, 2, 2, 2
22, 26, 23, 27.9, 29, 29.4
Max boost obtained 5.05 seconds into the run.
Launch setting (wastegate) 19
Aux channel launch setting (BOV) 6. This is down from previous. The launch pad of the track was bad and I needed to tune down the engine at the launch in an attempt to gain traction for the launch. I had this one pass left to get it right. In the two previous runs, the tires blew away at the launch.
The wheelie bars were also raised from my normal 2-4 turn setting to 14 turns. I felt they were unloading the tires too much for the amount of traction that was available at this track.
I had to lower the top end control pressure setting from previous because during the weekend, as I increased fueling to the top end, the boost kept increasing. I lowered the top end control numbers in a feeble attempt to bring the boost back down at the top end. The motor was simply swallowing up the extra fueling and turning it into power and more boost. Nice to have those kinds of problems.
The boost drop timing for the 1-2 shift was perfect with these settings.
For the next time out, the rate for stage 2 will be increased from 4 to 19 in an attempt to get the boost to ramp up quicker just after the hit at the launch. See if I can carry the wheels just a little longer.
The last run of the weekend, which used the above settings, handed me an 8.76 @ 156.8 mph, 1.33 60', on a pro light! With lean surging after the 1000' mark.So what did you run?
The best mph of the weekend was 158.7.
Thanks, Cal.When you get the boost control sorted out, you'll hit 8.6 ET's with that mph! j/k Congratulations
I am presently getting away with 295 kPa MAP at the finish of the 1-2 shift, whereas before I was at 200-220 kPa to maintain traction through the 1-2 shift. Getting the car out of the hole makes a big difference in how much boost the 1-2 shift will handle.
Heck, I'm shooting for 8.5s now.When you get the boost control sorted out, you'll hit 8.6 ET's with that mph! j/k Congratulations
Cal has recently brought up, in another thread, that my settings are not mathematically perfect so I corrected my settings.
Understand that the previous settings still created the EXACT SAME control pressure curve to the wastegate as the mathematically correct settings, but I decided to clean up the math for Cal.
The latest controller settings used at the last Barona test and tune were:
0.00, 0.05, 1.15, 0.40, 1.15, 1.80
0, 19, 19, 2, 1, 2
22, 24.5, 20.5, 24.5, 26, 26.5
The new mathematically correct settings are:
0.00, 0.05, 1.15, 0.40, 1.15, 1.80
0, 19, 19, 2, 1, 2
22, 24.5, 20.5, 22.8, 24.6, 26.5
Keep in mind that either settings will create the exact same control pressure curve, so neither setting is better than the other in terms of creating the desired wastegate control. The important question is, are the settings creating the desired control pressure curve? That can easily be checked by inspecting the graph view of the settings.
As you can see, the difference between the two settings are the stage 4 and 5 target psi settings. I studied this a little because Cal made me curious as to how the target numbers got so far off from being mathematically correct. I realized that a previous quick track change of the ramp settings was responsible.
During an event, I was lowering the boost rise rate after the 1-2 shift and through the 2-3 shift for traction reasons. The reason why the math ended up not correct was due to the fact that I had changed some ramping speeds to slow down how fast the boost built after the 1-2 shift and through the 2-3 shift. The old setting targets may have been mathematically correct with the previous ramp settings, but now with the slower ramp settings, the old targets couldn't be met in time before the next stage timer. Does this mean that I had an inferior control pressure curve? No. The point was to lower the ramp up speed of the boost, and in doing so, lower the control pressure at a particular point in time during the run. Simply lowering the ramp speed accomplished that, without me having to take the time to recalculate to the 'mathematically' correct new psi target for that stage.
In fact, the old target pressure number could just as well be left alone so that the user has a reference of what the past target psi was at a track that did have better traction. All he would need to do is change the ramp speed back to what it was for those stages and the target numbers would again be mathematically correct. No paperwork involved.
If you use enough stages and strategically place the stages at time points that are useful, then you can make simple changes such as just lowering ramp speed to give a quick change to the curve without having to get the pencil and paper out to see if the math is correct or not. Just remember that checking the graph view of the settings is a very popular option and a quicker way of checking your settings than trying to figure the settings out on paper.
Understand that the previous settings still created the EXACT SAME control pressure curve to the wastegate as the mathematically correct settings, but I decided to clean up the math for Cal.
The latest controller settings used at the last Barona test and tune were:
0.00, 0.05, 1.15, 0.40, 1.15, 1.80
0, 19, 19, 2, 1, 2
22, 24.5, 20.5, 24.5, 26, 26.5
The new mathematically correct settings are:
0.00, 0.05, 1.15, 0.40, 1.15, 1.80
0, 19, 19, 2, 1, 2
22, 24.5, 20.5, 22.8, 24.6, 26.5
Keep in mind that either settings will create the exact same control pressure curve, so neither setting is better than the other in terms of creating the desired wastegate control. The important question is, are the settings creating the desired control pressure curve? That can easily be checked by inspecting the graph view of the settings.
As you can see, the difference between the two settings are the stage 4 and 5 target psi settings. I studied this a little because Cal made me curious as to how the target numbers got so far off from being mathematically correct. I realized that a previous quick track change of the ramp settings was responsible.
During an event, I was lowering the boost rise rate after the 1-2 shift and through the 2-3 shift for traction reasons. The reason why the math ended up not correct was due to the fact that I had changed some ramping speeds to slow down how fast the boost built after the 1-2 shift and through the 2-3 shift. The old setting targets may have been mathematically correct with the previous ramp settings, but now with the slower ramp settings, the old targets couldn't be met in time before the next stage timer. Does this mean that I had an inferior control pressure curve? No. The point was to lower the ramp up speed of the boost, and in doing so, lower the control pressure at a particular point in time during the run. Simply lowering the ramp speed accomplished that, without me having to take the time to recalculate to the 'mathematically' correct new psi target for that stage.
In fact, the old target pressure number could just as well be left alone so that the user has a reference of what the past target psi was at a track that did have better traction. All he would need to do is change the ramp speed back to what it was for those stages and the target numbers would again be mathematically correct. No paperwork involved.
If you use enough stages and strategically place the stages at time points that are useful, then you can make simple changes such as just lowering ramp speed to give a quick change to the curve without having to get the pencil and paper out to see if the math is correct or not. Just remember that checking the graph view of the settings is a very popular option and a quicker way of checking your settings than trying to figure the settings out on paper.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 26
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 36
- Views
- 5K