Calibrating my Stg1 tune after 4-1 EL header install

[vtekdis]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

The whp number on virtual dyno is not that high for a catless header. Was the road level?

That's what I was thinking too...

Catless header, stock overpipe, stock front pipe w/ cat and stock midpipe with muffler delete. The road was flat. US 93oct

Here are some previous runs on the same road. Green is the current map.

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by vtekdis

That's what I was thinking too...

Catless header, stock overpipe, stock front pipe w/ cat and stock midpipe with muffler delete. The road was flat. US 93oct

Here are some previous runs on the same road. Green is the current map.

Ok, I found the "issue". You are using the Mustang Dyno option which gives lower numbers. If you select the DynoJet option, then you'll get much higher numbers. You are fine.

[vtekdis]

Originally Posted by nikitopo

Ok, I found the "issue". You are using the Mustang Dyno option which gives lower numbers. If you select the DynoJet option, then you'll get much higher numbers. You are fine.

LOL picked up 20WHP!!!

[Spec C Wannabe]

Originally Posted by vtekdis

Here is a run with my new MAF scale:

https://datazap.me/u/bogusbrz/log-15....60&tmax=66.02

Let me know what you think.

Could you please share how you performed the MAF scale?

I mean you don't have to explain the whole thing, only just let me know which program and where I can get the instruction that I can follow.

This one?
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=64790

[vtekdis]

Originally Posted by Spec C Wannabe

Could you please share how you performed the MAF scale?

I mean you don't have to explain the whole thing, only just let me know which program and where I can get the instruction that I can follow.

This one?
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=64790

Just google brz/frs MAF scaling and you'll find plenty of info. I'm using VGI tool it has all of the functions to perform this task. Do the research first before you start logging. It will save you time and gas.

Sent from my SM-G955U1 using Tapatalk

[freerunner]

Originally Posted by Spec C Wannabe

Could you please share how you performed the MAF scale?

I mean you don't have to explain the whole thing, only just let me know which program and where I can get the instruction that I can follow.

This one?
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=64790

MAF scaling (with crude PI/DI-balancing) in a nutshell:

https://www.ft86club.com/forums/show...99&postcount=5

[vtekdis]

Originally Posted by freerunner

MAF scaling (with crude PI/DI-balancing) in a nutshell:

https://www.ft86club.com/forums/show...99&postcount=5

On the part : "6. Feed results into 86inches' maf shaping tool" do you only use the MAFv range up to 3.2v? Since the OL part of the logging/scaling hasn't been done yet? Is your Tau = 3.2 in this case and the range is smaller? What's your Exp Base?

Correct me if I'm wrong regarding the following inputs:
MAF V and MAF row is for the calculated scale out of VGI tool
Comparison row gets the MAF from the scale used in data logging

The shaping tool is slightly confusing to me based on some of the data I've been trying to feed through it. I've been using the VGI smoothing function to do this part but I would like to understand 86's tool better.

Thanks for your help!

[freerunner]

I think my intention was to get CL values that actually fit the car (performed via VGI tool) for 86inches' spreadsheet.

I put the calibrated values in the MAF_V/MAF rows. Comparison row doesn't get touched by now.

Then (in the spreadsheet) to adjust the modifiers to get maf g/secs up about 3.0V to 'follow' the precalibrated VGI-curve while focussing on 'matching' the 3.0V value. The spreadsheet then does its magic and pre-calibrates the open loop part automatically.
I copy the results into the comparison row. I tweaked the spreadsheet to get % difference between comparison row and result row, when I'm adjusting the modifiers.
Hm maybe I should attach my spreadsheet, since it's probably easier to simply show it than to explain it.

It's important to get the scaling at around 3.0V (for the final fuel trim) right, else the ECU works against the OL part of the scaling.
After that is done, the upper voltage range can be edited with VGI or by hand, no problem.
But in the end, it just an alternative way for using VGItool or adjusting the tables manually. It's not better or worse if the data is right.


If you have any further questions, just ask right away.

[vtekdis]

Originally Posted by freerunner

Then (in the spreadsheet) to adjust the modifiers to get maf g/secs up about 3.0V to 'follow' the precalibrated VGI-curve while focussing on 'matching' the 3.0V value. The spreadsheet then does its magic and pre-calibrates the open loop part automatically.

This is the part I don't quite understand ...

[tomm.brz]

Why you guys, that spend the time to scale the maf, don't disable directly LTFT in open loop so that the maf is always scaled perfectly and you dont have to care about the ltft at 3v?
Fensport in UK tunes all the cars this way and the afr is always matched to the target, it s so much easier

[freerunner]

It's difficult for me to explain, but I'll try:



The trick is to fill the "CAL"-row with numbers to increase or decrease the slope of the new maf curve. It does not need to exactly match the pre-calibrated maf curve - so if there are "hills" and "valleys", you just try to adjust the new curve to go through the middle of it, with the least possible amount of corrections in the CAL-row.
The ECU will compensate with STFT+LTFT in these regions.

No reason to freak out about fuel-trims.

Just the area around 3V should be treated with care, we don't want much interfering from the ECU here, because the final fuel trim throws off the open-loop scale.
edit: I try to get around +/- 0.5% difference to the vgitool-calibrated data here (coloured "red" in the spreadsheet).

[freerunner]

Originally Posted by tomm.brz

Why you guys, that spend the time to scale the maf, don't disable directly LTFT in open loop so that the maf is always scaled perfectly and you dont have to care about the ltft at 3v?
Fensport in UK tunes all the cars this way and the afr is always matched to the target, it s so much easier

I don't do it because I drive my car in the summer and in the winter.


The UK got neither. Only rain. *cough*

[vtekdis]

Based on your spreadsheet and the data you used what's the point of all of this if your calculated MAF points below 3V are exactly the same as the VGI generated scale? Am I missing something?

[tomm.brz]

just disable ltft in open loop and you dont have to care about ltft in 3v area
just scale the maf in open loop and you will always have a perfect afr for a given fuel,without worrying of ltft applied