follow ft86club on our blog, twitter or facebook.
FT86CLUB
Ft86Club
Delicious Tuning
Register Garage Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB > Technical Topics > Software Tuning

Software Tuning Discuss all software tuning topics.


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-29-2015, 12:09 AM   #85
solidONE
Senior Member
 
solidONE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Drives: FR-S Whiteout
Location: California
Posts: 2,863
Thanks: 1,808
Thanked 790 Times in 611 Posts
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvincent View Post
Good question. There's probably a few things going on. The one's I can think of off the top of my head are:

1. Inherent inaccuracy in the various sensors. Like everything else, they probably have at least a couple of percent error in their readings.

2. Effects of the various compensation tables.

At a certain point we're probably being over anal about getting a perfect match.
Yeah at some point we have to step back evaluate if we've achieved what we set out to do by making these adjustments and if further adjustments will actually yield improvements or if were just chasing our tails trying to make it "perfect."

I have a feeling the cam timing has more to say about that spike in the afr than the maf scale or load limits, so I'll be looking at that more closely.
__________________
Intent > Content

cowardice is the mother of cruelty.
solidONE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2015, 10:12 PM   #86
thambu19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Drives: Scion FRS
Location: MI
Posts: 229
Thanks: 140
Thanked 78 Times in 61 Posts
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
@Wayno First of all a big thank you for assembling all this information in one place. If DI gives better knock resistance over PFI why did no one adjust the ratio at low speeds to 100% DI? Isn't it at the lower speeds where engine is more knock limited and where the spark efficiency is already bad?
thambu19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2015, 01:16 AM   #87
Wayno
Senior Member
 
Wayno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Drives: Toyota 86 GTS
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,129
Thanks: 453
Thanked 895 Times in 424 Posts
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
MAF scale spreadsheet updated with improved scales. Few other minor changes in the roms attached in the sister thread.
Attached Images
  

Last edited by Wayno; 12-19-2015 at 04:53 AM.
Wayno is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Wayno For This Useful Post:
phrosty (11-02-2015), solidONE (11-02-2015)
Old 12-18-2015, 07:12 PM   #88
jprice130
AutoX Nut
 
Join Date: May 2013
Drives: 2022 BRZ
Location: Harrisburg, NC
Posts: 265
Thanks: 75
Thanked 74 Times in 59 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
I've been experimenting with load limits to fix that pesky 3000 - 3800 RPM range that always wants to go rich. Has anyone run into an issue where it seems like the load limits you set are ignored? For instance, I know that the load limit I set in the tune is 1.00 at 3800 RPMs, but when I review WOT logs after the fact, I see readings around 1.08 - 1.10 at that RPM point and I'm still a full point too rich.

I know you're probably thinking: "Did you flash the right tune?" And I'm certain that I did because I made changes to the KCA table in my tune and can see that change in my logs. I know that the actual load limit values get extrapolated between the RPM points, but when I have it set to 1.00 at 3800 RPMs, shouldn't I be getting much closer to 1.00 than the 1.08 to 1.10 I'm seeing? Anything else I could be missing?
jprice130 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2015, 08:32 PM   #89
steve99
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Drives: FT86
Location: Australia
Posts: 7,998
Thanks: 1,035
Thanked 4,987 Times in 2,981 Posts
Mentioned: 598 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jprice130 View Post
I've been experimenting with load limits to fix that pesky 3000 - 3800 RPM range that always wants to go rich. Has anyone run into an issue where it seems like the load limits you set are ignored? For instance, I know that the load limit I set in the tune is 1.00 at 3800 RPMs, but when I review WOT logs after the fact, I see readings around 1.08 - 1.10 at that RPM point and I'm still a full point too rich.

I know you're probably thinking: "Did you flash the right tune?" And I'm certain that I did because I made changes to the KCA table in my tune and can see that change in my logs. I know that the actual load limit values get extrapolated between the RPM points, but when I have it set to 1.00 at 3800 RPMs, shouldn't I be getting much closer to 1.00 than the 1.08 to 1.10 I'm seeing? Anything else I could be missing?
like most ecu tables the actual value used is interpolated (kind of a smoothed average weighted value) between the previous and next values in the table, its not just stepped down or up to the next value
steve99 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to steve99 For This Useful Post:
jprice130 (12-19-2015)
Old 12-18-2015, 08:47 PM   #90
jprice130
AutoX Nut
 
Join Date: May 2013
Drives: 2022 BRZ
Location: Harrisburg, NC
Posts: 265
Thanks: 75
Thanked 74 Times in 59 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve99 View Post
like most ecu tables the actual value used is interpolated (kind of a smoothed average weighted value) between the previous and next values in the table, its not just stepped down or up to the next value
Thanks Steve. I do understand that the actual load limit values extrapolate/interpolate between the values setup in the tables, but if my load limit table has a specific value of 1.00 at 3800 RPMs (just like one of Wayno's Stg2 UEL tables above), shouldn't I see a value close to that at 3800 RPMs in one of my logs? Instead, my logs are showing a calculated load of almost 1.10 in the 3700 to 3900 RPM range and I'm still very rich.
jprice130 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to jprice130 For This Useful Post:
steve99 (12-19-2015)
Old 12-19-2015, 01:36 AM   #91
Wayno
Senior Member
 
Wayno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Drives: Toyota 86 GTS
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,129
Thanks: 453
Thanked 895 Times in 424 Posts
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jprice130 View Post
Thanks Steve. I do understand that the actual load limit values extrapolate/interpolate between the values setup in the tables, but if my load limit table has a specific value of 1.00 at 3800 RPMs (just like one of Wayno's Stg2 UEL tables above), shouldn't I see a value close to that at 3800 RPMs in one of my logs? Instead, my logs are showing a calculated load of almost 1.10 in the 3700 to 3900 RPM range and I'm still very rich.
You only need to use the load limits to make the AFR curve flat, or at least up to an acceptable angle, then you can move the whole 3.2V cell leaner in the maf scale.
Wayno is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Wayno For This Useful Post:
jprice130 (12-19-2015)
Old 12-19-2015, 01:41 AM   #92
thambu19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Drives: Scion FRS
Location: MI
Posts: 229
Thanks: 140
Thanked 78 Times in 61 Posts
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayno View Post
You only need to use the load limits to make the AFR curve flat, or at least up to an acceptable angle, then you can move the whole 3.2V cell leaner in the maf scale.
Does the 3.2v area have a tendency to go rich in general?

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
thambu19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 04:10 AM   #93
Kodename47
Senior Member
 
Kodename47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Drives: UK GT86
Location: UK
Posts: 3,040
Thanks: 185
Thanked 1,629 Times in 1,112 Posts
Mentioned: 155 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
The logged load will always read the true calculated value and does not cap at the load limits. Simple solution, if you're still rich, calculate by how much and reduce the limit by that amount.
__________________
.: Stealth 86 :.
Abbey Motorsport/K47 Tuned Sprintex 210 Supercharger

Kodename 47 DJ:
Soundcloud / Instagram / Facebook
Kodename47 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Kodename47 For This Useful Post:
jprice130 (12-19-2015)
Old 12-19-2015, 04:27 AM   #94
Wayno
Senior Member
 
Wayno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Drives: Toyota 86 GTS
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,129
Thanks: 453
Thanked 895 Times in 424 Posts
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thambu19 View Post
Does the 3.2v area have a tendency to go rich in general?
Not in general, only in late model cars.

And it's a real bitch because the value of the final LTFT bracket seems to start at 50g/s but is determined at exactly 60g/s.

OTS 98 on AU/EU A01I::
http://www.datazap.me/u/wayne/stg2-u...81-16818-16851

OTS E85 on AU/EU A01I::
http://datazap.me/u/wayne/206-stg2-u...&zoom=893-1084

93 OTS on a US A01D
http://datazap.me/u/jbilsky3/cruise-...zoom=6282-6754

Yes, have seen it on MT too, though not in US market.

Guide will be updated soon with new LL and some new things.
Attached Images
     

Last edited by Wayno; 12-20-2015 at 06:06 AM.
Wayno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 08:33 AM   #95
thambu19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Drives: Scion FRS
Location: MI
Posts: 229
Thanks: 140
Thanked 78 Times in 61 Posts
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
I see so we can either bump up the 3.2V area and create a negative LTFT at that point or raise up the area of MAF (where the engine runs OL) which would be the tail end of it or alternatively do what @KOdemname47 says which is play with load limits at certain rpms?
thambu19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 08:38 AM   #96
thambu19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Drives: Scion FRS
Location: MI
Posts: 229
Thanks: 140
Thanked 78 Times in 61 Posts
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
I dont know how rich and lean folks are seeing out in the field in general. I see this on mine. http://www.datazap.me/u/thambu19/12-...5-16&mark=1230
thambu19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2015, 04:15 PM   #97
jprice130
AutoX Nut
 
Join Date: May 2013
Drives: 2022 BRZ
Location: Harrisburg, NC
Posts: 265
Thanks: 75
Thanked 74 Times in 59 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Thanks for the help gentlemen. Over the course of a few tweaks and reflashes this afternoon, I finally got actual AFR to more closely follow the commanded AFR. I ended up dropping the load limit at 3800 RPMs to 0.93 and also made a few MAF scale adjustments in the 3.2 - 4.30 MAFv range.
jprice130 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2015, 04:08 PM   #98
BRZ_F
Member
 
BRZ_F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Drives: 2013 WRB BRZ
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 53
Thanks: 15
Thanked 18 Times in 12 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Hello all, I'm running Shiv's v2.07 Stg 2 UEL e85 tune and my mods are Gruppe-S UEL and K&N high flow filter. Everything else is stock. Below is my data log. Does it seem to be running rich? It goes down to 11.5 or so. Any tweaks I should do?

I use Propel e85 found in Socal which is pretty consistent year round I've heard and is usually above e80.

Thanks!

http://datazap.me/u/brzf/log-1451202...12&zoom=67-229
BRZ_F is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

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

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Maximum weight in the trunk? djmm Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum 20 08-13-2015 11:40 AM
“Maximum Attack” Scion FR-S stugray Scion FR-S / Toyota 86 GT86 General Forum 13 02-01-2015 08:45 PM
PA: Rays Gram Light 57 Maximum 5x100, 17x8, +43 (Price Reduced!) Needs more cowbell Wheels and Tires 20 02-22-2013 10:03 AM
MAXIMUM you would pay for a TRD Supercharger installed? FRiSson Forced Induction 24 11-04-2012 01:08 AM
MR-S Effect... Dimman CANADA 11 09-06-2011 11:49 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.