Data Logs! Post them here.

[steve99]

Originally Posted by username404

Stock OP+FP replaced with Nameless Catless Resonated DP and New Log after the reset.

http://datazap.me/u/username404/nov-...log=0&data=1-9

Better?

Yeah look fairly normal for un maf scaled tune. All the LTFT are positive and the spread is not rearly that great.

Usually when you have a decient leak you will get trims 15% plus.

Id look at scaling maf now, especially if you have smoke tested it and no leaks.

[username404]

Originally Posted by steve99

Yeah look fairly normal for un maf scaled tune. All the LTFT are positive and the spread is not rearly that great.

Usually when you have a decient leak you will get trims 15% plus.

Id look at scaling maf now, especially if you have smoke tested it and no leaks.

Today I drove the car over 100 miles and logged new files.

http://datazap.me/u/username404/nov-02-drive-0102

[Wayno]

Originally Posted by username404

Today I drove the car over 100 miles and logged new files.

http://datazap.me/u/username404/nov-02-drive-0102

AFR looks okay, maybe couple points too lean as you're getting -3 FLKC even though IAT is a cool 70F/20C.

Commanded AFR @ 6400rpm/1.3g/rev should be between 11.7 and 12, but it's 12.25. I've not seen the ecu adjust it so high before.

Keep the maf scale as is and chuck in the reduced timing seen here and it will run smoother. Definitely don't add any timing like the BPB "how to" instructs you to do. Run DI to 7000 instead of 5000 also.

[username404]

Originally Posted by Wayno

AFR looks okay, maybe couple points too lean as you're getting -3 FLKC even though IAT is a cool 70F/20C.

Commanded AFR @ 6400rpm/1.3g/rev should be between 11.7 and 12, but it's 12.25. I've not seen the ecu adjust it so high before.

Keep the maf scale as is and chuck in the reduced timing seen here and it will run smoother. Definitely don't add any timing like the BPB "how to" instructs you to do.

Thank you. I'll update the table as you have provided and do a test run again tomorrow.

I'm just so glad that leak issued is resolved.

Thanks again.

[solidONE]

I think my afr's are going stay like this as long as my cam tables don't change. I can either move on to try to "correct" it by other means, or just say "fuck it". On to trying to extract some more power via cam timing and ignition advance.

4th gear pull for better resolution in the log:
http://datazap.me/u/solidone/plm3d-p...27-442-451-467

corresponding load limits:

[Wayno]

Originally Posted by solidONE

I think my afr's are going stay like this as long as my cam tables don't change. I can either move on to try to "correct" it by other means, or just say "fuck it". On to trying to extract some more power via cam timing and ignition advance.

4th gear pull for better resolution in the log:
http://datazap.me/u/solidone/plm3d-p...27-442-451-467

corresponding load limits:

That's fugly. As soon as you use a different gear, it will be even more screwy.

The first one you showed me when you plugged in the EL limits looked much better. Better flat sections of being lean or rich than sharp spikes and rubber banding. Something like
2400 = 1.07
2600 = 1.30
3600 = 0.95
4400 = 1.50

[solidONE]

Originally Posted by Wayno

That's fugly. As soon as you use a different gear, it will be even more screwy.

The first one you showed me when you plugged in the EL limits looked much better. Better flat sections of being lean or rich than sharp spikes and rubber banding. Something like
2400 = 1.07
3600 = 1.30
3600 = 0.95
4400 = 1.50

Actually I have it logged in both 3rd and 4th gears and it looks pretty much the same while using my previous revisions. I think the reason why the one I showed you before looked better was because I started the pull from well above 2000rpms. On these I'm going WOT at around 1500rpms. I'll give it a shot, but I doubt it will look much different. I also noticed the 3rd gear pulls look smoother than 4th gear, but they're roughly the same.

3rd gear:
http://datazap.me/u/solidone/plm3c-p...zoom=3876-4085

4th gear:
http://datazap.me/u/solidone/plm3c-p...zoom=4588-4923

[Kodename47]

If you're not hitting load limits and it's going lean, just add fuel into the fuel map.

[solidONE]

Originally Posted by Kodename47

If you're not hitting load limits and it's going lean, just add fuel into the fuel map.

I guess that's what I'll have to do. To richen up the target afr to, say, 10.7 just to hit 12.7 feels too much of a "hack" to me. lol Then again, hacking the factory ECU is what we've been doing all along, so maybe I shouldn't feel so bad about it.

[steve99]

Originally Posted by solidONE

I guess that's what I'll have to do. To richen up the target afr to, say, 10.7 just to hit 12.7 feels too much of a "hack" to me. lol Then again, hacking the factory ECU is what we've been doing all along, so maybe I shouldn't feel so bad about it.

I just run with linear rising load limits, 0.9,0.9,1,1,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4, my own maf scale. This is E85 that im running lean as possible at low rpm for better economy.


http://datazap.me/u/steve99/uel-v5-e...zoom=1264-1554

[solidONE]

Originally Posted by steve99

I just run with linear rising load limits, 0.9,0.9,1,1,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4, my own maf scale. This is E85 that im running lean as possible at low rpm for better economy.


http://datazap.me/u/steve99/uel-v5-e...zoom=1264-1554

That's a good idea. Keep the simple tables, such as these load limit tables, more sanitary. Then, do your fine tuning on the larger tables, such as OL fuel tables, that have more resolution for more precise adjustments to play with.

I think I've spent enough time playing with the load limits and have a passable grasp of how it works. Looking at the engine loads being hit vs my hot mess of a load limit table it's safe to say with certainty that further adjustments to this table will not yield the results I'm shooting for. Appreciate all the help and input guys!

[steve99]

Originally Posted by solidONE

That's a good idea. Keep the simple tables, such as these load limit tables, more sanitary. Then, do your fine tuning on the larger tables, such as OL fuel tables, that have more resolution for more precise adjustments to play with.

I think I've spent enough time playing with the load limits and have a passable grasp of how it works. Looking at the engine loads being hit vs my hot mess of a load limit table it's safe to say with certainty that further adjustments to this table will not yield the results I'm shooting for. Appreciate all the help and input guys!

My car is manual though and some maf sensors seem to give more problems than others , maybe their was a revision/change in sensors at some point

[Kodename47]

Originally Posted by solidONE

I guess that's what I'll have to do. To richen up the target afr to, say, 10.7 just to hit 12.7 feels too much of a "hack" to me.

Why is it a hack? The open loop fueling table isn't actually for target AFR values, it's essentially a fuel enrichment table converted to AFR values to make it easier to read/use. At the end of the day, so long as the AFRs are ideal then it doesn't matter what's in the OL Fuel table. I'd rather have the fueling right with as close to OEM MAF scale as possible, obviously with minimal LTFT, what's in the actual OL fuel table makes no difference to me.

Here's something for those playing with load limits:
Load Limit Calculator

If your load limits are causing a rich area, it should calculate the correct load and if you're lean from the limit being too low then it will also sort that out. You can change the RPM and it will adjust it as necessary and you have plots of load and AFRs vs RPM. It also proves where a lean spot is caused by something else.

@solidONE I used your data to make that, all the lean areas occur when the load also spikes (you can see it in the graphs) which is likely due to increased VE and therefore a genuine lean situation. Adding fuel is the only way to get around this, how you do it is up to you (MAF vs OL Fueling).

[Wayno]

Originally Posted by Kodename47

Why is it a hack? The open loop fueling table isn't actually for target AFR values, it's essentially a fuel enrichment table converted to AFR values to make it easier to read/use. At the end of the day, so long as the AFRs are ideal then it doesn't matter what's in the OL Fuel table. I'd rather have the fueling right with as close to OEM MAF scale as possible, obviously with minimal LTFT, what's in the actual OL fuel table makes no difference to me.

Here's something for those playing with load limits:
Load Limit Calculator

If your load limits are causing a rich area, it should calculate the correct load and if you're lean from the limit being too low then it will also sort that out. You can change the RPM and it will adjust it as necessary and you have plots of load and AFRs vs RPM. It also proves where a lean spot is caused by something else.

@solidONE I used your data to make that, all the lean areas occur when the load also spikes (you can see it in the graphs) which is likely due to increased VE and therefore a genuine lean situation. Adding fuel is the only way to get around this, how you do it is up to you (MAF vs OL Fueling).

His AFR's were fine before he started turning the table into an incomprehensible nightmare. The simplest solution is always the best.