Data Logs! Post them here.

[Kodename47]

Only use load limits to lower the limit if it goes too rich. Otherwise you want the limits set above the loads you hit.

It's worth noting that playing with the MAF scale alters the load, so take that into consideration.

The CL/OL timers I mentioned don't appear in that definition. Try my OFT definitios: G Series OFT
The parameters are CL Delay Period, and the 2 counter thresholds. Some just set them all to zero. I have mine set to 10% of the original values.

[ninedice]

Test2

Anyone more experienced want to take a look? I've read the guide here but I'm not sure what logs look okay and which I need to worry about.

I've also got Test1 where my IAM went from 0.79 to 0.91

[cawith]

Originally Posted by Kodename47

Only use load limits to lower the limit if it goes too rich. Otherwise you want the limits set above the loads you hit.

It's worth noting that playing with the MAF scale alters the load, so take that into consideration.

The CL/OL timers I mentioned don't appear in that definition. Try my OFT definitios: G Series OFT
The parameters are CL Delay Period, and the 2 counter thresholds. Some just set them all to zero. I have mine set to 10% of the original values.

Okay, I see the table with your defs. Are your files comparable to Wayno's, I mean do you have all the same tables and some extras?
What exactly does the CL Delay Period do? Is it the amount of milliseconds the ECU will wait after OL conditions are there, before actually going into OL?

[Kodename47]

Originally Posted by cawith

Okay, I see the table with your defs. Are your files comparable to Wayno's, I mean do you have all the same tables and some extras?
What exactly does the CL Delay Period do? Is it the amount of milliseconds the ECU will wait after OL conditions are there, before actually going into OL?

Yeah, all tables in Waynos defs are there.

The delay periods do exactly that, although whether the value is in ms, process cycles or another value I'm not sure. They are designed to hold onto closed loop, one would suggest primarily for emissions and for sensor variation, if your MAF/fueling is pretty spot on then there's really no need. If you set them all to 0 then I beieve you'll be in open loop as soon as the fuel map dictates,

[cawith]

Originally Posted by Kodename47

Yeah, all tables in Waynos defs are there.

The delay periods do exactly that, although whether the value is in ms, process cycles or another value I'm not sure. They are designed to hold onto closed loop, one would suggest primarily for emissions and for sensor variation, if your MAF/fueling is pretty spot on then there's really no need. If you set them all to 0 then I beieve you'll be in open loop as soon as the fuel map dictates,

Ah, okay. So you have set your values to 62.5? Looks like stock is 625ms.

But do you really think that could be a reason for some of the knock at tip in, even though I don't get to OL at all? (not talking about the excessive knock I'm having right now due to load limits)

When the car goes directly to OL when stepping on the accelerator due to the delay table set to 0, wouldn't that mean more knock at tip in, as the STFT is removed from the equation and there's no immediate adjustment for any initial wrong mixture..?

[steve99]

Originally Posted by cawith

Is there anything else than absolute load?

But why are there any load limits at all? Isn't it best, if the load limits aren't reached at any point?

With "more linear" do you mean that the load limit should reach 1.3/1.4 at lower rpm and then remain there for the top range?

I tried to mod the load limits again so that WOT from 2500rpm shouldn't exceed the limit anymore. Do you think the table looks acceptable?


I made another 5th gear pull earlier which has a lot of knock and IAM lowered to 0.98, and a short 4th gear pull from 4000rpm. Car ran lean all the way as you can see. Hope the revised load limits help.

4th gear pull

5th gear pull

yes it looks better with those load limits.


If you scaled your maf with the previous load limits in place you may need to do it again as they may have skewed the results.


once the maf scaling is sorted then


as @Kodename47 said only use the load limits to correct a rich condition if you get it when you go WOT at low rpm causing really high loads.

[steve99]

Originally Posted by ninedice

Test2

Anyone more experienced want to take a look? I've read the guide here but I'm not sure what logs look okay and which I need to worry about.

I've also got Test1 where my IAM went from 0.79 to 0.91

are you on 91 fuel ?


Knock Correction for 91 Octane USA fuels
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showt...47#post2216047

[ninedice]

Originally Posted by steve99

are you on 91 fuel ?


Knock Correction for 91 Octane USA fuels
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showt...47#post2216047

Yes, 91 with no ethanol. I will try that modification in your link if the logs look bad

[cawith]

Originally Posted by steve99

yes it looks better with those load limits.


If you scaled your maf with the previous load limits in place you may need to do it again as they may have skewed the results.


once the maf scaling is sorted then


as @Kodename47 said only use the load limits to correct a rich condition if you get it when you go WOT at low rpm causing really high loads.

Okay, thank you very much for your help!

I think I may need to do it again as soon as I have enough kms on this tune.
Can you confirm that scaling the MAF is not affected by knock as long as IAM stays at 1? Or how would I do it, if under WOT the car knocks enough for IAM to drop?

[steve99]

Originally Posted by cawith

Okay, thank you very much for your help!

I think I may need to do it again as soon as I have enough kms on this tune.
Can you confirm that scaling the MAF is not affected by knock as long as IAM stays at 1? Or how would I do it, if under WOT the car knocks enough for IAM to drop?

should not effect maf scaling as your scaling the maf against your 02 sensor (ie your assuming your 02 sensor is correct.)

[solidONE]

FYI for those in Cali. You may have noticed the gasoline price jump up a good 10~20 cents per gal this past week. This is because we have switched to summer blend gasoline. woo hoo! that is all.

[Wepeel]

Originally Posted by solidONE

Since there is nothing there to absorb and radiate heat next to the O2 sensor when you delete the cat, it should be quite normal that its picking up leass heat at the O2.

I was observing my commanded afr numbers just now, and yup it still jumps around at cruising speeds (NTK O2). With the stock post cat O2 the Commanded AFR values would hold steady under steady throttle and load IIRC. I would order a stock O2, but after looking at the price tag compared to the $50 some odd dollars I paid for the NTK part... nah. lol

Alright, been a while, but with all the weather the car has been parked for a while. I was monitoring O2 sensor voltage today and noticed that it seems to fluctuate between 0.5-0.8 volts during driving, but on throttle lift will hit 0.0. Is that normal?

[DocWalt]

That's fairly normal O2 sensor behavior. I'd expect a little bit bigger swing, like 0.2-0.8v, but I don't have experience with that on these cars.

[Wepeel]

Originally Posted by DocWalt

That's fairly normal O2 sensor behavior. I'd expect a little bit bigger swing, like 0.2-0.8v, but I don't have experience with that on these cars.

Thanks. Is the 0.0 on lift normal?