OFT - Example alternate maps for AT, 98RON, E85, MAF Scales

[Wayno]

UPDATED the map.
- I had to pull some more timing from the low load 14.7 AFR area because a user was getting IAM drop. The timing won't be missed.
- Economy is exactly the same
- WOT timing/power is exactly the same.
- Updated cranking values for 10C and 20C (50F and 68F) columns.

- Copy from the unlettered version "v44".
- Versions labelled "F" i.e. "v44F" have the exact same total timing as normal, but flat 6 deg knock correction advance. These are for analyzing where it's knocking due to the map being lumpy, don't flash these.

[steve99]

Originally Posted by Wayno

UPDATED the map.
- I had to pull some more timing from the low load 14.7 AFR area because a user was getting IAM drop. The timing won't be missed.
- Economy is exactly the same
- WOT timing/power is exactly the same.
- Updated cranking values for 10C and 20C (50F and 68F) columns.

- Copy from the unlettered version "v44".
- Versions labelled "F" i.e. "v44F" have the exact same total timing as normal, but flat 6 deg knock correction advance. These are for analyzing where it's knocking due to the map being lumpy, don't flash these.

I got a bit of that knock when cold so fixed it with coolant temp timing retard for coolant temps below 60c and also adjusted the pi\di ratios for more di arround 2000/3500 rpm, still testing but looks promising

[Wayno]

Originally Posted by steve99

I got a bit of that knock when cold so fixed it with coolant temp timing retard for coolant temps below 60c and also adjusted the pi\di ratios for more di arround 2000/3500 rpm, still testing but looks promising

This guy was on caltex which is probably the cause for most of his knock. I was getting -2 around the 3600rpm/0.7 range. Both areas are in closed loop, so I reduced the minimum I could from those areas, keeping the whole map smooth. Both cars with same headers and stock exhaust, just driven differently. I didn't get any IAM drop, he did.

His log
http://datazap.me/u/notrq/caltex-fle...-14&solo=10-11

My logs (I did 11 last night)
http://datazap.me/u/wayne/

I figured dropping timing from that cruise area is a small price to pay for better guaranteed IAM under load.

I tried to keep as much timing in 0.8 as possible as it's already pretty low, I dropped more from 0.7 so it doesn't ramp up there as aggressively.

Here's the diff from v33-v44.

[steve99]

agree caltex fuel seems worse than shell or bp.
you could try reducing the pi to 25% in that area think its 50% at present but pulling that bit of timing not going to hurt as you say.

[504]

So I've been using the v33 el e85 tune on a stock 86 running eflex and I can confirm that I have been getting the slightest drop in fblk/flck (-0.6--0.75 once every 30 min driving session) under light load 3k rpm and heavy load 7400rpm. V44 should be good for this.

One issue I have been experiencing with v33 is somewhat erratic ltft staying at 6% on idle and hardly dropping from there. It goes up to 8% sometimes but under driving conditions it does drop to between -2-4%. So I take it from previous posts the original oft maf scale is best for stock airbox running a bigger range of ethanol concentrations? Would Steve/waynos o2 sensor scaling have something to do with this also? These are the main changes I see on v33 that could contribute to higher fuel trims

edit: I also tend to run rich under open loop reaching 10.5 AFR, I assume this comes part of universal tunes right?

Thanks in advance

[steve99]

Originally Posted by 504

So I've been using the v33 el e85 tune on a stock 86 running eflex and I can confirm that I have been getting the slightest drop in fblk/flck (-0.6--0.75 once every 30 min driving session) under light load 3k rpm and heavy load 7400rpm. V44 should be good for this.

One issue I have been experiencing with v33 is somewhat erratic ltft staying at 6% on idle and hardly dropping from there. It goes up to 8% sometimes but under driving conditions it does drop to between -2-4%. So I take it from previous posts the original oft maf scale is best for stock airbox running a bigger range of ethanol concentrations? Would Steve/waynos o2 sensor scaling have something to do with this also? These are the main changes I see on v33 that could contribute to higher fuel trims

edit: I also tend to run rich under open loop reaching 10.5 AFR, I assume this comes part of universal tunes right?

Thanks in advance

How are you measuring the 10.5 afr ? stock o2 scaling in oft tujes only goes to 11.25.

yes the ol maf scaling used in the standard oft tune make most cars run quite rich in open loop i gather its a safety thing, but since i only use united e85 i dont need it.

however i tested my tune a couple of weeks ago by running it down to fuel light so about 8 litres of e85 left then put in 12 litres of petrol, ran rich for a bit till fuel trims adjusted, no knock, drove it for 100 km or so no dramas, filled up with e85 again ran a bit lean did get some knock about -2 and iam drop to 0.7, till fuel trims sorted again then no dramas, i have increased the amount of knock correction timing in the knock correction max A table so the iam is verry agressive in countering knock though. running same overall timing though.

[504]

I have been monitoring with the openport 2.0



one instance of fblk/flck drop every drive seems ok compared to waynos logs, I think i may drop base timing B in areas I have been noticing it

my greatest concern right now is ltft, I am thinking of reverting to OFT e85 v23 maf and o2 scalings but am not sure if it will be the solution

For the sake of building the forum knowledge pool, why were intake and exhaust avcs modified in this latest update?

[steve99]

Originally Posted by 504

I have been monitoring with the openport 2.0



one instance of fblk/flck drop every drive seems ok compared to waynos logs, I think i may drop base timing B in areas I have been noticing it

my greatest concern right now is ltft, I am thinking of reverting to OFT e85 v23 maf and o2 scalings but am not sure if it will be the solution

For the sake of building the forum knowledge pool, why were intake and exhaust avcs modified in this latest update?

I dont think wayno adjusted cam timings.

however it looks like he put ztans o2 sensor scaling in his roms so sensor reads richer.

if your actually running that rich in the 10 afr range that can cause knock you dont need to be anywhere near that rich on an NA car with E85 about mid12 is fine, i am running the full timing 33degrees at about 12.5 afr on united e85 without knock 7000 rpm

[Wayno]

You don't need any other maf scale besides the ots one up to 3V, let LTFT do its job. Just change the open loop cells to flatten the curve and run 12.0 up to 7000 rpm.

Did you look at EL cam tables instead of UEL?

The sensor only reads richer and more accurate below 12.

[504]

I haven't yet setup datazap, sorry for any inconvenience



In a half hour log, flkc only drops in one instance as seen from the picture in previous post. Timing is mostly good then



ltft is not really stable. the peaks seen from the graph are from idling and am thinking of running ots v23 maf scale due to this seen below. Im not really sure on o2 sensor scaling aswell as the car is supposedly reading really rich (10.5).



the image here is just for reference comparing ots maf vs the latest one which I am currently running leading to potentially erratic ltft. It also shows the avcs changes wayno made with his UEL tune

[Wayno]

Please compare anything to shiv's ots tunes then report any errors, not compared to my previous examples which may have the errors.

[Wayno]

In screenshot comparing EL to UEL as i said before.

If you want to customise your maf scale, steve has tons of info for that.

v33 and later has ots e85 maf scale instead of petrol scale so it's less instrusive. You should forget the previous releases.

[Trettiosjuan]

Also noticing the high ltft when idle or releasing throttle, I only copied the economy related tables and this started as far as I can tell when I zeroed the CL Fueling Target compensation tables (A+B) which I skipped the first time. Don't fully understand the purpose behind changing these...

[Kodename47]

I've had a quick scour of this, might be worth a read. They mention advancing the intake AVCS might help quite a bit. However having not seen the maps I can't confirm if this is already the case.

http://www.romraider.com/forum/viewt...p?f=15&t=10725