12-11-2015, 03:01 PM | #225 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2014
Drives: Silver 2013 BRZ Ltd Auto 45,000 mi
Location: Vancouver, WA.USA
Posts: 965
Thanks: 86
Thanked 450 Times in 277 Posts
Mentioned: 60 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
|
E10 stoich?
A quick search with Google shows predominantly 14.13, rather than 13.9. Is that for WOT?
__________________
If I say yes, will that make you think I understand?
|
12-11-2015, 08:38 PM | #226 |
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)
|
|
12-11-2015, 09:31 PM | #227 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2014
Drives: Silver 2013 BRZ Ltd Auto 45,000 mi
Location: Vancouver, WA.USA
Posts: 965
Thanks: 86
Thanked 450 Times in 277 Posts
Mentioned: 60 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
|
Target AFR 14.15%
Here in WA it's up to 10%. Especially in winter. My favorite station uses ethanol year-round though, so I'm changing my AFR table to 14.15 in the lowest sections, instead of 14.70. I also changed the BRZ port scalar 4.6%, since that was about how far it was off in CL. I know it gets the best mileage when it is just the tiniest bit lean in OL, so 14.15 should be a good target. This is the only table with AFR ratios I could find. It's an Open Loop table, but I think it is referenced for Closed Loop as well. See pic for more info. @thambu19, I only changed the 14.70 cells, or do you think I should re-scale the whole table 3.7% richer
__________________
If I say yes, will that make you think I understand?
|
12-11-2015, 09:38 PM | #228 | |
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:
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to steve99 For This Useful Post: | thambu19 (12-11-2015) |
12-11-2015, 10:04 PM | #229 |
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)
|
In general running stoich or slightly rich will make the engine feel a lot better under load but ofcourse at the cost of Fuel economy
|
12-11-2015, 10:46 PM | #230 |
Senior Member
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)
|
I've also noticed this in OL operation where the "commanded AFR" is actually a bit leaner than the actual requested values on the OL fuel map. This really messes with the MAF scaling tool as it tries to match the MAF scale to the "commanded AFR" and not the actual requested AFR on the fuel table.
__________________
Intent > Content
cowardice is the mother of cruelty. |
12-11-2015, 10:56 PM | #231 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2014
Drives: Silver 2013 BRZ Ltd Auto 45,000 mi
Location: Vancouver, WA.USA
Posts: 965
Thanks: 86
Thanked 450 Times in 277 Posts
Mentioned: 60 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
__________________
If I say yes, will that make you think I understand?
|
|
12-12-2015, 02:40 AM | #232 | |
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:
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to steve99 For This Useful Post: | KoolBRZ (12-12-2015) |
12-12-2015, 06:42 AM | #233 |
Senior Member
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)
|
@KoolBRZ they also don't seem to actually change the AFR you target in closed loop. Anything leaner than the minimum open loop enrichment value in the primary open loop fueling table is ignored and the closed loop fueling tables are referenced, however the ECU does seem to try and target stoich at all times.
__________________
.: Stealth 86 :.
Abbey Motorsport/K47 Tuned Sprintex 210 Supercharger Kodename 47 DJ: Soundcloud / Instagram / Facebook |
12-12-2015, 01:27 PM | #234 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2014
Drives: Silver 2013 BRZ Ltd Auto 45,000 mi
Location: Vancouver, WA.USA
Posts: 965
Thanks: 86
Thanked 450 Times in 277 Posts
Mentioned: 60 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
|
Yeah, I thought maybe I could take the easy route and just change anything 14.7 in the definition to 14.13, but the calculations are more complex than that.
__________________
If I say yes, will that make you think I understand?
|
12-12-2015, 02:01 PM | #235 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2014
Drives: Silver 2013 BRZ Ltd Auto 45,000 mi
Location: Vancouver, WA.USA
Posts: 965
Thanks: 86
Thanked 450 Times in 277 Posts
Mentioned: 60 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
|
OK, this should do it
Here are my re-scaled Open Loop and Closed Loop tables that should bring my AFR down to 14.15. I just added .55 to all the cells in the A and B Compensation tables. I'll load up the tune and try it out this morning before I do my transmission fluid service/refresh, since I need it up to 42 C to measure correctly.
__________________
If I say yes, will that make you think I understand?
Last edited by KoolBRZ; 12-12-2015 at 03:24 PM. Reason: !@#%*& minus sign! |
12-12-2015, 07:10 PM | #236 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2014
Drives: Silver 2013 BRZ Ltd Auto 45,000 mi
Location: Vancouver, WA.USA
Posts: 965
Thanks: 86
Thanked 450 Times in 277 Posts
Mentioned: 60 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
|
OK. Got the comp cells to all be negative values, and took it for a test drive again. Here is a log I took, http://datazap.me/u/koolbrz/1st-e10-...g=0&data=1-4-9 @thambu19, is there any way you could create a table of recommended AFR's by Engine Load and RPM's. I want to try getting my logs closer to stoich with the E10 I'm running now.
__________________
If I say yes, will that make you think I understand?
|
12-13-2015, 04:12 AM | #237 | |
Senior Member
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)
|
Quote:
The real "workaround" for this would be to change your O2 scale, however the ECU will try and target 14.7 so you'll actually make it run leaner
__________________
.: Stealth 86 :.
Abbey Motorsport/K47 Tuned Sprintex 210 Supercharger Kodename 47 DJ: Soundcloud / Instagram / Facebook |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Kodename47 For This Useful Post: | thambu19 (12-13-2015) |
12-13-2015, 05:46 AM | #238 |
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)
|
CL target afr=14.7 + value in closed loop table
there are probably some other compensations as well. as you have put bigger negitive values in them the car is runnung richer in closed loop. if you want to run close to 14.7 then put -0.01 in the cells in both the A and B tables. As these tables are reverse engineered the ecu code often has multiple references to same table hence the need to change 2 identical tables. As @Kodename47 said the ecu logic prevents targeting leaner than 14.7 and putting positive values in does not work, putting zero in appears to disable ltft in that area. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FR-S Gear Ratio Comparison | SpeedR | Engine, Exhaust, Transmission | 36 | 02-25-2016 09:34 AM |
Best pistons to use and Comp ratio? | Fabron757 | Forced Induction | 36 | 02-05-2014 03:21 PM |
Rear End Ratio | White64Goat | Engine, Exhaust, Transmission | 6 | 07-07-2012 11:37 PM |
FR-S to BRZ Ratio | MannyO | New England | 11 | 03-08-2012 02:23 AM |
86,BRZ MT gear ratio | Yobiwan | Engine, Exhaust, Transmission | 1 | 01-26-2012 02:40 AM |