CSG Mike's 2017 Baseline dynos

[CSG Mike]

I need more coffee.

[himbo]

Do you think the current 13-16 tuners (Ecutek, OFT, etc) will work on the 17's?

[Kodename47]

Originally Posted by himbo

Do you think the current 13-16 tuners (Ecutek, OFT, etc) will work on the 17's?

ECUtek already has some MY17 ROMs available

[steve99]

Originally Posted by himbo

Do you think the current 13-16 tuners (Ecutek, OFT, etc) will work on the 17's?

ecu hardware appears same, just the proggram different, so all current tuning devices should be capable of reading or writing a rom to the 17 models

[steve99]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

It's difficult to make a blanket statement without being able to actually tune the car, but at 13:1, there was zero knocking on ACN91.

Is there more power that can be had running slightly richer? Possibly; we won't know until I can tune the car.

My Honda runs between 13-13.6:1 without knock, and makes optimum power at that AFR. The F22C can already hit MBT, so after optimizing ignition timing and then slightly pulling it back to reduce in-cylinder pressures, AFR was adjusted for maximum output, resulting in a range of 13-13.6 throughout the rev range in open loop.

I suspect the 17 tune wasn't as rushed as the original 13's.

Either their is something wrong with the car , unlikely, or your tailpipe sensor is off for some reason. The new roms/tune runs richer than the old ones see below.

It the same in Ecutek as well :-)


yes their is now two primary OL fuel maps

Also multiple timing maps
and a bunch of other logic changes

[Kodename47]

The values in the tables might not necessarily be target values..... It could be calibrated to run leaner despite it looking like it "targets" 10s.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by himbo

Do you think the current 13-16 tuners (Ecutek, OFT, etc) will work on the 17's?

@DeliciousTuning and I have already dumped and sent roms to Ecutek; they're available with the latest update that just came out.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by Kodename47

The values in the tables might not necessarily be target values..... It could be calibrated to run leaner despite it looking like it "targets" 10s.

Correct

[himbo]

Originally Posted by steve99

ecu hardware appears same, just the proggram different, so all current tuning devices should be capable of reading or writing a rom to the 17 models

Nice, it'd be cool to keep my oft and upgrade the car at a later date

[steve99]

Originally Posted by Kodename47

The values in the tables might not necessarily be target values..... It could be calibrated to run leaner despite it looking like it "targets" 10s.

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Correct

be pretty amazed if its running afr greater than 13 at high prm/load WOT with a target afr of 10. Yeah it might be off a few percent but 10.x to 13.x is like 30% off target.

its just got a new intake and exhaust (which heaps of people changed out anyway), the basic engine is still same, tuners on the previous model never targeted/ran AFR of 13 at wot high rpm on petrol, seems extremly strange. If their was power available and no knock at that afr then why did tuners not use that afr on previous tunes ?

so what your saying is that the 2017 can run 91 fuel at 13.2 or so afr at wot 5000-7400 with no knock ?

[steve99]

Originally Posted by himbo

Nice, it'd be cool to keep my oft and upgrade the car at a later date

guys already using oft on 2017 cars :-)

[Kodename47]

Originally Posted by steve99

be pretty amazed if its running afr greater than 13 at high prm/load with a target afr of 10. Yeah it might be off a few percent but 10.x to 13.x is like 30% off target.

its just got a new intake and exhaust (which heaps of people changed out anyway), the basic engine is still same, tuners on the previous model never targeted/ran AFR of 13 at wot high rpm on petrol, seems extremly strange. If their was power available and no knock at that afr then why did tuners not use that afr on previous tunes ?

Get the theory that the open loop fueling tables are targets, it's not the case. There are multiple ways to hit fueling targets, that table is in essence just a fuel multiplier below stoich. That's what LTFT is there for, to achieve the base stoich fueling. Would then need to compare MAF hardware, airflow over the sensor, scaling, fuel mulipliers etc

FWIW it seems comon practice for race engines to run 13s, so I was recently told. It wouldn't be that far fetched that they've managed a way to make it run well much leaner.

[steve99]

Originally Posted by Kodename47

Get the theory that the open loop fueling tables are targets, it's not the case. There are multiple ways to hit fueling targets, that table is in essence just a fuel multiplier below stoich. That's what LTFT is there for, to achieve the base stoich fueling. Would then need to compare MAF hardware, airflow over the sensor, scaling, fuel mulipliers etc

FWIW it seems comon practice for race engines to run 13s, so I was recently told. It wouldn't be that far fetched that they've managed a way to make it run well much leaner.

race engines be running much better fuel ?

yes i nderstand it only a target and dependant on maf scal)ng lrft etc but to be 30% of target seems odd the older stock tunes followed targets pretty well

[johan]

That AFR is not 13... that's 13 measured after two catalytic converters. Not even remotely accurate. Reality is much richer... and it should be.