Notices
ECU Flash

Injector scaling and latecy for different injectors.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 2, 2007 | 07:57 PM
  #241  
bigric09's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (37)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,146
Likes: 2
From: Spec-Ops Motorsports, Fayetteville, NC
did you search thru this thread ? i thought i saw a setup for the 1000's, maybe that was Fic though
Reply
Old Nov 2, 2007 | 10:06 PM
  #242  
MR's Avatar
MR
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
u r right as i also saw FIC 1000cc..

Originally Posted by bigric09
did you search thru this thread ? i thought i saw a setup for the 1000's, maybe that was Fic though
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2007 | 04:13 AM
  #243  
jason4656's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: UK
ok first of all thanks to everyone contributing here, i think you have done alot of the research for me.

i am building a 2.2 with gt35 and need to sort out the injector situation, as alot of research has been done

can someone tell me which injectors would be best for me? i can get any that have been used and seem most stable, maybe 1000cc seem less used, maybe pte 780 are better, but are they big enough?? i can buy any that seems to be the most popular and make my life easier playing with the fuel trims later

i have another questions, when i open my map in ecuflash 1.30 in this pc, the injector battery voltage shows as follows

1200.... 3.312
1800.... 1.680
2400.... 1.032
3000.... 0.720

and so on, doesnt make sense according to the threads, in my other pc running ecuflash 1.32 then it shows as per this thread and stock

the injector scaling also shows as 2cc/min on the 1.30 version where as the 1.32 in other shows as 542cc

any ideas why this is? opening same map using same definitions

thanks
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2007 | 06:37 AM
  #244  
bigric09's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (37)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,146
Likes: 2
From: Spec-Ops Motorsports, Fayetteville, NC
1.32 sucks ? .... the stock setup shouldnt show 542 either, it should say 513 there i believe.... you also shouldnt see 1200, 1800, it should show the values in volts and be a number with a decimal value.

for your setup id go nothing short of 880's, 1000cc's would be good should you enlarge your setup later on as you will never run out of injector (idealy)., just maybe out of fuel pump. 1000 seems less used because they are large and sometimes people have a hard time getting them to idle properly.... Malibu Jack has posted at least 1 set of 1000cc injector scalings in this thread and im sure there are others.... good luck. Im moving to a precision 6167 turbo setup and im only using fic 850's
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2007 | 07:30 AM
  #245  
jason4656's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: UK
yes i noticed his posts so i think i will probably copy that as a base and see where it gets me

i am going to be using a twin walbro, do i need to adjust or change anything else? fpr? or anything within the ecu?

and any ideas on the weird numbers then???

thank you
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2007 | 07:43 AM
  #246  
PVD04's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (23)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,503
Likes: 0
From: Wisconsin
542 is the correct number. USDM cars have the scaling set to 513, the UK cars are set to 542. The issue with the "voltage" numbers is either a scaling or a map definition address problem. First make sure you are using the correct definition file. It seems that the pre-1.30 versions of EcuFlash were more consistent with their accuracy.

-Paul
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2007 | 07:45 AM
  #247  
bigric09's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (37)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,146
Likes: 2
From: Spec-Ops Motorsports, Fayetteville, NC
Originally Posted by PVD04
542 is the correct number. USDM cars have the scaling set to 513, the UK cars are set to 542. The issue with the "voltage" numbers is either a scaling or a map definition address problem. First make sure you are using the correct definition file. It seems that the pre-1.30 versions of EcuFlash were more consistent with their accuracy.

-Paul
thanks... i didnt even look at where he was from
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2007 | 08:24 AM
  #248  
jason4656's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: UK
have a jdm car, am based in thailand

how can i check if i have the correct xml file? it works fine in 1 pc and not in the other? must be the ecuflash rather than the file??

thanks
Reply
Old Nov 14, 2007 | 11:39 PM
  #249  
MR's Avatar
MR
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
So can i use the FIC1000cc latency for the RC1000cc injectors?

Please advise...
Reply
Old Nov 15, 2007 | 05:52 AM
  #250  
bigric09's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (37)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,146
Likes: 2
From: Spec-Ops Motorsports, Fayetteville, NC
you can use that as a base to start from im sure..... but your latencies and scaling will not be dead on by any means, but a ballpark is always nice, just have to get it dialed in
Reply
Old Nov 29, 2007 | 08:51 PM
  #251  
Jorge T's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (18)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,494
Likes: 1
From: Houston, TX
I've started to dial in a set of PTE680 with:
scaling=609
Latencies
3.624
1.992
1.344
0.984
0.744
0.576
0.456


the above setting result in LTFTlo +5L/TFTmed-11

I've adjusted up latencies in the 11-16v range by .024 to:
3.624
1.992
1.344
1.008
0.768
0.600

0.456

LTFT lo is at 0 but LTFTmed hovers -7.5to-9
Should I increase scaling to 622? why are these NIB PTE680s flowing so much fuel? latencies are higher from any 680 settings I have seen posted here.
Cruise volts are 14.1 avg of 16 min, idle 14.2v
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2007 | 04:42 AM
  #252  
DCsleeper's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
From: D.C.
LTFT lo is at 0 but LTFTmed hovers -7.5to-9
Should I increase scaling to 622? why are these NIB PTE680s flowing so much fuel? latencies are higher from any 680 settings I have seen posted here.
Cruise volts are 14.1 avg of 16 min, idle 14.2v
Jorge T, I have been working on what seems to be the same issue with my setup. When I first started tuning the fuel trims mine where +9 low and -9 mid using the AEM calculation table for my FIC 650cc injectors. I was never able to get them to converge (best was +2, -2) by just modifying the latencies and scaling.

I believe that I may have found the issue with my setup and am currently tuning the trims again. I am using a GM 3 port solenoid for boost control and was venting the 3rd port to atmosphere rather than back to the inlet pipe (although I did have the inlet pipe plugged). When I reconnected this vacum line I have seen the low trim converge loser to the mid trim. I am not sure if this is my solution or not yet, but should know in a couple of days. If this doesn't work I may have to start looking at my fuel pressure which is 43 psi at idle rather than the stock value of 37 psi.

Just something else to look at. Possibly you have a small vacum leak.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2007 | 06:17 AM
  #253  
Oracle1's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
You are better of lowering your 14v.


Originally Posted by Jorge T
I've started to dial in a set of PTE680 with:
scaling=609
Latencies
3.624
1.992
1.344
0.984
0.744
0.576
0.456


the above setting result in LTFTlo +5L/TFTmed-11

I've adjusted up latencies in the 11-16v range by .024 to:
3.624
1.992
1.344
1.008
0.768
0.600

0.456

LTFT lo is at 0 but LTFTmed hovers -7.5to-9
Should I increase scaling to 622? why are these NIB PTE680s flowing so much fuel? latencies are higher from any 680 settings I have seen posted here.
Cruise volts are 14.1 avg of 16 min, idle 14.2v
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2007 | 06:20 AM
  #254  
Oracle1's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Any updates?

I have apexi AVCR BCS and the 3rd port is to atmosphere. I have blocked the inlet pipe feed though. I was told the 3rd port was if you had an external wastegate?

Anyone can confirm?

Originally Posted by DCsleeper
I believe that I may have found the issue with my setup and am currently tuning the trims again. I am using a GM 3 port solenoid for boost control and was venting the 3rd port to atmosphere rather than back to the inlet pipe (although I did have the inlet pipe plugged). When I reconnected this vacum line I have seen the low trim converge loser to the mid trim.

Just something else to look at. Possibly you have a small vacum leak.
Reply
Old Nov 30, 2007 | 06:46 AM
  #255  
l2r99gst's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,499
Likes: 4
From: CA
I don't have experience with any of the solenoids that you guys are mentioning, but anything that lets air into the cylinders that isn't measured by the MAF is going to screw up your fuel trims, especially idle. If you have a much larger idle LTFT than cruise and your injector scale looks to be about what you would expect, then that is a good indication that you are getting unmetered air.

That's why I always ask people if they have their breather hose connected, meaning the hose that goes from the valve cover to the turbo intake pipe. If you have a breather filter there, then you are letting unmetered air into the intake manifold, which will screw up your idle fuel trims, and somewhat your cruise fuel trims, depending on how much vacuum you are pulling.


Eric
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:54 AM.