Ya know, if you open it with Microsoft paint, you can just add text,lol.

 

Im running stock boost...

ya but its not as cool

 

NJ - great post.

I have one comment to make. Using your method for injector scaling and then retuning the AFR ... I would strongly recommend running a shot of racegas (something like 50/50 of 9x/100 octane). Personally, anytime I am monkeying with my AFR settings, I add some racegas, just in case I end up with a typo in my map.

l8r)

 

Okay so morning I did another run after I made some change to yesterday's log.
Today I actually took it from 2500 rpm - 7000 rpm and I did go WOT from alsmot 3000 rpm.

Well I noticed that my car is a little rich up to 10.5 aprox. but I am getting there.
I just want to make sure I am on the right track to getting my A/F where it needs to be.

Also I logged 2 counts of knock



BTW when looking at the entries, is it best to use MIN or MAX when it comes to A/F and Timing,
My idea would be MAX for A/F because it will should you the LEANEST entry? and the same for Timing, It should should the MOST advance?

 

13.04 is LEAN, not rich. You will likely make a little more power on pump fuel tuning for 11.5:1 or so. At 11.5 you can run a little more boost and a little more timing before encountering knock. However, I've run 12:1 before and it makes the car sound great ... the engine definitely likes it ... but it's at the expense of power when running 93.

 

yes LEAN you are right.. lol newb mistake.

 

We all make mistakes ... that just could have been a costly one for you.

It seems like you are picking things up well though. Keep on trucking and you will get this stuff. It looks like you are on the same path we've all been down, which is good.

 

Thanks, at least I knew the 13.xx spot needed to be 12.0:1 or lower phew.
well that is what the car ran this morning, this afternoon Ill work on the tune some more an post tomorrow

 

Assdyno's don't work right. Use either a real dyno or rpm slopes to determine MPP for timing. I would rather tailor the ignition advance just before knock, while making the most power with the fuel and boost. Saves gas and sounds better if you ask me.

 

Very good Info! Great write up.

 

When you guys read your logs what method do you use?

MAX / MIN / AVERAGE ... the reason I ask Is because i will get different values from the log and thus different target A/F depending on the numbers i put in into the formula

New A/F number = (Desired A/F X Map A/F) / (Logged A/F)

However after the formula I never get the Desired A/F. If anything i get step closer but not much. meaning if I tryng to go lean, it will go a litle lean but not close to my Desired A/F

help me !

 

This thread is ridiculously rich in valuable content ... subscribed. I need to be reading this for a long time to come.

 

Honestly, I haven't had much luck with tuning via a map tracer. I much prefer the raw log file. The interpolation between cells in the maps can make it hard to tell what exactly is going on based only on the map trace values. this is especially true if you have large jumps between adjacent cells because just a little interpolation from a much higher or lower adjacent cell can skew the values in the map trace. Think about it ... if your load is 249 you will get values in the 240 cell even though the ECU is interpolating nearly 50/50 with the 260 cell.

However, if you prefer to use the map trace method, check both the max and average values for the cells. If the average is close to target but the max is pretty far off, then look to an adjacent cell for the cause (higher map value). If the average is low and the high is on target, then check an adjacent cell for the low value.

I also say to either ditch the formula, or only use it for fuel values that fall exactly on a defined map cell (i.e. 240 load and 4000 RPM). It will not yield consistent results if you use interpolated values.

 

so basically if i need to lean it out just start adding to the value at 0.5 or 1.0 increment more or less?

does 0.1 make a noticeable difference in a/f ? 0.5 = 50% ..... and I know the 1.0 is a pretty noticeable difference right?

Basically this is what my map looks like after a little "formula" tunning, it makes no sense. It shows lean values, then rich values... however the logs show consisten smooth transitions... (i guess that i all the matters? )

Well this is another SS: Maybe I should just tune the TRUE CELLS as mentioned and if they dont fall or fall in between I should ignore them or type something in which will bring me close



Link to high-res

 

You've really go to think about the logic behind all of the maps and numbers. For instance ...

Your AFR target is 11.5:1 and at 4750 RPM and 250 load the actual AFR is 11.2:1. Obviously, you have to increase a map value to get the desired AFR.

In this specific situation (assuming you haven't re-scaled the map), the 4500 and 5000 RPM cells and the 240 and 260 load cells all have the exact same weight on that AFR value. Maybe they are all low? Maybe 3 are too high and one really low? You can only tell by evaluating the AFR curve leading up to and after this point and by comparing the map values at those locations.

BTW, I seriously can't see any detail in that SS ... =P