Brian very good point. The boost really hadnt changed more than 2-3psi as the MBC on this car was maxxed more or less.

 

He's referring to difference in fuel type 104 vs 93 oct. I think what JB was saying is that your fuel may be different enough from ours that your map 'looks' lean but in fact is fine for the fuel you tuned it on.

I'm betting your alright but I appreciate your caution. I would start with the exhaust leak and possibly look for another WB to quantify your results.

 

Mr Evo IX hit it on the head. I was also trying to say that depending on how load is placed on the car it seems that there are different affects to what the AFR is independent of the map setting ... or where it "should" be

 

ok chaps - finally redid the exhaust (6th time) and did a proper free air cal at the same time.

here is the resulting 3rd gear pull, also there doesn't appear to be any fuel smell anymore, so i take it the exhaust isn't leaking yay!



so does that look about right now? will I need to richen up the map if I put a 3" catback on?

 

So your logged AFR went from 10.6 at 6500 to 11.3 or so at 6500 just by fixing the leak?

 

yes, and a proper free air calibration!

 

And this was still on the map that you posted the screenshots of? IF so, dont fret about how the map looks, worry only about the results. If you wanted the map to look "right" you could alter the scaling of your stockers and change the global fueling. That would be alot of work though, so I stand by my original advice and just do what it takes...you'll get it

 

yes - the only reason I asked in the first place was because that map already looked a little lean... i didn't want to lean it out futher..