Buschur intake pipe
Jun 2, 2008, 08:09 AM
#34
OK, redlanevo, I took a look at your logs and your idle is pretty well tuned with what you have at your 50Hz mark in your maf scaling table. It's your cruise portions that are still anywhere from 10-16% off or so.
With the limited amount of data that we have, this is what I suggest that you try for your MAF scaling, for the first 12 values:
72
79
92
128
149
135
151
161
171
180
189
206
I left the first three values alone. You already had these corrected by roughly -25%. The 50Hz point is where you are idling at and your LTFT Lo is 0 and your STFT is fluctuatiing above and below 0, which is fine. So, those were left alone.
Then, I looked at your logs and from the limited amount of data, it looks like you need the follow corrections:
100 Hz needs about 10% taken out
125 Hz needs about 16% taken out
150Hz needs about 12% taken out
So, I made those adjustments and then tapered the next four cells down at -10%, -8%, -6%, -4%. The cells from there on shouldn't be necessary to tune since you should be in open loop at that time, unless you are doing a high RPM cruise. So, your WOT tuning will use the open loop fueling tables for tuning. I also used an average value for the 75Hz point in between the correction you had at 50Hz and the correction I made at 100Hz.
Give these settings a shot. Load them in, reset the ECU, then let the car idle and warm up, then go cruise at a set RPM again for a few minutes.
See if anything improves at all in terms of drivability. You can do some logs again to check the LTFT Mid. It should be coming closer to 0 now with the above changes. If stalling and drivability still suffers, we may need to tweak the first couple of cells, but we will have to guess a bit there, since you're idling above that range.
BTW, I changed your logs to LogWorks logs, so that I can easily see them in graphical format. If you have LogWorks, you can view them. I will attach them here.
Eric
With the limited amount of data that we have, this is what I suggest that you try for your MAF scaling, for the first 12 values:
72
79
92
128
149
135
151
161
171
180
189
206
I left the first three values alone. You already had these corrected by roughly -25%. The 50Hz point is where you are idling at and your LTFT Lo is 0 and your STFT is fluctuatiing above and below 0, which is fine. So, those were left alone.
Then, I looked at your logs and from the limited amount of data, it looks like you need the follow corrections:
100 Hz needs about 10% taken out
125 Hz needs about 16% taken out
150Hz needs about 12% taken out
So, I made those adjustments and then tapered the next four cells down at -10%, -8%, -6%, -4%. The cells from there on shouldn't be necessary to tune since you should be in open loop at that time, unless you are doing a high RPM cruise. So, your WOT tuning will use the open loop fueling tables for tuning. I also used an average value for the 75Hz point in between the correction you had at 50Hz and the correction I made at 100Hz.
Give these settings a shot. Load them in, reset the ECU, then let the car idle and warm up, then go cruise at a set RPM again for a few minutes.
See if anything improves at all in terms of drivability. You can do some logs again to check the LTFT Mid. It should be coming closer to 0 now with the above changes. If stalling and drivability still suffers, we may need to tweak the first couple of cells, but we will have to guess a bit there, since you're idling above that range.
BTW, I changed your logs to LogWorks logs, so that I can easily see them in graphical format. If you have LogWorks, you can view them. I will attach them here.
Eric
Last edited by l2r99gst; Jun 2, 2008 at 08:25 AM.
Jun 2, 2008, 10:36 AM
#36
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 888
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here are the logs I just did.
idle1 is a log of the idle after a few minutes of idling. midtrim changed from -13 to -4.
cruise1 is a log of my cruise. midtrim changed from -4 to -5 than to 0.
cruise2 is just a log of the cruise after midtrim changed to 0.
idle2 is the log of my idle after my cruise.
Then I just have 2 logs of when it stumbles. The first one is coming to a stop and the second one is just when I blip the throttle.
idle1 is a log of the idle after a few minutes of idling. midtrim changed from -13 to -4.
cruise1 is a log of my cruise. midtrim changed from -4 to -5 than to 0.
cruise2 is just a log of the cruise after midtrim changed to 0.
idle2 is the log of my idle after my cruise.
Then I just have 2 logs of when it stumbles. The first one is coming to a stop and the second one is just when I blip the throttle.
Last edited by RedLanEVO; Jun 2, 2008 at 10:41 AM.
Jun 2, 2008, 10:46 AM
#37
Is the Buschur hard pipe really going to make power over the stocker with a stock-like turbo? I have one sitting on the shelf. I took it off because of how erratic it made the MAF readings. I can't say that I noticed any difference in power. Just a big improvement in idle stability and the stability of the MAF readings.
Jun 2, 2008, 10:56 AM
#38
Here are the logs I just did.
idle1 is a log of the idle after a few minutes of idling. midtrim changed from -13 to -4.
cruise1 is a log of my cruise. midtrim changed from -4 to -5 than to 0.
cruise2 is just a log of the cruise after midtrim changed to 0.
idle2 is the log of my idle after my cruise.
Then I just have 2 logs of when it stumbles. The first one is coming to a stop and the second one is just when I blip the throttle.
idle1 is a log of the idle after a few minutes of idling. midtrim changed from -13 to -4.
cruise1 is a log of my cruise. midtrim changed from -4 to -5 than to 0.
cruise2 is just a log of the cruise after midtrim changed to 0.
idle2 is the log of my idle after my cruise.
Then I just have 2 logs of when it stumbles. The first one is coming to a stop and the second one is just when I blip the throttle.
Now, let me take a look at the stumble logs to see if we can try to fix that.
Eric
Jun 2, 2008, 11:03 AM
#39
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 888
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the Buschur hard pipe really going to make power over the stocker with a stock-like turbo? I have one sitting on the shelf. I took it off because of how erratic it made the MAF readings. I can't say that I noticed any difference in power. Just a big improvement in idle stability and the stability of the MAF readings.
Even if the trims change with the new turbo, (I don't know if it will) it should be close enough to where I can help myself at correcting it.
Jun 2, 2008, 11:14 AM
#40
l2r, is it really necessary to log for 16 minutes each time you log trims? That was my understanding from another thread. I need to fix my scaling I'm sure, but I don't have time for 16 minute logs nor do I have the space/lack of traffic to do it. I'm not having anywhere near the issues the OP is having. Matter of fact, I'm not really having any issues at all. Just when I put my Buschur pipe on my tune went haywire.
Jun 2, 2008, 11:15 AM
#42
l2r, is it really necessary to log for 16 minutes each time you log trims? That was my understanding from another thread. I need to fix my scaling I'm sure, but I don't have time for 16 minute logs nor do I have the space/lack of traffic to do it. I'm not having anywhere near the issues the OP is having. Matter of fact, I'm not really having any issues at all. Just when I put my Buschur pipe on my tune went haywire.
All you have to do is log your STFT and your LTFT. The error is the addition of those two.
Eric
Jun 2, 2008, 11:40 AM
#45
redlanevo, slightly off topic here, but did you change the 'accel enrichment' table at all in your ROM? And, when you changed from the stock intake pipe to the Burchur pipe, did you change anything in your ROM besides the maf scaling table, like injector scaling, latency or anything?
I looked at your second stumbling log (I opened the first one and took a brief look, but your RPM never stumbled...maybe you posted the wrong log). Anyway, I see exactly what the problem is, but I can't explain why it is doing it at this time.
Your blipping of the throttle is causing the STFT to rapidly increase, 10% on the first blip and 15% on the second blip. It seems as if the stumbling is happening because the STFT is causing too much fuel for the time that the STFT decays back to where it should be. Only when it comes back to where it was does your idle recover. During this whole time period, the Hz values are reading properly. I will post pictures of your log to better explain and show this, but there has to be some function that sets the decay time of the STFT in reponse to something else. That's what the problem is here. We could possibly tweak the maf scaling more, but if something else is controlling the STFT as well (like the accell enrichment table, which mrfred has found to be a baro adjustment to the IPW), then we need to adjust that as well.
Eric
I looked at your second stumbling log (I opened the first one and took a brief look, but your RPM never stumbled...maybe you posted the wrong log). Anyway, I see exactly what the problem is, but I can't explain why it is doing it at this time.
Your blipping of the throttle is causing the STFT to rapidly increase, 10% on the first blip and 15% on the second blip. It seems as if the stumbling is happening because the STFT is causing too much fuel for the time that the STFT decays back to where it should be. Only when it comes back to where it was does your idle recover. During this whole time period, the Hz values are reading properly. I will post pictures of your log to better explain and show this, but there has to be some function that sets the decay time of the STFT in reponse to something else. That's what the problem is here. We could possibly tweak the maf scaling more, but if something else is controlling the STFT as well (like the accell enrichment table, which mrfred has found to be a baro adjustment to the IPW), then we need to adjust that as well.
Eric