You got it. 28/255*5 = 0.54 V. Pretty close. There may be some voltage offset due to a difference in ground location between the meth system and the ECU.

130/255*5 = 2.55 V. Is that what the meth system is supposed to be outputting?

 

Yea those values makes sense now. I got a working formula in Evoscan and datalogged during driving and I am now able to log the flow of meth. Its pretty nice to be able to see how much meth if flowing in CC's along with all other logged data.

 

Meant to post that to start more discussion on what we should actually be setting things to, just didn't have the time yet. For the initial I basically just leaned out all of the 14.7 cells

Some things I notice:
-I'll probably lean out some of the slightly higher load cells more also. At ~1lb of boost I'm going ~13.2 with light accelleration. On E85 that could probably get leaned out more.
-Sometimes I will get a hunt where it goes rich and hunts its way back (within a few seconds) to the desired AFR. I was going to ask how the patch works with trims and if, by putting lean cells in cruise, I'm likely to be just pulling a bunch of fuel with LTFT Mid or if there is something smarter going on here. If that is the case I will probably lean out everything under the closed loop portion quite a bit more. I'll need to do some logging on this also when I get a chance.
-It seems the AFR on the wideband "swings" alot more with the patch (by 1 or two LEDs on my UEGO), but I'm not sure if thats just my perception or if it is actually happening. I also notice (but probably prefer) that it seems to swing further toward the rich side of things as it is oscillating, even if the final average AFR is spot-on.



Not sure why paint is compressing that so much, sorry! ...I don't have PS on the tuning computer.

 

I'll write more later, but just wanted to mention that you may find that the car bucks/jerks at bit at 13-14:1 AFR at moderate loads (120-200). At least that's what I found out when my AFRs started going lean (probably due to a clogged fuel filter) this past month. I would be curious to know if you find the same.

 

I've always had a bit of that at really low speed in 1st gear, but not so much in those load areas. I can hear my stock SE BOV flutter a bit and the car is slightly unsettled sometimes in the load areas you talk about, but never enough that I would call it a buck/jerk.

Did you wind up just replacing the pump filter or the secondary filter (on the passenger side) also? I noticed how little time it took for razorlab to clog his and I've been pushing the E85 for about 7k miles now (35k total on the car). I was curious of their condition but hadn't noticed any lean areas yet at WOT (though I'm running 100%+ dc at redline). I figured I would just check next summer if a double pumper winds up in my tank

 

Mr. Fred, how difficult would you patch be to implement into other ROMS? I'd love to add this to customer ROMs of mine to be used for economy tuning as well and to my personal ROM (94170015).

I would be more than willing to do the work just curious to know how about going how to do that.

 

I think it would take more time to explain than it would for me to do it. So many things to do though. I asked tephra if he would add it to his next ROM, but haven't heard back yet.

 

I also would love to have this patch for 94170015. Hopefully tephra can incorporate it into his next revision.

 

How much of a swing do you guys see when cruising at part throttle....Currently I have my map set for 16.4 in the cruise areas (e85) and It goes from 15.4 to 17ish and cycles back and forth. I have logged the stock sensor and I don't remember there being a large swing like that....even at idle it cycles almost a full point back and forth. Maybe this is normal and im just stoopid - but I never noticed it logging the stock sensor.

I have a zeitronix wideband

 

mine is still at 14.7 and the cycle is from 14.5 to 15.1 on average

 

Yea that is what I thought would be normal.....mines seems to be quite excessive. What are the ML / BL settings you are using? doubt if that would have anything to do with it though.

My analog vs. serial are very close when logging.

Could a grounding issue cause it I wonder? I have it grounded where I had my LC-1 grounded and when I used the patch with the ole LC-1 it cycled similar to yours...

 

The older patch achieved target AFR exclusively by tweaking the trims. The new patch works exactly how the stock closed loop system works. It first sets the base fuel pulse width using the AFR value in the fuel map, and then adjusts the trims as needed to reach the target AFR in the fuel map. If your trims were dialed before you switched to this patch, then they should still be dialed. If they drift a little further away from zero, that would indicate that the injector scaling and latency values could use a bit more tweaking (if worthwhile).

I didn't know there was a filter on the passenger side. Is it in the return or the supply? Do you have a PN?

The magnitude of the swings will depend on the speed of the WBO2 electronics and the distance between the exhaust port and the WBO2 sensor. My sensor is in the front side of my cat, and the magnitude of the swings definitely increased.

 

I have mine before the cat as well, its at 12 o clock right where the firewall is (near tc drain plug). It just seems it swings much more than my old lc-1 did using the patch, and the same bung location. Guess it could just be the zietronix unit itself...

 

My guess is that its more the location. The closer you can get it to the exhaust port, the less time delay for an exhaust pulse to reach the sensor.

 

My sensor is after my test pipe, so pretty far back. I think I may try and weld a bung in the middle of the DP right after the oil pan. Just to help with quicker response.

I notice that when I log the AFR the events seem to be delayd by about 2 lines from all other logged items.