Notices
ECU Flash

2byte airflow limit?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 18, 2008 | 05:12 PM
  #16  
RazorLab's Avatar
Thread Starter
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 14,092
Likes: 1,090
From: Mid-Hudson, NY
Originally Posted by C6C6CH3vo
It should be "At what Hz does the aluminum honeycomb collaps on itself?"

It would be nice to see the full log of the 500+ car to view rpm vs time
He epoxyed the honeycomb. Which actually brought the 2byte load down about 40-50points which gave everything a little more headroom. I'm sure we would have maxed out the 2byte with E85 without that little "mod".
Reply
Old Dec 18, 2008 | 10:47 PM
  #17  
KevOVIII's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco, CA
Yeah, were were surprised load actually dropped with the MAF epoxy mod. Mellon's load increased instead.

Here's another screen shot with more info.
Attached Thumbnails 2byte airflow limit?-load_airflow1.gif  
Reply
Old Dec 19, 2008 | 08:30 AM
  #18  
Mellon Racing's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
why would it decrease? that doesn't make any sense...I did mine wrong in hind sight...I put the epoxy around the outer edge on the outside which obstructed some of the honeycomb. I suspect that also forced more air through the center section that's metering the airflow and thus the load increased dramatically. I was pegging 380kpa when I shifted to each gear and it didn't come off of that until ~ 8000rpm +. I should have pulled it out and put a bead around the outside so that blockage wouldn't happen. I've since pulled the honeycomb out altogether...I anticipate going up on the boost with race gas (only run 93 thus far) and I don't want to take any chances. Currently I'm seeing ~ 370ishkpa IIRC (car isn't here right now)
Reply
Old Dec 19, 2008 | 11:20 AM
  #19  
RazorLab's Avatar
Thread Starter
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 14,092
Likes: 1,090
From: Mid-Hudson, NY
It doesn't make any sense but it happened. I'll take the free headroom.
Reply
Old Dec 19, 2008 | 04:03 PM
  #20  
KevOVIII's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco, CA
Not sure why it decreased, and yes it doesn't make sense. I epoxied all the edges that touched the MAF screen (purple, yellow, red, and lines in picture).





Here's a screen shot of the "before" and "after" MAF epoxy.
Left side = before epoxy, 91 octane
Right side = after epoxy, 91 octane (getting ready for 50/50 meth in the same dyno session)
No changes to boost, timing, or mods

Attached Thumbnails 2byte airflow limit?-load_difference.gif  

Last edited by KevOVIII; Dec 19, 2008 at 10:21 PM. Reason: Took out green as that part was for the MAF screen/honeycomb cover
Reply
Old Dec 19, 2008 | 08:23 PM
  #21  
Ted B's Avatar
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Photogenic
Photoriffic
Liked
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,334
Likes: 63
From: Birmingham, AL
I'm curious as to two things:

- How the JDM MAP sensor (a 3-bar absolute item) able to register 33+psi.

- The injector scaling used for the FIC 1450s.
Reply
Old Dec 19, 2008 | 08:26 PM
  #22  
RazorLab's Avatar
Thread Starter
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 14,092
Likes: 1,090
From: Mid-Hudson, NY
Originally Posted by Ted B
I'm curious as to two things:

- How the JDM MAP sensor (a 3-bar absolute item) able to register 33+psi.

- The injector scaling used for the FIC 1450s.
34 is about max depending on atmospheric for the JDM map sensor. (yes I know it doesn't make sense math wise but i've seen many flatline around there at sea level) So basically it's at the end of it's resolution.

1450's i'd have to look at my laptop, KevOVIII might have it more handy.
Reply
Old Dec 19, 2008 | 08:29 PM
  #23  
Ted B's Avatar
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Photogenic
Photoriffic
Liked
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,334
Likes: 63
From: Birmingham, AL
Standardizing a 4-bar sensor (what I and a few others need) would cover the bases for everyone. If one exists that fits physically and is a 0-5v sensor, we should look at that.

A base scaling for the 1450s from 1-2 persons would be helpful, as I need to go to that from 1250s (I'm at the end).
Reply
Old Dec 19, 2008 | 09:03 PM
  #24  
justboosted02's Avatar
Evolved Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,926
Likes: 14
From: northeast
mellon,

did you see any adverse affects with removing the honeycomb altogether?
Reply
Old Dec 19, 2008 | 10:30 PM
  #25  
KevOVIII's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco, CA
Originally Posted by Ted B
Standardizing a 4-bar sensor (what I and a few others need) would cover the bases for everyone. If one exists that fits physically and is a 0-5v sensor, we should look at that.

A base scaling for the 1450s from 1-2 persons would be helpful, as I need to go to that from 1250s (I'm at the end).
A agree with what you said about a higher bar sensor. Does Mitsubishi make a 4 or 5-bar?

I had to bring scaling all the way up to 1624 on 91 octane for the trims to be happy (low = 1.4 and mid = -2.4), and way down to 1008 on E85 (low = -0.2 and mid = 2.2). Stock FPR.
Reply
Old Dec 20, 2008 | 01:04 AM
  #26  
Mellon Racing's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Originally Posted by KevOVIII
Not sure why it decreased, and yes it doesn't make sense.
No changes to boost, timing, or mods

wow Kev, that's no little drop either. I really think something else is going on...injector scale change perhaps without accounting for it in the evoscan calculation maybe? then again that's probably 2byteload...hrmmm. If the airflow truly decreased that much the power would have dropped accordingly. I assume it was dyno'd after the change to get the power back where it was.
Reply
Old Dec 20, 2008 | 01:05 AM
  #27  
Mellon Racing's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Originally Posted by justboosted02
mellon,

did you see any adverse affects with removing the honeycomb altogether?
nope, I've been running without a honeycomb in my 700awhp TT Stealth for 12 years so I knew it would be fine on the EVO as well. Sometimes you have to ignore the gospel on EVOm and just do it.
Reply
Old Dec 20, 2008 | 01:26 AM
  #28  
KevOVIII's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco, CA
Originally Posted by Mellon Tuning
wow Kev, that's no little drop either. I really think something else is going on...injector scale change perhaps without accounting for it in the evoscan calculation maybe? then again that's probably 2byteload...hrmmm. If the airflow truly decreased that much the power would have dropped accordingly. I assume it was dyno'd after the change to get the power back where it was.
Yeah, it's weird. lol Yes, it's 2 byte load. 2 byte airflow wasn't logged on the 91 tunes.

Power actually increased from 409/315 to 415/317 on those logs you see.
Reply
Old Dec 20, 2008 | 04:13 AM
  #29  
Mellon Racing's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
nice mod list in the sig btw just noticed that... I just got my new tranny installed, maybe I'll get some airflow logs at 32psi on the HTA86 (~600whp DLL) for us this weekend.
Reply
Old Dec 20, 2008 | 01:43 PM
  #30  
justboosted02's Avatar
Evolved Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (31)
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,926
Likes: 14
From: northeast
Originally Posted by Mellon Tuning
nope, I've been running without a honeycomb in my 700awhp TT Stealth for 12 years so I knew it would be fine on the EVO as well. Sometimes you have to ignore the gospel on EVOm and just do it.
good enough for me lol
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:32 PM.