Big Cams Cruise Tune for the Evo 8
Aug 26, 2009, 06:19 AM
#31
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Northern KY near Cincy
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
I have a MAF Scaling, and a MAF Smoothing Table. I changed the MAF smoothing table utilizing the snipit of code you wrote here, and I have a wierd field now. On the left it says load (%) and on the right it states uints... Scaling seems to be off, it has 0 then 192, then 0, then 1, then 0, then 2...etc as it progresses up, this is int he % load column.
The older table was as I called it. You are correct in changing the MAF Smoothing table. The column on the right should show up as percents with 100 as max.
Switched to the 94170015 map and have had better success. The Injector scaling has not changed from map to map, am I missing something? They both say 513... I thought that was good for stock injectors? I was told I didn't need to upgrade to go to the Kelford's...? I am not seeing 100% IJDC in the logs...
If you are still on stock injectors you shouldn't need to change anything at all.
How would injector scaling get off? I have not adjusted anything to effect the injector scalings I believe. I first tried to set the idle utilizing the MAF scaling in the other thread I have spoken about before. I then returned it back to stock. While it is at stock, it is giving me the before mentioned "wanted" adjustments. +8% @ idle, -3/-4% at cruz...
Should I play with MAF Scaling first or should I try to find your MAF Compensation table and adjust that?
The only time you should need to mess with MAF scaling at all is if you have replaced the suction pipe with a hard pipe. The hard pipe changes the airflow the MAF sees so adjustment is necessary. I have also seen that some air filters also mess with the MAF scaling. Best ones to have are Vibrant with the inverted cone, Perrin, and AmsOil again with the inverted cone. These filters really don't mess with the MAF signal.
I am currently running at stable 12-14 ing/hg on the boost guage, and running -5 max on ecuflash logs...? Curious if I have a setting off(I followed MFRED's deffinititions to the tee for the addition of the sensor and calibration in ECU flash, must be something the EVO Scan data file)...? I have the timing at 11* and it seems ok...everyhing else is registering the same in ecu flash, only the map sensor is registering different.
What do you think of those settings?
These soind about right.
Also, I did not meen to hijack this thread, i was asking questions pertaining to the OP question. Thanks again for any help, and hope this helps the original poster.
Aug 26, 2009, 06:34 AM
#32
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Northern KY near Cincy
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Back to the OP....
In all honesty you are like many of us with that darn P0300. Seems like the problem becomes more of a problem after we add cams. By upgrading to the 94170015 (for 2003 and 2004) it helped the problem but did not eliminate it. So...most of us just disable the code. (set periphery FCA bit 4 from 1 to 0. BAM no more P0300.
Kelford cams don't need as much idle to remain "smooth" (if you are in the teens with timing, that is probably too much). You neen to consider that big cams will lope. Set base idle timing to 8*. Then raise the lowest idle RPM values to about 950. You Should have pretty good idle characteristics with these settings.
In all honesty you are like many of us with that darn P0300. Seems like the problem becomes more of a problem after we add cams. By upgrading to the 94170015 (for 2003 and 2004) it helped the problem but did not eliminate it. So...most of us just disable the code. (set periphery FCA bit 4 from 1 to 0. BAM no more P0300.
Kelford cams don't need as much idle to remain "smooth" (if you are in the teens with timing, that is probably too much). You neen to consider that big cams will lope. Set base idle timing to 8*. Then raise the lowest idle RPM values to about 950. You Should have pretty good idle characteristics with these settings.
Aug 26, 2009, 08:35 AM
#33
Ok, so i have the scaling correct now, I see in the left column, 192, 266, 512, etc. In the right column is now 90%, 90%, 96%, 100%, 100%...etc.
So now following in line wiht your instructions, So if I change the first coumn that is paired 192 <-> 90%, and I need to add 6%-8%, then I would only want to change the right column by an increment of 1 to make it now reflect 91. By doing so that roughly puts 10% addition?
Thanks again.
So now following in line wiht your instructions, So if I change the first coumn that is paired 192 <-> 90%, and I need to add 6%-8%, then I would only want to change the right column by an increment of 1 to make it now reflect 91. By doing so that roughly puts 10% addition?
Thanks again.
Aug 26, 2009, 09:06 AM
#34
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Northern KY near Cincy
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
You are all over it! !
BUT.....
The left colum should correspond to AirFlowHz. Change the left colum scaling to AirFlowHz.
I found that adjustng the 50, 25, and 19 Hz sections all helps with idle and startup.
BUT.....
The left colum should correspond to AirFlowHz. Change the left colum scaling to AirFlowHz.
I found that adjustng the 50, 25, and 19 Hz sections all helps with idle and startup.
Last edited by Appauldd; Aug 26, 2009 at 09:10 AM.
Aug 26, 2009, 09:16 AM
#35
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Northern KY near Cincy
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
<scaling name="AirFlowHZ" units="units" toexpr="x/10.24" frexpr="x*10.24" format="%.0f" min="0" max="6400" inc="1" storagetype="uint16" endian="big"/>
<scaling name="Percent (128)" units="%" toexpr="x/1.28" frexpr="x*1.28" format="%.0f" min="0" max="100" inc="1" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>
<table name="MAF Adjustment" category="Air" type="2D" level="3" scaling="Percent (128)">
<table name="MAF Hz" type="Y Axis" elements="21" scaling="AirFlowHZ"/>
</table>
The above needs to go in your BASE xml
<table name="MAF Adjustment" address="3322" scaling="Percent (128)">
<table name="MAF Hz" address="6584" elements="21" scaling="AirFlowHZ"/>
</table>
The above is the address in the 94170015 xml
These should get the table looking correct for you. You will see the table name is change to "MAF Adjustment"
<scaling name="Percent (128)" units="%" toexpr="x/1.28" frexpr="x*1.28" format="%.0f" min="0" max="100" inc="1" storagetype="uint8" endian="big"/>
<table name="MAF Adjustment" category="Air" type="2D" level="3" scaling="Percent (128)">
<table name="MAF Hz" type="Y Axis" elements="21" scaling="AirFlowHZ"/>
</table>
The above needs to go in your BASE xml
<table name="MAF Adjustment" address="3322" scaling="Percent (128)">
<table name="MAF Hz" address="6584" elements="21" scaling="AirFlowHZ"/>
</table>
The above is the address in the 94170015 xml
These should get the table looking correct for you. You will see the table name is change to "MAF Adjustment"
Aug 26, 2009, 11:38 AM
#36
OK, got the new deffinitions set. Now, I have put my MAF scaling back to stock.
I let it idle for approx 20 minuts to make sure to cycle through the (4) injector cycles.
Interesting that my log shows right when I start the car on stock MAF, and 11* on the timing, that I show rpms as they try to find the idle stat 500 to 750, and knock counts of approx 56 for 3 log entries as the idle picks up...after that, no mor knock....? What is causing the start up knock?
My logs show this for the Trims...This is at the end of the adjustments, after 20 minutes of idleing:
AirFlow: 37.5
Target Idle: 967.2
Fuel Trim Low: 2.6501
Fuel Trim Mid: -7.1549
Fuel Trim High: 0.1008
02 Feedback: -1 to + 3 on average.
My logs show this for cruise after 45 miles of driving: They want a -6 in the Fuel Trim Mid roughly at approx 3K rpm's, 100-300 HZ on the air meter
Where do i go from here, thanks for your help?
I let it idle for approx 20 minuts to make sure to cycle through the (4) injector cycles.
Interesting that my log shows right when I start the car on stock MAF, and 11* on the timing, that I show rpms as they try to find the idle stat 500 to 750, and knock counts of approx 56 for 3 log entries as the idle picks up...after that, no mor knock....? What is causing the start up knock?
My logs show this for the Trims...This is at the end of the adjustments, after 20 minutes of idleing:
AirFlow: 37.5
Target Idle: 967.2
Fuel Trim Low: 2.6501
Fuel Trim Mid: -7.1549
Fuel Trim High: 0.1008
02 Feedback: -1 to + 3 on average.
My logs show this for cruise after 45 miles of driving: They want a -6 in the Fuel Trim Mid roughly at approx 3K rpm's, 100-300 HZ on the air meter
Where do i go from here, thanks for your help?
Last edited by Raceghost; Aug 26, 2009 at 11:53 AM.
Aug 26, 2009, 01:20 PM
#37
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Northern KY near Cincy
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Sounds like you need to add a little fuel to the mid cruise section of the MAF scaling......OR in the 100-300Hz range add a point to the MAF adjustment table.
As for the high....you have to maintain aboe 1400Hz for a prolonged period of time. I don't see that happening unless you are on the main straight at nurbergring. Thus, don't worry about it as it won't affect drivability.
As for the high....you have to maintain aboe 1400Hz for a prolonged period of time. I don't see that happening unless you are on the main straight at nurbergring. Thus, don't worry about it as it won't affect drivability.
Aug 26, 2009, 02:09 PM
#39
Ok, I am confused, I thought if it was a negative number, (-6) that it meant I needed to subtract fuel? And visa versa for the + numbers(+2) meant I needed to add fuel...
At least that was what I interpreted that thread about "Scaling the MAF" with pics is similiar to the one I speak of.
Either way, so set me straight here guy?
Drivability wise, i subtracted 1 in the midrange to make most of them that were at 100% down to 99% and so on to 98% for some of the ones that were set appropriatly at 99. Either way, I have almost got all my knock cleared, accept for the 56 count in the low end when I start it...any ideas? Other than that, i have only 1 to 2 counts speratically throughout the 45 mile drive this morning. As well as my 3rd gear pull to 7500 only showed 1-2 counts in the top end when I let off.
So it looks like I am close. Help me get that last little bit straightened out, and i will be able to start tuning for power! Thanks for all your help.
At least that was what I interpreted that thread about "Scaling the MAF" with pics is similiar to the one I speak of.
Either way, so set me straight here guy?
Drivability wise, i subtracted 1 in the midrange to make most of them that were at 100% down to 99% and so on to 98% for some of the ones that were set appropriatly at 99. Either way, I have almost got all my knock cleared, accept for the 56 count in the low end when I start it...any ideas? Other than that, i have only 1 to 2 counts speratically throughout the 45 mile drive this morning. As well as my 3rd gear pull to 7500 only showed 1-2 counts in the top end when I let off.
So it looks like I am close. Help me get that last little bit straightened out, and i will be able to start tuning for power! Thanks for all your help.
Aug 26, 2009, 02:36 PM
#40
Ok, I am confused, I thought if it was a negative number, (-6) that it meant I needed to subtract fuel? And visa versa for the + numbers(+2) meant I needed to add fuel...
At least that was what I interpreted that thread about "Scaling the MAF" with pics is similiar to the one I speak of.
Either way, so set me straight here guy?
Drivability wise, i subtracted 1 in the midrange to make most of them that were at 100% down to 99% and so on to 98% for some of the ones that were set appropriatly at 99. Either way, I have almost got all my knock cleared, accept for the 56 count in the low end when I start it...any ideas? Other than that, i have only 1 to 2 counts speratically throughout the 45 mile drive this morning. As well as my 3rd gear pull to 7500 only showed 1-2 counts in the top end when I let off.
So it looks like I am close. Help me get that last little bit straightened out, and i will be able to start tuning for power! Thanks for all your help.
At least that was what I interpreted that thread about "Scaling the MAF" with pics is similiar to the one I speak of.
Either way, so set me straight here guy?
Drivability wise, i subtracted 1 in the midrange to make most of them that were at 100% down to 99% and so on to 98% for some of the ones that were set appropriatly at 99. Either way, I have almost got all my knock cleared, accept for the 56 count in the low end when I start it...any ideas? Other than that, i have only 1 to 2 counts speratically throughout the 45 mile drive this morning. As well as my 3rd gear pull to 7500 only showed 1-2 counts in the top end when I let off.
So it looks like I am close. Help me get that last little bit straightened out, and i will be able to start tuning for power! Thanks for all your help.
Aug 26, 2009, 03:01 PM
#41
I think he may have mixed things up / written incorrectly. You are correct - a negative trim means the car is pulling fuel to get to the proper place, so you should also. Unfortunately the car is adding quite a bit in the low areas (relative to the mid trim). I would multiply your injector scaling by 1.07 (to bring fueling down) and then add 1 point to all of the MAF Hz <51
Can you help me understand why I need to rescale my injectors, they are stock?
Where do i make these scaling adjusmtents in terms to what table?
EDIT:
Oops, are you suggestion that I take the current scaling of 513 and multiply it by 1.07 which will yield a new value of 549...plug that into the Injector Scaling table under the fuel column?
Last edited by Raceghost; Aug 26, 2009 at 03:14 PM.
Aug 26, 2009, 07:54 PM
#42
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Northern KY near Cincy
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Sorry....I had a retard moment when i wrote that. I re-read it and yeah....I'm dumb. ANYWAY.
Your question about scaling....
Your mods changes the Volumetric Effeciency "VE" of the engine. Thus a small bit of injector scaling may be needed to get everything back in spec. I would be curious to see if you have the correct stock values. in the "Injector Battery Voltage Latency Compensation" table.
As for the + and - thing.....
If you see that the car is in the - this means it is taking fuel out. You are correct...you need to take fuel out manually with table adjustments so the ECU won't have to think. Vice versa for +. Yep....I wrote it wrong. My bad.
What are you running in your fuel table in the 500 rpm idle zone?
The goal is to get your mid and low trims both + or both - . Once that happens it is easy to get the trims near 0.
Frosty.....you got the right idea. Thanks for bailing me out.
Your question about scaling....
Your mods changes the Volumetric Effeciency "VE" of the engine. Thus a small bit of injector scaling may be needed to get everything back in spec. I would be curious to see if you have the correct stock values. in the "Injector Battery Voltage Latency Compensation" table.
As for the + and - thing.....
If you see that the car is in the - this means it is taking fuel out. You are correct...you need to take fuel out manually with table adjustments so the ECU won't have to think. Vice versa for +. Yep....I wrote it wrong. My bad.
What are you running in your fuel table in the 500 rpm idle zone?
The goal is to get your mid and low trims both + or both - . Once that happens it is easy to get the trims near 0.
Frosty.....you got the right idea. Thanks for bailing me out.
Aug 26, 2009, 08:40 PM
#43
Sorry....I had a retard moment when i wrote that. I re-read it and yeah....I'm dumb. ANYWAY.
Your question about scaling....
Your question about scaling....
Onward and forward, to answer your question:
I have currently adjusted the MAF Smoothing/Adjustment table to where both the low fuel trim and the mid fuel trim are in the (-) side. Low fuel trim is it at -1.219, and the mid is at -2.1...
So I think I have it close.
As to the Question about the Fuel Table 500 RPM zone, a little bit more specific, is this the fuel map, the idle map...or? If this is the High Octane Fuel Map then I have 14.7 AFR from 0 load to 80 load...
Thanks again for everyons input. Hopefully this is all helping the OP out, for i know i am getting close.
As for the Injector scaling, if I understand right, i multiply the 513 by the +7% to yeild a 549 for the injectors, or with the trims where there at do i need to do anything with them?
Last edited by Raceghost; Aug 26, 2009 at 08:43 PM.
Aug 26, 2009, 08:44 PM
#44
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Northern KY near Cincy
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
If your trims are about as perfect as they are going to get. GREAT JOB ! !
I was asking about the fuel table 500 rpm below 60 load. I found that the stock value was 13ish and caused issues...I raised it to 14.4.
As for any other adjustments.....you are spot on so don't do any more. Time to go tune for power.
I was asking about the fuel table 500 rpm below 60 load. I found that the stock value was 13ish and caused issues...I raised it to 14.4.
As for any other adjustments.....you are spot on so don't do any more. Time to go tune for power.
Aug 26, 2009, 08:52 PM
#45
I was asking about the fuel table 500 rpm below 60 load. I found that the stock value was 13ish and caused issues...I raised it to 14.4.
Time to go tune for power.
Thanks again.
Oh, wierd thing, i did three back to back pulls, on these settings...
First pull, 1 account of knock in the midrange, perfect throughout the rest(2.5k - 7.4k rpms)
Sec. Pull, 5-7 accounts of knock in the midrange....?(not sure, was half a pull let off at 5k)
Third pull, 12 accounts of knock in the top end above 7k...
I know that everypull will be different. I have been tuning timing for approx 3 weeks now, and always close, with no perfect pulls. Then i get one, and the next two progressivly get worse...? Ok, worry, don't worry?
Thanks again