New thread for Speed Density tuning?...
Mar 2, 2010, 03:59 AM
#423
Evolved Member
iTrader: (37)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Spec-Ops Motorsports, Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 3,146
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
it will be a little hard that way as you wont have the spreadsheet needed for logworks. I am trying to make a spreadsheet now that doesnt need logworks. Its a pain, but should be helpful for everyone.
Mar 2, 2010, 06:33 AM
#424
Evolved Member
iTrader: (26)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
read thru this thread about 4 times. I learn something new everytime I read this.
Im confused by the RPM VE table. People have said that by lowering the RPM VE will make the car leaner, and vice versa. Here is my current VE tables (just the default rom values)
with these values, the car idles at 13afr. This is on a fully warm car in open loop only. I change the RPM VE to 70 in the first 4 rows and the car still idles in 13 afr. I drop it down to 40 and it is still the same. I can bump my fuel map like 4 points leaner and the car will idle at 14.7 but we dont want to do that right? I can change the injector size to 532 and it will idle at ~14.7 but I shouldnt have to do this on the 560 injectors? Upping the injector size works for me, but how else are you guys making the car leaner/richer using just those 2 tables?
Im confused by the RPM VE table. People have said that by lowering the RPM VE will make the car leaner, and vice versa. Here is my current VE tables (just the default rom values)
with these values, the car idles at 13afr. This is on a fully warm car in open loop only. I change the RPM VE to 70 in the first 4 rows and the car still idles in 13 afr. I drop it down to 40 and it is still the same. I can bump my fuel map like 4 points leaner and the car will idle at 14.7 but we dont want to do that right? I can change the injector size to 532 and it will idle at ~14.7 but I shouldnt have to do this on the 560 injectors? Upping the injector size works for me, but how else are you guys making the car leaner/richer using just those 2 tables?
Mar 3, 2010, 10:59 AM
#425
Evolving Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: nYc
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just followed l2r99gst's steps in post #400.
Thanks. that helped a lot in understanding tuning for SD. You're right, changing one of the 2d tables might fix one cell, but has the rest of the row out of wack.
Thanks. that helped a lot in understanding tuning for SD. You're right, changing one of the 2d tables might fix one cell, but has the rest of the row out of wack.
Mar 4, 2010, 01:00 PM
#426
Evolving Member
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: nYc
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wouldnt it be better to lock in one of the 2d tables so that you dont have to mess around with two tables and a fuel map to get the tune right?
I was looking at Bigric's log and l2r's suggestion for bigric's Map VE. I noticed that when I set the rpm on the Y axis and kpa on the x axis and populated the graph with 1byte load averages, the results were very very close to what l2r suggested, but in less words.
Since the map VE table needs kpa (known constant) and load (known average), wouldnt this be easier to lock in this 1 table, and then only adjust the RPM VE and fuel map for the tuning?
I was looking at Bigric's log and l2r's suggestion for bigric's Map VE. I noticed that when I set the rpm on the Y axis and kpa on the x axis and populated the graph with 1byte load averages, the results were very very close to what l2r suggested, but in less words.
Since the map VE table needs kpa (known constant) and load (known average), wouldnt this be easier to lock in this 1 table, and then only adjust the RPM VE and fuel map for the tuning?
Mar 4, 2010, 02:42 PM
#428
Evolved Member
iTrader: (37)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Spec-Ops Motorsports, Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 3,146
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Wouldnt it be better to lock in one of the 2d tables so that you dont have to mess around with two tables and a fuel map to get the tune right?
I was looking at Bigric's log and l2r's suggestion for bigric's Map VE. I noticed that when I set the rpm on the Y axis and kpa on the x axis and populated the graph with 1byte load averages, the results were very very close to what l2r suggested, but in less words.
Since the map VE table needs kpa (known constant) and load (known average), wouldnt this be easier to lock in this 1 table, and then only adjust the RPM VE and fuel map for the tuning?
I was looking at Bigric's log and l2r's suggestion for bigric's Map VE. I noticed that when I set the rpm on the Y axis and kpa on the x axis and populated the graph with 1byte load averages, the results were very very close to what l2r suggested, but in less words.
Since the map VE table needs kpa (known constant) and load (known average), wouldnt this be easier to lock in this 1 table, and then only adjust the RPM VE and fuel map for the tuning?
Mar 4, 2010, 05:45 PM
#429
I will reiterate for clarity's sake since it's been said numerous times through this thread...
99% of the time your load% and kPa will NOT match as a 1:1 ratio when you're under the 100% load/100kPa range. They will need to be set according to your logs to achieve the desired result and will affect your idle and closed loop afr's.
99% of the time your load% and kPa will NOT match as a 1:1 ratio when you're under the 100% load/100kPa range. They will need to be set according to your logs to achieve the desired result and will affect your idle and closed loop afr's.
Apr 1, 2010, 03:01 AM
#431
Just as an update, I finally got my large Holset turbo on the car this past weekend and tweaked the SD rom. The RPM ve tables make life so much easier, and even after spending a few minutes dialing in my 1000cc injectors I was able to have my feedbacks within a +/-5% range in 20 minutes. Amazingly enough, I only had to take out a hair of fuel in the top end of the rpm range, and I noticed the strange "lean warm-up" period is gone, as it now sits around 13.5-14afr during warm-up at all times with absolutely no break up through the rpm. This patch works EXCEPTIONALLY well with large turbos, and I highly suggest anyone with a large turbo give it a shot, your car will love you!
Jan 9, 2015, 09:24 AM
#434
Did you know that JDM evo IX came with MAP and IAT?
Guys I am actually trying to get some information-help about speed density conversion on my jdm evo 9.
As you can see in the picture below my car came with a map sensor (3bar) and an IAT from the factory. What I want to know is, if I wanted to go on SD route could it be possible to tune the car as it is?
I also bought an Omnipower 4bar sensor, can the omnipower be tune with my stock IAT for SD?
As you can see in the picture below my car came with a map sensor (3bar) and an IAT from the factory. What I want to know is, if I wanted to go on SD route could it be possible to tune the car as it is?
I also bought an Omnipower 4bar sensor, can the omnipower be tune with my stock IAT for SD?
