Injector Scaling and Latency (SUPERMERGE) - evolutionm.net



Injector Scaling and Latency (SUPERMERGE)

Reply
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 10, 2009, 03:24 AM   #1
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (50)
 
Fast_Freddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lexington Park, MD
Posts: 2,703
Thanked 10 Times in 9 Posts

Drives: 2005 550ish HP 2.4L & 2003 RR Daily

Injector Scaling and Latency (SUPERMERGE)

Instead of sifting through 58 pages of newbs asking the same questions I figured I would "summarize" everything in one thread, with quotes from contributers from the old thread.

First lets go over some common acronymns that will be associated with this evolution...

STFT= Short term fuel trim- what the ECU is doing right now to get as close to stoich (14.7:1) as possible, adding or subtracting fuel over the base fuel map to reach that target.

LTFT= Long term fuel trim- a stored value that the ECU has learned to do to reach that target. It takes longer to show changes.

O2 feedback= This is the same thing as STFT in Evoscan

In order to see a more precise percentage of fuel that is being adjusted in Evoscan I highly recommend changing the STFT, LTFT (Low, Mid, High) equations to this... 0.1953125*x-25

First things first, when dialing in your new injectors you need to let the car Idle and you will need to do a long cruise for the fuel trims to register. Don't beat yourself up for weeks to get perfect fuel trims, it will never happen. Strive for +/ - 5% for LTFT Low and LTFT Mid. However +/- 10% is acceptable by most.

From what I have observed the evo cycles fuel trims while at idle about every 6 minutes, i usually let my car idle for 24 minutes (4 cycles) and check the trims, if idle trims are good I go on a nice 30 minute drive and try to keep the MAFhz reading steady throughout.

Injector latency is a certain constant of injector pulsewidth added to the calculated pulsewidth to compensate for the time delay in opening and closing of the injectors. Larger injectors open and close at a slower rate so this constant needs to be increased appropriately. Its biggest affect is on the idle, too high and the car will idle rich or not run at all; too lean and the idle will be lean or not run at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by razorlab
First thing to look at is 02 feedback, that should be changing in real time and you do not have to wait for that to "cycle", just make sure the car is at operating temp.

if 02 feedback doesn't move whatsoever, then either you have a logging issue or your 02 is dead or disconnected.

On a Evo 8, fuel trims do not reset unless you cut the power to the ECU (disconnect the battery).

On a Evo 9, fuel trims reset every time you flash the ECU.

**Side note, make sure that your rear O2 sensor is not disabled via periphery bit, as fuel trims will not read.**
Quote:
Originally Posted by MalibuJack
Once you have the injectors scaled, look at your fuel trims, if their more than +25% you can adjust the scaling a little more until your closer to +/- 10%

Then you have to watch your fuel trims at idle, and cruising.. This is where your Injector Latency Voltage comes in.. If the trims at cruise are okay, then you adjust the lower voltage readings (below 13 volts) to increase the amount of fuel at idle slightly

Now, once your trims are within +/- 10% you can then make fine adjustments, but your open loop maps will be "Fairly close" but you have to watch it carefully not to go too lean, but you now have enough adjustment room to tune the car specific to its needs.. But at this point, when you transition to open loop, it should initially tip in a bit leaner, then stabilize a bit richer, but then the open loop maps get tuned.. Again, be careful since you don't want to let it go very lean, or be too lean at higher boost.. If it is, add fuel to the map, or adjust your injector scaling slightly (make the number a little lower) until its somewhere you want to work.

At this point, you should have STFT's that hover around 0%-5%, and LTFT's that are within 10%... You can adjust your idle speed slightly, and timing at idle to help the quality of your idle after you get to this point.

The result will be a drivable car, with a roughly stock-ish fuel table.. Then you go tune the car like you normally would...

Any additional closed loop adjustment would be in the fuel table, in closed loop fuel control, when you alter those settings in the fuel table, your just altering what would happen if your car had to run in open loop at idle and part throttle.. Obviously not useful unless you have a problem, but once you have those numbers close, the fuel trims are now closer to optimum and don't adjust as much.. Its not a huge deal if its not perfect, it just makes cold starting and driving the car (before the O2 sensor warms up) a little easier and less prone to poor drivability in those conditions, don't forget to check it a few times through the year as climate changes so you can get the best drivability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by L2r99gst
(Original modified slightly by me)
1. Choose an Injector scaling number
2. Log trims at idle and cruise
3. If trims are roughly the same, but positive, then you need to lower your injector scaling number.
4. If both trims are roughly the same, but negative, then you need to raise your injector scaling number.
5. If idle or cruise trim is positive, then you need to increase the latency value.
6. If the idle or cruise trim is negative, you need to decrease the latency value.

Note: After #5 or #6, you may need to readjust #1 accordingly.

Note 2: #5 and #6 implicitly answer ludikraut's questions about affecting idle and cruise trims. Basically, let's say that the IPW is 1ms at idle and 2ms at cruise. If you adjust the deadtime to add 100us (.1 ms), then you are affecting the idle fueling 10% and the cruise fueling 5%.

More latency = more fuel
Lower scaling = more fuel

Latency will roughly affect idle about twice as much as cruise and almost nothing at WOT/high airlfow. It's is inversely proportional to the IPW.

Latency is basically telling the ECU how long the injector takes to repsond. So, if you put in a larger latency value, you are saying 'this injector is slow to respond, so add this amount of time to keep the injector open'. So, this time is basically added to the IPW. That's why it will affect idle more than cruise and WOT. The IPW at idle may be 1ms and cruise may be 2ms, for example. If you are adding 100us (.1 ms) to the deadtime, it's increasing the IPW by 10% at idle ( for a 1 ms IPW).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludikraut
Question??? What is the relationship between the injector scaling value and the AFR values in the Fuel Map? Is it a linear relationship?

for example, let's say that I am running larger-than-stock injectors on my car which have been tuned via the fuel map only, not via rescaling the injector size. Does increasing the injector scaling by 10% then mandate reducing the fuel table by 10% to keep the AFR the same?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MalibuJack
Answer....That is a reasonable assumption, however its not a completely linear relationship because of how injectors work..

If you tuned your map for your injectors (and performance) without the scaling, then you would indeed need to go back and alter the Fuel map if you used the rescaling feature..

If the car was already tuned for 550 injectors, and you added 780's, then rescaling the injectors should bring the tune "Close" to where it was before you added the new injectors, however a retune would be recommended (and likely necessary)

Make any sense?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrfred
The latency (net time for the injectors to open and close) of the injectors is dependent on the voltage that the injectors see. The injectors take power straight from the battery. The 11 volt value sets the latency when the injectors are seeing 11 volts, and as razorlab implied, your car should never be operating at 11 volts except perhaps when starting.

The ECU does interpolate between latency values if the voltage is between two table values. I've never seen my car below 13.8 V except when cranking the starter, so for my setup, the 14.06 V latency controls pretty much everything. If you car gets down to the mid- or low- 13 V range, then the 11.72 V latency will play a role. The ECU uses simple linear interpolation, so if the voltage is, for instance, 13.3 V, then the latency used by the ECU will be 67% of the 14.06 V value + 33% of the 11.72 V value.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrfred
Found this page that lists latency values for a bunch of different injectors. Don't know how accurate the values are, but could be a good starting point.

http://injector-rehab.com/kbse/lag.htm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fostytou
E85 will have a scaling ~30% lower than that of pump gas. Easiest way to get initial E85 scaling numbers is to take the actual injector size and multiple by .7 (for the evoscan formula) and .7 again (for E85).
Quote:
Originally Posted by razorlab
PHP Code:
Denso 660s

Scaling 636

6.12
3.12
1.992
1.272
0.744
0.648
0.408 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bez
PHP Code:
Prescision 780 

scailing 
:609

latency

3.312
1.68
1.032
0.672
0.432
0.264
0.144 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpoevo
PHP Code:
PTEs 780

Scaling 696

4.69     3.504
7.03     2.184
9.38     1.224
11.72    0.96
14.06     0.744
16.41     0.552
18.68     0.432 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fostytou
PHP Code:
PTE 780cc 

Scaling
680

Latency
:
4.6875       3.624
7.03125      1.992
9.375        1.344
11.7188       0.984
14.0625       0.744
16.4062       0.576
18.6768       0.456 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oracle1
PHP Code:
RC 750s

Scaling
-665

Volts MS
4.69     3.576
7.03     1.944
9.38     1.296
11.72      0.984
14.06     0.768
16.41      0.624
18.68      0.504 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigric09
PHP Code:
FIC 750s

Scaling 650

3.312
2.04
1.296
0.696
0.624
0.408
0.192 
Quote:
Originally Posted by al/lupo
PHP Code:
FIC 750s

scaling 696 
or 713

Latency
:

4.69V     3.312
7.03V     2.04
9.38V     1.296
11.72V     0.912
14.06V     0.792
16.41V     0.6
18.68V     0.336 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnBradley
PHP Code:
FIC 750s

Scaling 650

3.312
1.680
1.032
.864
.648
.552
.360 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joedr
PHP Code:
PTE 880s

scaling 770

3.312
2.304
1.392
1.008
0.792
0.600
0.504 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph3n1x
PHP Code:
PTE 880s

Scaling 790

3.312
2.184
1.320
0.840
0.672
0.360
0.240 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnBradley
PHP Code:
FIC 850s

Scaling 770

voltage
-
3.312
1.68
1.032
0.84
0.552
0.456
0.36 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kracka
PHP Code:
FIC 850 

Scaling  696

Latencies 
3
2.376
1.2
0.768
0.504
0.36
0.312 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve93Talon
PHP Code:
FIC 950s

Scaling 812

4.69    3.312
7.03    2.184
9.38    1.392
11.72  0.912
14.06  0.792
16.41  0.408
18.68  0.264 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCalRedLine
PHP Code:
FIC 950

Scaling
812

Latency
:
3.312
2.184
1.32
1.008
0.768
0.624
0.504 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PD1
PHP Code:
FIC 1000s

scaling 860

3.312 
1.68 
1.344 
1.152 
0.84 
0.36
0.24 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lan_evo_MR9
PHP Code:
FIC 1000
Pump Gas Scaling
-835
E85 Scaling
-636

Latencies
3.312
1.704
1.416
1.2
0.84
0.576
0.264 
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartbomb
PHP Code:
RC 1000s

Scaling  860

Voltage   ms
4.69     3.312
7.03     2.184
9.38     1.560
11.72   1.008
14.06   0.696
16.41   0.408
18.68   0.336 
Quote:
Originally Posted by razorlab
PHP Code:
RC 1000cc  

Scaling  835

Latencies

3.6
2.184
1.56
0.936
0.672
0.432
0.336 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohhgyeahfasho
PHP Code:
RC 1000s 

E85 scaling 609 

3.312
2.184
.
1.560
.936
.624
.384
.288 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Testudo
PHP Code:
PTE 1000cc

Scaling 725

Latency

3.312
2.186 
1.281
0.771 
0.458 
0.283 
0.172 
Quote:
Originally Posted by travman
PHP Code:
ID 1000s

Scaling
812

latencies
4.69v 
5.328
7.03v 
3.144
9.38v 
1.992
11.72v 
1.368
14.06v 
1.008
16.41v 
.792
18.68v 
.624 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawkus
PHP Code:
ID 1000s

Scaling 812

3.816
3.144
1.944
1.392
0.984
0.72
0.504 
Quote:
Originally Posted by schiedes
PHP Code:
FIC 1050s

Scaling
1008

Latencies
:
Volts     ms
4.69     4.440
7.03     3.192
9.38     1.752
11.72    1.032
14.06    0.840
16.41    0.576
18.68    0.432 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnBradley
PHP Code:
RC1200's on both pumpgas and on E85

Gas Scaling  1044

latency
4.7        3.6
7.03      2.184
9.38      2.088
11.72    1.296
14.06    0.792
16.41    0.720
18.68    0.480

E85 Scaling  680

latency is the same as above except
11.72    1.344
14.06    0.864 
Quote:
Originally Posted by fostytou
PHP Code:
RC 1200 (on E85)

Scaling  622

Latency
3.6
2.304
1.728
1.32
0.864
0.72
0.48 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 16vTAWD
PHP Code:
Pte 1200s

Scaling 886

3.192
2.208
1.512
1.056
0.696
0.504
0.288 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrfred
PHP Code:
FIC Bluemax 1250s

Scaling  1271

latencies
4.7v    4.8
7.0v    2.4
9.4v    1.896
11.7v  1.368
14.1v  0.96
16.4v  0.744
18.7v  0.456 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bambooi
PHP Code:
FIC Bluemax 1250s

scaling 1170 

latencies
4.8
2.4
1.896
1.368
0.96
0.744
0.456 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlanoEvo
PHP Code:
FIC Bluemax 1450s with 2.3L

Scaling 943

4.69 2.784
7.03 2.448
9.38 1.608
11.72 1.344
14.06 1.244
16.41 0.984
18.68 0.816 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvoIX2240
PHP Code:
FIC Bluemax 1450s

Scaling 
(E85943

Latency
3.072
2.328
1.848
1.512
1.296
1.080
0.888 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jid2
PHP Code:
FIC Bluemax 1450s

Scaling 
(92 oct)  1329  (E85)  1008

Latency
From the data sheet included with the injectors
2.784
2.112
1.680
1.368
1.176
0.984
0.816 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnBradley
PHP Code:
ID2000s

scaling  1624 

latencies 
(very responsiveis:
9.38.936
11.72
.672
14.06
.504
16.41
.384 

Last edited by Fast_Freddie; Oct 3, 2011 at 12:35 PM.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Fast_Freddie For This Useful Post:
Adamsturbosma (Jun 11, 2016)
Old Nov 10, 2009, 03:43 AM   #2
EvoM Staff Alumni
iTrader: (16)
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Uxbridge, MA
Posts: 3,214
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

Drives: 2003 Corvette Z06, 2000 Sentra SE w/ SR20

adding to important thread list in sticky
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2009, 04:37 AM   #3
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (50)
 
Fast_Freddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lexington Park, MD
Posts: 2,703
Thanked 10 Times in 9 Posts

Drives: 2005 550ish HP 2.4L & 2003 RR Daily

Aaron... told you i was gonna do it...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MR Turco View Post
adding to important thread list in sticky
Thanks
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2009, 06:19 AM   #4
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 3,499
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

Drives: 2005 EVO VIII

Good job, but you misquoted part of my quote:

Quote:
Idle "latency"= adjust 11.72v
Crusie "latency"= adjust 14.06v
I never said that, and that's not true. Voltage doesn't correspond with idle and/or cruise. The voltage is curve is there to account for the slower/faster mechanical response of the injector at different voltage levels.

Also, instead of having to let the car idle for xx minutes or cruise for xx minutes, all you need to do is look at the appropriate LTFT and the STFT. Add them together to get your eventual LTFT value, without the wait.


Eric
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2009, 06:32 AM   #5
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (50)
 
Fast_Freddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lexington Park, MD
Posts: 2,703
Thanked 10 Times in 9 Posts

Drives: 2005 550ish HP 2.4L & 2003 RR Daily

Quote:
Originally Posted by l2r99gst View Post
Good job, but you misquoted part of my quote:



I never said that, and that's not true. Voltage doesn't correspond with idle and/or cruise. The voltage is curve is there to account for the slower/faster mechanical response of the injector at different voltage levels.

Also, instead of having to let the car idle for xx minutes or cruise for xx minutes, all you need to do is look at the appropriate LTFT and the STFT. Add them together to get your eventual LTFT value, without the wait.


Eric
Fixed... I didn't mean to put that there, I was doing like 3 things at once... and I understand that its technically not true, however once your latencies are close, usually changing 11.72v will effect your LTFT low, without much effect on LTFT mid. However adjusting the 14.06v will effect both significatly once latencies are close.

I have also noticed that adding the LTFT and STFT does not always work, if I let my car idle for 4 "cycles" it ends up being way different than what I would expect by addng the LTFT and STFTs after the 1st "cycle". Everyone will have a different technique with fuel trims...

Last edited by Fast_Freddie; Nov 10, 2009 at 06:37 AM.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2009, 11:43 AM   #6
Silver Sponsor
iTrader: (30)
 
JohnBradley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Northwest
Posts: 11,355
Thanked 22 Times in 19 Posts

Drives: 06 Rally Red MR

Also, in case anyone asks:

Yes you can set scaling to a few different settings in a basic range and they can all be right if you are using trims. The latency makes up the trim factor, the scaling will affect how the map looks at WOT (openloop at any time really). If you want your "target AFR" to match the real world or close to then get it too idle and set the scaling until you get an 11.5 AFR with an 11.5AFR in the map. Typically it will only be near peak power that it will match since the pump really starts to make the difference past 5k (depending on turbo).

freddie- I knew you werent blowing smoke

Also (since I didnt see it)-

Latency- less is leaner, more is richer
Scaling- more is leaner, less is richer
__________________
[email protected]
Jeff Bush runs [email protected] 1G DSM Auto
EnglishRacing/ETS GTR [email protected] best-213 / 244.6 in the 1/2
ER/ETS Evo X runs [email protected], 206.99 in the 1/2, highest power X in the world
Myles runs 198 in the 1/2, '94 Integra street car
EnglishRacing runs 213.47 in the 1/2, 1195whp Evo 8
English Racing offers ACD Tuning http://www.shopenglishracing.com/Eng...CD-Tuning.html
It's not enough to be good if you have the ability to be better..
PM for e-tune info
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2009, 05:18 AM   #7
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
lan_evo_mr9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: MD
Posts: 1,097
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

Drives: OB EVOX ,88590715- SOLD, 03 lancer OZ (DD), 01 Audi A4

So I've been doing a test/project just to see how scaling and latency adjustments coincide with each other. I purposely threw off my settings just I could readjust using the information on this thread that has been quoted....

Ie, pretend I'm a newb and I just got some injectors. I (newb) have folllowed the instructions that are quoted to try and get the correct fuel trims. I have not yet finished, but as you can see, I (newb) am getting closer and getting better drive ability.

All of the below figures/scaling are for E85 on FIC 1000's

================================================== ================
1.

585 scaing......low=-2.25/mid=-6.37

3.312
1.752
1.392
1.200
0.840
0.540
0.288 ...Poor idle and drive abilty...

I should raise latencies and scaling

================================================== ================
2.

597 scaling......low=-1.46/mid=-7.15

3.312
1.752
1.392
1.200
0.864
0.552
0.288 ...E85 Cold start was perfect with these figures...

I should rasie scaling and latencies

================================================== ================
3.

622 scaling......low=3.03/mid=-2.44

Same

latencies

as

above ,,,Idle a little rough/OK drive ability...

I should raise latencies (wrong, I should lower latencies and raise scaling)

================================================== ================
4.

622 scaling......low=-.095/mid=-5.13

3.312
1.800
1.416
1.224
0.888
0.576
0.312 ,,,Good drive ability/2 cranks on cold start...

I should raise latencies (wrong, I should just raise scaling)

================================================== ================

I will post 4 more results in another few days to see if I can get my trims as close to zero as possible. I feel like this is a good exercise in learning what affects what and how to adjust properly.

Anybody chime in if my actions from steps 1-4 are wrong. I'm here to learn too

Last edited by lan_evo_mr9; Nov 11, 2009 at 05:01 PM.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2009, 05:42 AM   #8
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (50)
 
Fast_Freddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lexington Park, MD
Posts: 2,703
Thanked 10 Times in 9 Posts

Drives: 2005 550ish HP 2.4L & 2003 RR Daily

Step one I would have taken 4% away from the 14v latency and that would have gotten you close...

If your trims are negative that means you are rich, adding to the latency makes it more rich.

When you increase scaling you are leaning the fuel out. which is why in step 3 your trims came down...

Again step 4 you added latency and again your trims went more negative ( more rich)
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2009, 05:56 AM   #9
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
lan_evo_mr9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: MD
Posts: 1,097
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

Drives: OB EVOX ,88590715- SOLD, 03 lancer OZ (DD), 01 Audi A4

"5. If idle trim is more positive than cruise trim, then you need to increase the dead time,
or in terms of ECUFlash, you need to increase the latency value."

I was going off that statement. Did I misread or misunderstand the statement?

Edit:I will redo step one values except I will change the 14v latency to 806 (4% of 840) and raise the scaling to 597. Does that sound logical?

Last edited by lan_evo_mr9; Nov 11, 2009 at 06:16 AM.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2009, 07:05 AM   #10
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (50)
 
Fast_Freddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lexington Park, MD
Posts: 2,703
Thanked 10 Times in 9 Posts

Drives: 2005 550ish HP 2.4L & 2003 RR Daily

Quote:
Originally Posted by lan_evo_mr9 View Post
"5. If idle trim is more positive than cruise trim, then you need to increase the dead time,
or in terms of ECUFlash, you need to increase the latency value."

I was going off that statement. Did I misread or misunderstand the statement?

Edit:I will redo step one values except I will change the 14v latency to 806 (4% of 840) and raise the scaling to 597. Does that sound logical?
try leaving the scaling at 585 and just change the latency and see where you are at.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2009, 07:14 AM   #11
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ma
Posts: 1,589
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

Drives: 03 Evo, 96 GSX, 02 tarus

On behalf of eveyone trying to scale in their injectors, Thank You
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2009, 07:27 AM   #12
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
lan_evo_mr9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: MD
Posts: 1,097
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

Drives: OB EVOX ,88590715- SOLD, 03 lancer OZ (DD), 01 Audi A4

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3gEclipseTurbo View Post
On behalf of eveyone trying to scale in their injectors, Thank You
No problem, I figured this would be a good learning exercise...to see what to do and what not to do. I'm hoping this will help a lot of people, including myself

I'll just adjust latency and leave the scaling and see what happens- will report after work. Now the question arises, do I just trim down the 14V or 11, 14, and 16?

Last edited by lan_evo_mr9; Nov 11, 2009 at 07:29 AM.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2009, 08:33 AM   #13
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (50)
 
Fast_Freddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lexington Park, MD
Posts: 2,703
Thanked 10 Times in 9 Posts

Drives: 2005 550ish HP 2.4L & 2003 RR Daily

Quote:
Originally Posted by lan_evo_mr9 View Post
No problem, I figured this would be a good learning exercise...to see what to do and what not to do. I'm hoping this will help a lot of people, including myself

I'll just adjust latency and leave the scaling and see what happens- will report after work. Now the question arises, do I just trim down the 14V or 11, 14, and 16?
Trim down the 14v for now and see where that gets you...
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2009, 02:19 PM   #14
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
lan_evo_mr9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: MD
Posts: 1,097
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

Drives: OB EVOX ,88590715- SOLD, 03 lancer OZ (DD), 01 Audi A4

Results are in.....
Same scaling as test 1 (585), just lowered the 14V latency to 816 (4% less than 840).
low=2.454
mid=-6.174

So now the idle/low is more positive than the cruise/mid. The drive ability felt great and idle was felt good.

It seems as if these injectors are tuned in the way of idle is latency and cruise is scaling. The test that I had mid the lowest, my scaling was the highest, and the test that I had my low closest to 0, the latencies were the highest.

My next test will be a 636 scaling with these latencies:
3.312
1.8
1.416
1.224
0.888
0.576
0.312

Last edited by lan_evo_mr9; Nov 11, 2009 at 02:42 PM.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2009, 04:36 PM   #15
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
lan_evo_mr9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: MD
Posts: 1,097
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

Drives: OB EVOX ,88590715- SOLD, 03 lancer OZ (DD), 01 Audi A4

The test/report is over.

With my previous mentioned figures my trims were as follows...low=3.710/mid=.976

As you can see raising the scaling greatly helped mid/cruise get closer to 0, but my low/idle was too high. I lowered the 14V latency to .864 instead of .880 and sat in the car, the low dropped almost one full point to 2.927. I'm sure if I drop it to my original value of .840 or maybe 1 notch lower, it will be in the high 1's or possibly low 2's (which I will, because of previous testing/knowledge).

Hence the original posted values (thanks to Fast Freddie):
Pump Gas Scaling-835
E85 Scaling-636

Latencies
3.312
1.704
1.416
1.2
0.84
0.576
0.264

I hope people will look at the steps taken, the adjustments performed, and the results given. That is your injector scaling 101. I'm not sure if all injectors react the same way FIC's do, so take my tests with a grain of salt, but you should get the idea. All tests were performed with at least a 30 minute drive- highly recommended.

A big shout out to Fast Freddie for putting this thread together. This thread should eliminate almost all questions on scaling and latencies.

Also notice, for the E85 guys, my cold starts were best when injectors were set the richest. In other words, you should have to definitely add fuel in the Alt Map IPW table. A lot of fuel.

Last edited by lan_evo_mr9; Nov 11, 2009 at 05:05 PM.
Offline
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Full Lean AFR @ idle after PTE 780 install superkizuna Evo How To Requests / Questions / Tips 21 Nov 5, 2016 07:11 AM
Mapped before? Turbobudz General Engine Management / Tuning Forum 2 Jul 21, 2013 01:31 PM
injector tuning help! babaz7 Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain 3 Jul 6, 2012 06:35 AM
tunning help. Stalling/startup issues. marcoEVO9 EcuFlash 12 Jun 16, 2012 11:54 AM
Getting ready for E85, some questions... LV///R E85 and Ethanol 17 Apr 10, 2009 08:36 AM


Tags
1000cc, 650, 650cc, decrease, denso, evo, evolution, fic, hks, injector, lag, latencies, latency, scaling, time, v7

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:26 PM.


 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
What's your question?
Send