*400 whp / 400 wtq!!!*
Air is not entering through the nipple on the valve cover. Positive pressure is being vented from the valve cover.
oh right, the PCV closes during boost right?
so under idle and cruise condition, this valve is open.
My oil catch can is being ordered today.
Probably wont be finished being made until next week.
Hopefully routing this back to the intake pipe will fix my fuel trims.
so under idle and cruise condition, this valve is open.
My oil catch can is being ordered today.
Probably wont be finished being made until next week.
Hopefully routing this back to the intake pipe will fix my fuel trims.
Late reply I know lol so I will stop with my stuff so its not a hyjack but ya I still have stock es junk suspension and a factory rear spoiler. I think I am just going to get some better suspension and not lsd and drive it for what its worth until I can get my evo
the catch can is a good idea to help with oil blow back from getting into the intake system. but it will not correct any leaning out issues.. if all ur ports are plugged.. and nothing leaking.. the valve cover pcv ventalations is not the source of your leaks.
have u considered that maybe ur just not able to push enough fuel threw the system to correct ur leaning out? whats ur fuel pressure at? what type of injectors?
not many people are pushing as much boost as you, so your lack of fuel could be a problem with the pump, lines, or even the rail. now a vaccume leak is possible, but if u checked all ur hoses and nothing is left unplugged or leaking then i doubt its a vac leak.. (also dont forget to check the charcoal box in the trunk!)
Last edited by Demon_ni2; Apr 6, 2010 at 12:48 PM.
Heres some info that I found:
Running a breather filter instead of back to the intake pipe can mess with your fuel trims. The breather filter is letting in unmetered air to the IM. The fuel trims will have to go more positive to correct the situation.
I don't know why so many people have a hard time understanding this, then come and argue with me.
The breather hose is connected to the turbo intake pipe after the MAF so that IT WILL BE COUNTED. If you understand how the PCV system works, it's really easy to understand.
For probably the 100th time, let me explain this again.
During idle or cruise conditions where their is vacuum in the intake manifold, the PCV valve is pulled open. The air follows this path:
1. Into the air filter
2. Through the MAF and counted
3. Into the breather hose
4. Under the valve cover
5. Out the valve cover through the PCV valve
6. Into the intake manifold
7. Into the cylinders
If you unhook the breather hose from the intake pipe, you are bypassing steps 1-3 and the air is not counted by the MAF.
I don't know why so many people have a hard time understanding this, then come and argue with me.
The breather hose is connected to the turbo intake pipe after the MAF so that IT WILL BE COUNTED. If you understand how the PCV system works, it's really easy to understand.
For probably the 100th time, let me explain this again.
During idle or cruise conditions where their is vacuum in the intake manifold, the PCV valve is pulled open. The air follows this path:
1. Into the air filter
2. Through the MAF and counted
3. Into the breather hose
4. Under the valve cover
5. Out the valve cover through the PCV valve
6. Into the intake manifold
7. Into the cylinders
If you unhook the breather hose from the intake pipe, you are bypassing steps 1-3 and the air is not counted by the MAF.
Also, I checked my logs and during WOT my IDC's are only ~70%
My fuel pressure is set at 38 PSI at idle and raises 1:1 with boost.
My fuel rail was bored out at the machine shop at work to fit the Aeromotive FPR, so that should be enough.
You were correct earlier when you stated that the PCV is closed under non-vacuum (or boost) situations. This would only affect your running rich at idle, not the running lean up top. It looks like your fuel system is adequate. You might try raising your base fuel pressure from 38 to 43-45 and see if this helps out. If you're still running the stock Lancer MAF, you might want to look into swapping to a 501 or Evo 399 MAF.
Also, are you still running the stock Lancer ECU? If you are, what do your fuel tables look like with only 10 load points to adjust? What sorts of loads are you seeing? I'd be willing to bet this is your problem. You likely have exceeded the capabilities of the stock ECU.
Also, are you still running the stock Lancer ECU? If you are, what do your fuel tables look like with only 10 load points to adjust? What sorts of loads are you seeing? I'd be willing to bet this is your problem. You likely have exceeded the capabilities of the stock ECU.
You were correct earlier when you stated that the PCV is closed under non-vacuum (or boost) situations. This would only affect your running rich at idle, not the running lean up top. It looks like your fuel system is adequate. You might try raising your base fuel pressure from 38 to 43-45 and see if this helps out. If you're still running the stock Lancer MAF, you might want to look into swapping to a 501 or Evo 399 MAF.
Also, are you still running the stock Lancer ECU? If you are, what do your fuel tables look like with only 10 load points to adjust? What sorts of loads are you seeing? I'd be willing to bet this is your problem. You likely have exceeded the capabilities of the stock ECU.
Also, are you still running the stock Lancer ECU? If you are, what do your fuel tables look like with only 10 load points to adjust? What sorts of loads are you seeing? I'd be willing to bet this is your problem. You likely have exceeded the capabilities of the stock ECU.
I am on the stock ECU with the IX 399 MAF.
Is there a difference between the VIII and the IX MAF?
On my fuel tables I removed lower resolution loads that are the same to free higher resolution loads.
I am using 260 MAF size so my load isn't sky high.
My log shows my loads do not go over the highest resolution in my fuel/ignition maps.
Can't think of the value off the top of my head, I'm in class
Hey 4G94T check out the last couple of pages in my thread you might be having the same kinda of issue. I also have a stock ecu with evo 9 399 maf (8 and 9 are identical btw) my ignition maps use the same load I log, however my fuel maps do not. Try logging afrmap if your not already doing so. This will tell you exactly what load/rpm cell your ecu is accessing at any given time. Mine is accessing a load cell about 50 above what I am logging. I dont know why it is all I know is I have definately confirmed this to be the case.
Page 47 and post 701 is where I start to discover this GL!!
Page 47 and post 701 is where I start to discover this GL!!
Correct. For instance I would notice my logged load would hit lets say 45, well according to my afrmap my ecu clearly refrenced load cell 90 in that rpm range. Also before I rescaled my fuel map load collumn any load logged above 100 would always clearly reference my 150 load cells ( my highest load cell at the time)
03lances:
After reading a couple threads in the ecuflash forum, the fuel table is just a number that represents the IPW.
I richened my map past 10.1 and according to my logs, my IDCs increased.
That means our fuel map DOES respond below 10.1
I've richened my fuel map where it leans out and now I have a steady AFR throughout.
Now the problem is.
How do we get the values in the fuel table CLOSER to actual AFRs on the wideband.
After reading a couple threads in the ecuflash forum, the fuel table is just a number that represents the IPW.
I richened my map past 10.1 and according to my logs, my IDCs increased.
That means our fuel map DOES respond below 10.1
I've richened my fuel map where it leans out and now I have a steady AFR throughout.
Now the problem is.
How do we get the values in the fuel table CLOSER to actual AFRs on the wideband.
That has to do with the maf scaling IIRC. This is strange because my ecu clearly does not register anything below 10.01 I have confirmed this on several occasions, strange...
The values in the cells are just values, nothing more. If you look at some of the Evo guys tuned maps, they have fuel table values that go lower than 9.0 and even 8.0 in some cases. That doesn't mean that their AFR will mirror those values.
If there is a way to get the ECU to mirror the AFR values with the fuel tables, I am unaware of it.