No changes will be made under 500hz?
I doubled my whole MAF scaling and it didnt affect my cruising AFR, it is still a solid 14.7

Increasing the scaling in the 30-50hz did improve my idle

 

If your injectors are scaled correctly and have the correct latencies, you should not need to modify the MAF scaling below 500hz.

Your improvement at idle is more likely because the injectors were not scaled correctly and the fuel trims were off. The MAF scaling table will also affect the fuel trims as it controls the airflow part of the A:F equation.

Your cruise AFR didn't change because you're operating in closed loop ... the ECU adjusted the fuel to compensate for the modified MAF values.

EDIT :: Actually, i have made minor changes under 500hz as my first revision of the map was based on Complink's post earlier in the thread. My first attempt was very similar to his map ... +5 to +10 or so below 500hz. https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/6418559-post46.html

 

Touring, do you notice in your logs that the IPW peaks and then drops down?
My AFR would hit high 10's and climb to mid 11's as the RPMs rise.
I noticed in my log that the IPW would decrease, if this would stay constant once it has peaked it would keep my AFR steady and not climb to mid 11's.

Here is my excel log:
http://www.box.net/shared/uqsdfbbo7k

 

Your IPW decreases after 4500RPM because the engine load is decreasing. However, the airflow continues to increase as does the ignition advance resulting in the increased AFRs you are seeing.

 

Pete nailed it ... it happens on Evo's too. That can only be addressed in the fuel map as the load drops. The low resolution of the maps for the Lancer don't aid you in this instance as you're still between columns. It looks like you could add some fuel in the 5500 - 6000 area though to help the issue.

 

On the plus side, he isn't seeing any knock in the upper RPMs and his engine load doesn't exceed 100 in his log. He's in a really good position to have a nice tune.

 

thanks guys.

even though my timing advances as the AFR and RPM's rise there is no knock. My AFR does not get any leaner than 11.5 AFR.

I'll add more fuel on the higher RPMs and see how that does. Also this is @ 9 PSI

 

What do these tables do?

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/n...untitled-1.jpg

 

This is the TPS voltage that is referenced to switch into open loop under high load and under low load. These two tables for for voltage whereas the open loop load (high & low octane) tables are for load %.

 

I see. So this table and the Open Loop Load table work together.

The reason I ask is because when I am on the freeway (70 mph) and I want to pass another car I would give about 40-50% throttle while staying in the same gear and the boost will climb up to 5 PSI and I noticed the AFR would stay at 14.7 AFR and I would knock.

I've lowered the Open Loop Load (High Octane) to 40% @ 3500 so that it would switch over to the fuel maps so I can get more fuel in and try to get rid of that knock, but nothing happened.

 

Since the ECU doesn't use a MAP sensor for calculations it does make for a tricky situation. What you will want to do is not adjust the Open Loop Load table, but the Open Loop Throttle values. At that speed in 5th gear there will be little increase in the engine load, but the TPS voltage WILL change because you are giving it 40-50% throttle. However, you may run really rich or lean because you will switch to Open Loop and the engine load will be less than 60% at an RPM of around 2500 or so. This is normally a range you wouldn't think to adjust for. Usually we'll focus on load greater than 60% from 2500RPM to redline.

 

Would I increase or decrease voltage and how much should I increment? I just want to add a little fuel and see if that gets rid of the knock...

Good news, I got curious and I increased my MAF size to 240, and I finally hit over 100% load and was able to hold a richer AFR. Could this be the answer?

 

You need to decrease the voltage. When the engine is off, the TPS reads between 0.3V - 0.9V. I think the TPS maxes out somewhere around 5V.

In terms of now seeing over 100% load, it isn't good. The Lancer ECU does not have the provisions to adjust for loads over 100%. What you have to do is re-scale the tables to now be able to adjust over 100%. Bad part about this is that we only have 10 points of adjustment in the load range in our fuel tables, whereas the Evos have over 20. And by changing the MAF size you are now fooling the ECU into thinking its seeing a higher load than it real is and thus tuning becomes impossible.

 

hey 4g94T about your excel log... i noticed that your fuel trims never changed throughout the entire log... I used mitsulogger and its the same? How are we supposed to go about tuning fuel trims if they never change?

 

My load % is scaled up to 120%. So increasing the MAF size too much will result in higher loads and no room for tuning?

Sykou, the low and mid trims don't change that fast.
You have to drive around normally and they will change little by little.

If you reset the ECU the fuel trims should come up after around 10 miles.

With my current fuel trim mid my scaling is set to 366.