PDA

View Full Version : 2.5 swirl head tuning



Force Fed Mopar
03-18-2011, 01:40 PM
Working on a tune for Bozo's car, it has a 2.5 w/ a swirl head, +1mm valves and some cleanup in the ports. Tried a MP MTX cal (the one that comes with T-Smec) and it idled very rich (11's on the wideband)and stumbled bad when revved. So I took the stock 2.5 MTX cal (B151 template) and scaled it for 40's and 3-bar, and now it idles in the 13's on the wideband. But, it still stumbles when you rev it from idle, watching the wideband it seems to go way lean when the throttle is cracked. What table needs adjusting for this? I assume there is one that handles a function like the accelerator pump on a carb?

Full setup is:

2.5 w/ .040 Wiseco forged pistons
Swirl head w/ +1mm valves and minor smoothing on the intakes, stock chambers
2-piece intake, 52mm TB
FWD-P F3 cam
FWD-P T3/T4 Super 50 trim turbo, .63 housing and larger than stock exhaust wheel (Stg 3?)
TU cast header
+40 injectors
Adj fpr set to 55psi w/ the line off
Aftermarket fuel rail (FWD I think?)
3" exhaust
Air-to-water intercooler system

turbovanmanČ
03-18-2011, 02:13 PM
Pump eff table, then tweak the part throttle.

ShelGame
03-18-2011, 03:15 PM
What intake? Throttle body?

Force Fed Mopar
03-18-2011, 04:19 PM
What intake? Throttle body?

2-piece and a 52mm.

zin
03-18-2011, 09:25 PM
subscribed....

Mike

Force Fed Mopar
03-18-2011, 09:45 PM
I changed the first post to show the intake and TB, also that the head really isn't ported, more like smoothed intakes.

turbovanmanČ
03-19-2011, 12:06 AM
Post #2 still applies, :p

Force Fed Mopar
03-19-2011, 12:44 AM
Post #2 still applies, :p

Ok :) Which way do you go w/ Pump Efficiency to make it richer?

ShelGame
03-19-2011, 10:26 AM
Up on the PumpEff. More air = More fuel.

Though, I was going to say you may need to tweak the transient fuel tables a little bit for the F3 cam.

Also, what vacuum do you have at idle? You could be in the wrong adaptive fuel cell for idle if the vacuum is very different from stock.

Force Fed Mopar
03-19-2011, 12:09 PM
Up on the PumpEff. More air = More fuel.

Though, I was going to say you may need to tweak the transient fuel tables a little bit for the F3 cam.

Also, what vacuum do you have at idle? You could be in the wrong adaptive fuel cell for idle if the vacuum is very different from stock.

20" of vacuum at idle. I was thinking that with the stock head the PumpEff shouldn't have to change much. I guess the cam may change it a bit though. Which transient tables should I look at?

ShelGame
03-19-2011, 10:34 PM
Which transient tables should I look at?

That is a good question. There are 4 time constant tables, I would start with them. They are used in the MAP and TPS averaging function. I forget the names, I'll look them up tomorrow...

Force Fed Mopar
03-20-2011, 09:45 PM
Bump, gonna need this info this week...

Force Fed Mopar
03-21-2011, 09:36 AM
I don't think changing the pump efficiency is gonna help, as it is rpm related. If I increase the PumpEff at idle it's gonna go back to idling too rich again I think. When it was idling at 11.4 on the MP tune it still had the same stumble when cracking the throttle. I dunno if leaning it would help either, as it is a lean stumble already.

Force Fed Mopar
03-23-2011, 03:08 PM
It might be the timing, maybe it needs to be bumped up a bit in vacuum? The lean spike may just be from cracking the throttle and it sucking in air.

What is DefaultSparkAdvance1?

Force Fed Mopar
04-15-2011, 09:39 PM
What is DefaultSparkAdvance1?

Bump...

ShelGame
04-16-2011, 11:10 AM
It might be the timing, maybe it needs to be bumped up a bit in vacuum? The lean spike may just be from cracking the throttle and it sucking in air.

What is DefaultSparkAdvance1?

That's the minimum advance, I beleive. I'd have to go study again to be sure...

GLHNSLHT2
04-16-2011, 11:20 AM
I don't know about the new relocatable cals but using the old T1 based cals there's a table that acts like an accelerator pump that I had to bump just a bit. Sounds like there's too much fuel in the fuel from no throttle curve causing your rich idle. For the pump eff I just floor it in like 3rd and watch the a/f. as long as the boost stays constant then the a/f will tell you where you need to tweak the pump eff table. I had to richen it up above 5200rpms because that's where a stock 1 piece intake starts choking off a 2.5 where the 2 piece on mine let it breathe up top.

Aries_Turbo
04-16-2011, 12:51 PM
I don't think changing the pump efficiency is gonna help, as it is rpm related.

yes it is going to help. pumping efficiency is all about RPM related fuel. at idle rpm, adjust the level. it will only go rich again if the o2 controller is changed so that it seeks rich o2 values.

as for the transient stumble.... im not really sure. id want to look at high sample rate map values vs tps vs afr. what are you guys datalogging with?

combine that with i dont exactly know what all each table/constant affects, its hard to tell what to try cause they are all interconnected. you may adjust one table and then have to tweak all of them cause it screws them all up.

i dont think its timing though as the fuel went super lean.

try Enrichment From Temp. i think that is the Throttle Position based enrichment. keep in mind that its coolant temp based. if it only stumbles when its warmed up, only enrich it at the temp range where it stumbles.

there is also a map based enrichment. DeltaMapEnrichment FromTemp2. id try the TPS based one first though im not sure why.

DONT DO THIS TILL YOU ADJUST THE PUMPING EFFICIENCY and get the idle in the afr range which you want it. if you dont, youll have to do the transient enrichment change again. PUMPING EFFICIENCY is always the table you tune first.


Sounds like there's too much fuel in the fuel from no throttle curve causing your rich idle.

NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO !!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!! !!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!

leave those damn tables alone. they are purely theoretical based fuel tables that calculate fuel based on injector size and 100% of the cyl being filled with air at various densities (ie map pressure/vac).

the changes to this motor (porting/cam/manifolds) do not affect INJECTOR SIZE and a FUEL CALCULATION BASED ON THE THE CYLS BEING COMPLETELY FILLED WITH AIR.

the changes to this motor affect how its going to need to be fueled based on how much air is drawn in from an RPM standpoint.

stick with the pumping efficiency table to adjust idle fuel.

only adjust the map fuel tables for a few reasons:

1. shutting the injectors off as much as possible below a certain vacuum (ie deep vacuum from decel, lower than any normal part or full throttle vacuum) to save fuel.

2. Making the FuelPartThrottle fueling match the FuelFullThrottle above 3-5psi or so for safety and when running a manual boost controller.

3. when running really high boost and the fuel pump/regulator/lines combo drops fuel flow a touch and the pumping efficiency table is dialed in perfectly for lower boost. then adjust the FuelFullThrottle and FuelPartThrottle table up a little bit in the really high boost ranges to compensate for a small drop in fuel flow due to the fuelpump/lines/regulator. DO NOT DO THIS to compensate for too small of a fuel injector because youll probably hit 100% duty cycle. Only do this if you stay below 85% duty cycle for the injectors. DO NOT DO THIS to compensate for way too small of a fuel pump or lines.

Brian

turbovanmanČ
04-16-2011, 02:05 PM
Ok Which way do you go w/ Pump Efficiency to make it richer?

Just look at the rpm where your lean/rich, then go to the PUMP eff table and raise it to add fuel, lower to take fuel out. If its a stock head and bigger cam etc, you'll have to move the table up around 5000+ rpm as the stock basically runs out of steam there, :p

GLHNSLHT2
04-16-2011, 03:07 PM
NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO !!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!! !!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!NO!!!!

leave those damn tables alone. they are purely theoretical based fuel tables that calculate fuel based on injector size and 100% of the cyl being filled with air at various densities (ie map pressure/vac).

the changes to this motor (porting/cam/manifolds) do not affect INJECTOR SIZE and a FUEL CALCULATION BASED ON THE THE CYLS BEING COMPLETELY FILLED WITH AIR.

the changes to this motor affect how its going to need to be fueled based on how much air is drawn in from an RPM standpoint.

stick with the pumping efficiency table to adjust idle fuel.

only adjust the map fuel tables for a few reasons:

1. shutting the injectors off as much as possible below a certain vacuum (ie deep vacuum from decel, lower than any normal part or full throttle vacuum) to save fuel.

2. Making the FuelPartThrottle fueling match the FuelFullThrottle above 3-5psi or so for safety and when running a manual boost controller.

3. when running really high boost and the fuel pump/regulator/lines combo drops fuel flow a touch and the pumping efficiency table is dialed in perfectly for lower boost. then adjust the FuelFullThrottle and FuelPartThrottle table up a little bit in the really high boost ranges to compensate for a small drop in fuel flow due to the fuelpump/lines/regulator. DO NOT DO THIS to compensate for too small of a fuel injector because youll probably hit 100% duty cycle. Only do this if you stay below 85% duty cycle for the injectors. DO NOT DO THIS to compensate for way too small of a fuel pump or lines.

Brian


See, those are the tables I play with 1st. So far I've had good results doing it. Car ran hard, had perfect a/f ratio's and got awesome mileage till I tore it all down to swap chassis. Guess we'll see what I can do with the Masi 16v head on it but I'll probably be tweaking it in the same way.

Aries_Turbo
04-16-2011, 04:06 PM
dont do it.

its wrong.

and if you are going to do it that way, dont tell others about what you are doing cause you are doing it wrong and theyll learn wrong as well.

other than the 3 examples above, almost all fuel tuning should be done with the pumping efficiency table.

do you touch the pumping efficiency table at all?

i cant believe that simon gets something about tuning and you dont. :)

Brian

GLHNSLHT2
04-16-2011, 04:53 PM
I don't see how it's wrong so that's just your opinion. The PE table adjust fuel across the board. Maybe I don't want more fuel at 14psi part throttle than at 14psi at WOT. Or Maybe I want to shut the fuel off in no throttle situations above a certain vacuum, or I want the O2 to be ignored at a certain boost level. I can't do that with the PE table.

When tuning cals 1st became something everyone could do they found that Mopar just scaled the PE table for the S60 cal. At that time everyone was told that is the wrong way to do it and not to touch that. Now you guys have reversed your tune to say Oh yes mess with the PE table to make fueling adjustments. So which is it? And WHY?

Cause my belief is that the PE table assumes you're trying to cram as much air into the engine as possible and it will flow better or worse at certain rpms and that's what the PE table represents. So if my a/f is rock solid from 1000-7200rpms at 0psi and WOT then my PE table is perfect. But If I'm lean at 14lbs of boost then I need to mess with either the WOT or PT table.

So yes I've messed with the PE table, but only because the car started to lean out above 5000rpms at a steady constant boost level. But when doing a cal the 1st thing I mess with is those 3 other tables.

Case in point when I went from a stockish top end to a heavily ported big plenum tube header top end I needed to add fuel at idle because the ECU couldn't adapt and kept getting leaner and leaner until it would stall out. So I added 50% at my idle vacuum in the fuel no throttle table to what had been there originally. Bam it was instantly fixed.

zin
04-16-2011, 06:37 PM
It sure would be educational to learn what the the factory did during development. That is to say, how did they determine the base numbers, then what did they adjust 1st ,why that parameter and what was the order after that? By how much were changes made? Once the baseline was there, what was the order of "tweaking"?

I can guess at it, but nothing replaces hands-on exp!

Mike

Aries_Turbo
04-16-2011, 07:43 PM
I don't see how it's wrong so that's just your opinion. The PE table adjust fuel across the board. Maybe I don't want more fuel at 14psi part throttle than at 14psi at WOT. Or Maybe I want to shut the fuel off in no throttle situations above a certain vacuum, or I want the O2 to be ignored at a certain boost level. I can't do that with the PE table.

of course you dont see how its wrong cause you dont know how those tables are set up to work. ;) Everyone sees those tables and gets all excited cause they are thinking in "boost" terms rather than RPM terms for how an engine responds to the mechanical bits.

its not opinion. its fact that those tables are based on 100% of the cyl being filled and how long of a pulse of the injector will create a given air fuel ratio.

overlay the PEFTBL on top of that and you get adjustment based on the breathing characteristics over the RPM range.

adjusting fuel to be different at part throttle than full throttle falls in the realm of ok things to adjust that table for.

shutting off the injectors in high vac falls into the realm of ok things to adjust that table for as well.

did you read what i wrote? seriously? :)

O2 cant be set to be ignored via the map fuel tables. another table does that. I think MAPLIM aka NoCellUpdateAboveThisMap may do this. im not 100% sure though.


Cause my belief is that the PE table assumes you're trying to cram as much air into the engine as possible and it will flow better or worse at certain rpms and that's what the PE table represents. So if my a/f is rock solid from 1000-7200rpms at 0psi and WOT then my PE table is perfect. But If I'm lean at 14lbs of boost then I need to mess with either the WOT or PT table.

thats more or less correct. thats pretty much what i explained. i know i said "really high boost" but it sometimes needs to be tweaked a little based on how the factory curves were set up if you didnt set your AF based on the calcs in MPTuner or CHEM2.


So yes I've messed with the PE table, but only because the car started to lean out above 5000rpms at a steady constant boost level. But when doing a cal the 1st thing I mess with is those 3 other tables.[\QUOTE]

sure thats perfectly fine. (the first part)

so when you say "mess with" do you mean "set things up for safety and some personalized tweaks"? if so, yeah that was what i was saying when i listed those three things that are ok to mess with those tables for.

[QUOTE=GLHNSLHT2;799803]Case in point when I went from a stockish top end to a heavily ported big plenum tube header top end I needed to add fuel at idle because the ECU couldn't adapt and kept getting leaner and leaner until it would stall out. So I added 50% at my idle vacuum in the fuel no throttle table to what had been there originally. Bam it was instantly fixed.

that should have been done at the idle RPM area of the PumpingEfficiency table. in this instance, we are splitting hairs but thats the way it should have been done or you should have added it to all 3 map fuel tables.


It sure would be educational to learn what the the factory did during development. That is to say, how did they determine the base numbers, then what did they adjust 1st ,why that parameter and what was the order after that? By how much were changes made? Once the baseline was there, what was the order of "tweaking"?

I can guess at it, but nothing replaces hands-on exp!

Mike

i dont know exactly what was going on but i can bet that there are a few folks around here that do know.

i do know how to tune pretty well and ive listened intently when those who do know were explaining things.

Brian

ShelGame
04-17-2011, 08:12 AM
Here's a good read for idle tuning... http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/showthread.php?52900-Which-parameter-to-adjust-idle-fuel-mixture&highlight=idle

ShelGame
04-17-2011, 08:33 AM
I don't see how it's wrong so that's just your opinion. The PE table adjust fuel across the board. Maybe I don't want more fuel at 14psi part throttle than at 14psi at WOT. Or Maybe I want to shut the fuel off in no throttle situations above a certain vacuum, or I want the O2 to be ignored at a certain boost level. I can't do that with the PE table.

Well, you wouldn't get more fuel at P/T than WOT becuase the A/F comes from the 16-bit fuel table.


When tuning cals 1st became something everyone could do they found that Mopar just scaled the PE table for the S60 cal. At that time everyone was told that is the wrong way to do it and not to touch that. Now you guys have reversed your tune to say Oh yes mess with the PE table to make fueling adjustments. So which is it? And WHY?

The problem with the S60 cal is that Mopar ONLY scaled the PeffTbl. They did not adjust the 3 main fuel tables for injectors, or fuel, or base charge temperature. They're just stock T2 fuel tables. The Pef Tbl is set to like 40% volumetric efficienct to compensate. Obviously, that's not right. The DC ported head that came with the S60 package would have flowed much better than that. I don't think it was said to NOT touch the PEfTbl, just to not do ALL of the fuel scaling with it.


Cause my belief is that the PE table assumes you're trying to cram as much air into the engine as possible and it will flow better or worse at certain rpms and that's what the PE table represents. So if my a/f is rock solid from 1000-7200rpms at 0psi and WOT then my PE table is perfect. But If I'm lean at 14lbs of boost then I need to mess with either the WOT or PT table.

Well, maybe. If the WOT table is calling for you to be lean at that boost, then you may need to add fuel there. But, for example, if the WOT table is setup for 10:1 AFR and you're runnning 13:1, then I would say the PefTbl is wrong at that RPM. I mean, I assume you were accelerating when you hit 14psi. Did it go lean at 14psi? Or at the RPM it hit 14psi at? You'd have to really look at some data to tell for sure.


So yes I've messed with the PE table, but only because the car started to lean out above 5000rpms at a steady constant boost level. But when doing a cal the 1st thing I mess with is those 3 other tables.

Case in point when I went from a stockish top end to a heavily ported big plenum tube header top end I needed to add fuel at idle because the ECU couldn't adapt and kept getting leaner and leaner until it would stall out. So I added 50% at my idle vacuum in the fuel no throttle table to what had been there originally. Bam it was instantly fixed.

Obviously, there's more than 1 way to skin a cat, but I think Brian's point is that you can really get yourself screwed up if you concentrate on the 3 main fuel tables. Of course, you can do tuning with them (they all go into the same equation). But, if you are not fully aware of when each of the tables comes into and out of effect, you can get yourself all bass ackwards and stuff. That doesn't sound like the case with you, but it's something to avoid if you're new to tuning these cals - especially if you're coming from a Ford or GM (or MS) tuning background...

---------- Post added at 08:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:25 AM ----------


O2 cant be set to be ignored via the map fuel tables. another table does that. I think MAPLIM aka NoCellUpdateAboveThisMap may do this. im not 100% sure though.

Try this ... http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/showthread.php?57466-What-table-to-adjust-the-open-closed-loop-parameter&daysprune=365

---------- Post added at 08:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:27 AM ----------


It sure would be educational to learn what the the factory did during development. That is to say, how did they determine the base numbers, then what did they adjust 1st ,why that parameter and what was the order after that? By how much were changes made? Once the baseline was there, what was the order of "tweaking"?

I can guess at it, but nothing replaces hands-on exp!

Mike

Well, if you look at all of the 2.5 T1 cals starting in '89, the PefTbl and the 3 main fuel tables really are not touched up thru '91. What they changed was mainly in O2 feedback and control. In other words, Chrysler found open loop performance that worked and they never touched it again. They let the closed loop control handle everything after that. Which makes sense - fuel economy and emissions are both more important to a production car and harder to achieve tuning-wise.

The 2.2 T1/T2 cals were similar. Though, the PefTbl is slightly different between generations of 2.2 (post log intake) cals.

I don't know how they got to the original PefTbl, I assume it was experimentally.

Aries_Turbo
04-17-2011, 04:00 PM
Obviously, there's more than 1 way to skin a cat, but I think Brian's point is that you can really get yourself screwed up if you concentrate on the 3 main fuel tables. Of course, you can do tuning with them (they all go into the same equation). But, if you are not fully aware of when each of the tables comes into and out of effect, you can get yourself all bass ackwards and stuff. That doesn't sound like the case with you, but it's something to avoid if you're new to tuning these cals - especially if you're coming from a Ford or GM (or MS) tuning background...

Try this ... http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/showthread.php?57466-What-table-to-adjust-the-open-closed-loop-parameter&daysprune=365

Well, if you look at all of the 2.5 T1 cals starting in '89, the PefTbl and the 3 main fuel tables really are not touched up thru '91. What they changed was mainly in O2 feedback and control. In other words, Chrysler found open loop performance that worked and they never touched it again. They let the closed loop control handle everything after that. Which makes sense - fuel economy and emissions are both more important to a production car and harder to achieve tuning-wise.

The 2.2 T1/T2 cals were similar. Though, the PefTbl is slightly different between generations of 2.2 (post log intake) cals.

I don't know how they got to the original PefTbl, I assume it was experimentally.

yup, when frank started doing his own cals, he immediately started changing his map fuel tables. it messed everything up and he had to start over. half the time i see folks learning to do cals, they go straight for the map fuel tables and then the car runs badly cause they dont know what they are doing.

im not saying that GLHSLHT2 doesnt know what he is doing, i just think he needs a little guidance in some areas.

like the saying in the linked thread
un-match the curves till the level you want the O2 to be ignored.. and this
or I want the O2 to be ignored at a certain boost level they are not quite accurate. if you set the part throttle table to a level that generates an afr thats not 14.7, its going to hunt for 14.7 until it reaches MAPLIM. then it will ignore the o2 and follow whatever level you have the curve set to.

as for peftbl, im sure they had some thoughts/design on how an engine would perform at various rpms based on cam specs, headflow and port volume, manifold design etc, but theoretical design and real world testing always reveals some differences between the two.

remember that "turbo" video that nemesismachine (i think) posted about the early formula 1 turbo development.

they had that engine on the dyno and were manually adjusting the pulsewidth at points the whole way up the rev range so they could program the controller with it.

Brian

zin
04-17-2011, 04:26 PM
I don't know exactly what was going on but i can bet that there are a few folks around here that do know.

i do know how to tune pretty well and Ive listened intently when those who do know were explaining things.

Brian

I'm in the same boat, though I haven't gotten into making my own cals just yet, always seems like there's a new program/widget that is just around the bend that will make whatever process you just learned obsolete/more difficult...

Initially I thought I'd get an Ostrich (still leaning that way), so I could see an near instant response to what changes I've made, but the interface seems to be a question in my mind... I was really hopeful that Quantum would figure out why the blue tooth adapter he was using drained the battery, as this was the best of everything IMHO...

Mike

PS I'm also really hoping some of us with "inside knowledge" will chime in, certainly 30year old tech shared on a smallish Forum would raise Chryco's ire? (if they even every found out)...

zin
04-17-2011, 04:51 PM
if you set the part throttle table to a level that generates an afr that's not 14.7, its going to hunt for 14.7 until it reaches MAPLIM. then it will ignore the o2 and follow whatever level you have the curve set to.
Brian

Does anyone know where/how to change this target A/F? I'd like to experiment with running leaner than that for mileage, and general shenanigans and would prefer to just let the routine do it's thing, but shoot for a different number...

Mike

Force Fed Mopar
04-17-2011, 05:00 PM
I believe it's in the O2 ramp settings, not sure how to adjust those yet.

Force Fed Mopar
04-24-2011, 09:27 AM
Working on this now, kind of giving me a fit. Scaled for 52lb injectors, it's rich pretty much everywhere. Scaled for 58's, it's idling rich (11's), going lean at part-throttle (15-16's in and out of boost), but at WOT it is pretty good, 10.9-11.3 on the wideband. I'm playing w/ the PumpEff a bit right now, any other suggestions?

BTW I am using the B151 template (T-SMEC). The FuelPartThrottle table is the same as the FuelBaselineFromMap table, like identical. Is this how it should be?

Force Fed Mopar
04-24-2011, 12:12 PM
Full setup is:

2.5 w/ .040 Wiseco forged pistons
Swirl head w/ +1mm valves and minor smoothing on the intakes, stock chambers
2-piece intake, 52mm TB
FWD-P F3 cam
FWD-P T3/T4 Super 50 trim turbo, .63 housing and larger than stock exhaust wheel (Stg 3?)
TU cast header
+40 injectors
Adj fpr set to 55psi w/ the line off
Aftermarket fuel rail (FWD I think?)
3" exhaust
Air-to-water intercooler system

Just bumping the setup for you guys to see easier.

Force Fed Mopar
04-25-2011, 01:55 AM
Well I made some progress tonight (this morning, whatever it is lol), pulled a bit of fuel out of the FuelBaselineFromMap table at the idle vacuum area (18-20 inHg, about -9.7 to -7.75 psi). Moved those two points down 2 arrow clicks each, wideband now reads 17-18 at hot idle, but it idles good and there's no fuel smoke.

BTW I tried adjusting the PumpEff table to do this, didn't work :p

http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=30553&d=1303710944

GLHNSLHT2
04-25-2011, 07:44 PM
Looks like you moved it too much though. I'd go back to the original and move it 20% and see where the values land. Should be in between those 2 lines somewhere. That should put you right about where you want to be. It'll take a while for the adaptives to kick in. Mine wouldn't start trimming fuel in the ECU till about 3 trips to and from work. But don't listen to me, I'm doing it wrong.

Force Fed Mopar
04-25-2011, 08:06 PM
Hehe :)

I'm starting to wonder if the wideband sensor is good, as I can still smell fuel at idle, no smoke but I can smell it's a bit rich. It's an AEM unit. It's going to go get inspected tomorrow and then to a car show this weekend, then it's coming back to finished tuning.

Aries_Turbo
04-25-2011, 10:42 PM
But don't listen to me, I'm doing it wrong.

dont be a turd.

Rob, how much did you change the PEFTBL when it didnt work?

Brian

Force Fed Mopar
04-25-2011, 10:57 PM
dont be a turd.

Rob, how much did you change the PEFTBL when it didnt work?

Brian

I want to say, like 6 arrow clicks down? I think I set it to 85% at 1500rpm and lower, whereas it was 87% at 2500rpm and lower stock. I only changed the first point. It made no noticeable change in AF ratio.

Aries_Turbo
04-25-2011, 11:39 PM
do drastic stuff to see how it effects the fueling. you can always put it back.

ive seen others change the peftbl and it worked pretty well to correct idle warbles and fuel mix.

Brian

Force Fed Mopar
04-25-2011, 11:48 PM
I thought that was drastic lol. I'll play with it some more.

x.Gen
04-26-2011, 05:07 PM
Hehe :)

I'm starting to wonder if the wideband sensor is good, as I can still smell fuel at idle, no smoke but I can smell it's a bit rich. It's an AEM unit.

this is the first thing I was thinking. I'm not familiar with AEM's, so I can't say much, but just the earlier post mentioning rich idle and relatively lean part-throttle had me thinking something was up with it (guessing that you only scaled fuel for injectors, though). I'd be calibrating the WB and figuring out that first before I go crazy on the fuel curves/PEFTBL. WB's having that rep of short life and heat sensitivity, I'd question that before anything.

when I've moved my PEFTBL, results were readily visible (on the WB and running condition). you having to scale for 58's to get it close seems extreme. that makes the WB questionable to me. I mean you could have a pinched/kinked fuel return or something, but I'd think that would have been noticeable previously. at the very least I wouldn't be running off the NB-out until you know the WB is good. without knowing, it will be hard to fine tune at best.

Force Fed Mopar
04-26-2011, 05:32 PM
I'm scaling for 58's because that is what some +40's flow. The ones I have in my Daytona are like that, scaled for 52 and it was rich all over, we fooled w/ PumpEff and other stuff it still wasn't quite right. Scaled for 58's and it was nearly spot on, minor tweaks only.

The Lebaron I'm working on doesn't even have a NB in it, just the WB, which is fine, if the sensor is good :) I know nothing of the AEM units either, I'll have to look them up. I do seem to remember something about their sensors dieing fairly often or easily.

x.Gen
04-26-2011, 06:21 PM
The Lebaron I'm working on doesn't even have a NB in it, just the WB, which is fine, if the sensor is good :)

thought your post lacked some emphasis ;) I guess my +40's were closer to spec, or my setup breathes better than I thought...I always work off calculated flow first, and really didn't have to do much to the curves when I put them in. kind of shocked me, actually.

ShelGame
04-26-2011, 06:32 PM
Yeah, I agree. There are some '+40's' that appear to me to be 550cc/min@43.5psi injectors. Which equate to 58.8pph (NOT 52pph). I think someone @Mopar screwed up a spec to a supplier at some point...

x.Gen
04-26-2011, 06:58 PM
58.8 = 42 + (42*40%) I think I figured that one out... :D

Force Fed Mopar
04-26-2011, 07:14 PM
Or, if you have a injector rated at 52lbs at 43.5 psi, then turn the fuel pressure up to 55 :nod:

turbovanmanČ
04-27-2011, 06:33 PM
I think I have some of those mysterious +40's, I never seem to run out of fuel, lol.