e85 + 3.0 + megasquirt - whats needed

[Sundance 6g72]

So ive been doing alot of thinking lately about e85 when i should really be thinking about how im going to get my motor back in the car before the weather gets really nice.

Im curious about e85 and whats needed to run it.

From my understanding, for my car to do 350whp, my walbro 255 that i have to install, 42# injectors (stock fuel pressure regulator), stock fuel lines, will be enough.

My first setback is how to actually tune e85. I know it burns at different air fuel ratios but the lambda values are the same?

so 14.7afr for pure 93 octane is 1 lambda but for e85 1 lambda is 9.7. I get this.

my first problem with that was that my wideband only goes to 10:1 BUTT i kept reading and found that my wideband is for gasoline and it really reads lambda values and then converts them to gasoline AFR values. So when im tuning for cruise with e85 i want the wideband to read 14.7 afr because that means the sensor is reading 1 lamda and i happen to really be at 9.7 afr but the gauge says 14.7 because it dosnt know that im not running gasoline anymore?

if this is true, tuning WOT to 12:1 AFR would actually mean my afr is around 8.5 due to the car burning e85 (or close to that?)


i guess what im getting at is do i tune the car as if its on gas? do i tune so my cruising afr is 15:1 and my WOT is 12:1 and not worry about what the real afr is because it should be the same because its the same lamda values

makes my head spin

i found this too

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i186/theswoleguy/AFRatioConversion.jpg


comments, suggestions, questions?

[c2xejk]

I think for the MS you just need to change the fuel setting to be e85. May have to change the AFR table. You should not mess with the VE table.

Not sure about your wideband, but I believe my innovate can be configured to read for e85. Remember that the wideband is reading excess O2 in the exhaust stream. It then maps that back to the AFR.

[Sundance 6g72]

the wideband should be reading in lambda though. so 1 lamda for gas is 14.7afr but for e85 its 9.7

i think my gauge will read 14.7 because thats how my wideband is setup to read.. so im thinking just tune to gas afr numbers. What i want to find out is this, does the prosport controller send lamda data to the megasquirt or does it convert it to AFR first and then send it to the megasquirt.

i have not looked at the MS settings yet but i figued i would just change settings, not ve values.

[Sundance 6g72]

so i just comfirmed that my current wideband is okay. once you understand how it all works you start to understand it. ill be tuning so my AFR values look correct for that of a gas engine and ignore the fact that the real afr is much "richer"

http://www.hptuners.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22372

[RoadWarrior222]

Yes, O2 sensor is an electrical cell activated by the presence of O2, it has 2 sides to it, backside and in the pipe, 2 cells, where the backside one is the reference as to how much O2 is actually in the air, and the inside one is how much is actually in the exhaust. So these are biased to give a value for how much O2 is remaining out of how much was there in the first place.

[Sundance 6g72]

yeah i get that. And now i understand that my gauge will distplay the same GAS afr and thats how i should tune the car

so im shooting for 15.5 gas afr during cruise and 12:1 gas afr during boost. Evo guys are talking about getting knock in the low 11 and 10 gas afr areas and leaning out to high 11s and mid 12s helps alot and usually eliminates it. they also say that they can run any timing they want and wont knock so they have to be extra carefull not to go past the MBT timing (timing where they see max TQ)


so im thinking 12:1 afr and maybe a few more degrees of timing in the boosted areas. Reason for this thinking is that my restrictive manifold, 13:1 afr spike and "high timing" only damaged one piston on 93 pump. I wont touch timing after that until i get knock detection figured out.

[Ondonti]

Evo guys are also using knock sensors that are probably worthless at those power levels. More likely they are suffering spark blowout when they run richer. It is well known that Alky can make better power compared to gas when run lean. This means you can be safer and not suffer as much power loss. Rich mixtures are hard to light. Thats why huge amounts of meth injection is hard to light off for me.

[Sundance 6g72]

i was thinking about that

if 14.7 gas afr is really 9.xxx e85 AFR then 10.9:1 gas afr is INSANE for e85. its funny reading threads that DSM guys post when making the switch, wondering why their car runs like --- when they have it tuned to the mid 10:1 gas AFR while running e85.

[c2xejk]

In a lot of ways, Lambda is probably a better way to read the AFR. I haven't switched because AFR is so ingrained in my head.

Some peoples confusion problably comes from a lack of understanding of what the number represents. AFR is the actual ratio of the Air to the mass of the fuel. That assumes a particular BTU/lbs of the fuel. Alcohol has a lower BTU and to further complicate thing, alcohol also brings oxygen with it. Thus max power for e85 comes when you add more fuel than just the BTU rating would suggest... As you might guess, you can make more power with e85 even with all else (ie. spark advance) being equal...

[TainterRacing]

The turbo you are running I dont think its going to help much you need to get a larger turbo to realy get advanteds with the E85.

[Sundance 6g72]

edit: i agree completly. if we learned on lamda, it would make more sense though i have no problem pretending its the same as gas. not like you can tune it wrong. pop e85 in and your gas tune will sudenly be very lean... add fuel and BAM your back to your gas AFR right where you want them.

i talked to DIY,they suggest just adding fuel via the VE table and changing no other settings. i like this idea because it will be easy to import and export VE and spark tables. Also have the option of the external switch that will change the spark and ve table for you with the table switching setting.



Tainter, I agree but here is my thoughts. e85 will help any car really, but with my turbo i cant take my motor as far as brent did with his e85 motor. If i go bigger turbo (IF) then itl come with regrind cams, and ill make a full 3inch downpipe (now 2.5.... :/ )

but this thread is about 3.0 + e85 in general, not just my car.

[RoadWarrior222]

. pop e85 in and your gas tune will sudenly be very lean...

Apparently this works rather well on older N/A cars with stupider 'pooters, i.e. pre-OBD2 mostly, the trick being to use about half and half with regular, can improve gas mileage quite a bit (Though dunno if it does much for power)

[Sundance 6g72]

hard to say if it helps power without knowing whats going on. from what im reading e85 makes best power between 11.5 - 12.5AFR. they tune for 12:1. This being the evo guys that i have been reading up on.

i can see a car cruising around at 13.5afr running 50% e85 and 50 straight pump would lean out a bit as long as the ecu does not compensate. Only problem with that is the injector pulse width is prolly the same and the leanning out is just an effect of whats going on.. still same amount of fuel being dumped. know what i mean?

thats why a normal modern car would go TOO LEAN and have to be tuned back to where it was by adding more fuel and thats where the bad mpg comes from.

[c2xejk]

edit: i agree completly. if we learned on lamda, it would make more sense though i have no problem pretending its the same as gas. not like you can tune it wrong. pop e85 in and your gas tune will sudenly be very lean... add fuel and BAM your back to your gas AFR right where you want them.

i talked to DIY,they suggest just adding fuel via the VE table and changing no other settings. i like this idea because it will be easy to import and export VE and spark tables. Also have the option of the external switch that will change the spark and ve table for you with the table switching setting.

While you can do that, I think it is a very KLUDGED way of dealing with the issue. VE is the volumetric efficiency of the engine, that does NOT change with a change in fuel. Also, if you make a change to the engine that does legitimately change the VE table, you have to tune it in two or more tables...

I would think a better solution would be to change the injector sizing...

Even better would be software support for fuel type (straight gasoline, e5, e10, e15, e20, ..., e85) I think during drag week we were getting different ethanol levels in some of the fuel and that was messing with the VE tables causing us to have to retune them when we would likely have been better off saying, we just added e10 to a 1/4 tank of straight gasoline so set the MS for e7.5. (maybe tweak that slightly) and not have to be constantly changing the all the entries in the VE table.

[TainterRacing]

This is info by a guy From another page I go to. Dealing with what you are talking about. He realy knows what he is talking about. He runs a small company making MS hardware and also as done some of the programming for MS.


OK, lots of guys have moved to E85, nothing new there. I think if you read and learn from what they've done the biggest issue they have is having to keep re-tuning, sometimes daily. That's because E85 is rarely E85 in your tank. E85 becomes E70 in the winter months so for a while each spring and fall its not even E85 or E70 in the stations that sell it but something in between. That same constant mixing and dilution happens in your gas tank and messes with your tune. Having AFR targets and a wide band helps because lambda is lambda whether you're running straight gas or straight alcohol so if your fuel trim is flexible enough it can take care of smaller variations. That's what the government is saying when they announced last week that late model cars can handle E15 without problem, the trim is wide enough to adapt. But there is a way better solution, GM and Ford both supply them:

http://picturehosting.com/images/oblique9881/flexfuelsensor.jpg

The flex fuel sensor, it constantly measures the refractive index and temperature of the fuel which indicates the ethanol concentration and reports it to the ECU. These are getting common in the junkyards now and on ebay where you can pick up a new one for about $300 or a used one for $100 or so.

So, what good is it unless you have a GM or Ford ECU? Hah! Megasquirt is already set up to read and run one! You do need an MS-2 processor as the MS-1 is already maxed out with features and has no room left.

http://picturehosting.com/images/oblique9881/flexfuel.jpg

You can program a linear fuel addition based on frequency output from the sensor (ethanol concentration) AND a linear spark angle or advance addition. You can or need to run more advance with increasing ethanol concentration as it burns slower. Adding this to an MS-2 is cheap too, less than a buck for the resistor and wiring required.

http://picturehosting.com/images/oblique9881/e89003.jpg

I mounted my flex fuel sensor on the drivers side fender, it needs to be part of the fuel circuit so I've got mine post-fuel rail in the return line. The fuel line is rated for ethanol so that's not going to be an issue but the flex line from the pump to the steel factory fuel line may suffer, I plan on replacing that with the same braided flex line I used from the factory steel fuel line to the fuel rail. Since I was installing the MPI system it was pretty easy to install but I think putting one on a TBI would be straightforward as well. Hopefully this thing will be running shortly and I can report how it all works.

[Sundance 6g72]

edit : i want to look into flex fuel sensor, my biggest holed up is how to get the outputs setup on the MS box its self. All my wires are used up (unless the flex fuel sensor will run on my idle valve wires. I dont use those, got through the winter just fine without it and the car was flawless all last summer)



While you can do that, I think it is a very KLUDGED way of dealing with the issue. VE is the volumetric efficiency of the engine, that does NOT change with a change in fuel. Also, if you make a change to the engine that does legitimately change the VE table, you have to tune it in two or more tables...

I would think a better solution would be to change the injector sizing...


Well think of it like this. does VE of an engine change just because you tuned it from 13.2afr to 12.5? The VE would increase even though you did nothing to improve VE.

point being that the ve table should just be called the fuel trim table or something like that (in my opinion) because its not an exact representation of volumetric efficiency.

Injector sizes would stay the same in most cases. for me, i would just tune my gas tune on my 42-46# that i plan on getting and then fill up with e85 and make a second ve table for the e85. the only variable changing would be the type of fuel used. both tables will have the same injectors.





Even better would be software support for fuel type (straight gasoline, e5, e10, e15, e20, ..., e85) I think during drag week we were getting different ethanol levels in some of the fuel and that was messing with the VE tables causing us to have to retune them when we would likely have been better off saying, we just added e10 to a 1/4 tank of straight gasoline so set the MS for e7.5. (maybe tweak that slightly) and not have to be constantly changing the all the entries in the VE table.

we do have the option to run a flex fuel sensor. Im curious if the big block guys running MS had this happening? i think it was something different but its worth looking into.

[c2xejk]

Well think of it like this. does VE of an engine change just because you tuned it from 13.2afr to 12.5? The VE would increase even though you did nothing to improve VE.

VE does NOT change because you change the AFR. Power may change, but not VE. To change the AFR at a particular operating point, you change the AFR table NOT the VE table...


point being that the ve table should just be called the fuel trim table or something like that (in my opinion) because its not an exact representation of volumetric efficiency.

Actually it is a representation of volumetric efficiency of the engine. The problem is that to tune it properly, you need a motoring dyno so that you can hold an operating point long enough to factor out the dynamic effects so you can set the static VE for that operating point.


Injector sizes would stay the same in most cases. for me, i would just tune my gas tune on my 42-46# that i plan on getting and then fill up with e85 and make a second ve table for the e85. the only variable changing would be the type of fuel used. both tables will have the same injectors.

Changing the injector sizing would be a more accurate way of dealing with the problem (and quicker) than monkeying with the VE table. That said, I think I need to dig into the flex fuel sensor. That may help stablize the tune...

Anybody have an idea how accurate the sensor is in the 0-20% ethanol range? (common non-e85 fuel alcohol content levels) More research to do :)

[Sundance 6g72]

VE does NOT change because you change the AFR. Power may change, but not VE. To change the AFR at a particular operating point, you change the AFR table NOT the VE table...



huh? you just lost me..

if im cruising at 35mph at 2000rpms taking in 35kpa and going steady. Im at an air fuel ratio of 13.9:1. To rich for cruise. My afr table would be saying 15:1. I could let the closed loop settings lean it out for me but id like to get it closer to 15 before i turn closed loop on. I take the laptop and i lower the VE value of 2000rpms x 35kpa until i get close to 15:1, then i call it good.

i dont see how changing the 2000rpm x 35kpa cell in the afr table would do anything to change the tune other than telling the closed loop settings what you want the car to be at.. even then the closed loop settings change the ve cells until they get you close to your afr target.


as for changing the injector sizing, you mean lying to the MS and saying your injectors are different even though you really didnt change them? that could work too.

[TainterRacing]

Anybody have an idea how accurate the sensor is in the 0-20% ethanol range? (common non-e85 fuel alcohol content levels) More research to do :)

Flex Fuel Sensor Technical Specification
Measuring range: 0…100% Alcohol (ethanol) in fuel mixtures
Sensor Accuracy: ±5% of the mixture ratio
Output characteristic: Linear
Operating temperature: Environment ‐40°C… +125°C, Fuel ‐40°C… +90°C
Maximum fuel pressure: 10 bar, (145 psi)
Maximum pressure drop: 0.1 bar, (1.45 psi)
Maximum flow: 200 l/h
Supply voltage: 6…18 VDC
Sensor Temperature error: <± 1.5%
Response time: < 250 ms after power on at any temperature

[Sundance 6g72]

one thing i want to say. If fuel companies are putting 10% ethenol into pump gas, it should change our WOT tune on the stock ecu sense that is not tuned by the ecu

I never noticed any difference when going WOT with the sbecII. I had ran normal gas, premium gas, and 100% gas no E added.. always had a 13.2 AFR no matter what as long as i was WOT. Makes me want to say that the 0-10% added to some of the gas did not effect the tune much at all.

So going from e80 to e85 and then to e70, i am not worried much. Another cool thing is that motors dont tent to detinate with e85. so if you tune e85 to 11.8:1 afr and the next day your running e95, your tune will lean out a little but not enough to cause problems as far as damage to the engine goes. same goes for e70, you would richen up but still have power. I too would like to have a perfect tune when going from e70 to e85 or even higher, so the flex fuel sensor would be nice. but from a durability of the engine standpoint, im not worried.

[Ondonti]

Fuel is usually mixed by the same refinery nearbye all the same stations. Go to a different area, different refinery, different %. In Utah E70 was really more like E66. All the same company for the whole state. All year round because E70 was mandated all year for silly high altitude reasons.
Stay in the same area and you will probably never see much difference in tune. Get fuel from the same place and you will probably be fine. Some places like Costco or others that buy bulk from different places might see more differences because the supplier is not consistent. Unless you have proven you have E10 and Ezero in your tank and seen the same tune (which would make no sense) then you can't say it.


I don't even bother with the AFR table. I built one originally but then I decided that its easier to fix up my own VE table then deal with the stupid wandering AFR in closed loop.

I agree with Ed that changing required fuel makes more sense. The only important difference between E85 and 100% gasoline is the stoic. Change the stoich in required fuel to match your Ethanol % and your tune is spot on. Just because VE tables are more easily switched doesn't mean it makes sense.
If it was me, an Ethanol sensor would directly change required fuel stoic instead of trimming VE. It might work but it does not make logical sense to change VE based on your fueing. It makes talking about engine performance or how engines actually function, very confusing. The only sensible thing about the VE trimming is that it does make sense to have a spark trim and its probably easy (lazy) to use that programming loop on VE. That or maybe required fuel can't be modified on the fly.

I like to think of VE as what it actually is, something that does not change. It is a characteristic of the engine.

SBECII 3.0 on true E66 will run 18:1+ when the normal Gasoline runs out from the fuel lines. That is open loop cold start. I have a video of my first cold E85 start (with E10 still in the lines) but I guess I never uploaded it. That is something that happened between the first junkyard motor startup and running at the track on that motor. Closed loop it should easily be able to drop that back down to 14.7 and destroy fuel economy. No way to trick the ecu unless you lie about AFR values with your wideband (which you can do with E10 and get much better mileage).

[Sundance 6g72]

okay i understand ALL THAT and agree

what i dont understand though is this



I like to think of VE as what it actually is, something that does not change. It is a characteristic of the engine.

everyone seems to be ignoring the fact that different afr will cause the VE table to have different values, even though the volumetric efficiency really didnt change.

if Ed and I both have the same Built N/A 3.0 that he has, and he prefers to have it at 13.5:1 afr and i prefer mine to be at 12.5:1, we will have different VE values. His will have less and mine more. So how in the world does my motor have a higher volumetric efficiency just because im running richer? it dosnt. Its a fuel table, nothing else.


changing the injector size is what ed was talking about. Thats easy, just say your running 30% smaller an injector (or whatever % you have to use) and would work.

changing stoic (or however its spelled) might work.. havnt thought about that much

now i found something weird.... i had stoic (or as its labeld in MS, "Air Fuel Ratio"

this is what ive had it at for a while now. notice 14.7 afr and 8.8ms required fuel

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/430319_10150734153958899_534573898_11200819_209589 7034_n.jpg

Changed AFR to 9 and then the required fuel went to 10 ish

http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/421056_10150734153988899_534573898_11200821_449083 986_n.jpg



change afr back to 14.7 and i got 6.6!!! ??? 2 less than before. whats going on?

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/423488_10150734161928899_534573898_11200830_140854 6212_n.jpg



only variable to be changed was the Air Fuel Ratio setting from 14.7 to 9 and then back to 14.7

wasnt aware that math could change.

[TainterRacing]

What brand is the wide band?? I saw it some time back can't rember....


This is a air fuel shootout a ford mag did.

http://www.26liter.us/gallery/albums/userpics/12127/Wide_band_shootout.JPG

[Sundance 6g72]

what brand wideband?? prosport, i found mixed reviews for them but thats not what im worried about right now

MS gives mixed required fuel ammounts... as posted above. what gives

edit: i always thought my VE values where a little low but i didnt worry about it.. now i know. had 2ms more required fuel than i needed somehow. Maybe the 8.8 was wrong? i dont know how to manualy do the math.

[RoadWarrior222]

Needs a 6th column, "Advertising dollars spent with magazine publisher over last 2 years" ... just 'coz I R naturally suspicious :D

[Sundance 6g72]

that must be old news too. AEM can be had for $165 new if you look hard enough, otherwise they are like $200, same with prosport.

inovate i think is 250 but ive heard of someone spending $350 recently...


and i havnt heard of anyone using fast in a long time (not that they are bad or that people dont use them, i just dont see it)

[c2xejk]

everyone seems to be ignoring the fact that different afr will cause the VE table to have different values, even though the volumetric efficiency really didnt change.

Changing the VE table entry _will_ change the AFR, HOWEVER, what you are trying to do is tune the VE table so that it fuels the engine to match the desired AFR from the AFR table.


if Ed and I both have the same Built N/A 3.0 that he has, and he prefers to have it at 13.5:1 afr and i prefer mine to be at 12.5:1, we will have different VE values. His will have less and mine more. So how in the world does my motor have a higher volumetric efficiency just because im running richer? it dosnt. Its a fuel table, nothing else.

If the engines are identical, the VE tables should also be identical. If you desire a richer AFR, you change the AFR table NOT the VE table.


changing the injector size is what ed was talking about. Thats easy, just say your running 30% smaller an injector (or whatever % you have to use) and would work.

If you look at the injector sizing more as a BTU/hr, then you are just updating it for the fuel provided to the injectors.

The flex fuel sensor seems to be the best option though. In some reading, there seems to a cheaper ($50 new) one out there, but I don't know much about it... (this was mentioned in some of the mega-squirt documentation.)

On stock ecu not varying, it has been my opinion that the ecu uses long-term fuel modifiers calculated in closed-loop to adjust the WOT fueling...


Joe, in your screen shots above, why do you have number of cylinders set to 8?

[RoadWarrior222]

Yup, you'll only get 3/4 the injector you need calculating for 8 cyl!

[Sundance 6g72]

just saw the 8. WTF.



this


If the engines are identical, the VE tables should also be identical. If you desire a richer AFR, you change the AFR table NOT the VE table.

contradicts this


Changing the VE table entry _will_ change the AFR, HOWEVER, what you are trying to do is tune the VE table so that it fuels the engine to match the desired AFR from the AFR table.


how in the world will changing the afr table ever change your tune? (with all closed loop settings turned off, running from just the fuel table.

[Sundance 6g72]

figured out the 8 cyl thing. That was only used in the required fuel calculation. changed it to 6 and it took me back to 8.8 (my origonal value)

so nothing is actually wrong, ignore the 6.6 part. The actual amount of injectors is 6 and it was always set as 6.

before i got MS, i had this problem when tooling around in ed's tune. I would go into the required fuel calculator thing and it would default to 8 cyl even though ed never put it to 8.

i never ran it as 8, it simply defaulted and i didnt catch it when i took the picture

[Ondonti]

I think this is just getting twisted. We don't even need an AFR table with megasquirt. You don't need to use closed loop.

When it comes to VE, VE is something that does not change. VE = volumetric efficiency. Let us concentrate on the word efficiency. You set your VE to make the most power at each load point. Anything else is not efficient. If your wideband says a different value, that doesn't mean the motor changed its characteristics, it means you changed the VE value. Your choices do not change how much air flows through the engine.

If you have the same motor and different VE tables, each person will have load points that are either better or worse then the other's. Best case senario would be both people having the exact same tables because there is only one optimum setup.

Yes you will modify the VE table to suit what you think the proper AFR should be but if this was an OEM setup, there is just one thing that is correct and that is optimum (either for efficiency or emissions or both). Different load levels have different optimum AFRs but the differences in RPM points simply reflect the motors increased or decreased ability to swallow air (VE!!!!). AFR should be almost a flat line across any load bearing part of a row and only change as VE changes with RPM. If your measured AFR changes throughout the same load range, then you have the wrong VE values.

[Sundance 6g72]

thats what ive been trying to say this whole time. The only way to adjust your AFR directly is to edit the VE table. (assuming the engine constants settings are correct) true VE for an engine will never change unless something is directly done to effect the flow of the engine. We all understand this. What i dont understand is the importance of having the 100% correct VE values in the VE table

what i didnt say or think about is what afr gives peak power. if 12.9:1 afr gives peak power for a certain WOT load, then the ve value for that load point is the true VE? Makes sense to me BUT what about VE values for low load low rpm (cruising) They will be less than the real value because noone cruises around at 13.2 (or whatever peak power afr it would be)

my point being is that the ve table is hardly exact in real world examples. pump gas might make most power in the 12 afr but for boost we are targeting the 11s and sometimes people target the 10s. Obviously the VE values in those areas will be higher than the true volumetric efficiency. Adjusting the AFR table wont do anything to help this.. its a target table and will not effect fueling.. unless there is a calculation in megasquirt that i am missing. something that takes the true Volumetric efficiency value for a certain loadpoint, then checks the AFR table for your desired AFR and then crosschecks that with your engine constants settings and finds the perfect amount of fuel to inject into the motor but i doubt thats the case. The afr table is used for autotune features like closed loop and megalog viewer or analyze live.. all of which edit the VE TABLE to get you your desired afr.

i think we are all on the same track, just saying it differently and not understand each other. And when it comes to switching back and forth from gas to e85, we have our preference of what MIGHT work best but as far as i know the only person to run e85 was brent and i dont know if he has ever ran it with megasquirt and had to switch back to gas. Just like how he works his timing tables, it kinda makes sense to me but i still dont understand how he does it.


so for me (not everyone else) my preference would be to have two ve tables because they can be imported and exported at anytime without having to mess with the engine constants settings. Im going to try changing the "air fuel ratio" setting from 14.7 to the stoic afr for e85 and see what i get.

[c2xejk]

my point being is that the ve table is hardly exact in real world examples. pump gas might make most power in the 12 afr but for boost we are targeting the 11s and sometimes people target the 10s. Obviously the VE values in those areas will be higher than the true volumetric efficiency. Adjusting the AFR table wont do anything to help this.. its a target table and will not effect fueling..

WRONG! The VE table is used to calculate the amount of air entering the cylinder. Then to calculate the amount of fuel needed, you look to the AFR table so that you know the desired air/fuel ratio!

You can change the air fuel ratio (and fueling) by changing the AFR table and NOT touching the VE table!

[Sundance 6g72]

i dont want to say your wrong but i need you to go into detail how touching nothing but the AFR table (picture below just so we are 100% specific) will change the tune because i have never done that and i dont even remember us changing the AFR table at drag week in order to dial anything in. in fact, i dont think we ever touched it.. we just changed the ve table after doing pull after pull and then parking in that business's parking lot to look at the datalog then manual changine the VE table.

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/s720x720/427599_10150736924953899_534573898_11208338_189539 8004_n.jpg

DIY told me to edit the VE table to get my desired afr after making the switch to e85.. so excuse me fro being so stubborn but they do ALOT of tuning on many different cars.

[c2xejk]

Just looked through a couple pages on the MS and you may be right. That said, it is not how it is supposed to be done. Every text book I have read on the subject says that you should calculate the cylinder air (via the VE tables) then divide that by the desired_AFR to determine the amount of fuel needed.

It appears that in the MS, they have mashed the VE and AFR tables together and then given you another table that they call AFR. The only reason I can see for doing that is throughput, it really is a poor design...

[Ondonti]

AFR Table is only for closed loop on the fly adjustments as I said earlier.

MS's fueling equation just uses VE as your user input. Its called VE. In my opinion there is only one right VE value in MS, whether or not its actually the amount of air your engine moves. That is because there is only one optimum AFR for each load point. Having a VE and AFR table that worked together would be great if closed loop was really that reliable. I don't see a need to ever use closed loop.

[Sundance 6g72]

closed loop for me dosnt work that great but i have gotten it to work better to where i was satisfied but i havnt had much time to mess with it obiously.

but yes, like i said, the afr table is only for closed loop stuff and the datalogging software that changes your tune based on what happend in the log and what your AFR says it wants it to be.

thats why i dont like it being called a VE table.. not sure what to call it other than that. I mean, it gets pretty close to actual ve but a turbo car will deff suffer from an offset value due to running so rich.

Anyways, now that all three of us are in agreement, where were we? :P

[RoadWarrior222]

I dunno, maybe you took a wrong turn in Albuquerque ... try asking the little guy with the big red moustache.