Injectors are 72 lb/hr. it goes rich for 15 sec or so then climbed back after another 15. I'll play with those and see if I can get it better. If you have time to scale those neon tables it would be great
Injectors are 72 lb/hr. it goes rich for 15 sec or so then climbed back after another 15. I'll play with those and see if I can get it better. If you have time to scale those neon tables it would be great
Is this based on the intake temp sensor or the coolant temp sensor? I see two different settings that are labeled Fuel Start from Coolant and Fuel Start From Coolant 2. I don't currently have the intake charge temp sensor hooked up although it is installed so I can run the wires in if needed.Originally Posted by ShelGame
They're both starting fuel from coolant temp. One is the base PW, the other is a factor that is multiplied by the baro factor (I think, I don't rememebr for sure).
Got ya. I always forget to look at the description to see what the table does. It usually helps to see how the setting your adjusting is combined with others to get the final value. What should the car be idling at also? It seems to be a little fat also reading in the 12's most times. At cruise it will be at 14.7.
It should idle at stoich, too.
I'll have to work on that next. It seems to be lower now that it is colder out. Another question I have is on the antilag timing. In the cal I'm looking at it starts at 0 and ramps up as it gets closer to target. The antilag pulls timing doesn't it? It seems like it should start high and then ramp down as it gets closer to target. Am I looking at this correctly?
For the SBEC,
Y-Axis = Timing removed from calculated total
X-Axis = Difference between current boost and boost target
So, the further below boost target, the more timing is removed. Up to about 8deg.
I'm about to change the way it works, so don't get too used to it working this way. In the latest SMEC version, anti-lag timing is just a single setpoint and it only works while staging. I found that the anti-lag while daily driving is too intrusive. It's better to leave it at the starting line.
Sounds good. I won't worry about that for now then.
After scaling those three tables from the scaling error it's much better. A little more out of the startup fueling and that should be good. Will wiring in the intake temp sensor help with it going a little lean now that its cold out or do I need to adjust for temperature?
Benji - I'm finally getting the new code into T/SBEC. If you send me your latest tempalte, I'll update it with the standard ones so you can try the new code. I asusme your car is put away for the winter, though, right?
Yeah it's put away but with the warmup I could be testing yet. The snow is all gone here. The heater core isn't hooked up though. I'll send it out when I get a chance.
Turns out there's still a problem with the SMEC version. I want to get that worked out before I apply all of those changes to the SBEC version. Give me another week or so. Hopefully I'll get it solved.
Sounds good
Jon Berube sent me the cal file from CSX#119. This car was apparently a press car and had a unique computer with a yellow wire coming out of it. It's also supposed to be quite a bit quicker than a 'regualr' CSX.
So, I dis-assembled the cal to see what it was. It has the A415 CalID - which is odd since that's a '90 Daytona VNT P/N (not a CSX). It has some clearly experimental boost control code in it that is not enabled. And, some new boost control code that is. My best guess is that the new code it's running is for the BOV control that I think 5Digits mentioned in another thread. Also, the cal has a bit more timing, quite a bit more knock threshold, and 12.5psi boost (instead of 11).
I'll be making a template of that cal and posting it with the next T/SBEC update. When I get a little time, I'll check out the boost control/BOV code and see if I can incorporate that into a future T/SBEC release.
Interesting...
Found this is a D-Cal Yahoo Group message:
--- In D-Cal (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com, Garry M <neonshow2nr@...> wrote:
IF you ever come across a module that has a yellow wire coming out
of it, this is a ROM-aided module. These boxes were special and used
just for calibration. YOu would flash the 1st board with a stock
calibration, and the 2nd board would be the one you edited on the fly.
This way, if you screwed something up with the 2nd board - unplug the
yellow wires, and run off the 1st chip/board. Pretty slick really...
---------- Post added at 09:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:45 AM ----------
So, I've got the new saprk cut code added to T/SBEC. And I'm trying to add the T2 boost control so that an actual '90+ T2 cal can be built. But, it's getting kind of crowded. The 3 different boost control schemes use some of the same label names, but the values are very different. So, I'm trying to decide the best way to setup the different boost control schemes. I don't really want to include redundant labels; it just takes up more space...
Maybe check the later code? My buddies 91 Shadow Vert uses T2 boost control. I had to look at the vac diagram about 5 times before I believed it.
No way, it's T1 boost control or VNT only. Got a pic of the vac diagram?
I'll see if I can get a pic next time I'm over there. I ran the vac lines for it so I know it's that way though. I thought it was very odd at the time.
I have the latest MPTune, and downloaded the Turbonator SBEC v3 file today. I've tried clicking the "Compile" button after loading several of the 2.5L templates, but it's not working. Every time I do, I get a popup window telling me there has been a "Major Error in assembly process".. The .err file tells me:
Line 5767 reads:Code:?ASxxxx-Error-< > in line 5767 of C:\t-sbec_v3\t-sbec_v3.asm <u> undefined symbol encountered during assembly
It seems I can't just ignore the error, as it fails to produce a .bin file.Code:ldx #DECEL_DecelLeanoutFactorMAP ; load index with value
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote