"Covers" it, but essentially gets most of it wrong.
Or, I should say, chases some red herrings.

 

I think I'm not really a good person to ask. I've done 541 calibrations, most of which had nothing to do with producing a good calibration, but rather as a part of a slow, ill-conceived fuzzing attack on the logic.

The best advice I can give is that you shouldn't try setting the entire ECT scale to -40.

 

I don't know that a sheer number of calibrations is a useful comparison (there are close to a thousand AccessPORTs out there that passed through my hands and there are over 3000 separate PTM files on this PC alone - I use three different PCs for work).
Situational differences from one calibration to the next are probably more useful as a teaching tool using your methodology.

Good advice.

 

Have not read the entire thread but I think it's great that more people are getting into doing their own tuning . I'm sure it will lead to bigger and better things being done with the Renesis over time .

 

Heres more logs, named proper too. Got a 2nd and 3rd in wot, the 3rd gear wot was cut short at 7900, blueberry pickers are freaking every where, surprised i even got that high in rpm. and a 4300 cruise in 3rd. Also I got a 30 min cruise last night and plus 5 minutes to work and 5 minutes to my spot on that tune. I'll run again after tomorrow if you think the trims need more time.

 

What are you doing? Just tweaking the fuel tables?

Making any progress on calculating the AFR error?

 

Getting there kinda, Just not sure if i should be screwing with the P2 size or the MAF scale first, MM thinks its both. If its the maf then the cal is just off and i have to do the math to readjust it comparing target to actual. if it is the P2's, i would think the afr would be off but stable and not getting richer and richer. Personally I think that it would be a exponential problem like the maf and not a linear problem like the p2 with the way the afr's go. Please correct me if i am wrong. Also making the fuel table leaner in the top end dont do much, target is 12.9, getting 11.5. That is too much of a difference i think to be mainly the P2's.

I gonna log more wot again tomorrow and make up a new maf scale tomorrow night. Maybe get someone to check it out before I load it up. I wanna get it better by friday night. Wanna go to the cottage and just relax.

With better tuning, will the afr spikes when the valves open get smaller or is it something we just live with?

 

Why are you scaling the P2s ? If they are stock you should be on stock scaling and be looking elsewhere .

FWIW - in an NA car the P2s come on at approx. 5300rpm 140g/s and 100% load

Sorry if this has already been discussed

 

Why are you tweaking the P2s at this point? Have you verified that you are passing the load crossover for the P2s in a spot you can identify?

 

LOL. Dicks are touching...

 

Depends on BARO and IAT. And TPS. And ECT.

The "drop-dead" for the P2s is around 7200 RPM (centered on the APV). If they aren't on by then, the PCM won't turn them on at all.
They can come on as early as 4800 RPM in an NA car, depending on the additional load-multiplying sensors mentioned above.

 

lol i never touched the p2's yet. I was basically thinking out loud and explained that the maf should more the culprit then the P2's. and I said i was remapping my maf tomorrow. Plus that little pic MM has of the injector staging pretty much confirms that. My afrs dont go til 7k. I gonna log again tomorrow just to confirm my afr's at wot then I gonna start changing my maf.

Quick Version... I was answering my own thoughts as I typed the post. Weird...oh well.

 

hey MM. Just wondering, who's dicks are touching haha.

 

OK - I did say APPROX.
If you look at his log it's possible his P2s are scaled wrong as it suddenly goes leaner at around 5400 .....

 

I suppose it's too late to warn them not to cross the streams

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyaLZHiJJnE

 

Brettus and I posted the exact same thing at the exact same time (though he edited his a bit thereafter.

 

I added the FWIW bit - just in case you are implying something .

 

Also my target right now is 12.936 or .88 for 88% load and 4500 rpm and up.
I just changed it to be 81% load and 4000 rpm after looking at my logs, seen a few spots with the load under 88. That will be going on the car with the maf scale.

 

Thats true the maf reading doesnt change during the spike either. stays at 132 g/s. vfad also opens at 5250 but because the g/s is the same I would think its still the p2, Weird the afrs are more stable in 3rd too been going through the 2nd gear wot til now.

 

No biggie - your sample rate is very high so you're gunna see that .


vfad wont cause an AFR spike

Nope not weird - it gets more and more stable as you row through the gears .


The things that you should be looking at with regard to that spike are :

your 3-4 fuel table (as someone mentioned - plotting target vs actual could be beneficial )
The Ve table
the MAf curve

and lastly the P2 scaling (if you have touched it) . If you haven't touched the stock scaling or latency it could well be an issue with the P2s themselves.

 

For the vfad, yeah, just figured i'd mention it.

For fuel tables, i have 1-3 and 4-6, i dont have 1-2, 3-4, 5-6 like you guys do. Is that a AP 2b thing MM?

For the P2's if something was wrong with the injectors, wouldn't they more likely spray less and not more?

 

Off to bed, talk to you all tomorrow.

 

The fuel tables should correspond with your ROM. Mazda changed these for different model years and markets.
I'm not sure, but I think they did this so USDM cars could puke even more fuel on the cat. in 1st and 2nd.

After looking at a Euro low-power ROM, the fuel targets seem to be about the same as a USDM rom. In any case, you won't miss the extra table.

 

No, it's a 2006 - 2008 thing.
They shrunk the fuel maps after 2005.

 

Wow ... looks like I missed some excitement yesterday.

FWIW I figured out how to get the RPM across the X Axis in your graph for OO
I just loaded up my excel sheet in OO and looked for the area it was setup ...
It's a value in the Data Range for the entire graph.

I've uploaded both my Cruise and WOT spreadsheets for anyone to use if they wish (I left some data in there for example).
I've provided both formats, MS Excel and OpenOffice

Don't scrutinize the data ... its old and the log data was performed against different fuel maps not the ones that are there now.
Fuel maps are for a 2005 Manual RX8

If you see something wrong with the math or the way I'm comparing the AFR measured against the data acquired from the fuel map, please let me know, Thanks.

Input ranges are from Column A to U for your log data
Coloured columns E,G,K,L,M,N,O are mandatory

The Stock fuel maps are on the tab Fuel Maps ... put your custom fuel maps in the same data range.


BTW what a PITA to get this uploaded
Attachment 174944

Attachment 174945