When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Yeah I am learning that it take a shitload of logging, making changes, flashing, and more logging, changing, and flashing to get there. It is much easier when you have a decent understanding of the mechanics and the science though. I am still trying to get there.
HI I download file from ma rx8, I have delete off cat and I have LS2 coils.
I have need tun the file mod lean AFR to economy and more power.
I have Winols this program can checksum and can not show me AFR.
I'm still new to doing this, and I have read through the thread as well as other ones. I see that the rx8 consumes 5.5 g/s at idle. Is this number any different with a ported throttle body or CAI?
At the moment my Rex is running with the basemap. At the weekend I will gonna map the software with the hymee software. Hymee supercharger is installed.. Is it difficult to do it on my own? What do I need to look for exactly? How do I do that?
OK, so I believe I have this figured out for closed loop (<3V) and am now working on open loop (>3V). Closed loop results look pretty consistent. I seem to be within 2% STFT now, and have 0% LTFT. So far I have done a couple of rounds of open loop adjustments from 3 to 3.75V and then scaled everything a constant amount after that.
My MAF calibration % change from stock is as below.
A couple of questions for the experts.
1) Does the fairly high % mean I should be looking for some kind of issue? This a series 2, using mazdaedit with the RB intake and a street port. However, MAF readings are similar to when everything was stock. O2 sensor is new. MAF and injectors are original. I did clean the MAF sensor when I installed the intake.
2) Should I look at scaling my (stock) injectors based on these results? Idle MAF reading is around 1.14V at 860-880 rpm. That works out 5.46g/s on my current scaling. I am pre-mixing at ~80:1 in case that makes any difference.
Too much adjustment down low. Did you correct for throttle inputs?
I believe so, in that I averaged things out over a lot of data, and tried to use the throttle progressively while logging. My LTFTs are all sitting at zero, or very close to zero right now as well. I'll check them again later today as it has been a few days now.
Just because it's zero doesn't mean there is not a problem. You tuned it there. You have a vac leak. Go back to a stock MAF scale and check your Airflow it should be around 5.5g/sec. If it's below 5 you have a vac leak.
Just because it's zero doesn't mean there is not a problem. You tuned it there. You have a vac leak. Go back to a stock MAF scale and check your Airflow it should be around 5.5g/sec. If it's below 5 you have a vac leak.
OK, so now it does look like it could be a vac leak, but I just reassembled the complete intake system from the engine block up, everything looked ok, and the trend has not changed
Our RX8 will not accept a MAF scale for some reason. I have all load maps in OL set for .9 lambda (13.23). I'll do a pull and it gives a 15.15.5 AFR (2.54v-3.24v), way to high. about 15% change. I make the 15% change, and do another pull. still gives me a 15-15.5 AFR. I've added 15% 4 times now and it is still 15-15.5 AFR. This has been an issue for a few weeks, I've cleaned and even replaced the MAF. I've replaced the o2 sensor also.
Now, anything I change from 3.36v-3.48v seems to make an effect, then above 3.48 have no effect again.
If I change the lambda target, it makes huge effects. changing target lambda from .9 to .88 will drop the AFR down into the low 14s. a .85 Lambda will drop me into the 13.2-13.3 range.
I'm kind of baffled why the MAF scale wont make any changes?
Last edited by ninetysixyenko; 07-18-2015 at 11:54 AM.
What you wrote does not make much sense. open loop and maf calculate off of each other but are not the same thing. posting pictures of the maps you're talking about might help.
You have to learn the relationship of the maps to each other. Some maps work the opposite of each other. So if you're putting 0/9 into them they will make you run leaner not richer. and 15.5 is about the max lean it will run without trying to get it to run lean.
Or even better post some maps.
Last edited by logalinipoo; 07-17-2015 at 03:47 PM.
Reason: forgot kane recomends scaling the whole scale. and this is his thread.
This is not my first car i have tuned, i've tuned 25 or so MAF and MAP cars. Most of my experience is on MAP (I have a 470whp s2000 on pump gas, for reference). This is my first time tuning a rotary, and a split timing car (different topic).
Cortect me if im wrong here: OL maps read the MAF g/s (along with IAT and other correction tables) and determine a fuel flow to obtain the desired lambda target in the OL map. So, if you're target lambda in OL is .9 (13.23AFR) and you're running lean (15-15.5AFR, according to Cobb and a PLX m-300) that means you're getting a lot more air (~15%) than is calculated, so you'd add 15% to your g/s under the corresponding V table. Correct?
I have now increased g/s by 15% 4 times with no change to the AFR reading. I have also tried going the opposite direction (subtracting 15% g/s) thinking I was doing it wrong, with no change.
Except, in the 3.24 & 3.36 V tables listed in my last post, for whatever reason, a change in the g/s flow has an effect there, but no where else. I'm beginning to suspect faulty wiring.
Now, if I go to my OL tables, and make a target lambda change, to .88 or .85, it Richens the car right out, like it should, but I should be able to make MAF g/s changes to recalibrate the MAF and then adjust my OL tables.
To clear up any other confusion, I am tuning WOT, not partial throttle or idle.
The Car has an AEM intake, Agency Power midpipe and exhaust, and a custom street port. I'm tuning with Cobb.
I was not trying to be condescending. The maps are not always as labeled correctly. and there are no maps labeled ol(I know what the open loop maps are, but if you use their proper name it will make sure we are talking about the same maps). That is why i said some maps do not work as expected. VE is normally used on MAP tuning. People have had success using VE here, but generally it is used for correcting small spots in your tune. The MAF sensor should remove the need for large changes in the VE maps.
Your problem could be several things, but since you are not putting the actual name of the map or showing me which map you are adjusting I do not know how your 0.9 Lambda will work. If you are adjusting the wrong map then 0.9 lmbda makes the car run leaner. The car has a lean limit of about 15.5. So you keep changine it the wrong way and keep changine it, but you are hitting the lean limit and that is why you keep sitting at 15.5. or maybe you're so far into the lean limit from another map that you're changing it back and forth does no good.
Now I could easily be wrong, but without knowing what you are actually changing I can only guess.
before you said you're changing the ol maps. Now you're saying you're changing the VE maps. Make up your mind or post the actual name or pictures of the maps you're referring to. you mention 3.24 & 3.36 v tables. What is that? I'm stuck guessing it'a the MAF calibration, but you called it the V table. THE ve tables has nothing about 3.24 or 3.36.
You already know what works yet you waste your time arguing about what an expert you are ... even if it worked the way you want it to, adjusting the MAF in large increments and essentially throwing the flow calibration out of whack is bass ackwards.
Carrying the MAF cruise trim correction up into the higher range is based on an assumption, but in reality the typical amount of change you're making is essentially irrelevant in the larger scheme of things
Everybody always makes this 10x more complicated than it needs to be ... KISS ...
I was not trying to be condescending. The maps are not always as labeled correctly. and there are no maps labeled ol(I know what the open loop maps are, but if you use their proper name it will make sure we are talking about the same maps). That is why i said some maps do not work as expected. VE is normally used on MAP tuning. People have had success using VE here, but generally it is used for correcting small spots in your tune. The MAF sensor should remove the need for large changes in the VE maps.
Your problem could be several things, but since you are not putting the actual name of the map or showing me which map you are adjusting I do not know how your 0.9 Lambda will work. If you are adjusting the wrong map then 0.9 lmbda makes the car run leaner. The car has a lean limit of about 15.5. So you keep changine it the wrong way and keep changine it, but you are hitting the lean limit and that is why you keep sitting at 15.5. or maybe you're so far into the lean limit from another map that you're changing it back and forth does no good.
Now I could easily be wrong, but without knowing what you are actually changing I can only guess.
before you said you're changing the ol maps. Now you're saying you're changing the VE maps. Make up your mind or post the actual name or pictures of the maps you're referring to. you mention 3.24 & 3.36 v tables. What is that? I'm stuck guessing it'a the MAF calibration, but you called it the V table. THE ve tables has nothing about 3.24 or 3.36.
Air/fuel tables 1-2, 3-4, 5-6. Target Lambda for 3000RPMS+ are .9 for all load tables. I never said I adjusted VE table. VE table have been left alone. V table for volts is under MAF correction.
Closed loop exit RPM is set to 3000. Closed loop exit load is 40%.
MAF correction table is where I am making g/s changes based on Equiv. Ratio AFR deviation from Target Lambda AFR (.9/13.23). the only spot any g/s change actually shows an effect is at 3.24 and 3.36 volts, and that ends up being around 6100-6500 RPMs. I get 15-15.5 (even a 16.5 spike around 4900), then a sudden drop to 13.1-13.3 at 6100-6500, then right back up to 15-15.5 until 8500. the 6100-6500 range I can change the g/s and see an AFR change. the sudden drop to 13.1-13.3 is AFTER i corrected the MAF g/s in 3.24/3.36 v table. it was 15-15.5 there before I corrected it. Again, that seems to be the only spot MAF correction appears to be making an effect.
Again, if I make target lambda changes under air/fuel 1-2,3-4, 5-6, to say .88 or .85, then the car richens right out, but not on a linear bases, actual AFR doesn't reflect target lambda, and IMO it's the incorrect way to tune something. On the stock map, most of these values are .77-.81 under air/ful 1-2, 3-4, 5-6, and the OEM wideband will not move off 11.2, and the PLX M-300 hovers around 10.5-10.7, and the car rich misfires.
I had a decent MAF calibration on it prior to winter, but it had a dead battery upon taking it out, and needed a re-upload of the map I had on it. it has been messed up since.
I am no expert tuner, but I do know what I am doing for the most part. Not only is this the first rotary car I've tuned and the first split timing car i've tuned, it's also the first time using COBB, and it's the first time I've ran into a MAF issue like this.
Those RPM ranges are also impacted by additional injectors coming online. Any change your injector scales are off?
I thought the same thing about injectors coming on. I was unsure what exact RPMs P2 and S1 came on though. It explains why the AFR can start to be impacted there, but it should continue to be impacted from that RPM to redline then, not lean out again and continue to not be 'adjustable'.
Edit - injector CCs are the same that the stock Cal uses. Stock injectors, reds in P1 and yellows in P2 and S1.
Last edited by ninetysixyenko; 07-18-2015 at 02:59 PM.
There's a chance your injectors are slightly clogged and that's reducing their flow. there is no specific rpm when the injectors come on they are load based.
What is your MAF at idle,with the stock scale? if it's 5-5.5g/sec and you are lean then there's a good chance it's in the injectors. I also agree that it's better to get your target lambda and actual pretty close to each other.
the reason the stock 02 sensor stops reading at 11.2 is it has a rich limit of 11.2 and lean limit of about 20. So it maxes out. your plx will show the true values after those.
a Dead battery should not affect the tune at all. it's permanently programmed in the computer. How long did it sit for? Maybe the injectors became gummed p and could use a cleaning.
There's a chance your injectors are slightly clogged and that's reducing their flow. there is no specific rpm when the injectors come on they are load based.
What is your MAF at idle,with the stock scale? if it's 5-5.5g/sec and you are lean then there's a good chance it's in the injectors. I also agree that it's better to get your target lambda and actual pretty close to each other.
the reason the stock 02 sensor stops reading at 11.2 is it has a rich limit of 11.2 and lean limit of about 20. So it maxes out. your plx will show the true values after those.
a Dead battery should not affect the tune at all. it's permanently programmed in the computer. How long did it sit for? Maybe the injectors became gummed p and could use a cleaning.
Talking injectors reminds me, I always had a hard start issue with the car, I took the injectors all out and sent them out to be cleaned in January, all flowed well. Upon re-installing them, I noticed I had my P1 pigtails plugged into my P2 injectors, and vise-versa. This got rid of my hard start issue, the car then sat for the next 4-5 months until the end of June. Car still has no hard start issues. All injectors should be good, so should the fuel pump (replaced when diagnosing hard starts). I would also think if it was a fuel starvation issue, lowering target lambda would not help richen it out.
This explains why my MAF needed to be cal'ed majorly last fall though, and also explains why it is currently out of whack. It does not explain why I cannot calibrate my MAF currently, or why even a stock MAF calibration is so far out of whack.
MAF g/s at idle normally shows 5.8-6.0, will the street port raise it a tad? Idle AFR is 14.6-14.8 like it should be, but it does Hunt for idle and AFR for a 2-3 seconds before it stabilizes (most likely adjusting to STFT/LTFT).
I figured 11.2 was rock bottom AFR, most other cars with factory widebands usually flat line around there. After charging the dead battery, the car would not start. It acted like a bricked ECU or a failed upload, I re-uploaded the map and it started right up. Could be coincidence.
11-23-2012, 04:33 PM
