i need a fast opinion
 

Happy Thanksgiving all!

i have a dyno tuning session in the morning.
My question is, at what temperature does the ect tell the computer its ok to change loops?

I just noticed that i have ZERO stft ( i cant log ltfts yet) at all times. My max ect is around 185 with the majority of the time between 165-175F. The stft continued to be zero even after adding 2 550 injectors (uncapped yellows).
After i changed ignition coils to the 8247 msds I also noticed my intake valves transition a/f's really jumped to a much more lean spike than I had before. Still ZERO stft.
i have gotten once code po126, i cleared it and it did not come back.
I am not running a screen on the maf pipe.
I am wondering if i need to change thermostats before my tuning sessions.
Thanks and if you are on the forum during this holiday then you are as addicted as i am.

24 views and no opinions?

I'll post. I don't have an answer.

understand--thanks for thinking about it!

Are you thinking the ECU is affected by the cooler temps and not reaching a preset temp factor in the cars fuel system?

sorry for the delayede response. had to go to family thanksgiving meal.
good food.

in a way yea. i am thinking that the pcm looks at the ect temps during one of its steps to clear closed loop running? I believe the breakpoint is 160F but i am not sure? Low ect will affect both closed and open loops?
What got me to thinking about this as the car is running pretty good--no decreased gas milage etc is that a have absoulutely no STFT--its 0 everywhere. this only started after the thermostat was modified.
I am assuming that low ect temps of 160 for a long time period is affecting the tune in the pcm? .
i think what I will do is just put the mazmart 180 back in and open the bypass. No since in taking chances. I have been waiting on this tune for a while.

I'm not sure where the breakout temperature to go into closed loop is...but it should be before 180 for sure....does your OBDII temp read normal? Is your O2 sensor OK? Seems like you may be stuck in open loop....hence no fuel trims???

How can you add that much fuel and not expect to need a tune?

You could be in open loop for any variety of reasons. You haven't provided enough info to diagnose the issue. An SC imparts a higher load on the engine in all conditions. Plus most of your cooling mods are not well thought out imo.

no --i added the bigger injectors because I am going for a dyno tuning session with steve kan today and he advised me to get more fuel than the oem set up. I cant get as much as he wants ( he likes 1000cc per 100hp) but i put as much in there as i can with what i have. Its around 2500cc? Maybe more with the higher than tested (injectors) fuel pressure?
My a/f's are good/ok per obdII data and mu lc 1 innovate wideband ( they do match basically)
I have already installed the mazmart thermostat/stock thermostat housing and I am heading out now for tuning.
I just have never had consistent zero fuel trims for so long.

Dan i know you are running the EWP but for track guys--this barrel thermostat/closed bypass may be something you want to look at? I think It is better. Flow does increase and better cooling in the lower rpms was obvious.

sub'd for interest on the answer.

OD my first thought was that there is no ect that impacts when the engine would move from CL to OL or from OL to CL.

I thought that transition was controlled by RPM and Load only.

i opened up ATR and it only SHOWS: RPM, Load, and Throttle exit tables. nothing about the ECT, however it doesn't mean it's not there, it just means we can't adjust it.

EDIT: silly me, ECT is one of the LOAD correction tables, so if ECT effects load, and load determines(or helps to) closed loop .. then yes the ECT effects closed loop.------ i take that back, there is no Calc. load max -ECT comp. only baro and IAT... still one would think ECT would be takin into account...

Can you tell from a scantool if you are in closed loop or not? i know the freeze frame data for most codes even on the most basic code readers will tell you whether the car was in open or closed loop during the time of the code.

is it possible you ARE in fact in closed loop but not building STFT because the tune doesn't need corrections... you could simply fuck the tune up enough to need ST and LT FTs and then see....

i just got through tuning with Steve Kan and concerning this question he wasnt sure either?
We spoke of the possibility that a time factor may also be present

After my tune and swapping back to the regular thermostat--i now have a very small stfl.

ECT does affect closed loop exit, and yes there are constants and 2d tables that we can't alter in ATR. However, I agree with Team, there are many other things that could be causing this and I doubt that an ECT of 165 is among them. There is, for instance, a bunch of logic having to do with warmup and the air pump.

at least it is an interesting question?

Have you verified your closed loop tables for calculated load breakout have a value other than zero?

no --didnt get to do that--car was tuned yesterday and I swapped my thermostat back to the mazmart one. Steve Kan was also not sure how to answer that question.
Getting trims now and temps back to "normal"

there is hope for you yet ...

For fun, here are some of the "extra" tables used by the closed loop exit function. 05 federal rom.

https://www.rx8club.com/attachment.p...1&d=1323391617

Don't know the scaling for the rest.

• 990.0 , 1000.0 , 1500.0 , 2000.0 , 2500.0 , 3000.0 , 3500.0 , 4000.0 , 4500.0 , 5000.0 , 5500.0 , 6000.0
• 0, 156, 312, 469, 469, 469, 532, 469, 312, 250, 0, 0
• 750.0
• 156
• 990.0 , 1000.0 , 1500.0 , 2000.0 , 2500.0 , 3000.0 , 3500.0 , 4000.0 , 4500.0 , 5000.0 , 5500.0 , 6000.0
• 0, 94, 94, 125, 219, 219, 219, 125, 125, 0, 0, 0
• 990.0 , 1000.0 , 1500.0 , 2000.0 , 2500.0 , 3000.0 , 3500.0 , 4000.0 , 4500.0 , 5000.0 , 5500.0 , 6000.0
• 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
• 3000.0 , 3500.0 , 4000.0 , 4500.0 , 5000.0 , 5500.0 , 6000.0
• 16, 16, 16, 16, 16, 16, 16
• 3000.0 , 3500.0 , 4000.0 , 4500.0 , 5000.0 , 5500.0 , 6000.0
• 16, 16, 16, 16, 16, 16, 16

i think there is also a "time" component somewhere. If a certain temp is not reached in a certain amount of time after it is started??
interesting--thanks for sharing that.