TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

hopefully you are only doing that @ 12 Volts and are otherwise compensating for voltage accordingly

Carbon8

iTrader: (4)

Stupid Question Time

Besides NGK are their any other plugs that are available that are known to work with our cars?

RE9B-T
RE7C-L

What are the P/N for the different NGK heat range plugs?

dannobre

iTrader: (3)

For an NA car you are fine with the stock plugs

I beat the crap out of it NA and never had a problem with the stock plugs

You can buy NGK racing plugs in 9, 10, 10.5, 11 and 11.5 heat ranges if you want to spend a ton on plugs I think they are about $35 a plug or so

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

the real Renesis NGK racing plugs are $60+ each, they are Iridium work better than the standard $30 NGK rotary racing plugs IMO

they're Leading (NGK R7440A) and Trailing (NGK R7440B) specific due to having a different insert length just like the OE plugs


.

dannobre

iTrader: (3)

Forgot the + after the $35 Thought that was scary enough

9krpmrx8

iTrader: (46)

There are also the Denso Iridium Race plugs that I run. But I run trailing plugs in both the leading a trailing locations at the advice of my tuner and they have been working great. IRT01-31 (Trailing) and IRL01-27 (Leading) if you run the recommended stock config.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

typical failboy, next time get the IRL01-31 and IRT01-31

they're leading and trailing specific for a reason

9krpmrx8

iTrader: (46)

It's running great right now, there is no reason to switch. But I do have a full set of the IRL01-31 and IRT01-31's for next time as well as a set of IRE01-31's but Steve said not to use those.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

The Renesis specific trailing plug is 2mm shorter than the leading plug. The Renesis plugs also have other dimensional variations from the 13B plugs. Bottom line is the right plugs make a difference.

HiFlite999

iTrader: (2)

Yes, it's a bad idea. The time between ignition events decreases with increasing rpm. Without decreasing the dwell time, the duty cycle of the coil with rise. Even if the coil can take the heating caused by running nearly full time, the small primary wires feeding the coil from the OEM harness may not.

Check out my 3 posts starting here:

https://www.rx8club.com/series-i-eng...8/#post4313860

dannobre

iTrader: (3)

It's the same kind of thinking that mashing the gas and letting the rev limiter control your speed would get you

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

It's the same kind of thinking that results in needing a new engine

Carbon8

iTrader: (4)

Wanted to throw out what I am seeing out their and see if someone with a lot more insight and knowledge than myself can help me put it together.

1 MAF scaling, done!
2 Bank 1 scaling, done!
3 Bank 2 scaling was way off, I was running very rich (high 9 low 10 under cruise loads) so we bumped up the sizing and leaned everything out to where it was supposed to be, done!
4 Bank 3 Scaling almost dead on OE done!

So now onto WOT logging and this is what was first achieved




Obviously their is a problem, peaking 16:1 AFR, and holding 260 g/sec. Albeit I have no real idea of exactly what was done during my rebuild as far as how extreme my "mild street porting" instructions where interpreted but either way seeing NA 8's barely push to 210 g/sec it seems excessive

So decided to scale my Bank 2 injectors back to OE sizing as before I made that change just driving around I noticed I stayed around 12:1 AFR, so this is what I am now sitting at.




A drastic improvement but still slightly lean, but now under cruise loads I am back into the high 9's low 10's between 4K and 6K RPM.

Needless to say its interesting stuff

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

because it's in open loop and you need to tune for this accordingly, also the g/s MAF figure is meaningless without also referencing IAT and MAF voltage


.

Brettus

iTrader: (2)

I have tuned multiple rx8s

Very rare for me to do anything to maf scale except perhaps at idle and below 60g/s . I prefer to concentrate on what the issue might be,rather than covering it up by rescaling the maf.

I rarely rescale stock injectors

I generally get really consistent results ................

Carbon8

iTrader: (4)

IAT of 77 F, Maf V of 4.2v for 260 g/sec

And these logs are way above what my open loop tables indicate they should be.

Also the injectors where flowed and cleaned, so I know that can effect their sizing, at the time I was only looking at Bank 2 being off so we scaled it accordingly as WOT was not being done yet.

Also seems when the Bank 2 where scaled larger my STFT where all over the place as seen in the graph above.

Brettus

iTrader: (2)

seems like way too much mass flow . Either scaling is wrong or you need to look at maf tube design

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

not necessarily, it's spot on for the OE MAF curve and I've posted similar numbers non-ported NA with a 3.375" ID MAF housing

decent numbers for sure, but you're going about it all wrong. At this point start changing fuel map cells based on open loop load/rpm/gear to get the results you need. It isn't possible to have actual vs target to match up on all levels, nor is it absolutely necessary. The exception is if the target gets super way off from actual (8.0 AFR target, 13.4 AFR actual), then you have something else going on and need to correct for it either by scaling, etc. or mechanical repair such as fuel pump, injectors etc.. With three pairs of injectors that we have no control over staging there are going to be areas that never match up well target vs actual. Just accept it.


.

Carbon8

iTrader: (4)

That's kinda my problem right now, my tables are richness to around 11.8-12.4 ish for WOTand was seeing almost 16:1 instead is a slight red flag.

logalinipoo

What did your injectors flow and what are they scaled to?

Brettus

iTrader: (2)

I would have a real good look at your maf pipe design . I hear what team is saying but I'm still picking 260 isn't a real number.
How did you scale your injectors and how far off stock settings are they ?

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

part of the issue, and one I personally detest, is trying to cram all that data on a single graph. I can't specifically see what AFRs are because the graph range is too compressed. I can scan the log report and pick it all out in a few seconds.

That said, you scaled out the lean spots and got rich. Either pick a middle ground and adjust both extremes in to what you want via the fuel maps or go back to the scaling that got you the rich, not so rich results and lean out the rich areas as may be necessary.

In general you seem too fixated on a preconceived process rather than going with the flow of it and relying on some analytical thinking coupled with common sense.

Carbon8

iTrader: (4)

MAF pipe is AEM CAI,

Scaling

Very Lean Graph
Bank 1=366
Bank 2=612
Bank 3=490

Lean Graph
Bank 1=366
Bank 2=476
Bank 3=490

When my Bank 2 injectors are scaled smaller my WOT is better, but my cruise loads result in very rich 9-10 AFR.

When they are scaled larger my WOT is very lean, but my cruise is dead on my AFR tables


I scaled out the rich cruise spots 4-6K RPM under 30-60% load, and ended up with a very lean WOT.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

and I'm telling you to open up your mind to do this:

and not this:

and tune out rich cruise loads with the fuel maps, which aren't really cruise loads since you're not in closed loop

OR ALTERNATIVELY:

set the scaling in the middle between the two and adjust the rich spots leaner and lean spots richer on each end

it seems pretty obvious to me, but you seem again to be fixated on some kind of specific thing that doesn't really make sense IMO

Brettus

iTrader: (2)

are you sure bank 1 and 2 injectors are wired up right ?