S70-R

Members
  • Content Count

    800
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

Community Reputation

145 Great

1 Follower

About S70-R

  • Rank
    Level 2 Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Location
    Lisbon, Portugal

Recent Profile Visitors

3,714 profile views
  1. Hey man i was just browsing the forum about actuators and I saw youre post. I wanted to know when you are on the gtx 2867R are you on the 97 factory rods? I didnt see any listed in youre signature.

  2. Cant that overshooting be due to a too strong wg spring or a not very progressive tcv map? You should be careful with the tcv dc values around the spool up area. If you are having that overshooting the transition values should be as smooth as possible.
  3. That's a huge difference in torque (18% or so) just because of 1 point AFR difference. Are the ignition maps and boost maps the same in those 2 runs (with and without WB regulation)?
  4. Yes, with the ostrich is by far not so time consuming :)
  5. Absolutely true! Those are the main reasons why I would (or likely will at somepoint) use the wideband mod ;) Filling the VE table and hit the target straight away is also awesome, for sure! My point was just to show that even without the wideband mod it is still perfectly possible to get a good AFR control although it takes more time and it's never as accurate as with the mod. And because, being honest, a 0.2-0.3 AFR variance will not hurt anyone or any performance target by noticeable amounts. I did. I've never used the wideband mod so far so I've been doing that since the beginning. I think most of the other members with a wideband gauge have also been doing that. It's not rocket science. It is something easy, logical and intuitive.
  6. Yes, sure. No doubt about it. Just said that even without the wideband regulation mod, the VE table is still an AFR target table and that the system is still able to achieve the target AFR in open loop with a 0.1-0.4 AFR variance, which is not that bad anyway. And if we do some runs, log the achieved target AFR, match it with the target AFRs on the table we can measure the variance and then adjust the VE table further to achieve our real target AFRs. It's a bit more time consuming of course and it's not so accurate as the wideband regulation mod but it does its job.
  7. I also haven't ever touched the wot enrichment table. That table enriches or leans the mixture indeed but it does from the VE table values. Use the VE/lambda table only. Values of 1 mean stoich target (14,7 AFR). Values above 1 mean richer than stoich and below leaner than stoich. It's like inverted lambda values. So, this means you can know the target AFR values included on that table by doing the following math: 1/x*14.7 being the x the VE number on the table. That formula outputs the target AFR for a specific VE number on the table. Actually, you can easily turn all the table into a target AFR table by changing its conversion formula in the xdf definitions. Put this formula: 1/(x*0.0078125)*14.7 If everything is well calibrated (MAF and injectors) and if you have no vac/boost leaks the AFR you will get should be close to the target AFRs on the table. It may differ by 0.1-0.4 AFR. To get extremely accurate AFRs you need to use the wideband regulation mod.
  8. TMM9, I've just dropped you a PM with the link for my log.
  9. TMM9 I'm sorry I couldn't log it yet. Hopefully I'll be able to do it within 3-5 days.
  10. I can log it with mine (manual). As Rod's asked, is just to use that adx and log for 20 min?
  11. I believe it should run ok provided you disable rear o2, sas, baro sensor, etc. And of course ignition map should be custom made for that car.
  12. That's what I did before trying to solve it but it was not working anyway. Tried again after restarting tunerpro and now works. About the TPS difference yes, with the correct conversion factor it is supposed to be the same as OBDII/torque app.
  13. I had already noticed different TPS values when logging with tunerpro or when using for instance OBDII with Torque App but I didn't bother with it that much. But actually the ADX file seems to have that error on the conversionf factor. However, and at least on my adx file, when I'm on trace mode and when I'm looking at the TCV/target load tables the trace is stuck on the first column (TPS <=25). The trace just bounces up and down in the first column according to the RPMs. I noticed it is missing the X Axis DA Link but it seems I can't put it ok.