Piet

Members
  • Posts

    1,147
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Everything posted by Piet

  1. That with the flex pieces does happen occasionally : http://www.volvo850forum.nl/index.php/topic,51078.msg1635254.html#msg1635254 You can't see it from the outside however. This is my EGT sensor install: http://www.volvo850forum.nl/index.php/topic,41329.msg1363461.html#msg1363461
  2. A GT3071R should be good for 400+ hp I agree with Simply volvo that a backpressure sensor and EGT sensor could be helpfull in determining what's wrong.
  3. Glad it worked :) The boost treshold mod Maartem mentioned is also helpfull in reducing boostspikes. A combination with this new mod could be benificial.
  4. OK, just give me a few weeks. I just have to find the time for programming it.
  5. By just leaving the aircomod out.. That's correct.
  6. That's because with knock the ECU reacts with fuel enrichement (knock fuel enrichement). Standard, the STFT is shut down.during knock fuelenrichement by the ECU Just send us your current bin and we will change that so that the STFT will not be shut down anymore with fuel enrichement.
  7. http://www.volvo850forum.nl/index.php/topic,25665.msg1627769.html#msg1627769 But there are other parameters of influence on the PID control: -@ $F1C2 : "Reglersteigung" : I-@ $F1C3 : "Reglersprunghoehe http://www.volvo850forum.nl/index.php/topic,25665.msg1628030.html#msg1628030 http://www.volvo850forum.nl/index.php/topic,25665.msg1628113.html#msg1628113 Not that much to be gained though.
  8. Interesting ... the difference in price between their board kit with and without the LSU49 is 70 dollar........ But the difference between the ALM-S with and without the LSU49 all of a sudden is only 39 dollar.... Hmmm .....
  9. @ avinitlarge (quoting failes, once again... I have to say this new site still doesn't funtion properly). You just need the board, since you already have the LSU49 with the spartan 2.
  10. @Avinitlarge I wasn't either in the beginning. I had bought a Spartan 2 which was the worst I've seen sofar, totally unusable for the wb regulation. At least you were lucky to get one of those rare good ones. @S70-R No, that wasn't because of the AFR difference :) They were two different tunes. Just wanted to show that with the Wb control you can get a straight line for AFR on the bench, just as requested in the VE-table.
  11. This is on the bench (a hub dyno) with my Spartan 1. The dotted (AFR) line is without and the continuous (AFR) line is with the WB control. (Don't mind the knock events here, which took me some peak power (whp), knock events which I did'nt have on the road b.t.w. only on the bench)
  12. The response time of the wideband is very important for a good wb regulation. I myself have the Sparftan 1 which is reasonably good. But I would strongly advise against the Spartan 2 because mostly they perform really bad. It's a hit or miss with these things, Avinitlarge was at luck with one that performs reasonably well. The best results we have seen were with the very fast and reliable ALM controller. The WB regulation is a feed back system, that means that there will be always some oscillation around the requested AFR, the amplitude of which depends strongly on how fast the controller is.
  13. Of course : Oscilloscope (don't know where that came from ..oscillator )
  14. Very likely the controller contains a 12 volt to 5 Volt voltage regulator, so an extra capacitor in the 12 volt line probably won't make a difference. If you have one, you could feed the signal output to an oscillator to see if it produces a clean signal. It is best to ground it as closest nearby the ECU as possible preferably to one if ground pins. A good signal lead also could make a difference.
  15. It's best to connect the signal ground, if your controller had a separate signal ground, to the ground of the ECU. Grounding further away from the ECU can give an offset of something like 0.2 volts relative to the tank pressure channel. But this will be a steady offset instead of a variable one. You're sure the controller output doesn't show the same variance?
  16. Huh Yes of course.... catalytic converter. Interesting slip of the mind
  17. Well...one of the other advantages of the widebandmod is that you can run an AFR at idle and light load (cruising) other then 14.7. The original narrowband control will always push AFR to 14.7 no matter what values you fill in the VE-table. An AFR of 14.7 is only benificial for the catalytic converter. The engine on the other hand performs best at higher AFR's at light load. And running higher AFR's at light load improves mileage. With the wideband control, at high loads the system will always keep striving towards the desired AFR, even if circumstances changes which in open loop would give a deviation. Yes of course you can get good enough AFR's in open loop, but with the wb-mod they are much easier to achieve, it's just filling in the AFR you want. Btw everybody can acquire the wb-mod if they want
  18. Yes, but also in open loop it still reads the VE table as a base to calculate the injector opening times. EDIT: it is switched of because the traditional narrowband control will keep striving towards an AFR of 14.7 which of course isn't desirable at wot. But the ecu still needs the VE table to calculate injection times Yes, you're right :) But that doesn't change the reasoning.
  19. The wot enrichment table isn't an acceleration enrichment table though.. The values of the wot enrichment table are just "added" (CORRECTION: multiplied) to the ones of the VE table at wot in the bin, that's it. So it doesn't make a difference whether you change the values at wot in the VE table or change the values in the wot table
  20. The biggest advantage of the wideband mod is that AFR is regulated in closed loop all the way to max RPM With it you can pin down the AFR you want. Changing, for instance, ignition won't have any influence anymore on AFR. Makes tuning easier. It says that you can do it this way not that you should. Sure, it will work changing the WOT enrichement table. But it just is much more clearer to adjust the VE table instead.
  21. Not worth the effort I would say. The basic control TMM9 designed already is a significant improvement.
  22. Rear O2 heater ouput to control the VVT that is, I believe.