JCviggen

Still doesn't make sense WI doesn't add any unmetered oxygen..you're not breaking the water down into H and O2 (thank god) and all the air came past the MAF. The one where it runs lean, its also showing much higher boost? In fact, I don't understand why the car would run at all at WOT with such figures. Last night I drove the 850 and although it rips with 12.0, it already starts to stumble around 12.5-12.6 AFR and goes berserk at 13:1 AFR. Trust me, those are not good AFR's. Perhaps the most puzzling part of this is why are you continuing to mess with this ECU which is never going to give you a clean AFR when you have another you can program yourself to deliver a nice steady AFR away from the silly lean that you're doing now. I'll bet the house that your car is not accelerating as well as it should with 13.5 AFFR's up top.

13.55 at 1.5 bar is silly lean. He is using a normal amount of timing. 12.0 gives me the best power. If it gets to 12.3-12.5 the timing gets pulled out. Honestly 13.5 is too lean any way you slice it. And because your AFR isn't stable at all through the revs testing with this ECU is quite useless.

You're too lean starting 5K onwards...so well before 6200. You really don't want to see above 12.5 AFR. I am using a 3" MAF housing with the TT, but be advised it takes a lot of work to adapt the spark map since the load figures are completely off (30-35% low) and a MAF rescale function is not (yet) available.

Technically that is correct. Spark can handle a pretty wide range of temps without needing changes but with considerably higher temperatures you can encounter timing pull that wasn't there before. Fueling same story, it's not too picky and you won't see any large swings unless you compare -10C winter to +30C summer.

The maximum number for the ECU doesn't change when you upgrade MAF diamater. You're just measuring less. The MAF stops accurately measuring airflow yes. Which is why you need to map fuel correctly for your target boost because if you boost less or more the AFR will change since the ECU doesn't know the difference until you drop back below the limit. Tuned cars (especially bigger turbo ones) will always max it out unless you go to 3" MAF. I can't hit 100% load with mine even at 25psi. 95% at 5K and then it drops back to 80s

I disagree, that's just 100% load (max measurable airflow for the ECU) which is what you would expect in this case. The problem is the fuel map.

Educated guess his values seem 5-6 degs off. If you look at the values before he hits it they are already on the low side. And as soon as he even makes 5psi they are dropping to 14 btdc. If you get detonation and timing pull, you wouldn't expect it to happen a mere second after going WOT and not even at target boost. But again, the AFRs are in my opinion already impossible to use so even if the timing is off it's pretty pointless to continue with this map.

I don't like your AFR...is this still Janne's ECU? You want a steady ~12 not start pig rich and end way lean. Point I'm trying to make, why waste your time with an ECU you can't remap. This one is never going to work well with that AFR plot.

At least you're keeping busy :D

My deka 630's are running as expected, no weirdness to be reported. I don't quite remember how I mounted them, just the usual way I guess ME 4.3 seems to have no limit when it comes to fuel compensation. Could be different with your car and the newer EMS.

Regardless of how much too big the injectors are or how much fuel is programmed after driving it for a bit it should settle at 14.7. That's what the front O2 sensor is for..you can stick 750cc's on a stock map and it should cruise at stoich. Would throw a CEL to let you know it has to compensate too much though.

Give it time to learn, it should idle and cruise at 14.7 then, only question is after learning what's the WOT AFR :D

Hell I think my Saab could do better than that :rolleyes:

4 tenths left to go. I think it's in there somewhere.

In Belgium any modification of the brakes is illegal. Even just SS hoses are out, caliper change is then obviously waaaay out. Drilled rotors, illegal too. One can get away with slotted.

You should see the belgian inspection <_<

6K for the first 3 months of 2009. Thats 24K on a yearly basis and '08 was around 25K.

Welcome, satisfied overseas customer here ;)

bling!

Nice post, actually most of the "issues" we have here, are just as present if not more on other (non volvo) forums these days. In fact I would say things are still quite all right aside from Volvo as a brand going down the gutter quickly. Then again maybe the RWD turbobricks guys felt the same 10 years ago :lol:

A household consisting only of working people between 18-62 doesn't sound typical to me And what debt are you referring to? You want to count people's mortgages and credit card debts as well? I mean...those debts people created all by themselves. Even if you add up everything you can possibly find you still won't be anywhere near that silly number. I found out where the 425K came from by the way, it started when someone divided 85 billion by 200 million over-18 americans. Only he or she put 3 zeroes too much on a billion and ended up with 425K instead of 425$. So again this is just something a regular person, bad at math, came up with on the internets. Its not "some estimate" like there was anyone serious involved. It would have taken you 10 seconds to see it was BS if you took a calculator... I'll humor you on the cars thing : "folks who need cars" would be who exactly? Who decides who gets a car? A giant national lottery? Everybody wants a free car, you'll never be able to weed out those who already have or can afford one. But that's a minor issue compared to this : the whole idea is to "save" the car industry and "help out" some people as a bonus. But would you do any good to the industry buying up their stock and giving it away for free? No, because you are effectively lowering the value of the cars they are trying to sell themselves, similar to inflation when more currency hits the streets. Giving stuff away for free will never, éver help the economy, period. You will get a huge amount of cars dumped into the market, on top of an artificially lowered demand because now less folks need cars. Prices will collapse like a failed pudding and the car makers and the economy are more screwed than before. I won't get into fuel prices, pollution, congestion, or any of that because they are frankly not worth mentioning next to something so catastrophic as the injection of free cars would be to the market. For this very reason, third world countries don't get any food aid unless people are literally starving. Dumping free food is the final neckshot to what's left of their local agriculture/economy.

The problem with the "proposal" you mentioned is that it sounds logical enough as long as you don't think about it, or know anything about economics. It just wouldn't work, seriously the problems are too numerous to mention. As much as I would love to see GM fail, mathematics suggest that keeping them on life support for the time being is better for everyone (except those interested in good cars obviously). Nobody is "giving" them free money either but the point is that they support such a large number of people that it would cost the government a hell of a lot more money to take over some of GM's obligations, but the economic impact would be even more far reaching. Honestly its the last thing that "we" need right now. Yes they suck and its annoying they will get loans to keep making crappy cars but the alternative is far worse. These things are frikkin complicated even for economists, I don't pretend to know half of it but I'm positive the average Joe doesn't know sh!t about it and the possible consequences. Maybe you could check your calculator. For 700 billion to equal 425K "per household" there would have to be only 1.65 million households. The US population stands at around 305,000,000 people. That works out then at 2300$ per person. May still sound like a lot (and it is, obviously) but its a very far cry from 425 grand a family and it wouldn't save the economy by a long shot if it was just handed out.

Was he joking or serious? That's one of the most retarded things i've heard yet..

I know plenty of "idiots" who were at my school. I know plenty of people who were a lot smarter than me as well. Must've been a weird school, not everybody being the same and all... if you can't see an obvious difference in brain function between W and Barry I don't know what else to say really. If I were an American the mere chance of someone like Palin backing into the presidency if anything happened to John would be plenty of reason to vote for another candidate. It's not such a giant leap either because both Barry and Johnny are (at sight) considerably better options than the 2 that were available in 04. I didn't call you a rural idiot You could be one, or not, not much info to go on here lol Maybe you could go off on a rant about Obama being the antichrist that would help :lol:

I was referring to the traditional democrats anyway...or you could compare Obama's background to McCains which is sort of similar. That's not to say I think McCain would make a bad president. I think he'd be a rather good one in fact. Presidents don't need to be particularly bright, that's one thing we've learned the better part of this decade! Unfortunately McC stopped being himself and picked an awful running mate believing he needed the hardcore reps :(