Captain Bondo Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 No I don't think so, unless you use some sort of MAF to MAP conversion system. But why would you want to anyway? Why would you want to be able to tune ans EMS like a normal speed density system? Unless turbo tuner allows access to all of the sensor trims that result in the load calculations, being able to run an actual speed-density system would be very desireable. Of course you would want to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbotuner Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Why would you want to be able to tune ans EMS like a normal speed density system? Unless turbo tuner allows access to all of the sensor trims that result in the load calculations, being able to run an actual speed-density system would be very desireable. Of course you would want to. OK, but I was trying to understand why someone would want to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
550 Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 No I don't think so, unless you use some sort of MAF to MAP conversion system. But why would you want to anyway? That is normal. I know it's normal ;-) Map tends to be better for big boost cars from what I have seen.(Only from what I have seen, I have never modified a MAP based car) I mean when you look at supra's you don't see MAF's on them. From what I have gathered MAF's are flakey :-/. Where as a MAP is based on the absolute pressure in the manifold it provides a better way to manage things on the car. Isn't there a lot of things controlled from the MAF? As in, the MAF can be the reason for things like timing pull, (aside of the knock sensors), and goofy AFR's? I just seems to me that if you could do away with the MAF and go with MAP, that some of the oddities of these cars would maybe be solved? You can go MAP when you go standalone, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbotuner Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 From what I have gathered MAF's are flakey :-/. Where as a MAP is based on the absolute pressure in the manifold it provides a better way to manage things on the car. If a MAF sensor isn't working correctly, then sure the engine won't run properly. But the same would apply to a faulty MAP sensor too! I'm still curious how a MAP based version would be better to manage things? It's a genuine question BTW - I'm intrigued because if there are significant advanatges then I would look into this for the TT. Isn't there a lot of things controlled from the MAF? As in, the MAF can be the reason for things like timing pull, (aside of the knock sensors), and goofy AFR's? Yes, but only if the MAF is faulty. Goofy AFR for example can be down to faulty sensors, air leaks, mapping etc. You could get equally goofy AFRs with a MAP based system. I just seems to me that if you could do away with the MAF and go with MAP, that some of the oddities of these cars would maybe be solved? What sort of oddities? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
550 Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 When you use a MAF you aren't taking into account the absolute manifold pressure for fuel tuning. When in reality you are only measuring the amount of air comming in. So unless you modify the signals from the MAF (which you are doing with the TT) it is harder to adjust the amount of fuel going into the engine. With a MAP based system you add fuel based on pressure not on air flow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbotuner Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 When you use a MAF you aren't taking into account the absolute manifold pressure for fuel tuning. When in reality you are only measuring the amount of air comming in. So unless you modify the signals from the MAF (which you are doing with the TT) it is harder to adjust the amount of fuel going into the engine. With a MAP based system you add fuel based on pressure not on air flow. What about the IAT? With a MAP based system, don't you also need IAT sensor to calculate the air density? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackT5 Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Yes. I use a combined MAP/IAT sensor in place of the MAF with Nira. From my understanding, the disadvantages of MAF are that they can be slow to react, sensitive to damage, expensive to replace, and are a restriction in the intake. Advantages being that it measures the amount of air entering the engine making fuel mapping easy, and good for emissions over the entire life of the engine 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted November 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2009 ^ interesting conversation worked on my modded breather system today... Oil cap take II - fitting silver soldered inside late style cap.. modified Cusco can - now has 2.25" baffle sleeve inside, setup like the Volvo breather box 1/2" drain, 3/8"vents ... oil cap will vent to Cusco can, which will vent to old CC, and drain back to factory breather like this... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Bondo Posted November 22, 2009 Report Share Posted November 22, 2009 A "load" calculation that is generated by a fixed formula based on throttle position, intake air temp, mass flow, and whatever odd values it uses, does not give you the control a MAP based system does. Unless you can actually modify how things like intake air temperature modify the load calculation. For example - with a map based system, you can exactly define how much fuel trim is added or subracted for any given intake air temperature independent of load. You can alter the pulsewidth calulation base don each variable independently, rather thanon a calculated mish-mash value that tries to incorporate them all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted November 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 Worked on the revised breather system today - pulled the intake & the box - added the extra drain port, replaced the drain hose. Fitted the modified Cusco can, put it all back together.... the formed drain tube is the PCV/flame trap hose from a 740 16V, vent hoses are 740 power steering return lines... back together Catch can - added a sleeve to the vent outlet inside the can, to reduce direct oil draw into inlet tract (see sketch below) drain nipple & hose new can.. did away with the sight tube, don't need two . ..trying to upload more pics... network connection sucks tonight... modified box overview... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackT5 Posted November 23, 2009 Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 Good job. Everything under the hood looks neat and tidy. Lets hope it helps to solve the problem :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted November 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 Looks like I'm all good! auxiliary breather can is obviously draining properly, no more oil build up in the catch can! short (shitty) Youtube vid from today - I'll get Adam to shoot some better footage now that it's pretty much sorted out. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted November 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Added boost via the Apexi AVC-R boost pressure sensor signal wire ..seems like the boost scaling is off slightly - according to my gauge I'm getting 24psi at the limit on the highway pull (3-6). I used -700mmHg to 2205mmHg (3kg/cm2) as the scale, since that's the specified range of the Apexi boost sensor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackT5 Posted November 25, 2009 Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Does it constantly run 14s at 1.2 bar in that one spot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookforjoe Posted November 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2009 Does it constantly run 14s at 1.2 bar in that one spot? That's 2nd gear - if I kept winding it out, it probably would. AFR's (at a specific RPM) seem to drop as you go up through the gears. According to Janne, it's nothing to worry about, in the lower gears (1,2) He even suggested just under lambda .96 is OK, as long as the EGT's are reasonable (under around 1400ºF) over 6200rpm - they don't get anywhere near that now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.