Tuners Rejoice! Free Tuning For M4.4!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 7.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Attention: The first 30 or so pages of this thread are outdated. Please refer to the M4.4 Wikia article where all the relevant information is currently being collated. Before asking any questions p

Crush it.

After alot of testing and rewriting code, we finally got a useful new mod working. As we all know, some time ago my dad Piet found out how to convert to bigger maf housings with the maf factor. Conver

Posted Images

As Razorx already stated, when I convert the VE-table into AFR values with his formula 14.7/(x*0.0078125), I'am getting values very close to the measured AFR's in my logs

I suspect that if the maf table, injectorconstant and injector deadtimes are really, really spot on, the logged values for AFR could be very close to the values in the VE/AFR table.

I'am planning to build an injector flow meter this weekend to determine exactly the injector constant and dead times of my injectors to see if I can get really close with my logged AFRs to the values in the table that way.

photo-thumb-48741.png?_r=1363156278 Posted by mercuric on 21 October 2013 - 11:23 PM in Performance Modifications

Yes, in concept, 1.0 in the VE map *should* be 14.7, but not being an actual target lambda, it will only be 14.7:1 if the injectors and MAF are both correctly calibrated. Technically it's simply a correction factor applied to the injection time value.

You're doing interesting work with the MAF and now with injectors. This will be on your "greens" first?

Rod

Edited by Rod'sT-5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I got RN head b523t3 exhaust stock timing (vvt-solenoid unplugged) and intake -4. It was about same with intake 0. Maybe I should try different settings.

Thanks!

This was mentioned in the past.

If you're getting knock that isn't curable by adding fuel or retarding ignition, play with cam timing. I couldn't get midrange knock to go away regardless of fuel/ignition parameters, but retarding the intake cam a couple of degrees really made a difference. That did away with the timing pull in the 3000-3600 RPM range, which kept the adaptive segment in that area retarded, leading to a lull in performance. Very annoying. I suspect the knock reduction was due to reducing flow a little bit in that region, and/or reducing cam overlap. Either way, without the timing pull torque improved and the slight increase in higher-RPM flow is an added bonus.

Not to sure about the RN head? Going from -4 to 0 would have advanced the cam timing.

Rod

Link to post
Share on other sites

photo-thumb-48741.png?_r=1363156278 Posted by mercuric on 21 October 2013 - 11:23 PM in Performance Modifications

Yes, in concept, 1.0 in the VE map *should* be 14.7, but not being an actual target lambda, it will only be 14.7:1 if the injectors and MAF are both correctly calibrated. Technically it's simply a correction factor applied to the injection time value.

You're doing interesting work with the MAF and now with injectors. This will be on your "greens" first?

Rod

Yes it will be on my greens first. Edited by Piet
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got my airfilter box coming, 960 maf is here. Car really dogs down when the MAF clips and the load drops.

Next will be injectors. Running 106% duty cycle. Will probably look for the greens also.

Didn't think my stock T5 would need them, but maxing out air and fuel.

Rod

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was mentioned in the past.

If you're getting knock that isn't curable by adding fuel or retarding ignition, play with cam timing. I couldn't get midrange knock to go away regardless of fuel/ignition parameters, but retarding the intake cam a couple of degrees really made a difference. That did away with the timing pull in the 3000-3600 RPM range, which kept the adaptive segment in that area retarded, leading to a lull in performance. Very annoying. I suspect the knock reduction was due to reducing flow a little bit in that region, and/or reducing cam overlap. Either way, without the timing pull torque improved and the slight increase in higher-RPM flow is an added bonus.

Not to sure about the RN head? Going from -4 to 0 would have advanced the cam timing.

Rod

I also have a RN head with a RN intake manifold mounted on my B5234T4 850R engine. Vvt fastened.

I have some knock retard of a few degrees round 4000- 5000 RPM I can't rid of by retarding or adding fuel.

In will try retarding the intake cam a couple degrees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have a RN head with a RN intake manifold mounted on my B5234T4 850R engine. Vvt fastened.

I have some knock retard of a few degrees round 4000- 5000 RPM I can't rid of by retarding or adding fuel.

In will try retarding the intake cam a couple degrees.

Isn't the throttlebody under the intake, or is that non turbo?

Rod

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an intake manifold of a turbo car.

I have made some modifications to fit a S90 mechanical throttle body with a 3" throttle plate.

This throttle body has replaced the original electronic throttle, which indeed is under the intake.

Rerouted the intercooler piping for this.

I could post some pictures of it tomorrow if you like?

Edited by Piet
Link to post
Share on other sites

While experimenting with the MAF I noticed something about the fuel trims, problably something everyone already knows except for me....... :blush: ...

I always thought of LTFT_P en LTFT_I as two seperate things, well... this is'nt the case.

The LTFT_P has his influence on every non-WOT situation, including Idle ! !

The LTFT_I is superposed on the LTFT_P at idle for finetuning idling.

That explains why if the ltft_p, for example, is +5% (ECU is adding gasoline at partial load) and if the ltft_i is -60 musec (ECU is subtracting gasoline at idle) both can move to zero with raising the injector constant towards 1 (adding gasoline)

That's because the ltft_i has to compensate less for the positive ltft_p

As Razorx already stated, when I convert the VE-table into AFR values with his formula 14.7/(x*0.0078125), I'am getting values very close to the measured AFR's in my logs

I suspect that if the maf table, injectorconstant and injector deadtimes are really, really spot on, the logged values for AFR could be very close to the values in the VE/AFR table.

I'am planning to build an injector flow meter this weekend to determine exactly the injector constant and dead times of my injectors to see if I can get really close with my logged AFRs to the values in the table that way.

The injector flow meter sounds really nice! I'll be waiting to see the results.

Regarding the VE table I also believe this should be very close to the target AFR (if everything is calibrated).

I don't have the wideband installed yet but I started to work on my VE map to setup a baseline. The formula you mention should be 14.7/X*1,0078125 and not 0,0078125, right?

The other day I started to translate the 611 S70R bin stock VE map into an AFR table (just based on the formula 14,7/X) and at that point I had almost no doubts this should be close to the AFR target. (at this point I don't know what accel enrichment DK and D+L values mean). Someone knows?

This is the stock 611 VE map (values):

VE_map_values.jpg

This is the stock 611 VE map (supposed AFR based on the simple formula I used):

VE_map_AFR.jpg

These values seem trully realistic to be the actual target AFR. Don't you think?

I'll get my conclusions once I have my wideband installed (hopefully this weekend).

Edited by S70-R
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got my airfilter box coming, 960 maf is here. Car really dogs down when the MAF clips and the load drops.

Next will be injectors. Running 106% duty cycle. Will probably look for the greens also.

Didn't think my stock T5 would need them, but maxing out air and fuel.

Rod

You are maxing out the 960 maf with a stock turbo, if i understand correctly?

That't odd. I just don't max out the 960 maf with my 19T at 1.4 bar, load 10 ms.

Came to just under 5 volt.

Well... it's getting late now in the Netherlands. I will be joining this very interesting discussion again tomorrow.

Edited by Piet
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got my airfilter box coming, 960 maf is here. Car really dogs down when the MAF clips and the load drops. Next will be injectors. Running 106% duty cycle. Will probably look for the greens also.

Didn't think may stock T5 would need them, but maxing out air and fuel.

Rod

Doesn't make sense that you are maxing the 960 MAF. Do you have a screenshot of your dashboard where this is evident? ... Or a section of an exported log file for review (not a link to a log session...) I would say doing the injectors ASAP should be a priority - anything over 85% is no good, and will impact all your other values due to the irregular flow that will occur once the injectors go beyond their safe limit.

Piet: Nice clean work on the TB conversion !

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is saying he has everything ready to fit the 960 maf and "Car really dogs down when the MAF clips and the load drops" with the stock maf. Thats how it read to me

Right! Looking back at his post, that is how Rod worded it, sorry for the error, Rod!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Guys,

i have a Problem now, i converted a 850r Automatic 0261204134 too m4.4 ecu 0261204457

i flashed a 607 bin

but for now i always get EFI - 335 and P1618 error codes

do you think the m4.4 Manual ecu dont work 0261204457 ??

regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.