Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

How does the car run now? What efi system is in it now?

92RSZ

iTrader: (6)

These threads always spin so far out of control because someone always wants to bench race about this or that is so much better. Take it from guys like orr who have the experience. I have a p4 on a 420 cube sbc with a procharger and big cam. I literally unplugged the old ecm, changed the map to 2 bar, and plugged in the new one. It starts, idles, runs, drives, and races beautifully. Thats with 110 lb injectors. I have no doubt that this system will run a 1000 horespower engine just fine. The megasquirt may have more functionality but I along with most others who have street cars don't need it. The only thing you're really giving up is a bit more stink at idle with a cam because of batch fire and maybe a slight hit in economy. I don't know of anyone looking to put a procharger on who is worried about that. Either decision you make is going to cost you more than you think. Both options have many hidden costs.
For me personally every time I smoke a race car at the drag strip and pop my hood, the look on everyone's face when they see a sbc instead of an lsx motor is the best part!

Linson

The EFI system is the stock ECM/custom chip and stock TPI. by "stock TPI", i mean the car came with TPI, and it still runs TPI.

specifically, this car has stock (48mm) throttle body w/air foil
ported plenum
AS&M runners
Edelbrock Vortec lower manifold
Walbro 255 fuel pump
Holley AFPR
Accel 24lb injectors
all the emissions stuff has been deleted...

as for how it runs now, its reliable...ish.
it seems under-powered somewhat for the combination of parts that it has. some days, it feels stronger than others.
starts and idles fine, but does usually go through a rough "IAC search" on cold starts.
sometimes, especially when the weather is cold, it wont want to hold idle - you literally have to feather the gas for 3 minutes for it to hold idle... then an hour later it starts and idles fine. NOBODY has been able to figure that one out. can't find any vacuum leaks.

it should get better mileage, even the way i drive. runs rich. runs lean.
have been told that there is some sort of "long term fuel trim" issue, but that's a little over my head.

the car actually runs pretty smooth and has potential. 60 mph feels like 40 mph.

id like to feel more pull from a rolling 50 mph.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Yeah sounds like there is some work to be done to the current state of tune. Good thing with EBL it uses stock code in most of the tables. Granted you'd be going from maf to speed density so the fueling is abit different but you should beable to start with the base bin file and tune from there since the car isnt that far off from stock, despite heads intake mods etc. you can do the ebl swap now, learn how to make it close for the current motor very quickly and then add the blower later

The guy that had the procharged 383 iroc basically installed EBL, got it fired up on his own, did a few ve learns and got car driving well enough to drive few hrs to me to finish everythin else and do wot. Beginner tuner and was able to make it work fairly well in short amount of time. Didnt take long to dial in the tune either. Boost tuning is fairly easy with that system imo

Linson

edit: here are two horribly recorded videos that made and uploaded today (my first ever YouTube uploads) so that you can see the idle as it is now.

it was actually pretty warm today, and the idle evened out pretty quickly, no obvious IAC search with a few seconds of erratic idle.

i kept my ugly mug out of frame as much as possible.

obviously i need to figure out how to make proper titles for my videos.

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

Just to point something out Linson, the setup at the time of that video was a small 305 SBC with 23x/23x camshaft and stock 48mm throttle body which effects where your kpa will hover, but despite this, after tuning it further I brought the idle down to 850-RPM Park, and 600-RPM in Drive, with 11" of vacuum essentially gaining one more over 10". I posted that video because that was the engine right after the install, the system works flawlessly, the idle got so tame after that you can't even tell it is that cammed, and that is a pretty big cam for a street driven 305 running a turbo. In the end though, the idea is for you to just enjoy the damn thing. These arguments about which ECM is better is so very unnecessary, and does more harm than good for the community...

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

That's always something I've been critical about. But I'm picky apparently.

So, one of the things that I wanted to avoid was hacking up my harness, in fact I wanted to keep the stock pinout because at the time it was between an EBL and Megasquirt, and if one didn't work out I wanted to use the other. I had always previously used an emulator, but was sick of using one application to tune, another to scan, and a spreadsheet to do my VE calcs for me. (based on the BLM reading of a narrowband 02).. Wow that was crazy. Anyway, I had the following goals:

1) It had to support boost, preferably with a VE table that went greater than 100kpa rather than a BPW multiplier.

2) The tuning and scanning had to be in the same cable, same application.

3) I had to be able to modify the tune in real time without a stall, restart, etc.

Another thing I was concerned about was the number of people reporting hardware problems with their MS2, which wasn't an SMT design and was very susceptible to noise, poor soldering, etc. I decided to buy a delphi 56 connector, and install it along with the Microsquirt module inside the stock '165 ECM case. This allowed me to keep the '165 stock pinout. The only thing I had to do was remove the MAF connector, and replace it with a MAP connector.

http://members.cisdi.com/~anesthes/p...om/megasquirt/

It cost me $300 and is plug and play. So for about $200 less than an EBL, I got a lot more functionality. It's not like I immediately dismissed the EBL either. I can show you my PM's between RBob and I asking about the system. It just didn't fit my needs, but may work quite well for you.

Since moving to the MS I've been kind of spoiled. The fuel system is typical speed density calc, and the closed loop correction is based on an AFR table. The default feedback is wideband. One of the features that I really like is that when adjusting the VE table, say on a new combo, the current cells it is interpolating around are 'active' on the screen, so you can +/i those cells directly until they are within the range you want. This translates to getting a new combo starting and idling within a few minutes. Then you just drive and let it auto tune for you.

At the end of the day, once tuned, is it going to make your car idle better? Not likely. Although the processor is 48 times faster, so it can calculate fuel requirements and deliver a PW many more times a second, in reality it probably won't change idle quality.


One place where the OE stuff and the EBL falls down is closed loop. On both, closed loop is based on stoich. (https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/dfi-...fr-vs-rpm.html From the man himself if you don't believe me).

This is great for emissions compliance, not so great for a hot combo. On most aftermarket systems, you have different target AFR based on what you are doing. (idle, cruise, wot, and so on).

(These are examples, notice how you can change the map value on the left. You can also use table switching for more resolution)








I'm sure this is another one of those features that nobody needs on a thirdgen, which is obviously why it's never been added.


-- Joe

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Fyi thats what pe enrichment and ae enrichments do, and also o2 milivolt offsets. You can alter idle air fuel target that way

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Not exactly.

The closed loop operation in the factory ECU has a target AFR of stoich, and it's global. When you enter PE learn mode stops, and it adds to the BPW based on the last learned cell. It is not making corrections based on o2 feedback. It's essentially open loop. You can tune your power enrichment to a specific reading on the wideband (while tuning), but again it is NOT calculating the pulse width based on feedback. It won't correct the AFR if environmental conditions cause it to go leaner or richer.
o2 voltage offsets simply trick the global AFR target.

Neither of these mechanisms are comparable to a fully functional closed loop AFR target table.


AE (pump shot) modifies the BPW based on throttle or map input. It does not target any specific AFR based on o2 feedback. AE is used in sudden map or throttle changes where an immediate increase in fuel is needed, and couldn't rely on o2 feedback anyway. (would be too late).

Every system (that I'm aware of) has AE.


With all that said, you don't need an AFR table. It just makes life a lot easier, and makes the tune more consistent.

-- Joe

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

You are talking about wideband closed loop. Yes that is a different thing but not needed. Stock motors are tuned for their specific package of parts. They run good in all conditions. If you change heads cam cubes, guess what? You just tune for it and it will run fine as did before

Big advantage in wideband closed loop is for racey setups imo, mainly multiple fuel pump deals, twin injectors per cyl, etc where monitoring fuel afr comes in handy incase of injector or fuel pump failure. Also if intercooler pump fails on air water coolers, high iat trigger slightly different air fuel perhaps, compensate for it. Those kinda things the aftermarket stuff is almost required imo.

For simple stuff its a luxary item imo. If you can get a system with it, go for it

On side note, code $59 supposively can do wideband closed loop. I have never mess with it however. Never had a need

Kingtal0n

I will never rely on wideband closed loop operation because I have personally had one fail on an engine, if the sensor gets too hot they will read rich. I was on a dyno but wasn't paying attention to the dynometer's sensor(never make that mistake again), just using the in-car wideband and nobody was around. It Turned into an engine rebuild because the excessive EGT caused the piston rings to all lose tension. Motor never knocked, everything came out looking great but the tension was gone from the rings.

Many widebands have a configurable analog output which can be programmed to fool the stock ecu into running different a/f ratios than 14.7:1

All that said, I run my car in open loop always. I have an in-car commander I can spot adjust if things wander (cruise numbers will wander) around too much so I don't have to carry a laptop around, and yes they do wander enough that my OCD at seeing 15.6's bothers me and I make it say 15.2's for a while when I cruise, always leaner than 14.7 though not much leaner. There isn't much fuel to be saved in leaner a/f ratios, most of the engine economy comes from a good clean plug/cylinder free from oil, reasonable compression and proper timing, and good temperature conservation, ive got heat shields and blankets on my turbine.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Notice the trend here. Stock ECM doesn't do it = not needed.

Sure, but most of your tune is static. Why go EFI if it can't properly maintain the target AFR?

Cars with bigger cams tend to run differently from day to day based on temperature, humidity, etc. The narrowband o2 is only good for attempting to target stoich, and is often fooled by big cams. Simply logging things on a daily basis with a wideband will show you that.

EBL I suspect is a bit better in this regard, as it will attempt to target stoich based on wideband so you don't have to play with o2 offsets. However, your PE enrichment is still a 'guess' and ultimately a static part of the tune.

Well that is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. But wideband closed loop is to simply maintain the correct target AFR. It allows the fuel injection system to be more responsive and adaptive to changing conditions. No, you don't "need it".

I have not touched $59 since about 2008. $59 never ran quite as good as $8d. I don't know why.

The supercharged Cobalt has a wideband o2 factory. I've never seen one of those ECM's tuned so I don't know how it's represented in the code, or if it's simply for emissions compliance. I know some of the import stuff also has wideband o2's factory.

Does the factory 30 year old ECM get the job done? Sure. Are you using this forum on a commodore 64 with a 1200 baud modem? I bet not, you are using a modern computer. Do you NEED a modern computer? No, but it's nice isn't it?

Your a bit younger than me, so you probably never owned a Commodore 64 haha


I'm not trying to convince you or street lethal to go aftermarket. I don't care what either of you run. The OP asked me a question, I gave him an answer.

-- Joe

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Ok. Things do fail.

Right, but that's the same as changing the o2 offsets in the code/bin. You are making a global change. That's not what I was referring to.

A lot of guys do. My speed boat runs open loop too. (It's carbureted).

-- Joe

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Hmm thats strange. I havent seen that in all the cars i've tuned and been around

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

You should probably call GM and let them know that they are wasting a boat load of R&D money on closed loop code and other feedback algorithms. Let them know in your vast experience that environmental conditions don't effect the running AFR, and there is never a need to adjust the fuel mixture. Silly GM. Must be a conspiracy to sell o2 sensors.


-- Joe

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

O2 works for stoich part throttle where it matters, air fuel shifts at wot vary very slightly. I'm sorry you dont have the experience that confirms this. Millions of cars from the factory dont have widebands and funny how they dont have issus lol. And those cars are sold all across the country

Maf and iat and map sensors in general work fine enough in changing air conditions.

You sure talk a big game with nothing to back it up with

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

I haven't either, and this was always confirmed by pulling the plugs every 100 or so miles to verify proper air/fuel in conjunction with O2mv, and/or wideband data...

I would also imagine that the R&D that is relentlessly done, not just by GM, but by all vehicle manufacturers, is to keep up with the more stringent regulations of the EPA. Such tests are a requirement with or without any real progress, and it is nothing that General Motors doesn't already know through years and years of thorough research and testing. Nothing's really changed. Much like auditing a bank, it just keeps GM on their toes and in compliance, and keeps people employed. The day we see vehicles averaging sixty plus miles per gallon is the day those tests have actually accomplished something, otherwise they are simply rehashing the same ole thing but in a new package. I can show you commercials of vehicles from the 90's boasting 30-mpg and over 300 horsepower, with today car manufacturers proclaiming the very same thing as if it were some real accomplishment. More refine, yes, but that's about it, and this is not to the new firmware's credit...

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

It's kinda funny how in just a few years you've gone from not knowing how to dial in idle, to being our resident EFI expert..

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/diy-...urbo-code.html

It's ok, I remember when I first started playing with EFI too in the mid 90s.

Anyway, I'm not going to get into chest pounding. The OP asked my opinion, I stated it. You are a mechanical engineer, I'm a software engineer. I wouldn't attempt to debate how to build a bridge with you, I'm not sure why you are debating software with me. I don't have stock in aftermarket ECM companies, my life is unchanged regardless of what you use.

-- Joe

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Turned out to be a code issue. Once you enable close throttle control and turned that quasi fuel mode crap off whatever it was in there, it ended up working fine

Went 9's on that code. And if wanna play this game, you never did get 58$ to work did you? And you had half the injector size i did lol

Building a v6 based turbo code into a hot v8 turbo code like i did was not for the novice tuner. It took a bit of work to figure out. And i did it.

Lots can change in 5+ years eh? Lol

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

Indeed it can. This website took a long time to catch up to the other websites, which is sad because once upon a time people used to source this website for information. So many arguments back and forth about how to control boost with a MAF, how to control it with Speed Density, how to do this, how to do that, yet it all changed for me almost a decade ago. I remember asking Bob Bailey to visit this website because everyone was arguing about the '7165 with boost, or how to implement the $8F code for a V8 with distributor, and he told me what to do in two minutes. Two minutes. All these threads of how so and so was going to create this or that, Bailey would have it done immediately. He felt that we were all living in the stone age with the arguments we were having, and that is when I jumped on the Turbo Buick bandwagon and learned so much from those guys, and that is also how I learned that RBob and Grumpy played a HUGE part in that world, so I reached out to RBob, soon learned that it was he who created the XDF files, and that it was he that those Turbo Buick guys sourced for their information, and this is why I went EBL and never looked back because while everyone was arguing, he was quietly developing it for us. The most stand up guy I ever met, and his work speaks for itself. Since then the '7148 Turbo Buick ECM's have been replicating XFI's, and this just goes to show that Grumpy was right, you can make a stock ECM do anything you need it to...

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Sounds like your dead time was wrong for the injectors used. Quasi/Async fueling is basically single or double fire. I was under the impression it didn't work at all unless on actual '749 hardware though since the injector drivers are logic level.

$58 never ran quite as well as $8d, yes. $58 is buggy on v8 because some of the calculations are hard coded for a v6. When you change the injector constant you have some issues. $60 worked a lot better, which was a 32k version of $58 modified by Bruce Plecan. I used that from like 2001-2003. But after Bruce passed away that code sorta died with him.

The other issue was the wb-o2 patches were 'listen only'. They simply recorded the AFR in the 'target afr' column of the log. You still needed a narrow band o2, which meant playing with o2 offsets.

"Super $8D" was a little better. I also experimented with a version of $8d that took a 2bar map input.

You modified the code? What did you change?

-- Joe

IROCZ1989

iTrader: (1)

What the heck happened to this thread?? Ls1 vs procharger I thought was the question. I for one dont like to reuse the stock ecu. Ya some guys do it. But your using 20+year old tech and wiring. Plenty to go wrong. And you might be chasing demons in terms of wiring issues. Best bet here is an aftermarket ecu. I like the holley. Thats my preference. I bought my system from moore racecraft. He knows his stuff. In terms of msd 6a and coils and such, i couldnt read the whole thread as my head was spinning. He runs them on all his FI cars. The 6A and a big hvc coil. I run that on my other car with a supercharger and a big 14gph meth nozzle and it never misfired. Never an issue. But do what you want Im just relaying the message that didnt do me wrong. I think the best route here is a procharger or even a vortech with a water/meth system. Tuning is key but like I said I like the holley. It seems original poster has tuning issues because in my opinion the car is down on power. It comes down to money in the end. Ls is a nice upgrade, but it wont be a couple hundred hp diff. Junkyard motors arnt $500 anymore. And when you do find one its loaded with miles and needs a once over. And you will be in the mid 300hp range in reality. As most are comming out of trucks and vans. So many variables here. You have more than half the battle now, all you need is the supercharger.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

The only big issue with stock chip burning, and i dont know if its just my equipment being old or new style chips used, is that sometimes chips dont seem to burn correctly and sometimes the adapter from moates used in the ecm doesnt always seem to have solid connextions.

I never had issues until after maybe 4 yrs of use. I had burnt sst 512 chips fine with the burn 1 and burn 2 moates burners. Then in 2011-2012 ish my new combo i was having issues getting chips to burn and verify with buffer. So i changed efi

Now i have a stockish 91 tpi car and started revisiting the chip stuff. I tried my friends burn2 also an older unit and it burns the older ACT 256 chips but hit or miss on 512's. Did get it to work part of the time but i found that the ecm was very sensitive to how the adapter was inserted. Had to slowly wiggle it to get it to work then car would run fine. If it bumped the car would go into limp mode.

I did another car with my adapter and it was doin similar things. So i just bought a new adapter and will try that when i get this other L98 heads cam project done.

My guess is the equipment just wore out after many thousands of burns

zz17iroc

iTrader: (4)

I think this needs to be said for anesthes, Orr, zz3Astro, RBob, Grumpy(RIP), Traxion and many many others I'm failing to mention, so if I did not mention you I'm very sorry. You guys have help me and many others on the forum figure out a lot things with these cars and deserve tons of credit for the success of this website. The knowledge you've shared has helped many people ranging from the everyday hobbyist to the all or nothing racer and will continue. I believe everyone has made their point very clearly and mentioned key facts. It should be up to the OP from here. Good luck Linson your in good hands no matter what direction you choose!

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

In terms of questionable 20 year old tech, I am not quite sure where this would even factor in. We target air/fuel and timing to be burned accordingly, has nothing to do with the age of the tech, the outcome is always the same. Resolution plays a part, but that is a forgone conclusion w/multiple MAP sensors readily available. Give the engine what it wants and it will give you what you want. As far as giving credit where credit is due, Bob Rauscher is the only one who deserves it in my book. This isn't meant to offend anyone, but the reality is, while everyone else was scrambling and scratching their heads with algorithm, arguing and getting banned one at a time, Bob was the source. It is more than evident in the archives. Bruce was a nice guy when you MET him, but on here he was a royal pain in the butt who had absolutely no patience, but in person you couldn't meet a more wonderful soul. But even Bruce sourced RBob, everybody did. How many know Bruce had a Grand National? A few, but how many know what else he did in the Turbo Buick world? Talk to the Turbo Buick and Supra community about tuning and you will feel just how out of touch this website has become with respect to making progress, it is stagnant if anything. Hell there is a thread in the DIY section still dedicated to creating $8D w/boost, a decade later and it still isn't done.

Eric Marshall of Turbo Tweak essentially owns the stock ECM field of the Turbo Buick community, hands down, you won't believe what both he and Bob Bailey were able to do with a simple chip install, it rivals XFI and that is the truth. Compare that with $59 and you will see that there is absolutely no comparison. Turbo Tweak even covered Typhoon/Syclone users with their own code, when I asked Eric why he didn't use the $59 code, he didn't trust it and he stood with $58. I never used $59 myself, but I know Eric, and I trust his opinion. Welcome SFI-6 into the Turbo Buick community offered by RBob and now things get even more unreal than ever before. This isn't to take anything away from what the former were able to do with the Buick code, but the egoism of some members on here and a few elsewhere keep them from appreciating what RBob gave to both communities. More than anyone realizes. Incidently, when I asked RBob about $58, he got it to work a long time ago, he seen the flaws, but he keeps it to himself. He's way too humble which is why some overlook him, but he's the man when it comes to code...

This thread has gotten way off topic by the way. My ECM ranting is over, Linson will be fine with whatever way he goes. BTW Linson I made my open set screws for the lights, I welded a nut to the headlight bracket in the same spot and used a screw to adjust for it. Why GM chose to use plastic is ridiculous, but I'm sure knowing them it was to save money. Hopefully you got a mountain of information that you needed as well as a little history to go with it. Anyway good luck with the build, and if you do decide to run with the EBL, we'll see you over in the DIY section...

- Rob

IROCZ1989

iTrader: (1)

I dont think what is said is the 20 year old tech is questionable, what is being said is the age of the hardware is questionable. 20+year old wiring etc. Point being with all that is out there now in 2016, it really makes no sense to use old hardware. Take this thread for example. Some are touting the ls platform. Its new. But old sbc stuff is still there. Electronics degrade as does wiring. You may be chasing demons in a wiring harness that has seen a long life under the hood. Turbo buicks were mentioned. Those avenues are well traveled. These not so much.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Actually, a forum member did modify $8d to work with boost and I tested a copy. He didn't want to distribute it for various reasons and I respect that.
But it was too little, too late.

-- Joe

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

And all the turbo builds i have done on stock code and willing to post the results, yet noone gave me any code to test lol
I dont believe it exists

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Perhaps you are not good at making friends ?

-- Joe

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

I guess not lol i couldnt think of a more perfect person to test it lol oh well. That ship has sailed

Kingtal0n

Its not the same thing. The narrow always puts out less than 1 volt when its leaner than 14.7, and 1v+ when its richer, you can't change the ecu code/bin and fix that. You can't ever run a stock ecu on a stock narrowband and target, say, 15.5:1 air fuel ratio because all narrowbands close the circuit at 1v after 14.7:1.

With a wideband like the LC-1 innovative (the last one I used to do this) you can program the output to go, say, 15.5:1 at 0.002v and 14.8:1 and 1.001volt and that way the OEM ecu can reliably target 14.8 -> 15.5 during closed loop cruise.


We are still using the same sensor, it didn't exactly "fail" it just got too hot (placement error). I got cocky with the accuracy and it bit me in the ***. Lesson learned. The EGT passed 1600*F and I have no idea how high it went, but I must guess 2000*F+ considering the kind of power that engine was making (200hp/liter) at 15:1 air fuel ratio or leaner.

Damn, I have. Everyday I am fighting for .5 a/f ratio here and there adjustments because of changing atmospheric conditions and altering load conditions (A/C and headlights for example, the voltage of the electrical system changes -> alternative a/f ratios start showing up at the same injector pulse). Even with a maf sensor the a/f will wander quite a bit from day to night, lights and rain to dry and hot conditions. You don't see it at WOT because the difference is negligible; but in a high economy vehicle (4-cylinder, low rotating mass) the slightest difference in voltage/temperature at low load conditions (low injector pulse widths where injector timing/"lag to open") can make a big difference when using a large injector on a small displacement engine. As the injector size gets smaller (I am using 74lb/hour for example which is quite large compared to the OEM 35lb/hr) the tiny differences in pulsewidth make smaller adjustments (become more negligible) whereas with the large injector, a tiny difference in pulse or lag can make a large one to the small displacement engine.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

You can change the swing points to try and move the average, but keep in mind I'm not the stock code cheerleader here. I wasn't suggesting any level of manipulation of the stock o2 offsets was comperable.


I have no doubt. But for part throttle, cruise, etc correction I'm not concerned.

-- Joe

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

Manage videos in youtube, and click on edit. Just rewrite the title as you need then save...

Linson, I started an EBL-P4 w/boost thread in the ECM section to help everyone get a better understanding of how easy it is to do. The EBL Flash is essentially the same thing, the only differences is the installation which takes a mere one to two minutes more to do with everything in hand, and the XDF is a little different in terms of categories, but the same as a whole. I touched on the Alky Injection feature but I will be getting deeper into it as I update the thread, as well as Wastegate Control. I'm only waiting to get the vehicle back on the road with a full exhaust, then I will get very deep into the process...

Any questions feel free to ask, k.

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/dfi-...4-w-boost.html

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Sounds like someone needs to spend more time tuning their injector voltage offset tables

And you are wrong on the o2 swing points. You can target whatever air fuel you want with narrow band. I suggest you get a thirdgen and tune the ecms in those to see.

O2 sensor stays the same but the swing points trick the ecm into thinking the air fuel is different than 14.7. Stock code does this on the AIR emissions system, when it adds air to exhaust, to not fool the ecm into thinking car is overly lean, it changes the o2 swings to compensate

Kingtal0n

One of the beautiful things about the nissan engine in my daily is that a full stand-alone ECU is only $350~ (used - ebay), plugs into the OEM harness like an OEM ecu, offers MAP or MAF tuning and many pre-sets for various other sensors available.

Because of its super affordability plug and play style, it does not have many bells and whistles. One of the things you cannot adjust for example is the step size for injector pulse width, unlike other stand-alone ECU such as Accel DFI where you can adjust how big of a "jump" the injector pulse makes. For example, you can never run a closed loop at idle with a large injector on a small displacement engine. As soon as you enable closed loop at idle, it checks the air fuel (like they all do) and then decides to move up or down the pulse. Since the size of the "jump" is large, the ecu quickly over-compensates and the engine will shut off. Luckily, there is enough configurability to only turn on the closed loop in whatever parts of the map you desire, so at higher rpm where the jump size is sufficient for closed loop operation you can still use closed loop.

The battery/voltage comps are given by the injector manufacturer, and entered into the ECU. I've played with them (deviations) and found very little "help" there. I believe it is a combination of factors outside of ECU control, such as fuel pump resistance/temperature/flow which give or take 1-2% of fuel, which is felt heavily when injector pulse is very low on a small displacement engine. Another factor is the maf itself, since I am using such a large maf for my tiny engine (to flow the 400horsepower into a 2L you need a bigger than stock maf) tiny changes in air temp/humidity just naturally play games with the maf signal, enough to make a 1-2% difference in fueling at low injector pulses.

Like I said, I could enable closed loop for 1300rpm+ and just let the ecu do its thang, but I'd rather spot adjust, it gives me something to do while I drive.

And I am calling BS on your statement about targeting non 14.7:1 using a narrowband. I am sure you can adjust sensitivity and transient delay perhaps, but there is no way to target say 15.5:1 using an OEM narrowband... I don't see it possible. The sensor is locked at 0V from 14.8 to infinity, the ecu will never know when to 'flip'

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Do you have any direct thirdgen camaro firebird experience?

If the answer is no, then please do the community a favor and stop posting! Non of your nissian bs is relevant to this forum

If yes, please go revisit tuning these cars

You clearly do not understand the concept of o2 milivolt offsets and short/long term fuel trims and how they work

And i am definately not gonna educate you for free

junkcltr

iTrader: (1)

Oppps, posted in wrong thread.

Kingtal0n

If just one other person in the entire world can come in here and say, "yeah a thirdgen OEM ecu can be used to target 15.5:1 air fuel ratio or 15.8:1 air fuel ratio, using JUST a stock narrowband O2 sensor." Then I could believe.

Right now, until then, just a single guy whos done it and is willing to explain it (the point of a forum is to: __________)
A: insult
B: troll
C: learn and help others from all backgrounds
D: junkmail
E: all of the above


Right now, I see you as B: Troll. No fact or proof, guy wants to post up on the forum, makes claims but doesn't want to help or support his own claims, and nobody else in the world can verify = troll. You can actually program an ECU to do whatever you want, I know that. But how are you "finding" 15.5 to one air/fuel ratio without physically verifying it with a wideband sensor separate? You can't do it without a wideband, even if you only need the wideband for a second.

Kingtal0n

random thirdgen experience

http://vid9.photobucket.com/albums/a...psesjggk5l.mp4
http://vid9.photobucket.com/albums/a...psnbounlj1.mp4
http://vid9.photobucket.com/albums/a...psgczaqs4m.mp4
http://vid9.photobucket.com/albums/a...psb3gyf3en.mp4
http://vid9.photobucket.com/albums/a...psbj6zzsfl.mp4
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a90...ps5nmakmcc.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a90...psgodxzfis.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a90...psukgpfbsk.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a90...psyj8varie.jpg
http://vid9.photobucket.com/albums/a...psbowudr57.mp4

call my credentials into question again

IROCZ1989

iTrader: (1)

Cmon already. Is this going to turn into a pissing contest? All you guys have done something to add to this community. Thats how I see it. I just want to see what the original poster is going to do.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

He's been around for quite a while, and did a few thirdgen builds years and years ago. We don't always agree, but his credentials check out.

I realize that you have been playing with forced induction the past few years and are really into it, but you are not the only one who has done this stuff. Many of us were tuning boost, modifying code, converting carb intakes to EFI, etc long before you even thought about hitting the drag strip. Perhaps before you even got your drivers license.

-- Joe

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

People can't debate tech without chest pounding or getting personal.

I'd delete posts and close the thread but I'd like to actually see the OP make a decision of what direction he's going and continue updating us on his progress.

-- Joe

IROCZ1989

iTrader: (1)

Joe, I can say this for sure about you. You have always been more than fair in terms of running the board for sure. Your one of the mods I do like. I enjoy your builds and things you have done over the years. Orrs build caught my eye when he started to chime in on my 421 build. I really enjoy his path he has taken with the car. Im glad we have 3 guys that are still passionate about these cars and the money and time involved in these thirdgens that keep the board going. King I dont know to well so I cant comment on him. I have been on the board for years under another name in the early 2000s. Alot have come and gone and I know the passion for the hobby might get in the way in debates. Long story short, I dont want to see guys I like and think are an asset to the community at each others throat. You are what keep this board going. Thanks for all you do.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Why should i give you free advice when i get paid to tune these cars locally? Lol but to give you a hint, you are on to it with that comment above. No one ever said a verification was not involved, but the ecm will do what you tell it to :wink

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

That may be the case but when i see incorrect data in posts, i will correct it. From the posts above and all the relations to the import car scene that is irrevelant to this forum, i have to question his advice

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

I missed this. Stock thirdgen narrowbands run 0-1v. 450mv is basically stoich. Less is lean more is rich. Guys will sometimes look at 900mv as wot target. We have found thats somewhat accurate to 12.5-13.2 air fuel. Sometimes its not however lol if you understand the o2 offsets, you shift the rich lean switch point from 450 mv to some other value and thus....it aint stoich no more

Linson

Here is where I stand right now.
I have about $3500 in my hotrodding slush fund.
I also have an AOD/Hatchback LX Fox Body for sale to further my forced induction agenda.
With an eye toward simplicity and ease of installation, I plan to go with the EBL for the ECM. I plan to get the EBL system soon (prior to getting a supercharger).
Before pulling the trigger on any parts I am in the process of making local/regional contacts with 'tuning professionals' to see who is available to help me dial in the tuning, both before and after forced induction.
For the blower, I plan to use one of the D1 (not the P-1SC) Prochargers, assuming those can be boost-limited to safe levels for my engine.
Prochargers are expensive, but they're also the only stand-alone kit that is still available for Third Gens.
So, EBL likely this summer.
Blower probably in hand by winter. Hopefully sooner.

Thank you all for taking an interest. I'll definitely keep you updated.

Kingtal0n

No offense I am not picking on you, but this is a perfect example of why having experience with a wide variety of vehicle applications is important (not just thirdgen related). Here is the perfect example:



If you had the experience with 10 or 20 different vehicle applications in various configurations, you would know also from experience that ALL narrowband sensors operate the same exact way as your "thirdgen sensor". In other words, you can walk into any auto store in the world in pick up any random 1, 2, 3 or 4 wire O2 sensor and it will do the exact same thing as your "thirdgen" sensors.

I am currently troubleshooting a wide variety of vehicles/performance applications as a hobby to help my friends, here are a couple that I recently started and not done yet:
http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewto...?f=101&t=63168
http://www.jeepsunlimited.com/forums...96#post4815396

Each vehicle has a type of 'crank' or 'cam' sensor, and each sensor works a specific way. By being able to diagnose and verify these sensors, knowing how they work and being able to implement them in other applications (or aftermarket wheels) you can use any applicable ECU i.e. megasquirt is a common "one size fits all" with some basic knowledge of electronics you can either use the OEM sensor or wire an aftermarket sensor/coils and run any engine you want.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Yeah they do the same thing but not as how you originally described it

Kingtal0n

please quote me where I screwed up and I will gladly clarify