BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

After a difficult summer of problem chasing, not related to the EZ-EFI install, that day has come for a definitive answer on the EZ-EFI system. A little background: Previously, I did a dyno run for the stock ECM and all my bolts ons, info here:

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/tpi/...-stock-vs.html

This post will show the EZ-EFI system running those same bolt-ons compared to what's noted in the above post.

Dyno Results:
-measured at rear wheels: 304 HP/431 TQ (see graph attached)
*that is a gain of +22hp and +32 ft lb at the wheels
-calculated flywheel (15% DLL): 358 HP/507 TQ
* this is a +25hp and +38 ft lb gain over the stock ECU (at the flywheel)
** of note, that is 112hp and 177 ft lb gain over the factory setup, all tolled

I'd like to say also, that after each pass the EZ learned more and more, improving with each pull. I feel confident that had I kept going, I could have had an even bigger number. I am very, very happy with the EZ-EFI.

xch3no2

I'm gonna say that my N/A builds & dyno runs show max power 12.2-12.8 AFR.
(other thread).

I'm still looking for the guy that can build timing learn program...I'ma dummy, just make horsepower.

BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

I thought my car would have run in that range too. Perhaps my 165/72 heads limit how much fuel can be effectively burned. There was no chance for me there, it hesitated so bad I almost ate the steering wheel. I have a feeling that when I go to 180 or 195 heads, it may want more gas. I don't really know.

xch3no2

The way I'm comfortable is adding timing to fuel, so you run a tiny rich into more timing till it it says FU (knock) add a little fuel & keep after the advance.

Optimum timing, IMO, can only be found on a dyno or at the track.

Edit: Unless you install cyl pressure monitoring equipment.
http://www.tfxengine.com/

Steve Mack

iTrader: (5)

Those are great numbers with the heads and cam you have.With bigger cam and heads you could easily get 50+ more horsepower.AS your motor stands now you have some great torque numbers.EZ EFI definitely can make some power.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

What was the actual air fuel on the before with stock ecm, and the after with ez efi? Certainly its not 9 to 1 as the black line says?

Very nice numbers. I'm kinda surprised you gained that much power with a different ECM. It would make me think that either timing and air fuel was off between the 2 since I wouldnt expect a different program to make any significant changes to fuel/timing. A motor sees air and fuel and you adjust spark angle to make most cylinder pressure. How you go about doing that is up to you, but should still theoretically deliver the right ratio and make similar power IMO.

Either way 300whp and well over 430wtq is insane for that little head combo. Extremely torquey.

BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

I don't know what the actual A/F ratios were, I didn't measure them. I've created a real stump puller, be great in a pickup truck! I think that leaves me a bunch of room to add hp and lose some torque (read: my quandry between the 180 and 195 head)

You mention timing; remember the stocker controlled it before and now I run a vac advance distributor. I set it at 10* base, all in by 3100, max of 35*. I didn't try to adjust it on the dyno for 2 reasons: with the stock version, once I moved beyond 6* base, it lost power. With the new distributor, I found anything over 10* base and it's streetability (idle mostly) declines. I realized later this evening that I might could have used a taller stop bushing which would have given me 38* max. Unsure if that would have helped or not. I am trying to balance max power with benign turnpike cruising.

I freely admit, I left some power on the table. I could have adjusted the advance and kept tinkering with fuel, but when I tested some of these ideas pre-dyno on the street, the car was uncomfortable which left me to balance comfort & power. The main goal of EZ was to get the most out of my engine, I may have come up a touch short, but 1hp to 1cube if just fine with me for now.

I want to say Orr, thank you for your support and advice with my projects. I do appreciate it.

JekyllandHyde

iTrader: (3)

I'm curious, how is the timing tuned with that system? From what I understand, the computer learns based on the timing curve and adjusts the volumetric efficiency tables to optimize the air/fuel ratio. Does it come with pre-made timing maps and software?

EDIT: Sorry, nvm, just saw in the post above that you're using a vacuum advance distributor... sorry!

BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

Just realized I'm not as happy with those numbers as I was before. I've figured out a parameter that will help me get bigger numbers. I'm going back to the dyno in a few days.

Many thanks to the fella that spelled out the 12.8-12.2 AFR, that really got me thinking.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

What was the system targeting? Most motors may make peak power in that range but not all. Just have to see. Tune for max power on the dyno and I usually will add a touch more fuel since most dynos dont load the car as strong as the street does, so it tends to lean out a tad bit on street driving compared to dyno.

BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

I had the WOT ratio at 13.8. I got good numbers as a whole, but I still think I could get better than 25hp for my money. I'm going to start at 12.8 and work from there, and hook the sniffer up to it as well this time.

BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

/duplicate post/

Steve Mack

iTrader: (5)

I think you have at least 25 or more horse left to get in your setup.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

I just dont see the efi system being the main cause for the increase...it just seems to be doing a better job at the fuel tuning than what was done with stock ecm...just my opinion but a few ponies likely can be found if it was at 13.8 to 1 and you richen it up and also try timing changes.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

I don't see any mention of tuning the stock ECM for the actual changes made, just mention of "FastChip PROM" in the other thread.

I would bet that if the OEM ECM was actually tuned for the rest of the combination, like the EZ-EFI is doing now, it would have made very similar power.

Steve Mack

iTrader: (5)

I don't think a stock ecm would make 500+ torque on a 350 motor.

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

Why?

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

I made 1086wtq on my motor with a stock based ECM

BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

Six Shooter: the FastChip was a tune-by-mail situation. I made most all of my bolt on upgrades and then had the chip burned. That is precisely one of the reasons I went for EZ-EFI, I don't want to burn chip after chip to get the car tuned, either mail order or doing it myself. I am not a tuner. I do not want to burn my own chips (and would probably do a lousy job anyway!). I want to hook it up, set the parameters and enjoy the benefits of getting the most out of my engine. I have no doubt that the stock ECM could be tuned to produce the results I'm making now, I just don't want to go thru all the hassle. When the head/cam swap happens, that means more chip burning. So, with EZ, I install the heads & cam and the computer will tune itself with some minor input from me.

Orr: I believe that is exactly what the difference is. Where you might map out and adjust fuel tables and whatnot manually, this system does that for me on the fly. I want to acknowledge, the dyno run and meager results were a product of my brain fart, not EZ-EFI being a flop (unless it doesn't improve). I expect the new results to come in much higher.

The main thrust of this project is simplicity. EZ will keep up with future changes without constant chip burning and data logging. One poster mentioned how he makes more power for less money. Great for him. I don't mind paying more for the computer to do the work and to get the results I plan to see on the next dyno trip.

Steve Mack

iTrader: (5)

Orr, I stand corrected those numbers are huge.

TTOP350

iTrader: (8)

EZ-EFI is cool for sure but I wonder what a on site tune of the factory ecm would gain ya???

BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

Went back to the dyno with more fueling on the mind. I ran from 12.4-12.8, 13.0 & 13.8 (which was yesterdays high). The best number come in at 12.6 AFR with a (-4) accel fuel correction.

The results not greatly improved, I suspect because I left the timing alone:
wheels: 306hp/439tq
engine: 360hp/516tq
increase of +28hp/+47tq over the stock ECM

Like last time, I was tuning max power in a street-friendly combo, meaning timing over 10* doesn't suit this car very well for idle & cruise. Being I posted only a slight gain, timing does seem to be the limiting factor here. The results certainly may have improved as some have suggested, but I am bargaining with drivability to get these results.

I know this is what some were expecting, I personally was expecting a tad more. Nonetheless, I am very happy (contrary to what I said the other day!) with what I've got. I've exceeded the 1hp/1cube goal I had by a bit. What I've also noticed is that I may exceed the limit of my 30 lb injectors when the heads & cam go on. I believe 384hp @ 80%dc/43.5 psi is the limit for these. Nice problem to have!

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Total timing at the balancer at idle should be closer to 20 deg overall. If you used stock ecm, est disconnected, base timing would still be 6-10 or whatever you want, but total timing with computer adding in the main spark table timing would generally fall in the 20 deg range. Hotter motor combos usually want more timing to idle somewhat stable so you can have as high as 30 in some cases. Cruise is generally even more. 28-40 deg depending on the heads/cam. Some heads want alot less timing 30-34 deg is fine. Some need alot more like L98 vette heads...38-41 deg.

WOT should generally be between 30-38. Most make max tq/hp at 34-38. Typical range. Better heads and higher compressions may only handle 28-30 deg total timing.

z 28 jari

iTrader: (1)

What kind of gasoline(E5,E10,or straight gas)?

BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

93 octane E10

Orr- you say 30-38 is best for WOT, I see 35* on mine, could hit 38* if I changed the stop bushing.

Orr89RocZ

iTrader: (20)

Its something to look into but you may not find much power between 35 and 38. Few degrees may make 5hp more or so, I dont see alot more to be gained on that setup. its making good hp for the mods.

watajob

iTrader: (29)

Does the Fast EFI completely replace the factory ECM or do I still need it for ancillary functions, (converter lock up, speedo signal, fan, fuel pump signal, etc.)? Nice numbers, BTW. I wish I had known about this sooner. I spent $500 for a half day of dyno tuning. I could have spent a few bucks more, did this and had the latitude of further mods being built in. Even if it was a few HP less, the being "unchained" would make it worth it. Sounds like just the set up for a technodunce like me!

BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

Speaking solely about my 89, I completely unhooked the factory harness from the ECU. I have a manual trans car so lockup isn't an issue for me. I suspect that you may need a separate system to control lockup as EZ does not control that. My speedo signal comes from the yellow box under the pass dash, not the ECU.

I'm still finding out things I've done wrong when I hooked it up. For instance, just 10 minutes ago I was told that the EZ-EFI and that ALONE is to be hooked up to the battery, everything else has to get power another way.

I am probably the most technodunce on the board which explains why I have had a love/hate relationship with EZ. The numbers are great! Trying to smooth out the edges has been a pain in the ***. Each time I solve an issue, I find out it was my fault, not the system.

I highly recommend it.

watajob

iTrader: (29)

Never mind. I just read your other thread.

BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

No problem, I'm always available to answer questions. There aren't too many of us here using it so ask away.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

This makes ZERO sense, care to elaborate?

Also how are you controlling timing? Did you replace the dizzy with a mechanical dizzy, or is there now timing control provided by the EZ-EFI?

BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

Tell me about it.

Little background, I first installed EZ about a year and a half ago. Life gets in the way and I haven't devoted as much time to the car as I used to. Only now am I getting around to fixing the issue that I have yet to find any solution for. That being, when I turn the stereo or fan(s) or headlights on, the RPMs start to bounce (at idle). Embarrassing when you got your car all shined up, lookin' tough, sittin at the light...and you start to get the vac leak-style idle bounce.

I am very much still learning about wiring. So anywho, I have called the tech line a number of times and got a few different responses: move the 12v SW to the battery, take everything off the battery except EZ, put EZ on the top terminals and the accessories on the side, re-route the power/ground wires away from virtually everything. Make more sense now?

I'm going to do a couple of those things, like re-route the power/ground wires from under the drv firewall (that has the stereo and fan wires running there too and empties under the MSD and beside the coil) and out the pass firewall and route them as much by themselves as possible. They will then get their own terminals on top of the battery. That doesn't work, distribution blocks. That doesn't work, I drive the car off a cliff and take up gardening.

EZ does not control timing, I run a vac advance distributor. Finding enough vac ports was fun too.

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

Nope, that makes ZERO sense, and the people telling you this are not addressing the problem.

EVERYTHING, no matter where it's connected feeds off the battery, no matter what. While the engine is running, most (ideally all) of the power should be supplied by the alternator. The alternator wiring in stock form feeds the main battery connection of the starter, which goes back to the battery and feeds the fuse box/ignition switch inside the car, where the rest of the circuits are fed from. So moving connections around really doesn't make much sense, nor wasting time re-routing wires. The wires don't care where they are run, just the overall resistance (value of guage x length) will matter to the components it will feed.

Your best bet is to add a 8 or 4 AWG battery charge lead directly from the charge post on the alternator to the battery, this will supply as solid of a voltage as you can get to the battery. I usually use nothing smaller than a 4 AWG personally. Also adding a large ground, say also 4 AWG, between the battery ground and the chassis ground. Basically "The big 3 upgrade", which also includes a ground between the alternator and the battery.

All distribution blocks will do is add more resistance, causing the problem to be worsened, if in fact it is a voltage issue causing this.

I suspect it's not (directly) a voltage issue, since EVERY EZ-EFI equipped vehicle I have seen in person or in videos has this same unstable idle issue. The onset of the problem might be brought on by a voltage fluctuation, but then because of that, the EZ-EFI might try to compensate for it, raising idle, and then decay it out that lowers the idle, causing a slight drop in voltage, which the EZ-EFI may not like, which then causes the cycle to keep happening, and in many cases gets worse over time.

Ronny

iTrader: (1)

Possible no voltage compensation for PW with EZ? Such as a prop gains table V referenced. Thus wiring direct to battery for consistency of V?

Z28ricer

iTrader: (2)

Connect an external 12VDC regulated power supply to feed ONLY the ecu.

That will either give you a solid sign that FAST is FOS, or if you've got an actual voltage supplied issue.

91 1LE

iTrader: (1)

Where things are wired DOES make a difference. The battery acts as a large filter of sorts and smooths out voltage/amperage variences from the alternator. The ECM is wired directly to the battery for the most stable input voltage/amperage.

The EZ EFI has an unstable idle because it doesn't control timing. Factory setups run less than ideal timing at idle so they can control fluctuations quickly with timing changes. If an accessory adds an additional load (a/c), the timing can be advanced quickly by the ECM to add the additional torque needed by that accessory. By controlling ignition timing at idle, a stock-based ECM can keep the idle at the selected target RPM. If you've ever seen a datalog of idle timing you can see this at work. At a seemingly stable idle, the timing values will change rapidly with quite a wide range.

I always recommend to customers that they use a stock ECM if at all possible. There are so many extra tables that deal with idle quality, accel enrichment, cold start, timing, etc. that make for far better driveability. The power output should be exactly the same or higher as any aftermarket controller. The extra power comes from better control of timing with electronic controls. An engine is just an air pump. Give it the correct amount of fuel for a given amount of air, fire the spark plug at the correct time(the most important thing for making power), and it will make a set amount of power. The closer you can get to this ideal, the more power you will make. A good tuner with a good load-bearing dyno will get you the most out of your given combination.

Remember, it's called EZ EFI, not BEST EFI or MOST POWER EFI. You are leaving some power and driveability on the table for the sake of simplicity.

BOSS 357

iTrader: (1)

91, I understand what you're saying, which is part of what I'm attempting to change. I have had the vac advance hooked up to the vac port on the plenum via a T, on that same port by itself, and am now moving it to a ported source under the throttle body. I get that you are saying the timing control may be the culprit, but I need to try and get the EZ to work this way.

The MAP sensor has also shared a port and is now alone on its own port, perhaps that was part of it too.

This is a cold start/restart/fan-on idle snafu I am working on.

Short of buying the EZ2 system which does control timing, I will just have to remove the whole thing and stick with the chip. Not crazy about tuning by mail or towing the car to another state for a dyno tune. My apologies for replying so late, I haven't been on the board much in '13.