I have been reading back posts on the AE and i have a Q. It seems you add to the AE for %TPS but what do you do to the AE for MAP, go up or down? DO you change them at the same time?

 

AE TPS is immediate as as soon as the TPS moves it is a PS based on the % TPS moves. AE MAP is a delay we would have to assume. not sure if 95 100 kpa will ever happen in some cars in MAP. they both go (values) up for more PS. like i said earlier i am at 250% of stock bin at all stock values.
PS: Gidd i forgot again to bring dyno run to work. will do tomorrow and email to you. unless i forget again !

 

Hey thanks Ron. Dont worry about your sheets, i can do them whenever. I was comparing your bin to Ben's and it seems that he has more AE TPS than you but less AE MAP. Like half the value of yours at 80Kpa. Just wondering how that went. TTY soon.

 

yes i am aware of that as well. i stated a while back the AE might be masking/covering up some other issues i worked on blms all the way to 3600 (disabled PE temporarily) last fall getting them close. on dyno went right to 12/1 for PE. so i think the basics are OK. cept the spark which is what you saw. no change there cept 2 deg out where KC occurred 2400-2800 at 30 map. . i asked the dyno operator to not slam the pedal but to accelerate briskly so that it not stumble and it did not. now with AE at 250% seemed to run well in that AE area. so i guess it needed it. had first ride of season sunday and did 3 blasts. as plenum warmed each was better. maybe ben will be adding AE as his tune just began recently.

 

Well, this is is your AE for TPS

3904.00
3111.00
2257.00
1830.00
1342.00
1159.00
915.00
610.00
305.00

this is his

6710.00
5795.00
4575.00
3416.00
2806.00
2074.00
1342.00
610.00
366.00

So what youre saying is that he hasent tuned his much? That means you would take less Usec is more AE.

 

that makes sense. his is greater since 383 cid. plus bigger heads afr 190? what i meant to say is he just began the tune on that motor a couple weeks ago, so his AE may grow. not sure how many adjustments he has had time to do. i did 3 data logs per week for about 4.5 months last summer.

 

Right. And the MAP table for AE

Yours:

2989.00
2135.00
1647.00
1220.00
671.00

His:

1586.00
1159.00
854.00
549.00
183.00

His is reduced. So when the MAP changes that many percent, Usecs are sutracted?

 

Hey, are you guys talkin' about me! ;-)

Gid, initially with the X-ram, both Ron and I found BIG bogs when cracking the throttle. It likes a fair amount of pump shot.
I started to increase both AE tables equally (10% increments to start with then 5, then 2) and it got alot better for the 1/2 second after you cracked it, but sounded 'fat' for the second half second afterwards...
I suspected the MAP AE would lag the TPS AE in response, so I started looking at all the 7747 stock bins...
From memory, none had more than about 2200usec on the MAP, the smaller motors had about the same on the TPS, but the 454's had 7000-13000 in the TPS!
So I then took a step back and reduced my MAP AE and that stumble in the 2nd 1/2 second was reduced.. Its still not perfect, but its pretty good! The X-Ram is a pig until its hot tho.. When its still cold, it hates all that TPS AE..
Also note that Ron and I both run 90lb injectors, but his are around 9psi whereas mine are at 14.5. So although my MAP AE usec are less than his, it probably injects more fuel in that time.
Make sense???
Ben.

 

last i checked in 2003 the FP was 9.5 lbs on cold start running at idle. sunday first ride i checked for leaks and saw it at 12 lbs with coolant temp at 180. i dont get it. i forget GIDD the AE MAP is a function of MAP is it not. that is the scale is MAP dependent. higher MAP(100=WOT) shows the largest values. higher value = more ps. right?

 

Ben, i am of opinion the AE effect is being reduced on cold plenum as lack of vaporization occurs. that spray condenses on cold plenum floor as spray is directly all over plenum floor. plenum about 3/4 inch thick? cold plenum=poor AE results. when heat soaked all is well.

 

Fully agreed Ron.
I made the following observation and was shocked! I may have told you this already on the crossfire forum, but i'll type it again for the benefit of others.
Started from cold and idling in my garage i noticed the tbs and xram top plate were cold to the touch, much colder than ambient temp and starting to collect condensation on the outsides from the atmosphere!!!!!!!!!!!! Imagine what the fuel in the plenum is doing in this 'chilled' environment!
Anyway, driving along now, coolant temp has just reached normal operating temp, but it is still boggy.. Another 10 mins down the road, coolant temp is the same, but near perfect to drive now that the manifold has become hot..
Interesting huh!
Ben.

 

Maybe running a MAT, and AE correction based on MAT?.
I've resorted to that on the GN due to the wide vaniances in MATs. After a run in boost the MATs rise alot. And it takes more pump shot to get the drivibility back.

Maybe time to look at a P4 that uses a MAT?.
Then just swap the AE from CTS based to MAT. Hmm, maybe a few other things.

And I didn't mention the 749.....
On the cross fire based systems it might suffer a little with less atomization due to the fewer injector firings, but they're as you've noted are about vaporization.

Maybe incorporating a water heating passage like the cross fires do, might be an aid.

 

Ok i see what you guys are doing. Ben, in regards to the Xram, i agree with others about that plenum. I think it screams fuel puddling. Its SY1 time good buddy.

 

as i stated mine is coming off in a week. retaining the single plane. adding the adapter and 454 TB. straight shot. no convoluted zig/zag to get to intake valve.

 

:rockon: