First of all, thank you for your replies. Second, just incase it matters, my questions are for an 87 Camaro with a 350 running $6E.

There are some questions I have that I can't find the answers to about adjusting your fueling. First of all, what is just an "ok" range to have your BLMs in? What range would be considered "great" or “near perfect”? Also, if you have BLMs of say 112, what do you actually gain, if anything by getting them closer to 128? The computer is adjusting everything to be right, so why do you need to be closer? Are the people who are getting really picky about that running open loop only?

Also, if you are building a car that doesn't need to get smogged and you are trying to get the best 1/4 times possible, can you in theory run faster in open loop than in closed? I would guess not since your computer backs off its control once you go WOT.

Another question: I saw in one of the guides, that someone suggested to first tune your BLMs at idle, and then at 2500 RPMs in closed loop, and then do the same to dial it in further in open loop. My question is, what is the problem with dialing the entire RPM range with this method?

Again, thank you very much for your replies.

 

The problem with a "non perfect" tune, many other factors like P/E, Highway Mode, pump shot are based on your tune. So, while the computer may be able to make "running" adjustments for the fueling on the main table. All the other parts that rely on the main table do not use the "adjusted values".

For example, if your main tables are out-of-tune and you invoke Highway Mode; your actual fuel economy may become worst until you correct the main tables. I say this having actually done this.

And this happen on virtually every ECM & calibration that I have worked with including the 165 MAF & 730 SD setups.

 

Ah, that makes sense.

 

This is also why it is best to tune your main fueling tables (with $6E, this means the MAF Scalar Tables & with SD the VE Tables) before you tune your P/E (WOT) tables.

Too many times, people will take their car to a dyno and tune the just the P/E tables and ignore the main fueling tables. "Hands-on Dyno Tuners" will do this because the amount of time to tune the maiin tables first would take far too much time - so either the Tuner would have to eat the time (unlikely) or cost too much. Hence why it is always best to do your own tuning

The result of the "quick fix" is usually driveabilty issues. This is when a person has some querky problem that in spite of trying everything, it just doesn't quite go away.

 

Thanks for your insight on this.

Could you give me an example of a range of BLMs throughout a whole RPM band that could be considered as good? I imagine it would be close to impossible to get it to stay perfectly at 128 the whole time... Would a change of plus or minus 3 each way be considered very good?

And what is the reason some people run open loop only?

 

i do believe there is a plus or minus range with BLM's. usually from what i heard, its about 5 or so isnt bad.

i think if your lean, the blms will be less than 128. and rich its the opposite. but dont quote me, i'm still learning


But i guess with fueling, the main tables being the MAF tables and scalar tables is where you want to start.

So if i plan to add a hotter cam to a stock L98 with HSR, i know it will run rich at idle and low rpms and will be lean on the top end. So to account for this i should just start adjusting the MAF scalar tables to get it close and then adjust the MAF tables?

What about doing scan runs under load? say a WOT pull from lower rpm like 3000 and goin to redline at 5500? i guess the MAF tables also effect this? Power enrichment also could be adjusted too then to get the tune/blms in line?

 

Actually, lower BLMs mean rich and higher means lean. Also, I think the scalars are a pretty big adjustment and I am not sure if you should change those unless you quite a bit off. If you are just a little off, then the tables obviously offer much more precision.

 

That is correct. The scalars will 'globally' adjust that tables fuelling. In other words if the scalar #1 is for MAF table 1, it will adjust everything for table 1. If you are close in MAF table 1 in one area and further in another area of that table, you would adjust the table for more precise tuning.

 

There are times when the car is in open loop or the o2 is bad that are the times when you want your BLM's in line. You never know when that might happen, so staying away from the 112's is a good thing.

I'd say +/- 2-4 is ok. I ran into some 122's on a hot day a few weeks back with my s/c'd car that made me unhappy and I fixed it, but I didnt notice any difference other than the numbers. The more you tune the closer it will get. Getting a baseline started at normal operating temp in normal weather conditions is easy, its the odd moments with a cold car up in the mountains in winter or a hot car on a really hot summer day at sea level you'll have to wait or take a best guess to get those in line. Sometimes... that will cause a driveability issue thats fixable. I'd stay away from the scalars. Get some data, make some adjustments, and also set the default airflow table to your car rather than GM's generalized baseline.

 

Most excellent point. Another great reason why getting your BLM/INTs as close to 128/128 is desireable (though if you got within +/- 4 you are doing well.) In fact, due to "precision", if you obtain 126 and make the smallest increment, you may jump to 130 and CANNOT hit 128 NO MATTER WHAT!

As for the MAF Scalar tables, I find the two lower ones tend to be the ones that require the most work as these are most affected by the "reversion" from a lopey cam.

I also agree that MAF Scalar Tables should NOT be the first area a newbie should dive into - but they shouldn't be avoided like the plague either. Some changes cannot be corrected EXCEPT in the MAF Scalar Tables (like the going to a lopey cam and correcting for the reversion).

After you have gotten your feet wet and spent a little time tuning, definitely try tuning the MAF Scalar Tables. The BEST WAY, is with a WB O2 sensor AND a Realtime Bin Editor (and a co-pilot to do the driving while you do the tuning on a "dyno hill).

And as Madmax stated, tuning for those "extreme conditions" require the most effort and you may need to wait a while for the condition to exist. I know that when I was tuning my car back in 2001-2002, I especially look forward for some extreme weather 0*F during winter & 100*F in the summer to get those "extremes".

My wife couldn't believe it when I asked her to take a ride with me to do some data logging in the middle of winter and take a trip to the Rockie Mountains. That was when discovered the problems (for 7730 SD) with the MAT Inverse Look-up Table, especially with a relocated MAT. Do some "searching" on the subject and you'll find some of my posts.

However, this also shows how "mail order tuners" are able to make a tune that people will swear is "the greatest tune they ever had". For the majority of regular driving conditions, you only need to tune a small part of the MAF Scalar Tables (or the VE Tables for SD). It's a case of the 80/20 rule (80% of the effect obtained through 20% of the effort).

It is when the "extremes conditions" come up that you realize that they didn't do the remaining 80% of the work.

But I am also willing to discuss the tuning of the MAF Scalar Tables (maybe in another post?) and try and dig up "old brain cells". It was my buddy that had the $6E MAF setup but I did all the tuning for him and resolved the tuning issues he encountered when he went with his solid roller setup 248/256 @ .050 )as I recall) with a wimpy 110* LSA...instead of a narrower LSA between 106-108 like I recommended). If you heard his car idle, it sounds remarkable docile - you'd swear it was no bigger than the LT-4 Hot Cam until you go for a ride.

 

I appreciate you talking about this topic. Its all good stuff to learn. I do plan on adding a fairly mild cam, something like a hotcam but no bigger than the very popular 224/230 comp 503 cam. If the MAF scalars makes large adjustments in the fueling, wouldnt that be a place to start? As these cams will need big changes in fuel patterns. When the time comes for me to do a cam swap and i'm not even sure i'm doing it this year or not, i'll be tuning it myself and searching for more information on this subject. I just have no idea where to start with the tuning aspect. I only know that the MAF tables control the fuel and thats where the majority of the changes should be made from what i been reading.

 

Im am at the point that I will begin playing with my MAF tables in my 86 305 using the $6E code. While i sort through old posts, id also like to keep up with a current discusion if this continues and contribute anything i might be able to.

And a question to those more experienced...

Is it a good idea to change the injector constant to get the range of your BLMs to average about 128, and then fine tune the MAF tables? Or leave the 19.33 value for my 305 and make adjustments completely in the MAF tables? Im not sure about other aspects that might rely on the injector constant.

So far thats really all ive changed, my constant is at 21.5 and its running the best BLMs! I almost wonder if someone swapped 350 injectors in. Although it ran very lean with the stock $32 tune... hmmmm...

 

^^^^ Most of the experts, from what I have read on here, seem to tell you to put your injector constant at the correct size of your injectors and not to tune your fuel with it. Others do it however and seem to be fine.

I must say, sometimes reading some of those older guides only confuse me. Some of that stuff is way before tuner pro and what not, and it seems as though it is somewhat obsolete. (I guess tuner pro takes away the need to do hex editing for the most part?)

Also, sometimes I can get confused when doing searches. For instance, I was reading all up on some guy tuning his MAT yata yata and tweaking yata yata and I am thinking "oh this is great info!" until I finally realized that everything I had read was for a SD car and was a complete waste of my time.

There is some great info here though guys and I really appreciate it. I don't quite get how you guys are tuning for "extreme conditions" however. If you are changing stuff for the extreme conditions, then won't you be off when the weather gets back to normal?

Madmax, could you please elaborate on “default airflow table to your car rather than GM's generalized baseline."? I have heard something like this mentioned before but I don't quite get what you are doing and how to do it.

 

I'd have to look to get you the exact spot, but its been posted up before. Usually people only mess with it to get away from random code 33's but there is more to it than that. Its in winbin and I'm sure tunercat. Looks something like this:
As for the scalars and MAF tables, I guess I should clarify. I wouldnt touch the table scalar unless you absolutely have to, but adjusting the values within the table is fine. Watch for the difference in values and especially between tables. It wont be a totally smooth line if you graph it, but you dont want any weird spikes or dips. Set the injector constant so the BLM's are generally close (if need be) and then adjust the values within the MAF tables themselves. What you are really doing is recalibrating the maf, based on actual conditions with your engine. Once that is done and your part throttle is pretty good, you can go into the vs coolant temp vs delta tps, etc etc and tune those tables as needed. In this area is where the SD does better but then again there are a lot of other options if you want absolute accuracy. With the 6E definitely adjust the crank pw vs ref pulse table, especially the arap based code. It'll start so much better than GM set it for.

 

Thanks again for your reply.

I am looking in Tuner Pro and I see "Maximum Air Flow vs. RPM"... Does that sound like the same thing as "Default air flow offset per pct TPS vs RPM"?

My car definitely starts rough. How would I tell what to turn my reference pulse multiplier to? Since I have 24# injectors, would I want to start at say pulse two, yet lower the amount from .50 to .25 or something? Right now my stock table starts at pulse 9 at .50, then goes to .25 at 11. So what I am trying to ask is, do I need to start it at a sooner pulse but lower the amount due to my larger injectors?

 

So what is the purpose of this default airflow table??
My guesses are either the 'Max air flow vs. RPM' like Camaero mentioned, or a table used when the MAF fails as in this much RPM yeilds however much airflow??

I know that big c.i. motors need that Max airflow vs. RPM table changed, because if the MAF reports a higher airflow for a given RPM, it will ignore it and go with the the Max table says.



Also, I feel that if Im tuning the values for the MAF because they are not perfect, its not completely wrong to tune in the value of the injector constant because it is not absolutly perfect either. Especially old injectors.

 

That makes sense, since what the computer thinks is coming out of the injectors may not be the actual value that the injector sprays out. but it also seems ok to change the injector constant since that effects fuel input, so it seems like that is another value to change when it comes to the fueling aspect of these MAF cars. you have the MAF tables and then injector constant so far.

 

Now there is also "Injector Pulse Wisth Correction VS Battery Voltage" available to me in TunerPro. Ive not played with this or looked into it much, but Ive heard it mentioned. My guess is it will basically accomplish the same as the injector constant, which is an adjustment to the entire fuel curve. For some reason i get a feeling that this might be a better thing to change instead of injector constant, but i have nothing to back that with..


Im sure there are other tables/constants of intrest also but cant talk about everything at once i guess.

 

Heya Grim, there's some great info in this, add it to the tuning sticky faq thingy list?

 

As for the question of whether to tune via adjusting the injector constant and even other parts like the Battery Adjustment.

Initially, it is not a bad idea to start with the Injector Constant to see if it gives a better overall tune. But, ultimately, I have found you are better to leave the Injector Constant at it's proper value and tune the MAF Tables. Having a "false" Injector Constant causes other issues such as "tip-in" and "pump-shot" problems because they too are affected.

Using the Injector Constant is just a "quick way" to see if it helps improve your overall tune. But ultimately, you really should set the Injector Constant back to it's real value and re-tune the MAF tables. AND, I do realize this contradicts information I made years ago. Let's just say, I have learnt more over the years as I worked with the MAF system more. And, I have found the same thing (ie. fibbing with the Injector Constant) on SD systems as well. You can start by using the Injector Constant to see if it heps with the tune...but ultimately, you need to go back, set the Injector Constant to it's realy value, and re-tune the tables.

Also, I have found the MAF Scalar Tables in the ARAP Bin is one of the better "MAF Scalar" tables. I would recommend that if you are using a different "bin" as your starting point; copy the entire MAF Scalar Tables over from the ARAP Bin. They are NOT perfect AND different MAFs (as well as removing the screens) all affect the MAF Scalar Tables - but I found the ARAP's one of the better ones.

Conversly, the ARAP's Crank Fuel Ref Pulse Tables suck. If you are using the ARAP as your starting point, these need to be changed to overcome the "hard starting" problem people encounter with the ARAP bin.

Actually, it's someone else who does it. But we review posts on a periodic basis (once they are no longer active and being posted to) and if they have good technical content, we add them.

This will will be added to the MAF Tuning section once the posts slow down and we review the Tuning Guide for updating. Currently there isn't too much info on the MAF system...but it's getting there.

 

I had a feeling it would mess with something else. So, I think my plan will be something like this...

- Use my altered injector constant to get the BLMs averaging 128.
- Tweak the MAF tables to get high and low BLM areas closer to 128.
- Bring the injector constant back to the correct setting while countering that with shifting the ENTIRE MAF curve to maintain the 128 BLM average.


Hopefully that 3rd point will work out as smooth as it sounds.


I think Ill try copying in the ARAP tables like you mentioned. Its worth a shot because I foresee just about the whole range needed tuned in the MAF tables.

Thanks for the info!

 

Just in case it helps someone else viewing this thread, by changing my reference pulse, under "Crank Fuel PW multiplier vs. Ref. Pulse" it made my car start just like my old stocker 32B PROM! (Which was good ) My $6E had 0s from 1 to 8. At 9 it finally started adding fuel. So I made #3 on up to match what my #9 was at and it works great on a modified engine. I also tried it on a friends stock 350 and it fixed his rough start problem too. I wish I would have done such an easy fix sooner!

I have another fueling question regarding a recent datalog session though. I had a buddy drive while I sat there with my Ostrich and data logger and watched how my fuel was. We did steady, medium speed driving, consistent highway speed driving, and a mix of normal stop and go driving. The drive had a very good balance of what a... well... normal drive would have. For the most part, my BLMs were right on target and only 1-4 off either way.

If the speed and RPM was maintained at say 2500 RPM, the BLMs would look good until the throttle was let off. Then it would go too rich while it coasted down. Throttling back up got it back in a good area though. So, is this normal or is this something that can be fixed? Why is being off the throttle at certain speeds making me rich while being on the throttle at those same speeds keep me in tune? Also, even though my BLMs were showing rich, the o2 sensor was leaned out, staying at around 130ish. Confusing stuff! Maybe one of you wiser gents could learn me a little more here.

Thanks for your replies.

 

There is a de-accel enrichment that you could probably bump down a little bit to help fueling when letting of the throttle. I can't quite remember the name, but it is a table and it is in TunerPro.

 

Hmmm.... I am looking in tuner pro right now. I don't see anything that sounds like de-accel enrichment under tables.

Under constants and scalers I see
"Decel Enlean Enable if LV8 <=X"
"Decel Enlean Enable if RPM above"

And a few other decels... Not sure what those do but they kind of sound like de-accel.

 

The default airflow table (@ $C222) is only used when the MAF is malfunctioning. In the case that the MAF goes bad tis table along with some other information creates an airflow value. This created airflow value is then used in place of what the MAF would provide for airfow.

IOW, if the MAF goes bad, or you unplug it, the ECM will use this table in place of the MAF airflow reading.

RBob.

 

To add further to what Bob said, this the "Safe Mode" part of the MAF system.

 

Look into the DFCO parts. That stands for "Deceleration Fuel Cut Off". I dont know anything about those areas yet myself, I just know of them. Im taking things one step at a time... hopefully.

Also, have Tunerpro display the Block Learn Cell while you watch the BLMs, because when mine jumps cells it will jump BLMs also. Are you familiar with the BLM cells? If not, I could find a post that would explain it well. Before I figured out the way the cells work, I drove myself insane watching the BLMs jump so far from just a small throttle change.


Id be interested to hear if your decelerating rich problem is cured by any of that, good luck.




RBob and Grim, thats what i thought. hmm, does anyone unplug thier MAF and tune this just incase of a failure? Id have to be quite bored hahaha

 

I will check that out Nitsuj86Iroc, thanks!

I am familiar with cells, so hopefully I can figure something out. I will report back in here if I have success (or catastrophic failure).

Also, I couldn't imagine very much need to tune your backup tables for failure on a stock engine... If it is heavily modified though, then maybe it could be dangerous to all of a sudden cut off the good tune and go to the stock air flow numbers in the event of failure?

 

The advantage of tuning while the engine is still stock - if you mess up the tables, you can easily restore the stock settings and retry.

However, on a heaviliy modified engine, you are going to have to figure it out whether you like it or not.

Take the time to learn on your basically stock engine so you know what to do when your engine becomes modified. I've alwasy felt the FIRST modification anyone should make, is to their eprom because you always have your original as "back up".

Also, on a "bone stock" engine, you can obtain .3 improvement in et (thats about 30 HP) plus you can obtain a 10% improvement in fuel economy. Thus, you can easily recover the money you spend on tuning just from the fuel savings.

Now you know why I promote learning how to burn your own chips over paying someone to do it. It's one of the few times where a "modification" actually pays for itself.

 

If the engine is being fueled and motored by the vehicle inertia, and it's not in DFCO, you can surely bet the PW's are small. This is where Injector VBatt Offset comes into play. Changes to the offset have the biggest effect here, and negligable effect at high PWs. Reduce it, and the small PWs will become leaner, without leaning the high PWs with any signifigance.
There's also a correction factor vs PW size (for small PWs only) that probably can be left alone in your case.

 

My thought is your are either in DFCO or the very low end of your MAF Scalar Tables need tweeking.

It has been my experience that only need to dive into the Injector Pulse Width Correction vs Battery Voltaage Table if you have Underdrive Pullies, and you typically need to tweek the lower voltage part of the Injector Pulse Width Correction vs Battery Voltage Table for idle. Higher voltage (and higher RPM) typically are okay.

But, be aware that you will affect other areas of operation when you play with the Injector Pulse Width Correction vs Battery Voltage. There is a big interplay between this table on your overall fueling.

This is why when underdrive pullies and a big cam are involved, it is common to tweek with the lower MAF Scalar Table, then the Inj PW Batt Corr, then back to the MAF Scalar Table and back to the Inj PW Batt Corr...and so forth.

AND, remember, when you change the spark advance, IT TOO has an effect. This is why a person may end up burning a 100 different bins to "fine tune" these issues. It just depends how much you want the perfect tune...

(Damn...sounds like Bruce's spirit has come back to haunt us).

 

"(Damn...sounds like Bruce's spirit has come back to haunt us)." Well that wouldn't be a bad thing, kinda miss him bouncin around the boards stirrin up stuff.

Anyway, in the DFCO theres a bunch of different settings that will enable it or turn it off such as consecutive minimum delay, could be that sometimes you're tripping the flags that shut it off ? That might be why you get it at some points and not others anyway.
You may also check your BLM update rate, on the copy of ARAP that I started with it and the BLM update amount were more than double what they were in my stock bin- I don't think this is likely to be the problem, but everything else I can think of has been covered well by everyone else.

 

So are you saing that a higher BLM update amount is better than the lower stock rate? I have not even touched any DFCO settings. That part should all be stock from an 89 350.

 

Yes, but it doesn't mean it's right

 

Nope... Unfortunately...


Anyway, a question related to this discussion,

Lets say a given spot on the MAF tables is showing a BLM of 115, a rich condition (if not for the correction). I want to know of a mathematical way of adjusting the table rather than guessing. Can you say, 128 / 115 = 1.11, so if Im 111% leaner Ill be right at 128 BLM? Then go to that point and multiply the grams/sec by .90 (which is 1 / 1.11)?

Or, maybe this is not the case, i have a feeling it isnt...

 

related to above, if your rich and you need to LEAN it out, do you decrease the MAF grams/sec values?

 

Yes, decrease gram/sec value to lean it out.

Think of it like, whats coming through the sensor in reality is not changing, but the value you tell the computer, is. If you want it to spit less fuel, tell it theres less air coming in.

 

Sorry, but I never bothered figuring out a mathematical formula (like I did with SD) because I stopped using the stock O2 sensor and used a WB 02 sensor with real-time tuning.

The stock O2 sensor is just not accuratre enough to tune with because it was never intended to be used as a "tuning device". It's better than nothing, but for tuning, you really need to use a Wideband O2 sensor..

 

It should work pretty darn close to that, the only error being injector offset error. The ECU is just a complicated calculator with some inputs and outputs.

 

i would figure with large cams it would cause problems but what about mild cams? is it worth goin to a WB for a milder setup when only alittle bit of tuning is really needed?

 

^^ To Orr89, as far as i know, the biggest reason for a WB O2 sensor is to tune PE at WOT.. Where you want a richer AFR and a normal O2 will not read correctly. I imagine that that is a reason that the O2 does not control fueling in PE mode. I wish it did, and i wish it was accurate.. but you can wish all day haha

 

Unfortunately, most of the cars I've helped tune tend to have pretty large cams. But note my reply to Nitsuj below.


Trying tuning while in "open loop" for the partial throttle (with a WB). Tune the various Tables at various rpms & loads while striving to maintain 14.7:1 (and do it in real-time). You'll be amazed how quickly you can tune those MAF Scalar Tables.

Then you have an even better tune and, if you wish, just stay in open loop; or ignore the BLM/INTs variations (you'll be really close any) when you are in closed loop. Remember, the real objective is to have a well tuned set of tables for WHEN you go "open loop" for WOT or Highway Mode (as well as cold start). And the WB open-loop method gives the best tables of all (regardless of what the BLM/INTs say).

 

Is there any danger to copy the ARAP maf table scalar into APYN bin ?
how does the Maf scalar table work ? if I set a higher number ? will it get more fuel ? and smaller number less fuel ? or how does it really work..

 

As long as you copy the scalars, AND the tables to remain consistant it is fine, knowing that they are compatible with the same MAF sensors. They are. Im using APYN (hmm, or APYM?) as a base, I jsut copied the ARAP tables and scalars in. In the low tables they are very close, ARAP slightly leaner (lesser gram/sec value), and in the upper tables ARAP is a couple grams/sec leaner.

Put a higher number of grams/sec in the table, the ECM thinks theres more air, gives more fuel. Put a lower gram.sec, thinks less air, gives less fuel. The REAL amount of air is not different when the tables change.


To Grim, tongiht when i get off work, "WB O2" is getting put in the search box up there haha

 

So if I copy the MAF Table #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6.

Do I copy the MAF Table #1 Scalar, #2 Scalar, #3 Scalar, #4 Scalar, #5 Scalar, #6 Scalar also ?

or just the Table ? or both ?

 

yep, definitly both.

And if you copy anything, copy all of it, not jsut parts. the tables match up. the end of the #1 must be the same as the beginning of #2 and so on.

Theres nothing saying that the ARAP tables are perfect, they wont be. Grim mentioned that they may be closer to where you wanna be than other bins' tables. So if they are closer, then they are a better place to start, so its worth a shot.

 

Yeah I know that
in Scalar table there is only 3 tables that is diffrent beetween ARAP and APYN
the difference is :


MAF Table #1 , ARAP = 17 & APYN = 16
MAF Table #4 , ARAP = 87 & APYN = 86
MAF Table #5 , ARAP = CF & APYN = CD


so there is not very much differnce but there is some . I will try both Scalar and Table so

 

ok cool, since your doing the same as me pretty much, maybe we can compare results if your familiar with your current BLMs. While the change to ARAP tables made not much difference at low airflows like idle, during highway cruising it leaned it out some, which was good in my case. Cant say exactly how much now but maybe when i get home and look at it. Didnt get on the pedal much last log, so im not sure how its doing above cruise and below PE.

 

The problem is thats the car running rich and I mean real rich at idle and midrpm in Datamaster its on sterm 108 and lterm 111 and thats not good. Its a friends car so we shall try do cutoff som fuel and se if its runs leaner.. there is new injectors, o2 sensor, all temp sensors, new sparkplugs, wires, rotor /disturbutor cap and ignition coil, ign. module, pickup coil... We just want to try do change some fuel and se if its runs better...

any sugestions of what wrong ?

Camaro 1989
350 TPI bore 0.30
COMP cam Xtreme energy cam with double non roller timing cain,Hypereutectic flat top pistons 4,030 ,ceramic coated hooker headers 3"
and custo 3" exhaust...
right now original prom with injector size change and litte litte timing and fan temp star/stop change...

the car is running very rich all the time almost.... So we want to try to give it smaller amount of fuel and se if it runs better... sometimes it goes down to 85 / 90 s/lterm and thats nooooo good.

 

almost a topic for another thread but whats the cam size? big cam will make the car run rich at idle for sure. try adjusting the tables in MAF to see if that changes anything. you can make quick adjustments to the idle scalars to see big changes. if it helps fine tune the MAF tables