IAT/CTS Blend Q?
IAT/CTS Blend Q?
I added IAT control last year. Never tuned it. Used EBL.bin table values. This morning cold environmental temps are 40F. IAT shows 55F in CL . 20 miles later IAT is showing 80F. Now my BLM's are showing 140-155 in some cells others are 130-140. I expected higher BLM since very cool air today.
Should I adjust the IAT/CTS table?
I see 16 grams being 96% so I assume that might be idle scenario and biased to coolant temp for final pulse width. Now at other end gm/sec at 255 shows 70% of coolant so now I assume that is a whole lot of cool air. Should I ADD or increase by say 5% from 128-255 gram/sec to IAT/CTS table?
during drive I checked AE. On a decent throttle stab it was lean. So I added 10% to AE CTS mult.
Now I did correct the BPC since I upped FP from 19 lbs to 23.5 but I dont think that affected above.
Should I adjust the IAT/CTS table?
I see 16 grams being 96% so I assume that might be idle scenario and biased to coolant temp for final pulse width. Now at other end gm/sec at 255 shows 70% of coolant so now I assume that is a whole lot of cool air. Should I ADD or increase by say 5% from 128-255 gram/sec to IAT/CTS table?
during drive I checked AE. On a decent throttle stab it was lean. So I added 10% to AE CTS mult.
Now I did correct the BPC since I upped FP from 19 lbs to 23.5 but I dont think that affected above.
Re: IAT/CTS Blend Q?
This is what I need answered: please..
I see 16 grams being 96% so I assume that might be idle scenario and biased to coolant temp for final pulse width. Now at other end gm/sec at 255 shows 70% of coolant so now I assume that is a whole lot of cool air. Should I ADD or increase by say 5% from 128-255 gram/sec to IAT/CTS table?
I see 16 grams being 96% so I assume that might be idle scenario and biased to coolant temp for final pulse width. Now at other end gm/sec at 255 shows 70% of coolant so now I assume that is a whole lot of cool air. Should I ADD or increase by say 5% from 128-255 gram/sec to IAT/CTS table?
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 18,432
Likes: 234
From: Chasing Electrons
Car: check
Engine: check
Transmission: check
Re: IAT/CTS Blend Q?
If you wern't running an IAT previously, then added it and changed the blend to use the IAT, the AFR should be richer (not leaner). There reason is that the IAT/CTS value as used in the PW calculation will be a colder temperature.
Colder air, more fuel is added.
Since you changed the fuel pressure, FPR spring, and the BPC, that may be where the real issue is.
RBob.
Colder air, more fuel is added.
Since you changed the fuel pressure, FPR spring, and the BPC, that may be where the real issue is.
RBob.
Re: IAT/CTS Blend Q?
I believe your last statement is correct. What I did was use Dom's calculated values for that table. Thanks again Dom. I dont have notes with me today but I believe he has same injectors(80's), CID and was using 20 lbs FP. I then recalculated 0 VAC/100 MAP values for BPC for 23.5 lbs FP. Then I changed the 10-90 VAC values by interpolating. I do not have a MightyVAC so I believed that to be best? My OL warm up period is now lean on WB. Once fully heat sinked then the idle OL is good. So maybe I should increase the BPC/VAC tables by 10% at 10-90 only leaving 0 VAC as is??? That should deliver more fuel. It is 30F these mornings in WI...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post






