anywhere between 1800 rpms and up to 2600. using saujpv4 1026A bin. this is driving me nuts because i keep adding to the ve table and its not getting any better. the only time it doesnt lean out and bog is when in PE, which is still set at 50% throttle. ive raised my open loop %change v. kpa from 13 to 25 and the ve table in this area is maxxed and yet the BPW refuses to go over ~5.75. in PE it goes up over 7ms and the AFRs are in a good range, maybe even a little rich. am i missing something? im thinking theres something else that is limiting the fuel in this load range.

also have design 3 ford explorer 19# injectors running at 50psi. at WOT i have no problems with leaning out.

 

Probably need to adjust the O2 values in that range of MAP.
Check the spreadsheet that is bundled with the 1026.
It outlines the 3 tables that would need to be changed and the locations.
The graph will show you what the values look like as you change them.
Much easier than trying to visualize them in your head.

The area from 80 Kpa up on the stock values drops off and may be your issue.

 

wow im not used to seeing the xdf info like this lol. i was looking for lower, mean, upper lol. this should help even though im running open loop? probably, ill give it a try. thanks!

 

I think JP86SS missed the open loop part. Those tables are only used in closed loop.

If more PW is required and the VE is maxed, need to decrease the injector flow rate.

RBob.

 

ok i think i got ya, decrease the inj flow rate but keep fuel pressure the same. basically trick the ecm?

 

Not a trick, the VE is maxed and there isn't enough fuel. Could also look at it another way, is the fuel injector compensation correct?

If not, then decreasing the flow rate may be a trick. But who knows. Make things in the cal as close as possible, then go from there.

RBob.

 

Yup.

 

so i tried to lower the injector constant last night, aside from making the rest of the VE area run pig rich, it still didnt work. i returned the constant back to the previous setting, which is actually a little lower than the actual flow rate of the injectors. i almost ate the steering wheel, it literally pulled me out of my seat at one point. its like there is a hole in the 85 kpa range at 2000 rpms, maybe a little broader but at this area its most prominent. ive also lowered to PE enable threshold and that didnt work either. WOT is fine, no issues that i notice. just this small area. so even in PE the bpw refuses to go over ~4.20ms. im attaching the .bin im using along with a couple of datalogs.

*edit* just came back from a cruise and im going to try and see if i can use the original upper VE table instead of the extended one in case theres something wrong there.

 

yep, it was the Z69 upper VE table to 6400rpm not sure if it was goofed when i unzipped the folder but at least i dont have to worry about taking a bite out of my steering wheel or worse. as of now ive reached my limits of knowlege, so if anyone wants to take a look at the .bin ive attached to see if something is goofed in the specified areas thats fine with me. for now im going to continue to use the original upper VE table to 5600 rpm. my engine runs out of juice at ~5200 anyway lol. thanks!

 

Isn't there an option flag or such to define which table to use? Maybe it was always using the original table?

RBob.

 

yep i unselected it to use the original table,no more lean spike. the values were far less in the trouble area and it still runs rich there with the original table. it wasnt as noticeable before i started to lean out the table. the injector constant is also set a little lower than the actual flow rate too. so between the good part of the table running pig rich and AE, the problem area wasnt as noticable.

the PE enable v. TPS is also raised back to original settings. i had it down to 32% and it still spiked lean in PE. weird

 

Did you previously make the extended table adjustments?
Those are not the supplied extended table values so I did a compare on your current bin to the starting bin to see if anything else has been radically changed.

• Speed sensor pulses are set 7257, not 4007
• Upper SA table has slightly less values than the lower table in high Kpa area. should match smoothly.
• Do the same for the VE tables so the up/down transitions match better at the 1600 rpm level.
• Fuel cutoff at 6100 will scare the crap out of you as well as making you eat the wheel (be careful) Use as an ultimate safety.
• Might want to pull the fuel back out of the OL %AFR table now that you found the problem.
• Same with the PE table.
• Closed loop enable is at 130 C (intentional I'm sure)
• 623 cc/cyl setting (= 305 Cu In, just checking)
• Injectors at 22#
• Crank fuel Vs MAT has some tweaks done.

Didn't see anything radical except that extended VE table. Other stuff looks intentional for tuning.

 

extended VE table and lower VE table need smoothing, ive only adjusted the areas where i have data for. VE will be smoothed out now that i dont have a problem area. everything else (PE,OL%) is pretty much back to where it was. closed loop wont be enabled until i get the AFRs closer to 14.7, which is gettin close. its a ford 302(5.oh) and the injectors are at 50 psi. i almost never take the rpms up that high, unless i free rev or break traction. 6100 may seem low and i might raise it later on but im starting to slow down and i really dont hammer it as hard as it used to. i dont think its ever been over 85mph since i brought it lol. since its a ford with 17" cobra R's and 275/45 tires, the PPM ended up where its at now. since it has the factory cruise control, it has cable speedo and a piggyback VSS. i just matched the speed in TP to my speedo when i had it on jackstands lol. hey it works. thanks!!

 

is there a way to check the extended table to see what could be the problem? id like to use it for improved resolution

 

Just opening it up in the editor will show you why you were lean.
Looks like it was dragged down all around the high MAP area.
These two pics show the "std" settings as supplied (interpolated from stock AUJP numbers) and what your table looks like.
Use the values in your stock table that is running good to fill in the extended table. Smooth out the transitions between the cells as a starting point. Then begin tuning using the BLM or WB as a reference.

 

is the second pic my table? somethings goofed somewhere because it feels like there is nothing there at ~2000rpm/85-90 kpa range. thats why i pegged them and jacked up the %change open loop V. map. nothing, absolutley nothing changed. i only raised the values that high because it refused to add fuel. as soon as i unchecked the 6400 upper table and pegged the values in the problem are(just incase), it ran fine. too rich actually, had to lean it out. brought all the other tables ive adjusted down to a more realistic number. i havent had any trouble whatsoever since. am i not understanding what you are saying? granted, my table is very jumbled right now. but thats because im gradually retrieving data to adjust the various cells. and since this is on a ford 302, it acts much different at low and high loads than a tuned port. i did some WOT tuning today and the PE % change falls off sharply after 5000ish wheras mine is demanding way more fuel at the same range. if that second pic is mine, its drastically different in certain areas than my 6400VE table. thanks for your patience!


*edit* here is what im working on now. looks like the rockies but in the main driving areas its good.

 

The 2000 rpm, 80-90 Kpa area has a ton of fuel taken out (values in the 30's IIRC).
Were you lowering the numbers to increase fuel?
The numbers will be higher to increase fuel.
Adding fuel by way of the % PE table would not do much with such low numbers in the VE table.
Bring that area back up to the 80's values and try it again.

 

there must be a problem somewhere because what you are seeing is not what im seeing. my VE table is pegged, come to think of it, everytime i raised the values in the problem area it seemed to get worse. all the values on my side are 98.xx. heres a pic....

im glad you see, on your end, what the values actually are. there must be a prob somewhere, TP maybe? im running V5 right now.

 

Send me your XDF file.
Johnshome at Wowway.com
That is not what I see when I open the bin.
Look at the high end of the table, it is definately set low.
I'll see whats up with it.

 

holy shnit, its like the table has been moved over a few columns or something. weird. ok ill send you my XDF now. thanks!

 

Nevermind, I know the problem.
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/diy-...-released.html
Post #28 has the fix.

The edits were not done to the XDF as posted in that thread.
There are several errors found in the defs when the stuff was released, This was one of them.
I saw the file name in the header of your pic and did some checking on it.

I'll get my S%^& together and post up a new version so all the edits are done so this doesn't happen again.

In the meantime, perform the edits as described and the values will display properly.
sorry, I should have caught that sooner.
Jp