PE % Change to Fuel/Air Ratio vs Rpm
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Peoria,Az,USA
Car: 86 IROC
Engine: ZZ4
Transmission: T5 WC
PE % Change to Fuel/Air Ratio vs Rpm
In Tuner Cat under the PE % Change to Fuel/Air Ratio vs Rpm screen, when you increase the value does the AFR go up meaning more fuel when in PE(numericaly lower AFR) or is it the opposite of what I described. I want to give it more fuel when I envoke PE.
Thanks Tom
Thanks Tom
TGO Supporter
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 10,907
Likes: 5
From: The Bone Yard
Car: Death Mobile
Engine: 666 c.i.
It means "more fuel added" and thus it will lower your AF ratio as you have "more fuel to air".
On some of those, you can actually put a "negative sign" which means "less fuel" and it leans the mixture.
On some of those, you can actually put a "negative sign" which means "less fuel" and it leans the mixture.
Air:Fuel
12:1 . . . Rich . . . 12 parts air vs. 1 part fuel
13:1
14:1
15:1
16:1 . . . Lean . . . 16 parts air vs. 1 part fuel
From what I've seen posted a lot of people are seeing peak hp at a AFR that is richer than the 14.7:1 that we tune for in our PROMs - correct?
12:1 . . . Rich . . . 12 parts air vs. 1 part fuel
13:1
14:1
15:1
16:1 . . . Lean . . . 16 parts air vs. 1 part fuel
From what I've seen posted a lot of people are seeing peak hp at a AFR that is richer than the 14.7:1 that we tune for in our PROMs - correct?
Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
From: va.beach.va/usa
Car: 87 IROC (low 12's)
Engine: 400 sbc .040 over
Transmission: 700r mod
Originally posted by Ragtop89
Air:Fuel
12:1 . . . Rich . . . 12 parts air vs. 1 part fuel
13:1
14:1
15:1
16:1 . . . Lean . . . 16 parts air vs. 1 part fuel
From what I've seen posted a lot of people are seeing peak hp at a AFR that is richer than the 14.7:1 that we tune for in our PROMs - correct?
Air:Fuel
12:1 . . . Rich . . . 12 parts air vs. 1 part fuel
13:1
14:1
15:1
16:1 . . . Lean . . . 16 parts air vs. 1 part fuel
From what I've seen posted a lot of people are seeing peak hp at a AFR that is richer than the 14.7:1 that we tune for in our PROMs - correct?
Supreme Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 7,554
Likes: 1
From: In reality
Car: An Ol Buick
Engine: Vsick
Transmission: Janis Tranny Yank Converter
Originally posted by RBMZ28
That is correct. 14.7 to 1 is stoich supposingly best fuel economy and I believe keeps the convertor happy.For wot the goal is generally 12.8 or lower depending on what combo you have.
That is correct. 14.7 to 1 is stoich supposingly best fuel economy and I believe keeps the convertor happy.For wot the goal is generally 12.8 or lower depending on what combo you have.
It has nothing to do with what makes the engine happy or gets best mileage or peak HP. That all varies by engine.
Richer then the 14.7 is used for in cylinder cooling, ie to prevent detonation. Again varies by engine, can be anything from 13:1 to 10ish:1.
They toggle the AFR across 14.7 to keep the converter working. The engine doesn't target 14.7 it targets averaging it, with swings richer and leaner then 14.7.
Long stories made short.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
eightsixseven
Tech / General Engine
2
Dec 16, 2024 01:50 PM





