[92GreenGT]

Hello guys/gals, I've begun my journey of TRYING to tune the ole junker car. Since I've got EA installed and working correctly and the car tagged/registered I'm legal to tune. Here is where I'm at so far:

Injectors: Ford #42 Green Tops
Injector Slopes: 42.50/49.68 (previously used Lightning BIN values, not sure which I want to commit with)
Injector Breakpoint: Stock A9L Settings
Injector Offset vs Battery Voltage: EA Table(I'm surprised these values are so close to the factory values in A9L tune)

MAF: C&L 76mm with Green Tube installed
MAF Transfer: Found online out of excel spreadsheet(real close to EA's base curve for this meter)

Here is the tune/datalog from today:
http://www.mediafire.com/?f2vij0oe1b2

As soon as you start the car, it will be in the high 12's AFR. If you let it sit and idle it will lean itself all the way out to the 19's in AFR. As soon as you give it some gas it will go rich again back into the 12's. Then once it idles down it will start its process of leaning itself out again. I opened my datalog in EA and here is a screenshot of what the "modified" MAF curve it recommended. Its not much different than what I'm working with currently, but I guess I need to follow what it says and keep datalogging.
Screenshot:

Yellow line = recommended curve
Green Line = current MAF curve
Red Line = Base C&L 76mm Green Tube Curve


I'm still not driving the car becuase I was hoping to get it leaned out a little more so I'm not driving around with the car in the 12's AFR. The larger the number in the MAF Flow section = more fuel correct?

[mustangless]

I don't know much about this still, but I would do this.
Since you are lean at idle I would adjust your low slope some. Somebody on here told me to start with 44/46 high/low. I was still lean when I came to a stop (kamrf 1.07) but I let EA adjust my battery offset.

Now that I typed that, I would let EA adjust your battery offset and see what that does.


But, I don't really know much sooo maybe this will get some other replies

[92GreenGT]

Ok, I used the calculate and the values werent that much different, I guess little adjustments can go a long way. Thanks!

[Frit]

If your running stock fuel rail pressure, I'd lower your hi slope injector to say 39 or so, then tweak up the lo slope abit.

I'm running 42's and my hi slope is 39.9 and lo slope is 47.59 with a breakpoint of 1.59. My fuel rail pressue is at 39psi, and my injectors are rated at 42#'s at 43.5psi.

[92GreenGT]

Ok, I will try that. How do I know if im going the "right" way? I'm guessing it wont be trying to lean itself out so much if im making changes to the good?

[mustangless]

From what I understand the bigger the number, the more fuel. My kams were 1.07 with my 14 volt at 0.75, now they are at 1.02 with my volt at .8036

[Adam McLaughlin]

Ok, I will try that. How do I know if im going the "right" way? I'm guessing it wont be trying to lean itself out so much if im making changes to the good?

The EEC is trying to tell you that the car is running very rich, too rich for it to compensate and tune around the error by itself.

You need to try and tune for a LAMBSE value that hovers around 14.64 at an idle and a cruise. I see mine wobble between 14.1 and 15.1, for an example when at an idle or a warm cruise. This is with 42 lb injectors and a 90 MM LMAF meter.

Suggestion here: A Wide band will save you lots of time and frustration!

As for the KAMFR values, a KAMFR value of 1.000 is ideal. Try to get this value by making Injector slope adjustments, or lastly by swinging the WHOLE MAF curve one direction or the other. Avoid adjusting points if you can. This will affect the continuity of the driveability.

Seeing a startup AFR of 12.XX is normal, this is how the EEC begins to start itself when you first turn it on. When it seeks a 19 at an idle, this indicates that it is significantly richer than it wants to be.

I spent an incredible amount of time getting my 42s and 90 MM to work. Now that it is together, the car runs and drives acceptably, even though I did this without a wide band.

Adam

[92GreenGT]

I've got a wideband that I use, thats how I knew the air fuel ratios. I'll mess with the tune some more this week, I ended up putting the turbo kit for sale. If it sells I'll probably throw a set of heads on it and focus on getting a 03-04 Cobra.

I'll mess with it a few days this week, the main problem I've had so far is figuring out whats the right way to lean the car out. It seems its one of those 50 questions, 50 answer deals.

Does offset vs battery voltage and breakpoint not have a HUGE impact on the tune that I can lean the MAF out before messing with those values? I changed the slopes from the stock lightning bin values to the ones listed above and it really didn't make a huge difference. I guess its a combo thing on getting it right. I'll mess with it some and post my findings/failures(hehe) and my tune tomorrow probably. Thanks guys, I wish I had someone local that I could exchange words with in person, tuning this thing is about like welding to me, you can have someone talk to you about it for 4 hours and you will still learn less than someone showing you hands on in 30 minutes.

[Adam McLaughlin]

Does offset vs battery voltage and breakpoint not have a HUGE impact on the tune that I can lean the MAF out before messing with those values? I changed the slopes from the stock lightning bin values to the ones listed above and it really didn't make a huge difference. I guess its a combo thing on getting it right. I'll mess with it some and post my findings/failures(hehe) and my tune tomorrow probably. Thanks guys, I wish I had someone local that I could exchange words with in person, tuning this thing is about like welding to me, you can have someone talk to you about it for 4 hours and you will still learn less than someone showing you hands on in 30 minutes.

I wish that you didn't live across the country from me, but my being here in Sonoma County means that I can't be the one to help you with the project.

I discovered that breakpoint is not THAT critical; after playing with mine for tank after tank of gas I just set the injector slopes to be equal to negate this function, and then I moved the entire MAF curve as a whole to sweep it up or down as necessary to make it "Track" accurately.

After running some datalogs through E.A. for a few weeks, I found that my injector offset vs. battery voltage was surprisingly close to what was published in the E.A. tables for the 42 # slopes. Even after 30 mb datalogs could not suggest other parameters, I settled with the published facts and drove the car.

Adam

[92GreenGT]

Thanks Adam, I've read a lot of people setting the slopes the same then using the offset vs voltage and maf curve to dial everything in.

In your opinion, is this the best(ie easier) route to take?

[Adam McLaughlin]

Think of it as the best way to a "quick start guide".

Remember that the people whom wrote that particular tune that we are speaking of, the X3Z in the Cobra, which used the injector slopes being identical did this to save time as they had a weekend to get everything together. Being pressed for time creates particular tuning scenarios that people like yourself and I might not want to take in the long run.

That being said, I am happy with mine set this way.

Adam

[92GreenGT]

I'm hopefully going to mess with the car tomorrow. :) I've searched a few threads on here since your last post Adam and I believe I'm going to go with the high=low slopes. I'm guessing where my car is so rich I will need to lean it out a reasonable amount with the MAF transfer and then dial it in with the injector offsets after, is this correct in thinking?

[Adam McLaughlin]

There are several ways to reach the ideal air to fuel ratio. In my own experience, I set the high slope = low slope, entered the published injector offset values for my 42# injectors, and then swept the entire MAF curve to make the KAMFR "track" 1.00X across all of the closed loop portion of the curve.

Once that was done, I then ran some LONG data-logs and then calculated the ideal injector offsets and found that....
.... the calculated injector offsets were surprising close to what the published stuff was.

This took me several tanks of gas, mainly cause I didn't do this with a wide band. It is possible, but much quicker and more accurate with the Wide Band.

Adam

[mustangless]

Do your kams stay within the 1.00x the enitre time? I stay between .96-1.04.

Anyways, I feel like I need to tune like you. My maf curve up top had to be tweeked 12%, but I did not touch the bottom. But my injecotor slopes are 44/46.

It works, but it just doesn't seem right.

There are several ways to reach the ideal air to fuel
ratio. In my own experience, I set the high slope = low slope, entered the published injector offset values for my 42# injectors, and then swept the entire MAF curve to make the KAMFR "track" 1.00X across all of the closed loop portion of the curve.

Once that was done, I then ran some LONG data-logs and then calculated the ideal injector offsets and found that....
.... the calculated injector offsets were surprising close to what the published stuff was.

This took me several tanks of gas, mainly cause I didn't do this with a wide band. It is possible, but much quicker and more accurate with the Wide Band.

Adam

[cougarnut281]

Personally, I feel that if you are using a ford injector and you have the Factory injector settings for that injector, Lightning 42lb injectors for example, then I will adjust the maf as I feel that the injector settings should be right and that any error is coming from the maf.

If I run an unkown injector such as an accel than I will play with the slopes first though.

There are always exceptions to this but in general that is what I try to do.

[cgrey8]

The catch with that is the injectors will behave differently on different era EECs. The hardware driver that grounds the injector to open it is also in the mix. And perhaps the Ford numbers were correct for that EEC's hardware. But moving those numbers from say a newer EEC to an older EEC that very possibly has a different era injector driver hardware on the circuit board may not work quite the same which means injector tuning is still a recommended thing to do. The good news is now that we have the BE defs updated to calculate Injector PW correctly, EA does a MUCH better job at calculating Injector slopes than it did before. Ever since that SNAFU was found by sailorbob, EA calculates slopes for my application that make sense and work very well...even better than what I'd empirically come up with.

[cougarnut281]

Like I said there are exceptions. Most of the cars I deal with are EEC-V so what you are talking about is hardly ever an issue for me.

[Adam McLaughlin]

In my case the problem seemed to be a MAF curve that had been calculated incorrectly.

I found that with injector slopes at 42/42 I could make things sit almost perfect within the entire MAF track ( 1.004 to .996 ) if I leaned out the MAF curve by precisely 1/3.

After several conversations with Byron he suggested that the EEC-V MAF sensors have been incorrectly converted to EEC-IV configurations because the math from clock ticks to kg/hr was not done perfectly.

That being said, I found that several other people on the board had no trouble by importing the published EEC-V MAF curves into their own EEC-IV processors without a hitch.

I have my injectors at 42/42, and the top and midrange was very, very good. Some very low RPM spots below the idle speed of 850 wanted to be richened, but I can attribute this to the camshaft being wonky down there. I am running the TFS stage 1 cam in the motor.

Adam

[92GreenGT]

Ok got a few minutes to mess around with the car today.

Here is what I done:

Used 42 for high and low slope
Used EA's base Injector Offset numbers for the Ford #42 injectors
Used EA's base C&L 76mm with green tube on a 55mm sensor MAF transfer function

Went out and the car acted about the same way, so I opened up TunerPro and leaned my MAF transfer out roughly 3%. Seemed to like that better but was still rich so I oepend up TunerPro and leaned it out another 3%(entire curve both times). If I revved the car up to 2000rpm and held it, I'm getting AFR's in the high 13's to low 14 range(compared to the high 11's low 12's that I was getting with the old tune).

Here are a few questions about whats happening.

1. KAMFR1 is showing 1.121 value at idle, but if I give it any amount of gas it goes to 1.000 and stays. Why is this happening?

2. HEGO1 is reporting values crazy low(0.034x) and HEGO2 reports values of 0.420x. I replaced the passenger side o2 sensor a few weeks ago becuase I thought it was bad, both of my O2 sensors basically read the same bank becuase of the crossover with the turbo kit.

3. LAMBSE1 values was showing 12.xx's at idle but my wideband was showing values of 15.80-16.10. I believe these are supposed to be closer, so this is just verifying that I still have more tuning to do, correct?

Here is my tune from this evening and a datalog while the car was running with that tune.

http://www.mediafire.com/?h24wj4efb1c

[mustangless]

kams, lambse, and afr all show that you are running lean at idle. You probably knew that though.


You could try changing your high slope some. Up/down, I always forget :?

edit: You could richen up the lower part of your maf curve too.

edit 2: I cant open your logs. It must be my vista computer because I can't open my dbs either.

edit 3: got it working. You can try adding fuel to your curve under 1.5 volts or so. I lost 2 hego sensors when I was running lean like you are so...

[Adam McLaughlin]

I can't open the file right now, Boss Over Shoulder.

What is the KAMFR value in the closed loop cruise condition? Does anything have a consistent track to it that you can see?

Adam

[92GreenGT]

No worries Adam, just check it out when you can. :D

As for the KAM values at cruise, I'm not real sure becuase I haven't drove the car. Before with the old tune I took it down the road and it was in the 11's AFR just cruising, I think I've got it leaned out a lot more now so I will take it for a spin again.

I ran that datalog through EA and it gave me the same exact MAF curve as I have, nothing was changed at all. I must not be getting a long enough datalog or enough data in my datalogs for it to help me, it did recommend a few changes to my injector offsets though, I may go ahead and try them.

It's raining like crazy here but if the flood stops I'll try to take the car out for some part throttle cruise driving so I can look at the AFR's and KAMs etc.

Clint told me I need to log both banks, the TwEECer only allows 16 parameters to be logged at once correct?

What do I need to log:
KAM1
KAM2
HEGO1
HEGO2
LAMBSE1
LAMBSE2
MAFv
MAFkghr
ECT
ACT
Injectorplswidth1
Injectorplswidth2
Battery Voltage
RPM
Injector Duty Cycle

Is this good enough? Load isn't a big ordeal right now with just cruise/idle that I'm working on, so I shouldn't need to log that.

[92GreenGT]

I ran codes this morning and got a few that I figured I would.

Using EA to figure out what all of them mean, here is my list:

Code 14 - Two or more successive erratic Profile Ignition Pickup(PIP) puslses occurred, resulting in possilble engine stall or miss

Code 15 - EEC permaneent Read Only Memory(ROM) Test failed

Code 41 - HEGO showing lean/not switching(Right Side)

Code 91 - HEGO showing lean/now switching(Left side)

Code 66 - MAF dropped below .4 volts during the last 80 warm-up cycles

Thats a hefty list of codes, hehe. I guess I need to get these fixed before I go any farther. Lets disect them and see what we figure out.

Codes 14/15 I haven't a clue about, someone help me with possible fixes/causes on that? Codes 41/91 dealing with the HEGOS, will richening up my idle fix these or is it a wiring problem? Code 66, I lowered my MAF min voltage scalar but I may of not lowered it enough, I guess I need to go through my datalogs and find the lowest voltage and then go some below that to keep this code from showing? Thanks!

-Edit-
Wow, after looking at my datalog that I posted up above the lowest MAF value was 0.019531

[92GreenGT]

TTT

[5.0Rick]

Code 15 - EEC permaneent Read Only Memory(ROM) Test failed

Code 15 is perfectly normal when you are running a chip or a tweecer. This code basically points out that the checksum value does not match for the ROM that is being used. You can just ignore it.

Regards,

Rick

[cgrey8]

BE and TunerPro can recalculate the ROM checksum and include that in the tune. I've never noticed that I got this error prior to BE supporting it. But perhaps I did and didn't notice. I don't check codes that often since I have datalogging and can see what is a miss if I get a CEL.

[92GreenGT]

Thanks guys.

Cgrey8, what do I need to change in the tune so I wont get that code anymore?

Also, should I lowered my MAF min voltage to .000 since the lowest I saw in my datalog was .019?

[cgrey8]

Lowering the MAF Min Voltage is a completely different discussion. However if you are getting running volts from the MAF that low, then yeah, I think you got no choice but to zero it out. However if that voltage was while the motor was sitting still, then no. You should enter a min voltage just lower than the lowest possible cranked voltage (the motor running).

In BE to get it to calculate the ROM checksum, go to the settings tab. In the center should be the ROM checksum stuff. The only thing you should need to do is activate it using the checkbox. Give that a try and see if this gets rid of your checksum errors in the self-test stuff.

[92GreenGT]

Thanks. I'll check that out about the checksum.

As for the MAF voltage, that was with the engine cranked. I've read you get voltages that low with blowthrough boosted apps becuase the MAF is before the BOV and values like that happen when the bov opens and air is being "sucked" back across the MAF. Not sure if thats gospel but I have read that before, I want to get this pos running well enough that I get no codes or any bs like that anymore.

Thats the whole reason I bought the TwEECer I wanted to restore the "niceness" of a stock car, or as nice as a 1992 model car can be. Thanks guys.

[92GreenGT]

Code 41 - HEGO showing lean/not switching(Right Side)

Code 91 - HEGO showing lean/now switching(Left side)

Is this a wiring issue or is it becuase of my lean idle that I've been getting? I reset my KAM and I'm going to see if the codes come back. What exactly happens when a HEGO "switches" in layman terms?

Also switched to BE from TunerPro, after looking around they seem about the same to use and BE supports a few more features so I might as well. Thanks!

-Edit-
It's not a wiring issue becuase both O2's are showing the crazy lean values(like the wideband is) and they go up when the gas is pressed becuase it richens up. I think I FINALLY figured out how to read the LAMBSE value, right now mine bottoms out at 10.980 at idle and thats becuase its lean and the computer is commanding a lot of fuel to try and richen it up, correct? At cruise its showing 18's LAMBSE becuase my part throttle is real rich so its commanding a lean value to try and lean itself out.

So basically when its commanding a super rich value the car is actually lean and when its commanding a lean value the car is actually rich. That makes a lot more sense.

Will adjusting my Low Slope help with my lean idle? Its real lean at idle and real rich at cruise/part throttle(haven't touched WOT yet). If I lower my Low Slope won't that richen up the idle? I decided to ditch the Low Slope=High Slope values after searching on here, mainly after reading a lot of Cougar5.0's post. Right now im using 42/50 as my slopes, but I believe my Low Slope needs to come down,

Opinions? Thanks!