Here we go again, kamrf

Anything about Ford EEC tuning. TwEECer and Moates questions dominate, but there's some SCT and OBD-II knowledge too.

Moderators: cgrey8, EDS50, 2Shaker, Jon 94GT

Post Reply
Gear Head
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:59 pm

Here we go again, kamrf

Post by recharged95 » Wed Oct 23, 2019 12:07 am

Ok, after2 months, checked the logs every few weeks and notice, kamrf is 1.23+ at idle. Seen it hit 1.29 after 1 reset. Lambse is 13.9-14.3 and WBO far is 14.5-15.1. Idles decent, tip in is near perfect, once in awhile stumbles on a hard downshift coasting. Otherwise car runs strong. BUT this kamrf is driving me nuts. Reset adaptive kamrf creeps back up over the days.

Multiply MAF curve by 1.23, idles like crap and 1 week later it’s back at kamrf 1.25 (still runs like crap). O2s are 6 months, old stock location. WBO follows WOT near perfect. Tried bypassing thermactor, no change. Plugs look ok, block egr ( off in eec), vac at idle -16.

User avatar
Posts: 10784
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)

Re: Here we go again, kamrf

Post by cgrey8 » Wed Oct 23, 2019 7:42 am

On my setup, one thing I did to avoid lean tip-ins was "bake in" rich-on-tipin into my tune. What I did was purposely set things up so that LAMBSEs settled in down in the mid .90s while at idle. During cruise, the tune is setup to hit targets with LAMBSEs closer to 1.0 (preferably without KAMRFs). As a result, the LAMBSEs work their way down to the mid .9s while sitting still. And when I tip-into a load, even if there was a moment of leanout, the idle got the LAMBSEs proactively rich so no actual lean stumble is experienced. Even if the WB does flare a tad above 1.0, it's not so much that it causes any kind of problem. Once the load is stable, the LAMBSEs stabilize out. Although often my aggressive programming of MFA has me lean-cruising before KAMRFs can learn anything. I try to setup lean-cruise in the 1.03-1.10 range. If it gets much over about 1.15, I start to feel the loss of power and that counteracts the whole intent. Under heavier load, I pull out of MFA and run a rich-biased Closed Loop. And somewhere around 2.8v (above RATCH) on the TPS, Open Loop is forced. I have WOT-mode completely disabled so I can control true WOT conditions using both RPM and Load via FN1360.

The only noticeable unintended side-effect is that as I approach an idle-stop, LAMBSEs will be at or above 1.0. But at closed throttle, the engine is wanting them down in the .9s (as discussed above). The result is idle AFRs go very lean until LAMBSEs work their way down. Normally, this isn't a problem. However if I go to tip-in before LAMBSEs can get themselves down into the .9s, then I can find myself tipping into a lean condition. Or if I think traffic is about to move, I tip-in, then have to quickly return to idle. But then tip-in again as traffic actually does start to move. The 2nd tip-in might tip-lean enough for me to notice it's tipping lean and act noticeably more sluggish than the first. On occasion when I'm not paying attention, I'll feel what is headed toward a near-conk-out on that 2nd tip, so I tip-in harder with the throttle and while that does catch the engine from conking, it often causes an over-rev. For my normal commute, this is never a concern. However it's quite noticeable in really bad bumper-to-bumper traffic. It's during these times that I wish I could just re-invent the whole fueling strategy in the EEC and do things "my way" instead of relying so heavily upon a Closed Loop algorithm that want/expect all Closed Loop conditions to "want" 1.00 LAMBSE values.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, 1.6RRs, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, Slot Style MAF, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', 8.8" rear w/3.27s, Powertrax Locker, Innovate LC-1, GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA


Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests