Safe lean cruise.

[lateshow]

Im just explaining what happens if you rescale the injectors so that you get a moving Low fuel trim ( as stock it sits tightly at 4.68 and all around you get leaner mixture than in the AFR maps) By rescaling I mean making the scaling value smaller so that engine gets more fuel and LTFT doesnt have to be maxxed out.

[fassi1]

Im just explaining what happens if you rescale the injectors so that you get a moving Low fuel trim ( as stock it sits tightly at 4.68 and all around you get leaner mixture than in the AFR maps) By rescaling I mean making the scaling value smaller so that engine gets more fuel and LTFT doesnt have to be maxxed out.

That's very truth.
The hotter it gets the higher the STFT so more likely to suffer from lean idle AFR > 14.7
Moving LTFT closer to 0% gives AFR in closed loop closer to stock maps.

[lateshow]

That's very truth.
The hotter it gets the higher the STFT so more likely to suffer from lean idle AFR > 14.7
Moving LTFT closer to 0% gives AFR in closed loop closer to stock maps.

Yes this is true, but when you rescale the injectors the area where the boost builds up doesnt seem as good as it is with standard scaling. Car feels much lazier and doesn't respond. I am using approximetely 88% of the original scaling value and i'm gettin about 1-2 % STFT for gasoline, I have also retuned the AFR map for gasoline so that it has much leaner values in the low rpm at big loads so it doesn't go right ahead to 11.5 AFR. Acceleration enrichment has an effect too here. This means that the AFR's dip easily to rich area.

[fassi1]

That's right, I've noticed the same situation.
Tested few different values for injector scaling and looks like 351 is the best one, keeps LTFT close to 0%
The thing is that after rescaling injectors open loop area has been offseted by the difference between LTFT before rescaling and LTFT after rescaling,
when closed loop remains unchanged with target 14.7, that's why as soon as ECU switches from closed loop to open loop (boost buildup) there is sudden dip in to AFR 12-11.
I reckon, after rescaling injectors, whole open loop area needs to be adjusted to bring AFR down to max performance values so logging data would be required.

[lateshow]

That's right, I've noticed the same situation.
Tested few different values for injector scaling and looks like 351 is the best one, keeps LTFT close to 0%
The thing is that after rescaling injectors open loop area has been offseted by the difference between LTFT before rescaling and LTFT after rescaling,
when closed loop remains unchanged with target 14.7, that's why as soon as ECU switches from closed loop to open loop (boost buildup) there is sudden dip in to AFR 12-11.
I reckon, after rescaling injectors, whole open loop area needs to be adjusted to bring AFR down to max performance values so logging data would be required.

Yes, this means that you have to much bigger AFR values the places i suggested. But it seems still that it is eager to make a dip and that is because of the acceleration enrichment.

[fassi1]

Yes, this means that you have to much bigger AFR values the places i suggested. But it seems still that it is eager to make a dip and that is because of the acceleration enrichment.

Do you mean table Accel Enrichment TPS Delta Multiplier.

Done few runs on shell V-power with modified high octane AFR map and injector scaling DSM 351 and results were very close to the target with very rare knocking < 3
Pic 1 is target, 2 and 3 logged data

[lateshow]

Good one fassi1!

I think you could still run a bir leaner @ load 100 ( I think one could still run close to 14.7. But if your arse tells you that car feels good then ok! I can't log anymore those afrs cause i have the ethanol sensor on 75.

[fassi1]

I've done some adjustments after doing this test but due to rather slippery and snowy roads. they haven't been tested yet.
The other thing is, that some of these logged values include some stupid numbers like 0, 20, 25, 69, so for that reason average value displayed in 3D map is far from truth values.
This sort of result will definitely give better economy than stock map with 10s and 9s.
Still more testing to come.

[lateshow]

Yes, however when thinking about economy, @ that boost level you're still burning a lot of fuel and there's nothing you can do about it. So the actual economy areas are at loads 0-100. Now that you have a perfect scaling, try putting her on open loop. If you have standard airbox you will get within +-0.1 AFR all the time ( i suggest the following: try to reach 15.2 generally and 14.7 when load is 70 -100.)

I've seen one vr4 in Finland that has a living LTFT with standard scaling, others have been 4,68. Im using 354 as a base value for 0% ethanol content.

And yes i meant Accel Enrichment TPS Delta Multiplier.

[fassi1]

open loop load vs rpm.jpgYeah like you said the area above the line to around end of the vacuum can be adjusted to around 14.7 to give better economy,
but below the line, which is closed loop, without cheating ECU playing with narrowband signal, not much can be achieved, cause ECU will do its best
using fuel trims to hit 14.7.
I agree, talking about economy in boost areas sounds a little bit confusing

[disco-ian]

Lambda different than 1 may cause MOT emission test failure.
There is other load areas where economy can be improved where VR4 is overfuelled.

Not with LPG :-) Emissions tests go back to pre CAT test. lol