I you knew how much air (in weight) went through the AFM at what voltage you could better estimate injection times/AFR.
But I guess that data is not available...
Search found 639 matches
- Sat Sep 16, 2017 3:17 am
- Forum: Type 2
- Topic: Changing K vs injection pulsewidth
- Replies: 6
- Views: 2206
- Sat Sep 16, 2017 3:05 am
- Forum: Type 2
- Topic: Reducing K while idle, no effect?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 5308
Re: Reducing K while idle, no effect?
Flex fuel would be interesting, but I've never seen any gas station providing it .. otherwise I'd be more tempted.
My mate just blew his engine with launch control on a LinkG4 ECU.
The oil pump didn't like the stop and go @ higher rpm and broke, the whole engine went kaput.
My mate just blew his engine with launch control on a LinkG4 ECU.
The oil pump didn't like the stop and go @ higher rpm and broke, the whole engine went kaput.
- Thu Sep 14, 2017 1:08 am
- Forum: Type 2
- Topic: Reducing K while idle, no effect?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 5308
Re: Reducing K while idle, no effect?
OK, thanks ... interesting. Well my MAF (Q45) goes up to 4.99V in the logs at full boost that is, so I do use the full scale. I'm not sure that the feature pack would be right for me, I'm not interested in launch control and flex fuel would be nice but here in the UK E85 is rare. I've been honing my...
- Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:59 am
- Forum: Type 2
- Topic: Changing K vs injection pulsewidth
- Replies: 6
- Views: 2206
Re: Changing K vs injection pulsewidth
Hmmm ..
I don't have TIM, so as far as I remember the procedure was to adjust K till A/F ratios are in line with what the wideband shows?
I don't have TIM, so as far as I remember the procedure was to adjust K till A/F ratios are in line with what the wideband shows?
- Mon Sep 11, 2017 10:28 pm
- Forum: Type 2
- Topic: Reducing K while idle, no effect?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 5308
Re: Reducing K while idle, no effect?
I reduced TPmin by 1 (from 8 to 7) allowing me to reduce K. Consequently I could lean out idle mixture by reducing K (I was idling at 11.9ish) but for some reason the car didn't like the leaner mixture and started to miss beats as soon as I moved leaner than 12.2. I don't know why that is, my inject...
- Mon Sep 11, 2017 10:05 pm
- Forum: Type 2
- Topic: Changing K vs injection pulsewidth
- Replies: 6
- Views: 2206
Re: Changing K vs injection pulsewidth
Thanks for the explanation,
Interestingly the values in the pulsewidth table are very close to actual values I get from the logs.
How would one have to tune without an AFR table?
Interestingly the values in the pulsewidth table are very close to actual values I get from the logs.
How would one have to tune without an AFR table?
- Mon Sep 11, 2017 4:20 am
- Forum: Type 2
- Topic: very lean AFR @ +/-3000-3500 rpm [SOLVED]
- Replies: 40
- Views: 13451
Re: very lean AFR @ +/-3000-3500 rpm
Sorry to hear that ....
- Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:58 pm
- Forum: Type 2
- Topic: very lean AFR @ +/-3000-3500 rpm [SOLVED]
- Replies: 40
- Views: 13451
Re: very lean AFR @ +/-3000-3500 rpm
????
Can we have some more detail please?
Can we have some more detail please?
- Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:56 pm
- Forum: Type 2
- Topic: Changing K vs injection pulsewidth
- Replies: 6
- Views: 2206
Changing K vs injection pulsewidth
Out of interest:
When I change K which represents the injector size, why doesn't the Estimated Pulsewidth in NT change?
When I change K which represents the injector size, why doesn't the Estimated Pulsewidth in NT change?
- Tue Sep 05, 2017 9:17 pm
- Forum: Type 2
- Topic: Reducing K while idle, no effect?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 5308
Re: Reducing K while idle, no effect?
That's what I meant :) On that note it might be worthwhile to put this into the notes pertaining to the injector resizing or MAF change procedures. When you install bigger injectors (resulting in lower K) you might get a richer idle due to TPMin. I will report back if it worked out for me, 11.9 is n...
- Mon Sep 04, 2017 9:10 pm
- Forum: Type 2
- Topic: Reducing K while idle, no effect?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 5308
Re: Reducing K while idle, no effect?
Hi Matt,
Thanks for that.
I basically wanted to calculate what my TP would be with K lowered from (currently) 190 to 170 (the result is 7.9 down from 8.8 )
So TPMin does lock in the K and MAF values then?
Thanks for that.
I basically wanted to calculate what my TP would be with K lowered from (currently) 190 to 170 (the result is 7.9 down from 8.8 )
So TPMin does lock in the K and MAF values then?
- Sat Sep 02, 2017 7:53 pm
- Forum: Software Bugs
- Topic: NT 1.2.76 MAF % table values displayed incorrectly
- Replies: 2
- Views: 3024
Re: NT 1.2.76 MAF % table values displayed incorrectly
The 'bug' is now gone .. I deleted my old ROM_PACK folder and reinstalled it
I also had two files in there version.txt fp_version.txt
I also had two files in there version.txt fp_version.txt
- Sat Sep 02, 2017 7:01 am
- Forum: Software Bugs
- Topic: NT 1.2.76 MAF % table values displayed incorrectly
- Replies: 2
- Views: 3024
NT 1.2.76 MAF % table values displayed incorrectly
The MAF Table % values seems to be displayed wrong.
Q45 Z32
Q45 Z32
- Sat Sep 02, 2017 1:30 am
- Forum: Type 2
- Topic: Reducing K while idle, no effect?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 5308
Re: Reducing K while idle, no effect?
I'm running AFR 11.9, I sit a lot in traffic and would like to run somewhat leaner So let's do the calculation ..at idle: 1 Volt MAF (raw lookup 715) 750 RPM K=190 How is that calculated please? I get 181.13dec That's an 8 bit number ... so I guess I did something wrong? My TP Min is set to 8, here'...
- Thu Aug 31, 2017 8:15 pm
- Forum: Software Bugs
- Topic: NT shows feature pack gauges on non fp board
- Replies: 7
- Views: 4290
Re: NT shows feature pack gauges on non fp board
I thought there haven been issues with the Z32 ECU and the FP, at least last time I checked.
Has this been resolved?
But back to the issue .. it's a bug then?
Have you seen my other post ...?
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3514
Has this been resolved?
But back to the issue .. it's a bug then?
Have you seen my other post ...?
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3514