LMS 3 bar V11 93 bounces off rev limiter

[SaveMelMac]

Now I’m speaking for myself and maybe others as well ? To me this all sounds right it still boils down to a 50/50 shot whom ever u tune with u may have issues ? Then why do people say one tuner is better than the next tuner ? People who understand these comments please chime in and explain which makes more sense in having a tune on your car. Whichever claim has more people satisfied then we can all go from there. Idk

The deal breaker for me was that the LMS tuner can not datalog. If an issue arises they need the car in their shop. Just about every other tuner uses the sct device, which you can datalog and the tuner can remotely make tweaks to the tune. I’m switching to GH he seems to have good results and looks to be committed to the platform with the development of his intercooler.

 

[Livernois Motorsports]

The deal breaker for me was that the LMS tuner can not datalog. If an issue arises they need the car in their shop. Just about every other tuner uses the sct device, which you can datalog and the tuner can remotely make tweaks to the tune. I’m switching to GH he seems to have good results and looks to be committed to the platform with the development of his intercooler.

While our old tuner did not have this function our new touch screen tuner we released last year does have the data log as well as the ability to view live data through gauges!

 

[Livernois Motorsports]

 

[SaveMelMac]

While our old tuner did not have this function our new touch screen tuner we released last year does have the data log as well as the ability to view live data through gauges!

I asked you guys about a trade in program, said it wasn’t going to happen. So I’m not dropping another $600 to have that ability.

 

[Livernois Motorsports]

We did end up implementing a trade in program, but in all honesty there is no company out there that if they upgrade to a new model that offers a trade in program the reason being is that it devalues a product that a company such as us put a huge amount of hours into research, development and testing. But we did feel that something should be in place so we did start offering a $100 trade in credit on an old working tuner

 

[SaveMelMac]

We did end up implementing a trade in program, but in all honesty there is no company out there that if they upgrade to a new model that offers a trade in program the reason being is that it devalues a product that a company such as us put a huge amount of hours into research, development and testing. But we did feel that something should be in place so we did start offering a $100 trade in credit on an old working tuner

Cobb tuning offered a trade in program for years on their accessport. I believe they just stopped not that long ago. I asked about a trade in program a few months ago and was told not going to happen. They did not even mention that a program existed at 1 time.

 

[rubydist]

...

There are only 2 situations where EGT would increase with a richer mixture, and neither are apples to apples.

1: lower spark do the combustion process is happening later, so more heat is being lost through the exhaust rather than being disappated into the cylinder head/block/piston compared to a leaner mixture with more timing (there is an area of overlap, but it's small)

2: you're so rich it's misfiring and actually combusting within the exhaust...

I disagree with this statement. Any time you are running rich, there is unburned fuel in the exhaust. The catalyst has the job of burning (oxidizing) that excess fuel (to pass emissions). That means that if the a/f goes from 12:1 to 11.5:1, the cat has to burn more excess fuel, which raises the cat temperature. It does not require misfire or inadequate spark to cause this, it just happens.

The implication of your earlier statement was that there were more particulates at 12:1 than at 11.5:1. Your statement about manufacturers putting particulate filters on to deal with particulates at cruising (closed loop stoich) situations does not have anything to do with the rich WOT situation, nor does it begin to explain why you believe that there are less particulates as the mixture gets more rich. I would still like an answer to that question.

 

[SM105K]

I disagree with this statement. Any time you are running rich, there is unburned fuel in the exhaust. The catalyst has the job of burning (oxidizing) that excess fuel (to pass emissions). That means that if the a/f goes from 12:1 to 11.5:1, the cat has to burn more excess fuel, which raises the cat temperature. It does not require misfire or inadequate spark to cause this, it just happens.

The implication of your earlier statement was that there were more particulates at 12:1 than at 11.5:1. Your statement about manufacturers putting particulate filters on to deal with particulates at cruising (closed loop stoich) situations does not have anything to do with the rich WOT situation, nor does it begin to explain why you believe that there are less particulates as the mixture gets more rich. I would still like an answer to that question.

I didn't want to keep stirring the ***...

 

[Livernois Motorsports]

I disagree with this statement. Any time you are running rich, there is unburned fuel in the exhaust. The catalyst has the job of burning (oxidizing) that excess fuel (to pass emissions). That means that if the a/f goes from 12:1 to 11.5:1, the cat has to burn more excess fuel, which raises the cat temperature. It does not require misfire or inadequate spark to cause this, it just happens.

The implication of your earlier statement was that there were more particulates at 12:1 than at 11.5:1. Your statement about manufacturers putting particulate filters on to deal with particulates at cruising (closed loop stoich) situations does not have anything to do with the rich WOT situation, nor does it begin to explain why you believe that there are less particulates as the mixture gets more rich. I would still like an answer to that question.

You're talking about a complete over rich issue. Factory COT goes to .7 Lambda, we aren't even going that rich. You'd have to go richer than .7, which really does misfire at that point. But that is way richer than the range we are debating. But again, this is predicated off of an incomplete combustion process which will result in a misfire.

There are many areas that PM changes based on a direct connection with Lambda, but it's not a linear change. There are areas where leaner creates more than richer, and richer creates more than leaner, but these are outside of the bounds being discussed. Ultimately we're talking about buildup on the intake valves. This can only happen at low air speed where there is more reversion, which will be low load situations. You wouldn't be in enrichment at this point anyways, so it's not something that is tied to the target lambda. And if it was you'd still be talking about a scenario prior to the combustion process, which would be liquid gasoline. So wetting the back side of the intake valve wouldn't create an issue since PFI does this anyways.

 

[StealBlueSho]

Just curious here... in order for the PCM to accurately fuel the system, wouldn't there need to be a base stoich it works off of? I know LMS stated that the factory preset is for E10 fuel as that is now standard. I am not a tuner, but I know that with my LMS tune, the fuel trims are +-6% where as with my other E30 tunes are +15%ish, not sure if it that is based on adjusting the base stoich parameter? If so, then it would appear the approach for tuning the fueling is very different between tuners. If not, then perhaps I am way off here...

If you are targeting .82 lambda and you have a default stoich of 14.10 which is E10 but you are running E30, then you are running much leaner than you would be thinking VS if the base stoich parameter is 13.0 which is E30, then your targeting correctly based on lambda. I could be way off.. but perhaps thats where the miscommunication is on running lean or not.

 

[Livernois Motorsports]

Just curious here... in order for the PCM to accurately fuel the system, wouldn't there need to be a base stoich it works off of? I know LMS stated that the factory preset is for E10 fuel as that is now standard. I am not a tuner, but I know that with my LMS tune, the fuel trims are +-6% where as with my other E30 tunes are +15%ish, not sure if it that is based on adjusting the base stoich parameter? If so, then it would appear the approach for tuning the fueling is very different between tuners. If not, then perhaps I am way off here...

If you are targeting .82 lambda and you have a default stoich of 14.10 which is E10 but you are running E30, then you are running much leaner than you would be thinking VS if the base stoich parameter is 13.0 which is E30, then your targeting correctly based on lambda. I could be way off.. but perhaps thats where the miscommunication is on running lean or not.

You're correct, an E0, E10, E15, E30, E44, E85 etc tune will have things like stoich fuel values change to accommodate the change in actual stoich. This is a base lookup for many items like cranking fuel quantity, transient fuel, cold start enrichment, and dozens of other fueling tables. So this is like the first thing ever that should be changed. We have seen people simply turn off the error reporting for fuel trims, which is also weird because that takes fare more work than doing it the right way. Now the real scary thing is by not making proper adjustments for ethanol content you're making the o2 sensors do all of the correction, but this means the engine has to be lean first, and then the o2's correct to bring it back to commanded lambda.

 

[StealBlueSho]

You're correct, an E0, E10, E15, E30, E44, E85 etc tune will have things like stoich fuel values change to accommodate the change in actual stoich. This is a base lookup for many items like cranking fuel quantity, transient fuel, cold start enrichment, and dozens of other fueling tables. So this is like the first thing ever that should be changed. We have seen people simply turn off the error reporting for fuel trims, which is also weird because that takes fare more work than doing it the right way. Now the real scary thing is by not making proper adjustments for ethanol content you're making the o2 sensors do all of the correction, but this means the engine has to be lean first, and then the o2's correct to bring it back to commanded lambda.

Thanks for the confirmation. So would it be accurate to say, even after the long term fuel trims are established, if you don't change the base stoich parameter for higher E content, you are still running lean? Example being that .74 lambda with a stoich value of 14.1 is going to be vastly different than a .74 lambda with a stoich value of 13.0.

 

[Livernois Motorsports]

Thanks for the confirmation. So would it be accurate to say, even after the long term fuel trims are established, if you don't change the base stoich parameter for higher E content, you are still running lean? Example being that .74 lambda with a stoich value of 14.1 is going to be vastly different than a .74 lambda with a stoich value of 13.0.

well, lambda is always lambda. it used because it's consistant no matter the fuel type used. Now, stoich matters because it's the look up reference for the base quantity. As for LTFT, it will learn eventually, but not everywhere. there are a good number of zones that it will learn, and takes a good amount of time. The problem is you're going to be lean and correcting for that good amount of time.

 

[rubydist]

You're talking about a complete over rich issue. Factory COT goes to .7 Lambda, we aren't even going that rich. You'd have to go richer than .7, which really does misfire at that point. But that is way richer than the range we are debating. But again, this is predicated off of an incomplete combustion process which will result in a misfire. ...

^^ No, this is also not correct. By definition, anything more rich than stoich will have unburned fuel in the exhaust. That is quite literally the definition of stoichiometric ratio:

"Stoichiometric ratio. Stoichiometry is also used to find the right amount of one reactant to "completely" react with the other reactant in a chemical reaction – that is, the stoichiometric amounts that would result in no leftover reactants when the reaction takes place."

So any time the mix is more rich than stoich, there is unburned fuel. Unburned fuel is particulate matter. There is not a need to be to the point of misfire to have unburned fuel in the exhaust. A simple 2 minute search on the internet will find you all kinds of scientific organizations stating that particulate matter in exhaust is mostly unburned fuel.

If you cannot even explain this basic chemistry correctly, that does not provide much confidence that you are doing all the difficult stuff correctly. I guess I will stop asking the question, since I am not getting a scientifically valid answer.

 

[Livernois Motorsports]

^^ No, this is also not correct. By definition, anything more rich than stoich will have unburned fuel in the exhaust. That is quite literally the definition of stoichiometric ratio:

"Stoichiometric ratio. Stoichiometry is also used to find the right amount of one reactant to "completely" react with the other reactant in a chemical reaction – that is, the stoichiometric amounts that would result in no leftover reactants when the reaction takes place."

So any time the mix is more rich than stoich, there is unburned fuel. Unburned fuel is particulate matter. There is not a need to be to the point of misfire to have unburned fuel in the exhaust. A simple 2 minute search on the internet will find you all kinds of scientific organizations stating that particulate matter in exhaust is mostly unburned fuel.

If you cannot even explain this basic chemistry correctly, that does not provide much confidence that you are doing all the difficult stuff correctly. I guess I will stop asking the question, since I am not getting a scientifically valid answer.

you're assuming all matter that is not converted via the combustion process is still combustible. these are 2 different things. The reaction within the catalyst is to make a reduction in emissions. This is why closed loop fueling oscillates between rich and lean so the cat can build a reserve of oxygen and hydrocarbons so that when there is a situation that needs to have the cat react it has the building blocks necessary to reduce emissions. the catalyst is NOT igniting fuel to do so. What you are suggesting with your comment would imply that anything richer than stoich will ignite in the catalyst and increase temp because of this. That's not how it works. Again, if it where the factory logic would NOT command .70 Lambda during the various exhaust overtemp situations as it would increase the temp rather than decrease.

stoich has the highest heat generation of any fuel mixture when all other things are equal. leaner and richer both decrease EGT. Again the ONLY time a a rich mixture can create a higher temp is from a rich misfire where fuel is igniting in the cat. Both of these are irrefutable facts that are in hundreds if not thousands of SAE papers. Propane, Diesel, Gasoline, Ethanol, Methanol, CNG, all of these and more fuels all react this way. The only thing that changes is the lambda at which this happens. CNG can happen around .9 Lambda, others richer, but they all play by the same rules. richer than lambda reduces temps until a rich misfire occurs.

Please bear in mind we are actively working on catalyst analysis and thermal models right this minute, so you're talking about something we are definitely versed in. Making it seem like we are wrong about something that is well established facts just makes us scratch our heads. We've been doing OEM testing and development long enough to know who something works and why there is a base design approach on items like these.

Also, referencing anything form the internet with just 2 minutes of research does not an expert make. It typically shows that you've found something to give your argument some type of validity, and not anything close to the full picture.

 

[yaycandy]

So when we use other tuners and the car shifts and runs perfectly at high rpm, its because those tuners are working around issue and not solving it?

I run open catless downpipes. Stock fuel system and the only time i see it happening now with my new engine is with traction control off and pushing the car really hard. Seems to me like the shift point and the rev limiter are really close to each other from my normal consumer point of view
Maybe its from slip in my ptu, i do need a fluid change sense my shop didnt have the time to do it and 72k on the ptu. Ill change it out and see if it will help. I didnt notice the rev limiter issue till a few months after. And ive pushed the car very hard many times and most of the time never had an issue until recently

 

[Johnbigdog]

So when we use other tuners and the car shifts and runs perfectly at high rpm, its because those tuners are working around issue and not solving it?

I run open catless downpipes. Stock fuel system and the only time i see it happening now with my new engine is with traction control off and pushing the car really hard. Seems to me like the shift point and the rev limiter are really close to each other from my normal consumer point of view
Maybe its from slip in my ptu, i do need a fluid change sense my shop didnt have the time to do it and 72k on the ptu. Ill change it out and see if it will help. I didnt notice the rev limiter issue till a few months after. And ive pushed the car very hard many times and most of the time never had an issue until recently

You have bigger problems if your P.T.U. is slipping.

 

[yaycandy]

You have bigger problems if your P.T.U. is slipping.

I dont think it is. Just an idea because im weery about the miles on the fluid. Just a maybe. Anything is possible. I just never noticed the rev limiter issue until the past recent months. I figured it was from something wearing out. Maybe its the winter blend gas.

 

[rubydist]

you're assuming all matter that is not converted via the combustion process is still combustible. these are 2 different things. The reaction within the catalyst is to make a reduction in emissions. This is why closed loop fueling oscillates between rich and lean so the cat can build a reserve of oxygen and hydrocarbons so that when there is a situation that needs to have the cat react it has the building blocks necessary to reduce emissions. the catalyst is NOT igniting fuel to do so. What you are suggesting with your comment would imply that anything richer than stoich will ignite in the catalyst and increase temp because of this. That's not how it works. Again, if it where the factory logic would NOT command .70 Lambda during the various exhaust overtemp situations as it would increase the temp rather than decrease. ...

Also, referencing anything form the internet with just 2 minutes of research does not an expert make. It typically shows that you've found something to give your argument some type of validity, and not anything close to the full picture.

Yes, all the hydrocarbons that are not reduced during the combustion process are still combustible. That is certainly fact.

I have been asking about why you claim that the particulate matter is reduced by going from ~12:1 to ~11.5:1 and you are responding with all kinds of stuff that does not relate to the question. No one in this thread claimed that a richer mixture increased egt, but at some point a richer mixture does increase the cat temperature. What happens at stoich closed loop cruising does not relate to the question. My wife calls this type of response "a diversion" because it either attempts to change the subject or to confuse the matter with other not relevant information.

I didn't claim to become an expert from 2 minutes of internet research. I am, however, a scientist by training so I have some knowledge of the matter at hand. I simply pointed out that it doesn't take much research to confirm the point I am making, that most of the particulate matter in the exhaust stream is unburned fuel. If you prefer, I can dig out some chemistry books and reference pages in them for you.

As I said in my last post, I am not getting scientifically valid responses, so I am just going to give up and go on with life.

 

[StealBlueSho]

Since we are talking lean vs rich... etc etc...

LMS does lean out the AFRs compared to stock settings...

WOT I target .68 lambda on the stock tune vs LMS I target .74 lambda...

Interesting to me given all this conversation of carbon build up, PM, and EGTs that ford would run that rich....