More Tweecer (and ECC Analyzer) Help needed.

[Lance Cheney]

i got excited after reading lance's post so i ******** the cams 3 deg. Now the engine is so quiet all you hear is exhaust thru the rear. Back fireing through the intake made it louder?

Well the engine felt alot stronger from mid range it feels like its going to pull really hard but then it leans out. Before the change the AFR at high RPMs about 11.5ish to 12.5ish.

Im going to set them back at 0 deg and do the datalog.

Now that's odd... Mine didn't affect the A/F on the dyno at all. (you can't see that in that graph, but I have the dyno files and it clearly shows the A/F overlapping). I'm not sure why the engine would be quieter either. I can't tell any difference between the sound, even with the thing off by 6 degrees. I'm running stage II cams.

Now, looking at the CCF file I do see some interesting things.

(A) The spark curve is funky -- almost linear, which is odd.
14 @ 2500
19 @ 3300
21 @ 3650
24 @ 4500
29 @ 6000

My old motor (3.2L ATX pistons) was running:
15 @ 2200
24.25 @ 3300
28 @ 3650
30 @ 4800
34 @ 7600

On 91octane CA gas with no signs of detonation. You should be able to run a lot more spark then they're running if you have standard pistons.

Secondly, you will want to target the A/F to around 13:1 unless you do nitrous or F/I. From what I've seen the torque doesn't appear to really be impacted until you go over 14:1. Right now they still have it set in the 11.5-12.5:1 range.

Lastly (and most odd) is the injector sizing. I haven't ever seen anyone set them like this. 25lb high slope and 30lb low slope?

Now, the 73mm MAF you're running is supposed to be a drop-in replacement for the 55mm, right? They set the MAF a lot lower (eg. 4.3V on your computer is 585 kg/hr. Stock is 711 kg/hr). That seems like an odd thing to do too. The top end of the curve is really bizarre. Check out this file:

I think Josh has/is working on a tuning guide that will help you to correctly tune the MAF and injector sizes with wideband O2. This doesn't look right to me right now though.

-Lance

PS. your rev limiter is at 8500 RPM ... Is this what you intended (that's pretty high!).

 

[SHOWYA]

Now that's odd... Mine didn't affect the A/F on the dyno at all. (you can't see that in that graph, but I have the dyno files and it clearly shows the A/F overlapping). I'm not sure why the engine would be quieter either. I can't tell any difference between the sound, even with the thing off by 6 degrees. I'm running stage II cams.

Now, looking at the CCF file I do see some interesting things.

(A) The spark curve is funky -- almost linear, which is odd.
14 @ 2500
19 @ 3300
21 @ 3650
24 @ 4500
29 @ 6000

My old motor (3.2L ATX pistons) was running:
15 @ 2200
24.25 @ 3300
28 @ 3650
30 @ 4800
34 @ 7600

Maybe it leaned out because of the obvious timing difference? Therefore me retarding the cam by 3 deg has made it have more air coming in. Does this make scence?

Secondly, you will want to target the A/F to around 13:1 unless you do nitrous or F/I. From what I've seen the torque doesn't appear to really be impacted until you go over 14:1. Right now they still have it set in the 11.5-12.5:1 range.

I saw that table too. Im am a newbie to this... Should i just add a point evenly and make it 12.1 - 13.1?

Lastly (and most odd) is the injector sizing. I haven't ever seen anyone set them like this. 25lb high slope and 30lb low slope?

What do you have these values at and are they 24lbs-ers? I had set these values according to the "getting started" info from shonutperformance. They tunned according to those settings? Maybe thats why the MAF calibration had to be changed I know its 27 and 72 for stock.

Now, the 73mm MAF you're running is supposed to be a drop-in replacement for the 55mm, right? They set the MAF a lot lower (eg. 4.3V on your computer is 585 kg/hr. Stock is 711 kg/hr). That seems like an odd thing to do too. The top end of the curve is really bizarre.

Yes, it is a drop in replacement. I had called C&L and asked for a calibration sheet for the MAF. Thats what i had inputed on the MAF function. I guess he moded it to get it where he wanted to.

I think Josh has/is working on a tuning guide that will help you to correctly tune the MAF and injector sizes with wideband O2. This doesn't look right to me right now though.

Hmmm ... where do i get that guide from? I looked on the site and didnt see it.

[/QUOTE]
PS. your rev limiter is at 8500 RPM ... Is this what you intended (that's pretty high!).[/QUOTE]

Since i got the +40 Cams and bought the stiffer valve springs im asuming that it will not be a problem the rev it that high. I have not done so. Maybe i wont at all, but maybe untill the car is tunned where i get the max power out of it.

 

[shomesomesho]

Too rich and too ******** (timing-wise, I mean) might explain
why you're max torque is kinda low. Either they were really
trying to play it safe or they thought you had FI??

I am running AFR of 13.1 all across the RPM range (OL) and timing
advanced up to 37 deg. No pinging on 91 octane. 3.0L bolt-on
motor.

Let me dig up the file and post the numbers.

 

[SHOWYA]

Too rich and too ******** (timing-wise, I mean) might explain
why you're max torque is kinda low. Either they were really
trying to play it safe or they thought you had FI??

I am running AFR of 13.1 all across the RPM range (OL) and timing
advanced up to 37 deg. No pinging on 91 octane. 3.0L bolt-on
motor.

Let me dig up the file and post the numbers.

I think they were just playing safe since they dont get SHOs at all. Torque is low but it is not lower than a stock SHO. I think i can get above 200 torque with the ported heads and all the extra goodies on the car. I will need to upgrade the exhaust to get some extra ponies. But i been wainting on completing this ...

 

[Lance Cheney]

Maybe it leaned out because of the obvious timing difference? Therefore me retarding the cam by 3 deg has made it have more air coming in. Does this make scence?

I would *expect* -- that the MAF should accurately read the extra air and compensate. Since you're not changing the overlap of the cams it shouldn't have significantly different amounts of blow-through.

I saw that table too. Im am a newbie to this... Should i just add a point evenly and make it 12.1 - 13.1?


What do you have these values at and are they 24lbs-ers? I had set these values according to the "getting started" info from shonutperformance. They tunned according to those settings? Maybe thats why the MAF calibration had to be changed I know its 27 and 72 for stock.

Yeah, the factory one is a bit odd. I would probably have stuck with the 27 top-end and changed the low-end one to 40-50. Is the getting started guide you are talking about in the Tweecer software or somewhere else?

Hmmm ... where do i get that guide from? I looked on the site and didnt see it.

I don't think he's posted it. Just working on it ;-).

Honestly, now that your fueling issues are fixed, I would start with a base program, modify the MAF table to the stock Mustang 55mm table (it's the same MAF - the curve is slightly different because they used the wierd 27/72 injector settings), or if the 73mm C&L is the pretty much the same, you should be able to use their flowchart. Change the injector low slope to 40 or so, and then do some A/F logging to see how close that is coming in to the 'expected' A/F. If it's way off then something isn't working right - you'd expect some difference because of the cams but nothing severe.

How well does it run with the straight stock program? I can't do this comparison because I have 30lb injectors, but the WOT A/F should be pretty close to what the factory programmed. I guess you'll also need to reset the computer first before doing that (maybe after a datalog so Jason can see the KAM values ;-).

Since i got the +40 Cams and bought the stiffer valve springs im asuming that it will not be a problem the rev it that high. I have not done so. Maybe i wont at all, but maybe untill the car is tunned where i get the max power out of it.

Nope, don't see any problems there. Just wanted to check!

-Lance

 

[SHOWYA]

Ill try some settings and datalog over the weekend. Ill try to run the stock program and see what happens.

 

[yamahaSHO]

Since you're still NA, they could have added timing vs. taking away advanced timing. I'm still trying to find out what else the changed to make the fuel injector slopes so close. You're running a MTX computer, right? Do you have a screen shot of your dyno? The secondaries are being opened later than I open them on my blown car.

It appears the commanded AFR tables are about the same... If the car were in tune, you'd be hitting every number commmanded there with the given load and RPM.

I'll be waiting for the DL.



Actually, your torque number is lower than AutoSHO's stock number.

 

[shomesomesho]

I am running AFR of 13.1 all across the RPM range (OL) and timing advanced up to 37 deg. No pinging on 91 octane. 3.0L bolt-on motor.

Actually, 35 degrees all in by 4800 RPM:

Fuel:

 

[yamahaSHO]

You're timing curve leaves more to be desired. You should try smoothing it out.

 

[shomesomesho]

Yeah, but don't blame me . . . that is remnant from the stock timing curve. I only changed the points in the higher rpm range. I'd touch it up to make it look better, but it probably won't make any worthwhile difference . . .

BTW Jason, thanks for the PM. I tried to reply but your PM capability is turned off??

 

[SHOWYA]

Well ... I reloaded or copied the spark advance from the stock bin file. Loaded the MAF calibration for the 73mm given to me C&L. WOW!!!!! this thing pulls so hard its crazy! It needs some refinement.

I saw that for voltage between 1-2v for the MAF it was leaning out yet getting richer as it climbs in the RPMS. I richened that area by 6% it helped a bit but i think it would be wiser to mod the fuel table instead.

Idle is a little eratic. It leans out then it almost dies. some times i controls the idle good and AFR oscilated between 13-14.5

I took the car to chicago and let me tell you, it pulls so good! In second gear if i punch it before the runners open then when the runners do open you can literaly feel the pull ... its not smooth as it is in 3rd gear.

Yamaha Sho .. I will post dyno chart tomorrow. I had my laptop with me but battery ran out ... so no datalog yet.

 

[SHOWYA]

here is the calibration and the datalog i did coming to work.

http://www.geocities.com/[email protected]/050902065146.DB
http://www.geocities.com/[email protected]/AMSSHO-V282.CCF

Dynot chart

 

[SHOWYA]

I asked for the run with AFR.... I was surprised on how the A/R was tunned.

 

[shomesomesho]

voila . . .

 

[SHOWYA]

Nice! ECC analyzer does good work. Almost like having a dyno.

The initial settings were 24.5 30 for the injector slopes (NOT 40, I changed that, and changed the MAF calibration) thats how it was tunned.
I cant really grasp how to apply the numbers on the low slope. I know the high is 24.5 for the actual size of the injector so the computer can make whatever calculations based on the size of the injector.

So why not the same number on the low slope? Wouldnt the computer make correct calculations nowing exactly whats on the engine?

I know there is more to that ... can sombody explain?

 

[shomesomesho]

At the smallest pulsewidths the fuel injector is reaching its limit of resolution and loses accuracy. Think of it like premature ***********. There's less control.

Using a bigger slope is an attempt to improve resolution at these smaller pulsewidths. Telling the injector it has a bigger slope makes it ********* smaller more precise squirts instead of shooting a big, poorly quantified wad.

Fine resolution is less of an issue at larger pulsewidths (bigger wads), and so smaller slopes are used.

 

[SHOWYA]

shomesomsho ...

So trainslate whats on the graphs for me so i can understand whats happening and where i want to be at as far as the data.

 

[SHOWYA]

At the smallest pulsewidths the fuel injector is reaching its limit of resolution and loses accuracy. Think of it like premature ***********. There's less control.

Using a bigger slope is an attempt to improve resolution at these smaller pulsewidths. Telling the injector it has a bigger slope makes it ********* smaller more precise squirts instead of shooting a big, poorly quantified wad.

Fine resolution is less of an issue at larger pulsewidths (bigger wads), and so smaller slopes are used.

That makes more sense. So is 72 (stock) still a good "resolution" to work with. I know Yamahasho said go from 40 -50 to tune it.

 

[shomesomesho]

My low slope is 63 but this is with diddling the MAF and injector offset. Just keep experimenting with different slopes until you get the the kamrf's as close to 1.00 as you can.

 

[SHOWYA]

I tried upgrading to the new version of EEC Analyzer and its crashing at startup. ANyway. I came today from chicago and datalogged all the way home so it about an hour of datalogging. (Its a 17MB file zipped)

http://www.geocities.com/[email protected]/050905162759.zip
http://www.geocities.com/[email protected]/TUNETEST3.CCF

I loaded shomesomesho's timing and fuel tables. The car runs so much better and i been able to take the car to 8000 RPM without a problem.
I did noticed that the car runs extreemely rich almost al the time. Idle is good since i ran the proevious lod through the analyzer and exported the new "corrected" MAF.

If im cruising and have the peddal pressed only a tad bit just to keep it cruising, it will oscilate between 11 and 13 AFR. I guess this has to be done in the stabalized fuel table correct?