TDStuart Tuning Adventure

[engineermike]

Stop logging EQ ratio commanded and start logging WB eq ratio. The commanded numbers confuse people. The WB eq ratio are the actual lambda reported by the factory widebands.

Stop logging calculated engine load since you are already logging air load. You can also stop logging desired load unless there's a specific issue you're trying to diagnose related to it, typically like unwanted throttle closure. You airload is logging pretty low, but again that's most likely partly due to the fuel trims being high and partly due to high ambient temp.

Other than that, the borderline is still too low, causing a long delay before you get all the timing. Exhaust temp control isn't kicking in, so that's good.

Sponsored

 

[engineermike]

Just an FYI, the L&M cam timing recommendation is:

Obviously, it's different cam specs but they're pretty close to what Lund was running. Might be worthwhile to experiment with this some.

 

[tdstuart]

Stop logging EQ ratio commanded and start logging WB eq ratio. The commanded numbers confuse people. The WB eq ratio are the actual lambda reported by the factory widebands.

Stop logging calculated engine load since you are already logging air load. You can also stop logging desired load unless there's a specific issue you're trying to diagnose related to it, typically like unwanted throttle closure. You airload is logging pretty low, but again that's most likely partly due to the fuel trims being high and partly due to high ambient temp.

Other than that, the borderline is still too low, causing a long delay before you get all the timing. Exhaust temp control isn't kicking in, so that's good.

Thanks for the info, I’ll adjust the logging.

I haven’t changed borderline or lambda yet. Just wanted to get a baseline of how off or close the car is.

I disabled all the cat and exhaust protections I think.

Now that we know nothing super weird is going on should I try adjusting the maf to get fuel trims closer? They look pretty good for the most part.

 

[K4fxd]

Now that we know nothing super weird is going on should I try adjusting the maf to get fuel trims closer? They look pretty good for the most part.

I still think PMAS's maf settings are correct and I would suspect the injector data. You could multiply the maf settings by 1/2 % and see what happens.

Maybe Mark or Mike has some better advise?

It is strange that your IAT's are climbing under acceleration....

I looked through all my computers and I cannot find the comp cams recommended WOT settings. Search bracketing cams and use the draggy.

 

[Midwestracer]

Just wanna give a shoutout! to @markmurfie @engineermike @K4fxd and of course OP @tdstuart for diving in head first. and I'm sure their are many more but you guys make forums great.

 

[markmurfie]

High injector slope, lower it, this will add fuel as the injector will be opened longer to meet demand.

 

[engineermike]

I still think PMAS's maf settings are correct and I would suspect the injector data. You could multiply the maf settings by 1/2 % and see what happens.

Maybe Mark or Mike has some better advise?

usually I just say, “calibrate the maf if you know your injector data is right. But I’m far from convinced his Injector data is right. Not only are there several sets to choose from for those, but you also have to understand how it works to confirm you did it right. I’ve seen several people make mistakes when entering injector data. Also, is the fuel pressure what ford thinks it is?

 

[tdstuart]

usually I just say, “calibrate the maf if you know your injector data is right. But I’m far from convinced his Injector data is right. Not only are there several sets to choose from for those, but you also have to understand how it works to confirm you did it right. I’ve seen several people make mistakes when entering injector data. Also, is the fuel pressure what ford thinks it is?

I’m not convinced my injector data is right either haha.

Is there a way now that I can log so much more of the Lund tune that I could figure out what injector data is in their tune? Keep in mind their tune is using different maf data as it was for a JLT

 

[K4fxd]

I would do like Mark said and lower the high injector slope. Try 1 % or .5 % at a time.

 

[tdstuart]

I think I’ll also try converting the ford data to the right pressure. It looks pretty simple but don’t quote me on that

 

[Mike Pfeifer]

Just wanna give a shoutout! to @markmurfie @engineermike @K4fxd and of course OP @tdstuart for diving in head first. and I'm sure their are many more but you guys make forums great.

It has been enlightening!

 

[engineermike]

There is no need to “convert” injector data if it’s entered correctly.

 

[tdstuart]

There is no need to “convert” injector data if it’s entered correctly.

The ford performance data is for 39.15 psi.

So using the tables they give me I need to convert ALOSL, AHISL, FUEL_BKPT, FNPW_OFFSET to 55 psi

 

[markmurfie]

The ford performance data is for 39.15 psi.

So using the tables they give me I need to convert ALOSL, AHISL, FUEL_BKPT, FNPW_OFFSET to 55 psi

I believe they all have pressure multipliers, and if your inferred pressure comes out to 55, it will just multiply the value for 39 appropriately to correct them.

If you want to correct it so that multiplier 1 is for 55, that's fine, but what you really want is to cover up to pressure delta near 70psi.

I'd you do adjust the high slope, just be aware or will effect the entire MAF. You should see what I describe as a pivot in the trims as fuel demands go up. Your goal would to be a consistent off set like -5% across the transfer. Not +10 in the high fuel demands areas, and +2 in the low demand areas.
If that makes sense.

 

[engineermike]

I also do think the maf cal needs work because an air load of .76 at wot is very level even considering the high ambient.

Sponsored