ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

At least you and frcefed agree on something!!!

kingtal0n

iTrader: (1)

You just run 1 wideband like everybody else with this combination successfully does. If 1 cylinder is screwed up on an $500 longblock you want to spend $5000 in equipment to monitor that?

Likewise if I have a $5000 engine built I expect the head/valvetrain/piston/ring to be in good shape from day 1, its up to the tuner (Hello) to make sure it stays that. It isn't going to downgrade 1 cylinder for no reason. I've never heard of a single injector leaning out exactly 10-15% suddenly for no reason, and if it did you would notice because it should cause a misfire or subtle change to the engine, and the plug will change color also. But if that happens, it just means your injector choice sucks, and a wideband on every single cylinder isn't going to save you anyways (unless you have them ALL plugged into a computer which is monitoring 24/7 and also has an alarm/warning to alert the driver that one single cylinder is screwed up, which if you cant tell is absolutely ridiculous and silly, pointless gadgetry). The whole thing is nonsense. You arn't going to watch 8 wideband gauges simultaneously while driving the car around.

That(1 wideband per cylinder) is not a solution. It is not cost effective, it is not pretty, it does not help anything. Useless bullshit. Engines which need individual cylinder monitoring depend on EGT sensors, not widebands. %(*@# widebands.

kingtal0n

iTrader: (1)

each cylinder always runs slightly different. no 2 cylinders will ever compress, burn, extract power the same way. No matter what. DOesnt matter if you had 1 wideband, or 10 widebands, or a combination of them, because variances occur in each sensor, AND each cylinder, not to mention the nature of a running engine dynamically changes pressures between each cylinder due to the firing order (some valve events impact some cylinders more than others).

The KEY is that they are all preparred identically, use the same hone, same ring, same piston, same parts. That gets everything pretty close. And then, I agree that, "you will never be able to keep an eye on it (your words)" that is pretty much the highlight of the entire post, that even if you did have so much monitoring tools, you couldn't possibly watch them all anyways. Pointless.

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

Go ahead an do the average of all 8 cylinders when 7 of them run 11.5 AFR and the 8th runs 12.5 and tell me what the wideband will say. The point of discussion was at least having bank to bank granularity and how pre vs post turbo affect the reading.

kingtal0n

iTrader: (1)

Even if you have a pre-turbo wideband on each side (2 of them total) you are not going to see that one cylinder running 12.5:1. It will still average off the other 3 cylinders on that side, whether its PRE or POST turbo. So thats not going to work.

And we already discussed why 8 separate wideband sensors is not going to work.

So, a wideband is not the sensor for the job. The proper sensor category for this individual cylinder tuning issue is: EGT. The EGT sensor on that 12.5:1 cylinder will show up as hotter than the rest. This is typically done (routine) on an engine dyno, where they will notice right away because the computer will point it out: and then they will fix the issue, either by bumping fuel, try another injector, find the problem, and THEN the engine goes to it's new owner without the individual cylinder monitoring (because it has already been done). Let that sink in for a minute. This is not the sort of apparatus you drive around with for 200k. You use it ONE TIME to set the fuel of the engine ON AN ENGINE DYNO and that is the last time the motor will see individual cylinder reports. I could see maybe Racing/competition teams that have sponsor $$ to protect their race-engine on a race-track (to hopefully WIN and make MONEY) use/need this sort of apparatus "all the time" but it is not within the scope of a daily driver application, unless power/$ were out of sight ($50,000 in the engine for example).

FWIW wideband sensors are not reliable enough to EVER be trusted 100%. When I do my final high-boost tune its on a dyno with a known good sensor to back up the reading from the one in the car, and STILL I am very cautious because I have seen many mistakes over the 15 years of tuning experience I have. They are just supplementary tools for us to double-verify. Your primary tools are: math and common sense. The math of the injector calculation (I Know how much duty cycle I need at 500rwhp with XXlb/hour injector, and I look for those numbers to show up) and common sense (hearing/smell/touch/taste/eyes, we should know how the engine and it's oils/parts should sound, taste, feel, should run, plug condition is a valid way of verifying nothing is melting, proper rich condition exists etc...)

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

I already brought up EGT probes in my initial post, so most of what you posted is pretty much useless...oh and your math and injector calculations doesn't help you when you have bank to bank injector pulse width on a stock ECU and not individual cylinder control

stevieturbo

Can we lock this thread with a footnote for future readers.

king is full of ****, so dont read too much into his posts.

ddnspider

iTrader: (26)

roastin240

iTrader: (13)

Well for me, this is how I am breaking it down:

1. I am not integrating a pressure transducer to scale the lambda sensors (right now).
2. I am not plumbing up the system that Stevieturbo presented to compensate for pressure using a low flow pressure drop chamber.
3. I am not running lambda per cylinder for many reasons discussed here, not to mention they still need to have point #1 or point #2 above taken into acount.
4. I would like to monitor individual cylinders somehow within reason.

My decision....an EGT off each bank in the manifolds and a single wideband in the downpipe. If I feel the need to make individual cylinder trims with respect to fuel, I will base that off of EGT. My global AFR control will be based off of lambda in the downpipe. I also would like to have my injectors flow tested, that way if one cylinder "appears" to be more lean than another (basing this off of EGT alone), I can rotate injectors around and try to place them accordingly to reduce the individual cylinder fuel trims. Maybe 1 wants more fuel than the other, so I put the higher flowing injector in that port, etc etc

stevieturbo

Presumably as you asked the question at first...you are using an aftermarket ecu. So surely this will allow you to trim fuel/timing on each cylinder if you want to try and alter EGT's rather than the crude and awkward option of moving injectors about ?

And the photos I showed were on a very space limited install hence the need for thinner tubes and remote mounting. I'd think you'd have much more space around so you could easily install lambdas directly onto hot side plumbing....albeit in say a 2-3" long tube to dissipate heat with only a small hole feeding this tube.
But yes it would still require the discharge from this lambda tube routed either to the DP or to atmos.

But of course a single lambda does work for most, just dont push as hard and take risks edging towards leaner running. Most do seem to keep things richer than needed anyway so it should give any leaner cylinders a good safety margin.

kingtal0n

iTrader: (1)

It sounds like you are blaming the non Sequential EFI computer and have mixed up priorities with what to fix first? That is just your vehicle. my post is directed at all vehicles, several billion different configuration variations can be viewed or modeled. Its like you buy the wrong parts and then blame other people for not tailoring their responses to your exact specific problem vehicle?

kingtal0n

iTrader: (1)

I think whats really happening is you arn't able to actually read what I post up, so you just ignore it and call it bs. If you did read it, you would notice maybe that it exactly mirrors everything you said, except the part where actually adding some rediculous contraption to the vehicle and extra holes/tubes was a good idea or actually street worthy. The priority, I guess, is also mixed up there. We dont prioritize complexity on any street vehicle, unless the benefit is absolutely incredibly outweighted. For example, a turbocharger is a thing I go out of my way for. Until this thing adds 200 horsepower I don't want to hear about any lines or tubes, or sensitive electronics with calibrated sensors living in harsh environments.

stevieturbo

So you dont want any engine...with any sensors or electronics ? A car IS a harsh environment.


Just **** off and get a grip.

Seeker1056

considering many corvette manifolds have the 02s mounted right in the centre of the ehaust manifold - I am not sure where anyone sees the problem - if it is good enough for GM after spending millions on r&d it should work good for you

stevieturbo

And those vehicles are not turbocharged, ie less heat/pressure in the exhaust manifold and they do not run wideband sensors. As I stated in post #3

Narrowbands dont really give a ****.

M_Minnick

iTrader: (1)

Eight 1/8" tubes have nowhere near the flow of a single 1" tube. It would take 64 1/8" tubes to have the same surface area as a 1" tube.

I would also only have 1 WB connected at a time. I could set up one pressure differential chamber leading to the DP, and simply run the smaller tubing to it as I test each cylinder. This is not intended to be a permanent setup, I am just looking to get the cylinders balanced as part of my initial tuning.

Mike

stevieturbo

Bosch do now list a sensor for pre-turbo...although can't imagine it will be cheap and you'd need a suitable controller

http://www.motorsport-systems.co.uk/...9312011pdf.pdf