PCM Diagnostics & Tuning - LTFT going + at WOT, why?

ok well i was looking at the logs and what i thought was right before going wot the trims will lock to whatever they are at. i went out for a ride, wot fueling is right where it needs to be, and all of a sudden bank one is +4.7and bank two is +0.8 at WOT and running too damn rich. why in the world is this happening? what should i check on?

Are your trims zero or negative,just before WOT on your scan?? If they are positive then the trim will be added to your fueling. If they are negative they should not be added (drop to zero in cell 22 or 15). Long and short - you want your LTFTs "0" or slightly "-" .
FWIW.

the last numbers i saw were 0 on the stft and 0,0.8 on ltft. then it went from cell 14 to 22 and went to ~+4 on the last log that i just did. so is it the last hit just before WOT or a few hits before?

I would guess it ignores transients. It is dependent on the LTFTs though...not the STFTs (It's been a few years since I ran closed loop).

ok im gonna go back and look at the LTFT and see what is going on with them before it goes wot. it just sucks cause one day the car is strong and it will stay 0 and the next day +4 to +7 and it feels like a slug

4-7% rich would feel sluggish :(

If I remember correctly keeping them in the neg 3-7% will help alot. Maybe HumpinSS will jump in with the correct range?? :D

ok well highest ltft before wot is 1.6 on both banks, could it be that it remembered old numbers and it needs to be reset? so keeping the whole VE 3-7% rich?

ok well highest ltft before wot is 1.6 on both banks, could it be that it remembered old numbers and it needs to be reset? so keeping the whole VE 3-7% rich?
Whatever it takes to keep cells 1-14 slightly negative. :D

haha thanks man, im wondering if i just didnt have enough drive time on this one to get the trims to settle in. we will see, im gonna drive this around for a while like this and see what happens. so the only thing related to + trims wot is being lean somewhere going into wot? right

:nod: Right :nod: ......although I never actually thought of it in those terms. Good point. :D