MPG Thread with MS3 on a 6L LQ4 Turbo 5spd Fiero or any Boosted Car.
06-27-2018, 04:32 PM
#41
that seems normal. i'd expect adam's cam to pull like 30 kPa at cruise.
when i was really into messing with lean cruise I developed a little procedure.
I would lean it out in my cruise cells centered around 1800 rpm and 25-30 kPa. Leave the timing alone for now.
I would pull enough fuel to get a lean misfire. In that engine/gear/vehicle it seemed to be right at 16:1
As fuel was pulled, you had to increase the throttle blade angle. This would generally make the kPa rise as there was less pressure drop across the throttle blade with it open more.
To offset that I would push the timing out 10* in that area and see if my kPa dropped back down. Rinse and repeat.
I went from stockish 32* advance as far out as 50*
eventually I ended up with the the afr at about 16.5, TPS % around 25 and 45* timing at 1800 rpm (62mph converter locked)
this got me a consistent 24 hwy mpg. which is pretty good since early 60's chevy trucks have the aerodynamics of a brick. Actually a brick might be more aero.
As I understood it, the throttle blade cracked more made for a more turbulent mixture at low cylinder fill volumes. With that you could have a stable burn even at lean mixes.
of course you could never do this and meet emissions standards...the oxides of nitrogen created goes though the roof when you go lean and crank the timing.
anyways, thats just my experience with it. Eventually I quit messing with it. I couldnt figure out a way around having a big mushy spot in the pedal just cruising around in town. I wanted to revisit it with an '04 GTO p59 with actual lean cruise tables to avoid that mushy spot.
when i was really into messing with lean cruise I developed a little procedure.
I would lean it out in my cruise cells centered around 1800 rpm and 25-30 kPa. Leave the timing alone for now.
I would pull enough fuel to get a lean misfire. In that engine/gear/vehicle it seemed to be right at 16:1
As fuel was pulled, you had to increase the throttle blade angle. This would generally make the kPa rise as there was less pressure drop across the throttle blade with it open more.
To offset that I would push the timing out 10* in that area and see if my kPa dropped back down. Rinse and repeat.
I went from stockish 32* advance as far out as 50*
eventually I ended up with the the afr at about 16.5, TPS % around 25 and 45* timing at 1800 rpm (62mph converter locked)
this got me a consistent 24 hwy mpg. which is pretty good since early 60's chevy trucks have the aerodynamics of a brick. Actually a brick might be more aero.
As I understood it, the throttle blade cracked more made for a more turbulent mixture at low cylinder fill volumes. With that you could have a stable burn even at lean mixes.
of course you could never do this and meet emissions standards...the oxides of nitrogen created goes though the roof when you go lean and crank the timing.
anyways, thats just my experience with it. Eventually I quit messing with it. I couldnt figure out a way around having a big mushy spot in the pedal just cruising around in town. I wanted to revisit it with an '04 GTO p59 with actual lean cruise tables to avoid that mushy spot.
06-27-2018, 05:03 PM
#42
I has this crazy issue where my scaled OLMAF tune would go lean as soon as I tried to enable fuel trims. Worked with joecar and finally got it to idle and cruise in the 15s low 16s and called it good since it's low load and will keep my TR7s clean. Never bothered to mess with cruise timing other than to get the right spark values in the correct g/cyl column with the scaling.
06-28-2018, 06:11 AM
#43
TECH Fanatic
my experience with ending up with large throttle opening ended up with worse cruise mpg because even though youre leaner the motor is consuming a higher volume of air. in my s10 i got worse economy at 16.5 than i did at 15.5 but that was a few years ago so i dont remember the details.
I am probably going to give it another try in my full size.
this has been a project for me lately actually. i have been adding timing 2* at a time and datalogging my drive to work. i have a ton of data and just havent been able to visualize it as well as id like yet. i did some basic filtering and scatter plots in megalogviewerHD. last week i started with 3d scatter plotting in python but havent been able to load my data in yet.
what its telling me so far is my motor happens to like around 50* at cruise which is 2200-2600 and 55-65 kpa
I am probably going to give it another try in my full size.
this has been a project for me lately actually. i have been adding timing 2* at a time and datalogging my drive to work. i have a ton of data and just havent been able to visualize it as well as id like yet. i did some basic filtering and scatter plots in megalogviewerHD. last week i started with 3d scatter plotting in python but havent been able to load my data in yet.
what its telling me so far is my motor happens to like around 50* at cruise which is 2200-2600 and 55-65 kpa
Last edited by TrendSetter; 06-28-2018 at 06:19 AM.
06-28-2018, 10:18 AM
#44
Teching In
Thread Starter
my experience with ending up with large throttle opening ended up with worse cruise mpg because even though you're leaner the motor is consuming a higher volume of air. in my s10 i got worse economy at 16.5 than i did at 15.5 but that was a few years ago so i don't remember the details.
I am probably going to give it another try in my full size.
this has been a project for me lately actually. i have been adding timing 2* at a time and data logging my drive to work. i have a ton of data and just haven't been able to visualize it as well as id like yet. i did some basic filtering and scatter plots in megalogviewerHD. last week i started with 3d scatter plotting in python but haven't been able to load my data in yet.
what it's telling me so far is my motor happens to like around 50* at cruise which is 2200-2600 and 55-65 kpa
I am probably going to give it another try in my full size.
this has been a project for me lately actually. i have been adding timing 2* at a time and data logging my drive to work. i have a ton of data and just haven't been able to visualize it as well as id like yet. i did some basic filtering and scatter plots in megalogviewerHD. last week i started with 3d scatter plotting in python but haven't been able to load my data in yet.
what it's telling me so far is my motor happens to like around 50* at cruise which is 2200-2600 and 55-65 kpa
that seems normal. I'd expect Adam's cam to pull like 30 kPa at cruise.
when i was really into messing with lean cruise I developed a little procedure.
I would lean it out in my cruise cells centered around 1800 rpm and 25-30 kPa. Leave the timing alone for now.
I would pull enough fuel to get a lean misfire. In that engine/gear/vehicle it seemed to be right at 16:1
As fuel was pulled, you had to increase the throttle blade angle. This would generally make the kPa rise as there was less pressure drop across the throttle blade with it open more.
To offset that I would push the timing out 10* in that area and see if my kPa dropped back down. Rinse and repeat.
I went from stockish 32* advance as far out as 50*
eventually, I ended up with the the afr at about 16.5, TPS % around 25 and 45* timing at 1800 rpm (62mph converter locked)
this got me a consistent 24 hwy mpg. which is pretty good since early 60's chevy trucks have the aerodynamics of a brick. Actually, a brick might be more aero.
As I understood it, the throttle blade cracked more made for a more turbulent mixture at low cylinder fill volumes. With that, you could have a stable burn even at lean mixes.
of course, you could never do this and meet emissions standards...the oxides of nitrogen created goes though the roof when you go lean and crank the timing.
anyways, that's just my experience with it. Eventually, I quit messing with it. I couldn't figure out a way around having a big mushy spot in the pedal just cruising around in town. I wanted to revisit it with an '04 GTO p59 with actual lean cruise tables to avoid that mushy spot.
when i was really into messing with lean cruise I developed a little procedure.
I would lean it out in my cruise cells centered around 1800 rpm and 25-30 kPa. Leave the timing alone for now.
I would pull enough fuel to get a lean misfire. In that engine/gear/vehicle it seemed to be right at 16:1
As fuel was pulled, you had to increase the throttle blade angle. This would generally make the kPa rise as there was less pressure drop across the throttle blade with it open more.
To offset that I would push the timing out 10* in that area and see if my kPa dropped back down. Rinse and repeat.
I went from stockish 32* advance as far out as 50*
eventually, I ended up with the the afr at about 16.5, TPS % around 25 and 45* timing at 1800 rpm (62mph converter locked)
this got me a consistent 24 hwy mpg. which is pretty good since early 60's chevy trucks have the aerodynamics of a brick. Actually, a brick might be more aero.
As I understood it, the throttle blade cracked more made for a more turbulent mixture at low cylinder fill volumes. With that, you could have a stable burn even at lean mixes.
of course, you could never do this and meet emissions standards...the oxides of nitrogen created goes though the roof when you go lean and crank the timing.
anyways, that's just my experience with it. Eventually, I quit messing with it. I couldn't figure out a way around having a big mushy spot in the pedal just cruising around in town. I wanted to revisit it with an '04 GTO p59 with actual lean cruise tables to avoid that mushy spot.
Now to expand this, are any of you running MAF. I was given a 5 wire MAF and have thought about integrating it into the setup rather than just using a MAP sensor. It may be more hassle than its worth though.
06-29-2018, 07:25 AM
#47
TECH Fanatic
OLSD on all my stuff
i have had pretty good luck with drivability on mine but im running efilive cos5 on 0411 hardware so i dont have any scaling in my tune. i can see how that could muck things up.
i have had pretty good luck with drivability on mine but im running efilive cos5 on 0411 hardware so i dont have any scaling in my tune. i can see how that could muck things up.
06-30-2018, 01:33 AM
#51
edit-- At least we get to choose. Ford lightnings are stuck with MAF only, and Dodge anything is stuck with SD only. Although I think we all have a hidden backup Alpha N limp home mode.
06-30-2018, 07:42 AM
#53
TECH Fanatic
it doesn’t control boost, that’s up to the user.
It has two ve tables, one for 0-100kpa and the other for 100-300kpa
it also has a 2d boost spark table, and iat spark.
The nitrous input has both fuel and spark adjustment. I used it to great effect as anti lag on my t56 s10.
Overall it’s a pretty solid solution for a boosted factory computer. An ms would be ‘better’ but then my factory dash gauges wouldn’t work.
It has two ve tables, one for 0-100kpa and the other for 100-300kpa
it also has a 2d boost spark table, and iat spark.
The nitrous input has both fuel and spark adjustment. I used it to great effect as anti lag on my t56 s10.
Overall it’s a pretty solid solution for a boosted factory computer. An ms would be ‘better’ but then my factory dash gauges wouldn’t work.
07-01-2018, 10:18 PM
#55
You can disconnect the MAF and MAP and still get the motor to crank. The only way I see that being possible is if there is a hidden Alpha N backup somewhere in the OS. I have never seen any tuning software that accesses it, though. Anyone reading this should be aware that I am speculating, as opposed to stating facts. I could be completely wrong.
07-02-2018, 10:38 AM
#57
I have on accident not had the map sensor hooked to manifold pressure and it would start and idle....really fat. I dunno what unplugging the map would do, guessing default to it's lowest kPa on the table..which is pretty close to idle. It'd still have ECT and IAT fuel adders though so not really a true alpha-n
07-02-2018, 10:52 AM
#58
I have on accident not had the map sensor hooked to manifold pressure and it would start and idle....really fat. I dunno what unplugging the map would do, guessing default to it's lowest kPa on the table..which is pretty close to idle. It'd still have ECT and IAT fuel adders though so not really a true alpha-n