need starting log
04-13-2011, 07:24 AM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Belgium
Posts: 999
Total Cats: 73
need starting log
Trying to get my car starting faster, but haven't much luck. Anyone with a good starting car that has a log I can look at? Mine goes vey rich just after starting but no matter what I do with cranking makes it start worse. Lowered ASE but when I take out too much it starts running rough after driving away.
Notice how long it takes before it starts injecting fuel after hitting the key btw, 1.1 second.
Notice how long it takes before it starts injecting fuel after hitting the key btw, 1.1 second.
Last edited by WestfieldMX5; 04-13-2011 at 08:36 AM.
Reply
0
0
04-13-2011, 07:54 AM
#2
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Warrington/Birmingham
Posts: 2,642
Total Cats: 42
My dad's stock ECU powered MX5 doesn't start any quicker than 1 second.
Note that from your log a good 1/4 of that second is the engine actually syncing, (see the battery voltages drop yet no RPM reading.
Note that from your log a good 1/4 of that second is the engine actually syncing, (see the battery voltages drop yet no RPM reading.
Reply
0
0
04-13-2011, 08:38 AM
#3
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Belgium
Posts: 999
Total Cats: 73
It syncs after 0.5s and starts injecting fuel after 1.1s, it didn't start yet at that point.
The richness after starting makes me think I have too much cranking fuel, and I'd like to get rid of it. Or is that normal behavior?
The richness after starting makes me think I have too much cranking fuel, and I'd like to get rid of it. Or is that normal behavior?
Reply
0
0
04-13-2011, 01:45 PM
#5
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
I just logged mine at lunch.
I logged .808 sec. That was from the moment the MAP dropped from 100Kpa to the moment the motor caught.
The second time I logged 1.09 sec. using my manual marks as reference points, so factor in my delay.
I wouldn't see any way to improve that.
I logged .808 sec. That was from the moment the MAP dropped from 100Kpa to the moment the motor caught.
The second time I logged 1.09 sec. using my manual marks as reference points, so factor in my delay.
I wouldn't see any way to improve that.
Reply
0
0
04-14-2011, 02:04 AM
#8
Elite Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Schwarzenberg, Germany
Posts: 1,553
Total Cats: 101
Starting seems to be way better this year with the new 3.1.1 code...
I have a quite nice log:
As you can see, the AFR drops very low after the start (~10), but that doesn't seem to be so wrong, as the outside temps were ~11°C (51.8°F) so the warmup enrichment and the ASE together could make it run so rich...
I took the time in MLV from "crank" lighting up to go out and the time was .579 s.
I think I had more problems and it to longer to start with the old code...
Greets
I have a quite nice log:
As you can see, the AFR drops very low after the start (~10), but that doesn't seem to be so wrong, as the outside temps were ~11°C (51.8°F) so the warmup enrichment and the ASE together could make it run so rich...
I took the time in MLV from "crank" lighting up to go out and the time was .579 s.
I think I had more problems and it to longer to start with the old code...
Greets
Reply
0
0
04-14-2011, 04:13 AM
#9
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Warrington/Birmingham
Posts: 2,642
Total Cats: 42
I do hate how long it take the MS to sync when starting. That's a big part of the slightly longer than OEM startup times, shame that you can't have 'batch injection' for startup, without needing to wait for the cam signal would speedup sync a lot I'd have thought?
Suppose it helps build oil pressure though?
Suppose it helps build oil pressure though?
Reply
0
0
04-14-2011, 10:53 AM
#10
Supporting Vendor
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,332
Total Cats: 67
I do hate how long it take the MS to sync when starting. That's a big part of the slightly longer than OEM startup times, shame that you can't have 'batch injection' for startup, without needing to wait for the cam signal would speedup sync a lot I'd have thought?
Suppose it helps build oil pressure though?
Suppose it helps build oil pressure though?
Reply
0
0
04-14-2011, 04:28 PM
#12
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Belgium
Posts: 999
Total Cats: 73
thx Sven, looks similar to mine. Voltage drop to about 9V and briefly rich after startup. Guess that's normal. It does seem to sync / start quicker as Crank Y to N takes 1.000 second on mine.
Can I have a look at your starting settings? crank, prime etc
I'm on 3.1.0, did anything change to make it start quicker?
PS, your Vbatt seems a bit high (15.5V) unless it's not calibrated in MT.
Can I have a look at your starting settings? crank, prime etc
I'm on 3.1.0, did anything change to make it start quicker?
PS, your Vbatt seems a bit high (15.5V) unless it's not calibrated in MT.
Reply
0
0
04-15-2011, 04:15 AM
#15
Elite Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 5,977
Total Cats: 356
I have verified this time and time again on the stim - the cranking pulses are sequential if you have setup the ECU for full sequential with additional drivers. There was a thread about it on msextra, IIRC Jean said it was difficult to switch to sequential after batch.
Reply
0
0
04-15-2011, 10:33 AM
#18
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
it's not really slow starting in sequential. I checked a recent log and the "crank" indicator was lit for about .6 seconds before it fired up.
Log
http://y8spec.com/megasquirt/vvt_tes...8_18.35.37.msl
map
http://y8spec.com/megasquirt/vvt_tes...8_09.32.59.msq
Log
http://y8spec.com/megasquirt/vvt_tes...8_18.35.37.msl
map
http://y8spec.com/megasquirt/vvt_tes...8_09.32.59.msq
Reply
0
0
