Ben

iTrader: (33)

Why are you **** so concerned about the crappy 8x8 target VEtable? That's just for closed loop operation. You're not running closed loop in boost, are you? The use of the 8x8 table is simply for emissions and economy and has NOTHING to do with tuning.

Since I assume we're talking about TUNING the VEtable, why aren't you discussing the 12x12 chart in MLV? You know, the chart that the autotune actually uses?

Below are pics of MLV autotune target and VEtarget tables that seemed to work for me.

poobs

iTrader: (1)

Ok guys I read the manual as best as I could ( kids were pulling my ears )

If my target table is so lean why does the wideband gage and log show "normal" values - ie. Rich on acceleration and heavy load and stoich at light criuise ?

In any case, I am going to go with the default table for starters.

BTW The car is not driven much at all since I am (unfortunately) unemployed

It drives nicely with good pep. No pinging or blistering on the plug electrodes.

I know what running overly lean mixtures can do but thanks for the warning

AbeFM

iTrader: (3)

POOBS! Seriously, I've been there -I've been broke and not driven something much, and not tuned it all the way since I didn't "want to get into that right now". Do y ou know where you end up? Broke, with no engine.

DO NOT RUN THOSE SETTINGS.

The reason your car is ok is because the mixture trim is a trim - it will only move the AFR's a few percent. When you ask for 18:1, but the car is putting out 12, it can only move it a little, to 13. And from what you're doing, I'm not going to tell y ou how to change it because you will burn a valve.

I run very lean, and I have an EGT probe, so I can keep an eye on what's going on. There's no way to tell if your EGT's are too high, either you read it on a gauge, you check your plugs every mile or so, or you get new valves.

DON'T run on the edge unless you know just what you are doing, you have the tools to properly understand what's going on, and the money for a new motor. You asked for people's targets - pick one from a RUNNING car, and copy it.

AbeFM

iTrader: (3)

You can go too lean, and then the mileage goes down. I was messing with richening mine up for better mileage, but my driving style wasn't consistant enough to tell. Going to do it based on instantaneous feedback, but haven't yet.

No comment. I don't know where I moved my limit to, but I think it was like 130 kpa

ORLY? Huh. MS-II FTW, I always do the table in MT, since that way it's saved with the file that uses it, in my MSQ. I guess for the 8x8 table you have to do it that way.

Ben

iTrader: (33)

I'm sorry to hear about that Poobs, but definitely can relate. We've all been there, and I personally wish you the best of luck.

Perhaps you could find some time to read the megamanual some more, and then solicit some help from a local to get you tuned a bit better.

ABE, nothing I said was really directed towards you, since I know that you're running MSII and probably are at least as knowledgeable as me, if not more-so. But personally I'd not run closed loop over say 105kpa or so. Who knows, maybe your MSII PID is a little tighter than MSI though.

AbeFM

iTrader: (3)

heh - no offense at all Ben, merely thought it was funny, I didn't know you guys had to maintain two tables.

While I think Poobs is doing reasonably ok, it's hard to pick up all the terminology, he IS going to break his motor running like that.

Poobs: You really do need to read more on tuning, at least.

poobs

iTrader: (1)

Thanks man !!!

I just got the fuel targets changed to the default (richer ) I am also going to re do the Fuel table so as not to let the smoke out of any of the important bits

hustler

iTrader: (6)

ok, how the **** do I get to the 2x12 afr table?

richyvrlimited

iTrader: (1)

12x12?

In MLV change 'afrBins1' to 'Default AFR'. It's MLV only for it to tune with.

poobs

iTrader: (1)

You guys were so feisty yesterday !!! where did everybody go ?

Well, I did some more work on tuning the car yesterday - Looking at the VE table side by side before and after my two very short log runs and subsequent tuning via MLV, I could see where my incorrect AFR target tables caused the VE table to lean out in spots. I call this proof of concept.

So, I now I have a rescaled and richer AFR.

Yes, I am ( Yuk! ) reading

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Within MegaTune for the MS1, the AFR table is 8x8.

There is no Dana, there is only Zuul.

skidude

iTrader: (3)

You don't want MLV to use the 12x12 table if MS only uses an 8x8 table because then your EGO correction will be shooting for something different than your VE table was tuned for.

johndoe

iTrader: (5)

As long as your 12x12 table is relatively simple you should be able to match it up. Something like Abe's table would obviously be very hard to match but something more like Brain's you could probably do.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

unless you format them close to identical...

yeah exactly I do the same. I like Ben's idea of scaling the AFR table for vacuum only...I wish I thought of that. Either way I don't really need to extra resolution as I would just have more 15.5:1 cells in there....its all a wash.

AbeFM

iTrader: (3)

Yeah, it's all interpolated, so the worst that will happen is you might round off some peaks. Not a major concern.

I watch EGO to see where it corrects as I drive, it gives me a good idea of what's going on, functionally, so I know where I want to make changes.

Redoing the table for mostly-vacuum is fine. Certainly throwing 8 or 9 cells at 130 kpa and below makes sense, saving just one or two for boost - just in case MS decides to use it anyway, I want to give it a point up high that makes sense.

miatamania

iTrader: (9)

Actually, mine looked similar for some reason. I don't remember which base map I started with. 94 I think since it is high res and inputted the 1.6 stuff.

the AFR targets were retarded and I wasn't exactly sure how to start from scratch. I was not comfortable with the idea.

poobs

iTrader: (1)

I just made this AFR table with some help from a friend. I think it is better for my non aspirated 1.6

90 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6
80 13.6 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 13.8 13.7
70 13.6 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.2 13.8
60 13.6 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.7 14.6 13.9
50 13.6 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 14.0
40 13.6 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5
30 13.6 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8 15.8
20 13.6 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0
1000 1800 2600 34004200 5000 5500 6000

johndoe

iTrader: (5)

the term is naturally aspirated. Your car still breathes even if it isn't force fed. Still looks a little lean to me under 60kpa unless you have advanced the timing and have an egt gauge.

AbeFM

iTrader: (3)

Heh, I can't read an NA chart. I'm sure folks will chime in, but it's probably much more reasonable. Where are the inflection points and why are they there? :-) They seem minor anyway.

Does it bother people, conceptualy, to have your last point IN your range? i.e. 90 kpa or 6000 RPM when clearly the motor goes to 100 and 6500-7000 regularly?

Poobs, one word of advice, though it looks very good. If you're toying with the idea of forced induction, redo the table, leaving 4 rows above 100 kpa. It seems like a waste, but truly, when you go to the turbo you'll have a dead reliable NA half of the map and it will make your life that much easier.

I tried doing a new table when I added boost, and it wasn't "hard" but it was a "pain". :-)
This is more for the VE table, even so, I would expand the table you have to at least 110-120 kpa.

edit: good point john, I forget how handy my EGT gauge is.

poobs

iTrader: (1)

Thanks for the input guys !

Yes, I would like to go Turbo but it is going to be a while still.