Miata install and operating questions
06-13-2007, 04:03 PM
#21
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Windsor, Canada
Posts: 191
Total Cats: -2
Are I/C sprayers even "legal" at the track?
Many dragstrips they are not.. I/C sprayers suck anyways.
Magna, you have great sucess w/o an I/C, you've done a great job for your application. This guy runs for extended periods of time under heavy load, but says:
Thus, ridding himself of the "big hunk of metal obstructing your rad" for cooling purposes doesn't make much sense.
Personally, I love the idea of W/I. However, the problem remains of A: injecting it before the AIT and possibly getting inaccurate readings (per jayc72), but I've heard of this as well. It's always "don't inject before the temp sensor!" (*I'd like Wideopen to get in on this* please
) Or, B: Injecting it after the AIT sensor, cooling the charge, but the software does not know this, and continues to act in the same manner. If there is someway around this, I think that's the best option because the fact that your car does fall on its face when it heatsoaks is actually a good thing, you don't want to jeopardize that safety factor.
In theory, if you can prevent your I/C from heatsoaking, you can have your "first lap" performance last the whole time. Some inject pre I/C to help prevent heatsoak, but bad things happen there as well, such as water build up.
Continuing with my ramble, perhaps injecting far enough away from the AIT would prevent inaccurate readings. Perhaps a test is in order. It would seem rather obvious (I'm purely guessing) if the AIT started going haywire, and you were seeing 36º intake temps on an 85º day, for example.
Many dragstrips they are not.. I/C sprayers suck anyways.
Magna, you have great sucess w/o an I/C, you've done a great job for your application. This guy runs for extended periods of time under heavy load, but says:
Thus, ridding himself of the "big hunk of metal obstructing your rad" for cooling purposes doesn't make much sense.
Personally, I love the idea of W/I. However, the problem remains of A: injecting it before the AIT and possibly getting inaccurate readings (per jayc72), but I've heard of this as well. It's always "don't inject before the temp sensor!" (*I'd like Wideopen to get in on this* please
) Or, B: Injecting it after the AIT sensor, cooling the charge, but the software does not know this, and continues to act in the same manner. If there is someway around this, I think that's the best option because the fact that your car does fall on its face when it heatsoaks is actually a good thing, you don't want to jeopardize that safety factor.In theory, if you can prevent your I/C from heatsoaking, you can have your "first lap" performance last the whole time. Some inject pre I/C to help prevent heatsoak, but bad things happen there as well, such as water build up.
Continuing with my ramble, perhaps injecting far enough away from the AIT would prevent inaccurate readings. Perhaps a test is in order. It would seem rather obvious (I'm purely guessing) if the AIT started going haywire, and you were seeing 36º intake temps on an 85º day, for example.
If the Link retards timing off the IAT sensor, then it can't be doing it that much. Since the water is doing the majority of the cooling effect in the cylinder when the water turns to steam, there would be no difference as to where the water does the cooling. Yes, the IAT may not show an accurate temp (low), but it wouldn't matter since the cooling effect is happening in the cyclinder anyway....so the timing decrease at the IAT sensor, if the WI nozzle was mounted after it, would be uncalled for.
Reply
0
0
06-13-2007, 05:32 PM
#22
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sammamish, Washington
Posts: 1,396
Total Cats: 0
I always go before the sensor if I can so the ecu will allow maximum timing for the added detonation resistance. I know about the "Super Engineer SAE Study Papers" thats say its going to read accurate IAT's. Whether its the truth or not I could care less. In the end WI works and works well.
Spray across the sensor and keep your FMIC
Spray across the sensor and keep your FMIC
Reply
0
0
06-14-2007, 09:55 AM
#25
Newb
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7
Total Cats: 0
I re-read the LINK tuning manual. Here is what is happening to fuel and timing as IAT rises and the control I have over the settings:
Fuel Settings
1) There is a IAT upper limit (call this setting 1) that the ECU will lean out fuel as temp rises. I can set this. So If I wanted to defeat the leaning of fuel I would reduce this limit down to near ambient.
2) There is a enleanment slope setting (call this setting 2) that begins the lean out process at 77 F and leans the fuel until it reaches setting 1. I can adjust this setting. By lowering the setting I reduce the slope and do not allow as much fuel to be removed.
3) There are others dependant on water temp etc... but I have those under control
Timing Settings
1) There is a setting for IAT at which ignition begins to be retarded (call this setting 3). I can set this. So If I want to delay the onset of the retarding I would up this number.
2) There is a setting for the amount of timing taken out for each degree celsius as the IAT rises (call this setting 4). I can adjust this as well in increments of 1/256 degree. The default is 1/8th of a degree timing across the boost maps for each degree Celsius.
So I could if absolutely necessary, install the nozzle after the IAT sensor. However, that would require me to make adjustments to all 4 of those settings to make sure the IAT was not messing up the fuel and timing maps. I guess this is the problem with a fully tunable ECU. Too much stuff to alter. My biggest concern is that with the WI keeping the charge cool the ECU doesn't know this since it is seeing the higher temp from the intercooler and screws up the fuel (reduces it too much) and timing to the point it blows the motor. That is why I was wondering about being able to spray prior to the IAT...it avoids lots of other mucking around by me.
Fuel Settings
1) There is a IAT upper limit (call this setting 1) that the ECU will lean out fuel as temp rises. I can set this. So If I wanted to defeat the leaning of fuel I would reduce this limit down to near ambient.
2) There is a enleanment slope setting (call this setting 2) that begins the lean out process at 77 F and leans the fuel until it reaches setting 1. I can adjust this setting. By lowering the setting I reduce the slope and do not allow as much fuel to be removed.
3) There are others dependant on water temp etc... but I have those under control
Timing Settings
1) There is a setting for IAT at which ignition begins to be retarded (call this setting 3). I can set this. So If I want to delay the onset of the retarding I would up this number.
2) There is a setting for the amount of timing taken out for each degree celsius as the IAT rises (call this setting 4). I can adjust this as well in increments of 1/256 degree. The default is 1/8th of a degree timing across the boost maps for each degree Celsius.
So I could if absolutely necessary, install the nozzle after the IAT sensor. However, that would require me to make adjustments to all 4 of those settings to make sure the IAT was not messing up the fuel and timing maps. I guess this is the problem with a fully tunable ECU. Too much stuff to alter. My biggest concern is that with the WI keeping the charge cool the ECU doesn't know this since it is seeing the higher temp from the intercooler and screws up the fuel (reduces it too much) and timing to the point it blows the motor. That is why I was wondering about being able to spray prior to the IAT...it avoids lots of other mucking around by me.
Last edited by RobSpec; 06-14-2007 at 09:58 AM. Reason: added text
Reply
0
0
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
elesjuan
Build Threads
9
11-14-2018 12:18 PM
