Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Maybe someone can clear a couple of things up for me..

Ive read when tuning the fuel maps with the PFC that the O2 feedback should be turned off. ok, but should it be turned back on after tuning is finished ?

Also, the o2 feedback loop, is it more economical to run with it on or off ?

:P

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246590-o2-feedback/
Share on other sites

i find with mine turned on it used to retart the ignition when u booted it and back teh fuel out

the tune on the car was farcked anyway what i have to loose i guess

turned it off again

and it would rev beter

not trying to lean it out etc

my engin prefers t run a little rich

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246590-o2-feedback/#findComment-4286129
Share on other sites

typically on when driving normally

it should be off when wideband tuning your car

in most scenarios you will get good economy with it on and a basic tune

if you have an aggressive tune and the tuner has spent lots of time on light cruise with a wideband sensor

you can get better economy with the 02 feedback off - you can also adjust the 02 feedback co-efficient

so its not just a fixed "stuck at 14.7" setting if that makes sense

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246590-o2-feedback/#findComment-4286149
Share on other sites

Ok, so when its on, are the maps setup on the pfc ignored?

Reason i ask, when on monitor, i dont see the ign timing that the map is set to for that specific rpm. ie the map is set to 28' ign for idle yet under monitor the timing is 15' ... this is with feedback on.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246590-o2-feedback/#findComment-4288525
Share on other sites

Ok, so when its on, are the maps setup on the pfc ignored?

Reason i ask, when on monitor, i dont see the ign timing that the map is set to for that specific rpm. ie the map is set to 28' ign for idle yet under monitor the timing is 15' ... this is with feedback on.

Closed Loop running doesn't affect the ignition timing, only the fuel delivery. You should notice the fuel ms varying (at cruise only!).

Closed Loop attempts to run the engine at 14.7 AFR by continually reading the O2 sensor output and adjusting the fuel delivery. Because it is reactive, rather than predictive, it continually overshoots 14.7, so the AFR actually cycles between "> 14.7" and "< 14.7" AFR.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246590-o2-feedback/#findComment-4288627
Share on other sites

For the government emissions test they have a low idle and a hight idle test (high idle being they hold the engine to approx 2750rpm).

My car is failing on high idle on carbon monoxide, whether feedback is on or off.

Anyone know if i took fuel out of the cells around that point will it bring the CO down?

Or do I have to put the cat back in (de-cat pipe fitted), in order to pass this damn test? :P

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246590-o2-feedback/#findComment-4294155
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...