Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hi can someone help me with understandind injector lag time...i can undertand Injector "lag" time is the time it takes for an injector to open form the time it has been energized until it is fully open but by chaning it what does it do to the way the car is tuned

thanks

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/336483-injector-lag-time/
Share on other sites

Lag changes with battery voltage, and the ecu must add appropriate time to the fuel table to compensate. Also if you are V.E. tuning, then the ecu calculates the amount of fuel injected, so it must add the lag time to the calculated injection time.

Lag changes with battery voltage, and the ecu must add appropriate time to the fuel table to compensate. Also if you are V.E. tuning, then the ecu calculates the amount of fuel injected, so it must add the lag time to the calculated injection time.

what is v.e. tuning

all injectors have lag time, bigger injectors normally have a bigger lag time as their parts are heavier etc.

when a factory base map is created on say a power fc the lag time is set to suit the stock injectors ie 444cc for RB26.

i think the lag time for 444cc is 77

so when upgrading to say 600cc lag time 80 there is a formula to calculate the new lag time needed into the power fc.

mine with this setup is 73% .03 lag time.

if you dont calculate it right then even though your reading the correct afr the power will be low because the fuel isnt spraying at the precise time needed, for example if sprayed too early it will sit behind the valve and wont atomise correctly.

and if sprayed too late (too much lag time) the valve will be already open and the fuel wont have enough time to be fully injested into the cylinder and the valve might shut leaving fuel astray at the valve till next intake cycle,

if you dont calculate it right then even though your reading the correct afr the power will be low because the fuel isnt spraying at the precise time needed, for example if sprayed too early it will sit behind the valve and wont atomise correctly.

and if sprayed too late (too much lag time) the valve will be already open and the fuel wont have enough time to be fully injested into the cylinder and the valve might shut leaving fuel astray at the valve till next intake cycle,

err no, if you use the wrong latency the car will be spot on at WOT but way off at idle. the ecu calculates the amount of fuel required from its maps, then figures out how long the injector needs to spray fuel for, then adds the latency and pulses the injector for that long. so if you set the latency to 0 but the injector takes 1ms to open before it starts spraying fuel and the ecu thinks it needs 2ms of fuel at idle its only gonna pulse for 2ms, giving you 1ms of fuel, whereas if you set the latency properly it'll pulse for 3ms, giving the correct 2ms of fuel. at a constant voltage the latency never changes for a given injector, hence why it has more effect on idle than WOT

err no, if you use the wrong latency the car will be spot on at WOT but way off at idle. the ecu calculates the amount of fuel required from its maps, then figures out how long the injector needs to spray fuel for, then adds the latency and pulses the injector for that long. so if you set the latency to 0 but the injector takes 1ms to open before it starts spraying fuel and the ecu thinks it needs 2ms of fuel at idle its only gonna pulse for 2ms, giving you 1ms of fuel, whereas if you set the latency properly it'll pulse for 3ms, giving the correct 2ms of fuel. at a constant voltage the latency never changes for a given injector, hence why it has more effect on idle than WOT

Err no,

Lag time being off should have more of an affect at high engine speeds, Where piston speeds are much higher and the engine will rotate through a greater number of degrees during a given time interval

Speaking of lag times, how on earth do you find the correct injector latency for different voltages other than mindless google searching? I tried looking for the Nismo 555cc and I found an old thread on here that had the latency time but at what voltage I have no idea and didn't have any listings for the other voltages.

My Vipec is still on that factory injector latency and seems to run fine, but if the Nismos are a bit different i'd like to have it perfect :D

Lag time certainly has much more effect at idle and cruise than full throttle.

If you cant find latency numbers for an injector, it can be calculated manually. I ahd to do this on one car by setting the afr at 14.7 at say 3000 rpm no load, tehn disconnect the alternator, and as the battery dies, you manually alter the lag time.

I tried looking for the Nismo 555cc and I found an old thread on here that had the latency time but at what voltage I have no idea and didn't have any listings for the other voltages.

My Vipec is still on that factory injector latency and seems to run fine, but if the Nismos are a bit different i'd like to have it perfect :P

nismo 555s are .18 higher latency than factory.

from my very vague memory factory is .63 and nismo are .81 or something like that

So .18 higher at every voltage?

Vipec lists the following for the factory map:

6V - 3.2ms

7V - 2.5ms

8V - 1.9ms

9V - 1.5ms

10V - 1.25ms

11V - 1.11ms

12V - 0.945ms

13V - 0.87ms

14V - 0.743ms

15V - 0.6ms

Edited by PM-R33
  • 6 months later...

Ok guys i believe nismo uses the same denso injector as tomei so may be these values can work>

http://www.tomei-p.co.jp/_2003web-catalogue/efr_set-from_top-menu/efr_index_fuel-line_rset.html

I see alot of guys use .71 for the yellow 555cc side feed nismo injectors also which kinda confirms it is the same injector as tomei because they recommend the same value

so i guess .61 will work for the pink 555cc topfeed ???

I really don't think you can give definite answers anyway, the lag changes dramatically depending on the injector voltage so every application will be different. Use the graphs supplied to give you a ballpark figure and adjust it from there to give your engine a good idle I guess.

lag/latency can be set up at idle, if your AFR's are unstable at idle try adjusting lag time and monitor what happens.

the main reason there is a formula to work out when changing to bigger inj etc is so you can get the tune close so the vehicle can be driven to get a tune.

Are you using a Power FC or something else?

I never really found a definete answer about what to set mine to.

Yea pfc for me

You're using 555cc yellow side feeds?...If so i'd focus on the 14v value because basically this is the pretty much the operating voltage with the car idling so from the values you posted earlier i'd say youre very close ie.

14v -0.743ms..... nismos> 0.71ms

what do you have it set on now?? how does it idle?

Yeah 555cc yellow side feeds.

At the moment it is just set to the default value on the Vipec as I listed above.

Idle isn't perfect but that's probably a lot to do with my tune lol.

Might change atleast the 14V value to 0.71 and see if it likes it.

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

    • Any difference in induction noise?
    • If I got a dollar for every flipped commuter missile I've driven past I'd have two dollars   Some people get into wild adventures on the road and I doubt it's gender or ethnicity specific. I'm just glad I don't usually drive during peak times.
    • Just got the car back and gave it a good run back home Power wise, whilst it only made a extra 5 killerwasps up top at 7200 rpm, it made more power everywhere from 2500 rpm and kept pulling much harder all the way, to the point of me relearning when to shift so I don't hit the 7200 limiter, with the old intake it seemed to take alot more time to rev out, and, throttle response is also much improved  As I didn't want to remove the bumper every time I serviced the air filter (basically every aftermarket and fabricated CAI has the filter behind the bumper) it currently has a hektic exposed pod in the engine bay sucking in hot air, this will be rectified shortly after some some of my CAD (cardboard assisted design) for a alloy heat shield feed by the OEM intake tube behind the bumper, this will cop some wrinkle black paint, as well as the intake pipe for that totally OEM look... The only fly in the ointment was that the OEM "strut" brace doesn't fit over the rear runner of the new intake with the 2.5 engine is in the engine bay, as the 2.5 raises the engine up by 20mm, it's not a war stopper, and I didn't notice any difference without it in some twisties, but....... MX5 Mania is bringing in some GWR "fancy pants" braces that apparently do fit, if it bolts up I'll grab it, it is also stiffer than the OEM one, which is a bonus All in all I'm happy with the outcome      Fancy pants "strut" brace that gives the required clearance      This is where the clearance issue was, the GWR extends out past this
    • Well, I'm back from the dyno today. Some things do partially make sense. The pod filter/airbox delete picked up between 6-10rwkw on 98 - because heat soak does kind of affect things and there was playing with tune/timing/AFR. Oddly enough, the car was running much leaner than before. So lean it was audibly pinging on the dyno which I got video of:   70de0dd5-2099-4a71-8b10-6fc833fb9d59.mp4   We're talking going from ~12.7 in the past to the first run being at like ~14.0. It is now tuned to ~12.5 on the Dyno, which correlates to about ~12.1 on my wideband in the car. These matched last time, which is very odd. The dyno plots only show the dyno's reported AFR - should be last time, yet now it no longer agrees and was way leaner. Nobody has an explanation for how a pod can make the car run notably leaner, yet not really give any more power when you add fuel in. A few different types of intake design were tested:   94c22c34-7991-4902-af85-314b5f5bf352.mp4   There was no difference other than IAT with the pod sticking out of the bay. The pod sticking out of the bay (but connected) is actually still warmer than what I usually see on the road. Removing the pod entirely lost about ~2kw. But to be fair, all of the runs could be argued to vary by that amount when temperatures climb etc etc. It's safe to say that the filter isn't causing any restrictions of any note that can be reasonably altered in any way. This is in line with what I'd expect given the Engine Masters testing. 323KW on 98 and ~335KW on E85 is actually a pretty solid result, up about ~45kw from 99% of LS1 cammed combos, with generally much larger cams/exhaust etc as well. It is after all up 42KW (98) and 54KW (E85) from before. +10KW from a pod and removing the box is cheap as chips compared to what the head work cost per kw No, I did not get to drop the exhaust and test. When it comes to exhaust... it all just seems to change frequencies and cost or gain 2hp here or there. I don't realistically think I'll drop this to test it - because there's not much else I can really do about it/route it any other way/make it bigger/just bought mufflers. Engine masters beat the hell out of headers with a hammer to deliberately kink them and didn't lose power at all, I sincerely doubt that going larger primaries would help. If it were even possible for clearance/conversion reasons... which it's not... I may throw the E85 in there at some point and do a drag run to see what MPH it traps for science. It isn't lost on me that ~320kw Skylines do trap about the same MPH that ~370kw F-Body/Corvettes do in the USA for the same  or similar weight. (122-125mph). Of course, if I go there and trap 104mph or something then I'll just 'accidentally' have an accident on the way home from the drag strip and buy a M4.
×
×
  • Create New...