Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I thought I'd start a new thread for this seen as I was stealing the other one a bit. And I think this might be an issue if it turns out to be a problem with the new gen Power FC's

If you havent read the other thread I'll do a summary here.

Basically the Power FC is retarding around 10 Degrees when going from closed throttle to any throttle input. It will stay at 10 degrees retarded for about 1-2 seconds then go back to normal map at which point the car surges forward with a power boost. It appears like its going to the idle map then taking a second to realise its off closed throttle before reacting

This is a graph on the HC of timing, showing what is happening:

White and Red are gear changes where it is retarding the timing

Blue is a normal gear change with normal timing

TimingEdit.jpg

So far I have tried:

Adjust TPS - No change, except when adjusting it to far so it didn't go into the idle map at all

Data Init - Changed injector and AFM settings only and went for a light drive, no change

Changed TPS vs IGN - In FC Edit, every value to 0, no results

Played with the IGN map - no results

Disconnected and turned off the boost control Kit - no result

Below 60 Degrees, everything works fine, so it must be fine in the cold start map, but as soon as it goes to std map, something goes wrong

I'm hoping its not faulty Power FC but I guess if thats the case I can get a replacement. Have emailed Apexi USA about it so hopefully they have answers

Any help is much appreciated, its frustrating me quite alot at the moment, considering my ancient Power FC (V2.20E) doesnt have this problem and then new one does.

Have now tried unplugging VCT and going for a drive with no change (VCT plug is leaking oil, but its still clicking so sounds like its working)

unplugged the wtr temp sensors, gauge one made no difference (didnt expect it to) and ECU one just made it stick in Cold start

Does anyone know how to extract the information from the Power FC so you can view the coding, I've seen lines of code from power fc data before, but cant work out how to extract it at the moment, going to compare old with new to see if theres any answers in there.

I just had a thought and it may be a long shot but .

In one of the threads I think I mentioned that I set the 50c warm up setting to zero where the default is different .

Mine is not a fresh PFC but I can't remember what version it is .

It sounds like the thing is not coming out of "invisible learned idle mode" straight away and is retarding the ignition to pull what it thinks is a high idle back .

The only other thing I can think of is the scaling with Z32 AFMs may not be spot on at just off idle speeds .

A .

The Wtr Temp (Cool) settings are the same as the old unit. Set at 0 retard at 60+ degrees

I suppose I could try putting 1 degree retard in there to see if it just always runs 1 degree less then normal, and I can just bump all the cells up 1 degree. Its worth a try I guess

Comparing the two (old vs new) Power FC settings in FC-Edit there is no difference at all in the Air flow curves for the VG30 AFM. The only difference is the IGN vs TPS settings which apparently arent used in the older versions of FC edit. Besides all this, as far as I know its the TPS that tells the ECU to return to the Idle map when at closed throttle (and perhaps this is compared with engine RPM also)

Might try the Wtr temp cool vs IGN, retard it 1 degree at +60 and see what happens, but don't think its going to be the answer

Thanks for the idea though, I'm open to any suggestions at this point. Its a bit frustrating, Thinking I might have to send it to Apexi

No go on that, doesnt make a difference. It seems to work ok for the first minute or so, all gear changes seem ok, but then it starts after that. i've graphed it in FC Edit (chart) and the timing goes crazy when it does this. Have done some dodgy paint marking to show whats happening. Its got me a bit stuffed as to why the timing is jumping around like it is and then so smooth when the gear change is quick:

TimingJPEG.jpg

I hope this is just an isolated incident and not affecting all of the new Power FC's. Its bad news for me if so but good news for everyone else. Don't suppose anyone has a new one that can tell me if theirs does anything like this. Frustrating that everything is so good, and the car is running better then ever apart from this issue. It might not seem to bad, but you imagine making a snap decision at a roundabout to go through and then the car just goes nowhere for a moment, its not good :(

EDIT:

A thought has occured to me, am I running to much timing in the top row(s) (More then 40 degrees) and its cutting it back as a precautionary measure? I didn't think it did this but just a thought: UPDATE - No improvements as expected

Edited by 89CAL

What was wrong with your old Powerfc Cal?

Nothing at all really, its just (Im told) a really old version and is slow to write and read data, which I have noticed compared to the new one. The new one for whatever reason shows the car having less knock, I always knew I was getting false readings on the old one so thats a really good thing for me. It was basically just available at a good price and I thought I would update before mine decided to die. But in saying that its never showed signs of dying before.

I was trying to sell it but I may hang onto it for the moment till i can work out whats wrong with the new one

done about 3 or 4 with no issues, sounds odd but it may be a dud ecu rare but possible.

Where these all complete new tunes from scratch or was data bought across from older Power FC's? I think they will have been complete new tunes but just something else for me to think about. Might try and bring the old tune over to the new power FC with FC Pro. Don't expect to see any change but

Have you got a valid Vehicle speed signal on both PFC's.

Generally when you have delta idle ignition maps, you need to lockout their effect via either vehicle speed or rpm or both.

The logging I did with FC Pro shows both RPM and Speed about where they should be. Revs slowly rising and speed rising very slowly till the Timing returns to normal at which point it increases faster

O.K i have made some sort of progress on this. It's not giving me the answer but I have found some proof that of where the problem lies, here is the explaination I've just been writing:

So when lifting off the ECU should realise TPS is back to idle and initiate fuel cut to the determined point (As tuned, the F/C AC on and off) right. So I have a permanent wideband setup and driving around now I’m just noticing that its taking a little longer for it to realise the throttle is closed, it drops down in the 10’s:1 AFR momentarily before going right to max lean. Now on the old Power FC when lifting off it went quickly to full rich then quickly to full lean, which is to be expected. So the new Power FC isn’t making this transition as quickly for some reason. I think this is the root cause of the problem.

Also if I stay off the throttle (In this case lets assume im in second) until the F/C window is reached and it goes back to having a readable AFR (Not just off the scale lean) and I then put my foot down, no such problems, it takes off fine.

I'm wondering if its just the TPS or is it something in the ECU. It just seems strange that it works faultlessly on the old Power FC

BTW, since the last post I have:

Used FC Pro to pull the tune from my old Power FC, done a data init on the new one and put the new tune on it. Have completed the self learn idle again. No results

Pulled the bridged neutral switch in case it thought the car was always in neutral, no results

Awaiting a reply from Apexi america, hopefully they reply soon

I loaded the tune with FC-Pro but previously have done the data init and used the HC to just change the injector and AFM settings to go for a drive and see if it made a difference but it still had the problem then

The logs I have from FC-Pro show everything normal except for the timing, where it appears pretty much the same as the chart from FC edit above. FC-Pro is good for logging as it logs everything and you can select any point along the log and it tells you all values at that point

But it just isnt helping me at the moment :(

Logged a run with the old power FC and the only difference is there are voltages at the AN1 and AN3 points, but these have nothing to do with the Power FC when the FC-Hako is disconnected so I think thats a dead end

I pulled my TPS off and checked to make sure everything was working. And it looks like its 100% O.K

emailed APEXi Pacific before so hopefully get a response from them. At this point I just want to send it back for repairs/replacement

If it's commanding the low ignition values then it's software based; hence a software issue.

Hopefully it's an easy fix. Maybe it's something to do with how quick they allow the ignition to transition between commanded values....

A few of the high end ecu's like autronic can change how quickly ignition timing can be ramped in and out, wouldn't surprise me if PFC had similar background variables. This is usually only required on high compression engines where transient knock can be an issue.

If it's commanding the low ignition values then it's software based; hence a software issue.

Hopefully it's an easy fix. Maybe it's something to do with how quick they allow the ignition to transition between commanded values....

A few of the high end ecu's like autronic can change how quickly ignition timing can be ramped in and out, wouldn't surprise me if PFC had similar background variables. This is usually only required on high compression engines where transient knock can be an issue.

Best answer so far, Thank you :)

Makes sense

Just not sure why its occuring at the moment. Wonder if I will have to send it back or if they will give me the stuff to re-write software on it. I highly doubt that but

Appears to be all the time. I have loaded 2 different maps in there (albeit both maps from my car) and driven with data init performed and just the injector and AFM settings changed via hand controller just to get it moving. Havent got a reply from apexi yet. So think I try and contact Apexi america again and maybe get in touch with apexi japan

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...