Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I bought the innovate lm-1 kit to tune the afr with the datalogit.

It interfaces easily to one of the 0-5v analogue inputs and allows you to plot average afr for each load cell. Very easy to tune with.

I do the same with the tech edge...also too easy.

Hey BMX, hows the wrx catch can?

After finishing the current tank of fuel I was on I managed to travel 402km's on a full tank. This is a significant increase in fuel economy. The wideband tuning was done when my fuel tank was just over 1/2 used and the ODO was on approx 220km's when we had finished wideband tuning. I usually get approx 330km's to a full tank.

I will see how it goes next week as I have just filled up today. I expect around 450km's to a full tank which is a massive improvement.

Thanks to all of those who have offered help and assistance.

The PowerFC guide will be updated in the next few days to include the wideband on road tuning and how to do it.

Paul I reckon your problem lies somewhere else. The stock ECU and Powerfc should give about the same fuel consumption if you dont hamer it much. You wil be in closed loop most of the time - relying on 02 sensor reading.

Are you getting around 14.7AFR at idle and whenever car is in closed loop?

I was getting about 400-450km to a tank (about 11-12L/100km) without the powerfc tune. When stuck on the dyno the AFR went into the 9s at full throttle.

Since the tune I got about 460km to the tank (10.6L/100km) but I reckon if I stayed off the gas then I don't think there would be any difference in consumption. The timing down low doesn't give you much benefit in fuel economy. I think a wheel alignment might give you more if you have too much toe.

You should check your injector duty cycles and air flow voltage at say 60km/h, 70, 80 and 90 in 4th gear (on the flat) and compare them with others on here.

Maybe you just sit in bad traffic or have a lead foot!! hehehe

no i wasnt getting 14.7 under normal closed loop, the whole close loop imho is a bit of rip i think, it takes so long for the stocky 02 sensor to give anything useful to the ecu about the afr's almost not even worth having it on.

when ive done a full tank im gonna turn off 02 feedback.

with proplerly tuned afr's i dont think 02 feedback will do anything other than waste calculating power. ive never had good economy on the FC until now, when i tuned the INJ map with a wideband sensor. before then it was always average is 320/330/340. on a full tank of fwy i would get maybe 400 if i was lucky. never ever ever over.

stock ecu economy was ok ish, not super great. not over 400 thats for sure

i do mild spiritied driving some of the times but the majority is light load / cruise. my inj duties however around 1.8% 2.2% on light cruise

I just came back from Bendigo taking it easy and i got 390ks before the light comes on. I generally can push this out to 450 before i fill up (love running it on empty) Last tank 434ks. I was quite dissapointed with the open road cruising as i took it easy and was only gettting 100ks every quarter of a tank. When we tuned it we concentrated alot on fulll throttle but didnt do much on light throttle since upping the fuel pressure so i guess its guzzling on light throttle. Im smoothing out the part throttles Inj cycle to try and bring a little more effeciency into it. Even with the bigger turbo i think i could still get 500ks on a trip but might need a dyno to see my AFR's at light throttle.

Im experimenting at leaning it out a little on light throttle but its all guess work until i get a monitor. Remember i could only be adjusting it 1% here and there so its really not going to make much. I hope i dont lean it out too far.

about to upload my current tune data and .dat files and also got the datalogit afr chart in excel so i can spit out my afr's apparently based on what the pfc inj map values you are (so it claims anyway)

attached fuel inj compare against last tune and also fuel map and also datalogit tune .dat file. rename .txt to .dat and use it with datalogit if you wish

post-2054-1138879080.jpg

post-2054-1138879124.jpg

paulr33_193rwkw_widebandtuneup.txt

thanks Robo for pointing that out, something i clearly missed.

I managed to get 504k's to a full tank of all hwy driving on the weekend,

This week is city testing, so far 100k's on just under a 1/4 of a tank.

Will update those 3200rpm cells, should be 1.00 instead of 1.070

I was getting about 400-450km to a tank (about 11-12L/100km) without the powerfc tune.  When stuck on the dyno the AFR went into the 9s at full throttle. 

Since the tune I got about 460km to the tank (10.6L/100km) 

460km to the tank at 10.6L/100km would suggest that you have only a 48.76L fuel tank.

To properly work out fuel economy you need to start with a full tank, resest the trip meter drive how ever many Km's you want then refill tank to full and compare your actual Km's travelled to the amount of fuel you needed to fill it back up.

My around town fuel consumption for my PFC tuned 25t is 15L/100km which would be 433km's on a tank (65 litres) full to empty.

I did the fill up reset the trip, then fill up again to get those readings. Thats the only accurate way you can do it. Not everyone is going to run it dry..I ran it till almost E and got 460km - no doubt plenty left - yes I put in close to 49L. You probably will never run it down to less than 5L unles you really push it.

15L/100km is horrid. To be honest though I havent really done much heavy traffic driving - I guess mine would probably go to 12-13L/100km then. They are only a 2.5L engine. If u use boost a lot then expect bad consumption.

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...