Commanding 11 afr and getting 11.7?

Discussion in 'Mazdaspeed 3/6 ECU Tuning' started by mazdas4me, Apr 11, 2017.

Watchers:
12 users.
  1. Fstrnyou

    Fstrnyou Greenie Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2016
    Posts:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Location:
    Rock Hill, SC
    Ratings:
    +10 / -0
    I'm sure there is a situation where the ECU will stop making that "correction" or maybe even increase that correction. Then you are left with an overly rich mixture, which isn't too terribly bad, OR ZZB from a lean mixture.
     
    Fstrnyou, via a Samsung mobile device, May 10, 2017
    #61
  2. mazdas4me

    mazdas4me Greenie Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2016
    Posts:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA
    Ratings:
    +49 / -0
    I have my ATR, MAP, and a good log posted for download. You are very welcome to check it out and make suggestions, or maybe it is something you will see right away. You could actually modify the map with my ATR. :) I am no dummy, but far from tuning expert...
     
  3. Vansquish

    Vansquish Greenie Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2016
    Posts:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Detroit, MI/Bloomington, IN
    Ratings:
    +59 / -1
    It's interesting that your Abs Load Target and Norm BAT TRL tables are identical to your TRL Max A table and your Calc. Load Max A/B tables. I've found some weird behavior over the years with that sort of arrangement. For that reason, I always leave a bit of room between the Abs. Load Target and Norm BAT TRL values and the upper limit defined by the TRL Max A table and Calc. Load Max A/B tables.

    I'm not saying that this will definitely fix anything, but it might make your car behave more predictably at or near those limits.

    Moreover, your MAF curve is...um...wonky. It's not a particularly smooth curve, as it looks like you've been making point corrections to the values therein.

    I have attached a map revision that includes ONLY a tweak to the MAF A/B tables that looks like it should get you closer to your currently targeted 11.1:1.

    I would also note that your specific fuel gravity appears to have been changed in the wrong direction, but your map also includes a change to the injector scalar, so that may be your means of compensating for the fuel gravity issue.

    In any case, if you're using an E17 mix rather than straight 93 Octane (which is probably E10, anyway), then you could also try resetting the injector scalar to stock (1.00) and changing your current 0.7442 specific fuel gravity (which is increased from the stock 0.74) to something more like 0.7134. See the attached table for more info. VTCC.png
     

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 2
  4. broda

    broda Greenie Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2016
    Posts:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    PA
    Ratings:
    +30 / -0
    Have you made sure your MAF sensor is working properly? When mine was going down the crappers, I was getting very lean AFRs during WOT since it wasn't able to measure all the air that was going through my intake. I could adjust my MAF can but it would only make slight adjustments in my AFR with pretty drastic changes.
     
    broda, via a mobile device, May 27, 2017
    #64
  5. udntknw

    udntknw Silver Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2016
    Posts:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ
    Ratings:
    +34 / -0

    To piggyback off of this, when you correct your gravity, correct your scalar as well. The scalar alone is adding about 2% more fuel that needed if the gravity was correct.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)