i'm don't have any thing in front of me, but you have your scale, it's the +10 that is your offset.

 

I must not have hit "calculate" when I put the values in before.
Based on the entries I put in: 0v = 7.35 / 5v = 22.39
The rtek calculated a multilpier of 3.08 and offset of 7.35

Now the rtek reads 18.X when the AFR is 13.X I tried revving the motor and the AFR ranged from 12.X to 16.X - the rtek only ranges from 18.03 - 18.88.

The wideband is an innovative LC-1. IT says the output is 7.35 - 22.39 (however it also says it ranges from 1v - 2v ???) I tried inputting the values from the manual and that didn't work either.

 

Are you sure you connected the proper output (output 2) from the LC-1 to the Rtek?
Did you disconnect the wire that used to go to the Rtek pin?
When you connect to the LC-1 with the LM Programmer software, is it actually set up like this:

 

Yes.
I connected the yellow wire (analog 1) from the LC-1 to the narrowband input on the ecu. The brown wire (Analog 2) is connected to the var resistor pin of the ecu. The var resistor wire was cut and capped off and the unit was removed from the car. I don't have access to the programing software because i don't have the cable to connect the lc-1 to a laptop.

 

Those numbers are right.

Use the "Raw Voltage" preset and see what the voltage is ranging. Either you have a bad connection or the LC1 is not set up right.

 

FWIW, I ended up using the ATP input because I couldn't seem to get the VAR RES input working right, could have been a problem with my wiring tho...

I didn't have any issues with sensor scaling.

Good luck, hope you get it all sorted!

 

Interesting... Voltage is 3.5 most of the time. "range" is from about 3.45 -3.57

The wiring has been triple checked, but the wideband is used, maybe he screwed up the settings? I can't check though because I don't have the stereo to DB9 cable...

 

I would check the settings on the controller itself. Out of the box my LC-1 fed the right info to the Rtek, and logged the correct AFRs.

I've been using slightly tweaked LOAD based maps for over 2 years with my setup. I pretty much just pulled 1-2 degrees from the areas I expect to see 8+ psi. I was going for roughly duplicating the additional timing pulled by the Rtek 1.7 for boost over 9 psi. The stock maps won't do that, so I added it in myself for safety. I run 12 psi max, and you can see the rest of my setup in my sig.

Here is a complete version of the S4 TII leading timing map (the one Arghx posted is a quick one I made awhile ago).



I also took some data from a log I made of a 4th gear highway pull, and came up with some rough estimates for load based on timing and RPM. Anywhere I have load at 84%+ could in fact be up to 100%, but I can't tell because the top 2-3 cells of the timing map are the same.

This is at WOT from 3500 RPM to 6000 RPM with the boost controller set to only 8 psi. I would have gone to redline, but I figured it would be a good idea to let off at 110 MPH.

 

Thanks for posting this. Here is your map compared to the boost-based map I posted in another thread, which I called the "conservative" map





Now of course they are based on two different signals, the MAP signal vs the AFM signal. Generally speaking though we can see that on the load-based map you are using the top 3 rows as the AFM load calculation maxes out. If we could rescale or otherwise recalibrate the AFM, you would be adjusting it so that you would fall into a lower load row.

The biggest difference you will notice between my map and the stock one is that I am running way less timing over 5000rpm. This is where **** gets real on ported engines with big turbos. Running 30 degrees of leading advance at 6000rpm on a ported motor with bigger turbo is just asking for it.

Now if you wanted to stay with the load-based map on a more heavily modified setup, you would really have to tweak the top 3 rows. You could keep the engine from blowing up but it's not going to be ideal. So let's say you crank the boost up to 15 pounds on a BNR stage 4 but you are hitting the top two load rows even before that. Well you would have to make big changes to the top two or three rows on the load-based maps. End result: if you used load-based maps and the load calculation maxes out, you will have reduced performance or an increased risk of engine damage. Due to AFM limitations you will have to run too much or too little timing under certain conditions.

RotaryRocket could you put together a trailing and/or split map for us? It would be a big help. I want to make a thread about this in the 2nd gen technical forum explaining some of this stuff, especially for guys who want to push a completely stock ECU on a bigger turbo.

 

Sure, I'll put together a trailing/split map to go along with this one. It always makes me cringe when I see people running hybrids on just an Rtek 1.8, or a stock ECU and an SAFC. That timing advance up top is no doubt there because the stock turbo runs out of breath as it approaches redline, but a bigger turbo is still going to be flowing a lot of air in the 6k+ RPM range.

For the minimal timing adjustments I've done, I did exactly what you're suggesting: tweak the top 3 rows of the map. You can see from my graphs that once you reach about the 8 psi level, it stays fairly consistently in the 80%+ load range. So if I want to make sure that when I'm at 10+ psi timing is a degree or two less than stock, I'll go in a make those adjustments in the top 2 or 3 rows.

Now once I finish building the hybrid turbo on my workbench, I'll switch things over to boost-based timing since I can figure out where adjustments will be needed much more easily. It's too bad load is not a setting we can log with the Rtek. Maybe Turb2ltr knows the calculation the ECU uses?

 

Excellent into guys, thanks!

I have sent a pm to the guy I got the wideband from, I suspect he changed some settings....looks like I'll have to order another cable from innovative so I can fix it.

 

Alright, so in the previous version of the leading map I forgot the 63% load row, so use this one:



And now for the trailing and split maps. The color scales feature in excel is pretty badass. If anyone wants the excel version of these for editing, PM me.

 

Ok, got the AFR datalogging issue resolved...apparently the random leaning issue has been resolved as well.

To install the Analog outputs of the WB I de-pinned the pins from the harness to make it easier to wire it up. Initially I took out the pin in the largest connector 3rd from the right on the bottom row (light blue w/ white stripe). However once I re-read the instructions I realized it was the middle plug that housed the VR pin. Apparently I forgot to fully re-seat the pin for the blue/white wire and perhaps the VR pin as well, because I took them out, cleaned them and now everything seems to be working.

I just took this 2nd gear log to test. AFR seemed to stay around 12-13 (before it used to jump to 20.X (apparently because of improper voltage to that blue/white wire). Hopefully I'll be able to turn my attention to timing and input the above maps soon now that AFR are acting reasonable.

 

Glad you got it all figured out! Time for some ecu tuning! Good luck!

 

had to stab the throttle twice while letting out the clutch to get moving?

 

Yessir! Lightweight flywheel ftw

Also, apparently that other wire that wasn't quite seated was pin 1F (A/C main relay) its supposed to OUTPUT 12v w/ a/c off....not sure how that manifests into the symptoms I was having but at this point I could care less.

 

So task #1 is to get these afr's in line.

Idle and cruise are fine 14-15 afr. However for some reason, low-load acceleration is still causing lean conditions.

High-load (4th-5th gear) in contrast is fine. I can accelerate in 5th and afr stays around 11-12 up to 8psi which is where I let off.

However, if I am in 1st-3rd afr will drop to 13.X at thee lowest and start creeping up to 14-15, this is all at low boost (0-5 psi). At first I thought it was a fueling issue, but it takes more fuel to maintain 11afr @ 8psi than it should to do so @ 0psi, so it must be the tune right?

This is just a stock turbo, why should I have to add fuel especially in low boost areas of the map? I had already added +5% fuel at 0psi and above for all rpm.

So tonight I bumped it to +7% above 0 psi at 20XXrpm and tapered it up to 10% @ redline.

We shall see...

 

And the results are in....
What I did was pull off from a stop and ran out 1st 2nd and 3rd, I then put it into 5th and cruised down the road a bit...
Despite the lean AFR it pulled pretty hard and did not hiccup.


Then I went WOT in 5th while monitoring AFR...
Everything went smoothly, and counter-intuitively the afr's dropped to a reasonable level unlike the 1-2-3 pulls.


I came to another stoplight and ran through 1st, 2nd, and 3rd again, but this time I used part throttle instead of WOT.....apparently my car does NOT like this wtf???
I'm out of ideas on this one, makes no sense to me.


Finally I did another WOT 5th gear pull and pretty much got the same results...


I have attached a copy of the full log, 6:33 for anyone interested in specifics or other areas of operation. I would appreciate any insight that anyone may have in regards to improvements to be made.

 

Notice when your secondaries come online, that's when you have lean issues. Fifth gear pull and no secondaries come online?

I can't look at the actual log right now. but it seems when your secondaries come online, this is where your problem is. You're sure your secondaries are 720's or more? Are they the correct impedence?...

WTF and on the part throttle, your secondaries are switching back off? (see the yellow bar on the bottom of the log) WTF... wierd.

 

Yes, I noticed that when I went through the log after posting. So I guess I'm back where I started. I have verified that the secondaries click appropriately using the cas test, so perhaps there is something clogging the injector? Also they are originally 680cc injectors, however after cleaning they flowed 710cc @ 2.5 bar (which is what idle fuel pressure has been set to). Perhaps they have reverted back to 680's? Impedence is low, like 3.X

I went back and upped the fuel from 3k - 8k from -8hg - 14psi. Basically its +7% @ 3k and 0psi it increases 1% every cell from that . So +8% @ 3k and 2psi and 8% @ 3.5k and 0psi. Its up to +20% to +23% in the higher rpm/boost cells. I took a log this afternoon so I'll see what affect that had.

Like said, I have no idea what's going on w/part throttle, boggles the **** outta me! Maybe a tps issue? The tps only seems to read closed, 20% and 98% basically cruise and wot. Seems to me that if its reading wot and I'm actually giving it part throttle it should read rich not lean.

 

Still not fixed, this makes no sense whatsoever!

 

Ok, just to update, the strange leaning issue had been solved!

I couldn't figure out why it started after I changed the clutch/flywheel, I figured I must have missed a ground or knocked a write loose somehow...wrong. Apparently it was the break in period for the clutch that must have caused my secondaries to stick closed.

Yesterday I (once again) pulled the uim verified injector resistance, checked harness/plug continuity, fuel pressure and vac leaks. However I also decided to apply 12v to the secondary injectors while the rail was pressurized. To my surprise (well not too surprised as they were recently cleaned) they both worked great. Fed up that I couldn't find this mystery problem I bolted everything back up and called it a night.

Today on the way back from picking up a 20b afm I decided I'd see where it wanted to lean out today. I almost **** myself when I saw 9.2 afr! Lmao, guess I should go back to the stock map now that the secondaries work again.

M oforal the story, use your secondaries every time u drive and never let them go unused for 2 months, even if you're breaking in a clutch!