miliman13
10+ Year Contributor
- 1,957
- 276
- Jan 1, 2011
-
tampa,
Florida
I also meant to ask how you are supplying the 5v source to the sensor.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
This site may earn a commission from merchant
affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I also meant to ask how you are supplying the 5v source to the sensor.
I agree that shouldn't be the problem, but it's an easy check to do. Although, if there's a restriction somewhere, it won't do much.
At this point, it's probably a good idea to send the injectors out, and get them looked at.
BTW, Kenny is a boss at tuning, so I'd trust his advice.
How new is that pump? Unless there's a restriction you haven't found somewhere, I'd lean toward the pump possibly being the issue.
What AFPR are you running?
What's your fuel line setup like?
Can you post the latest log ? Since getting everything in order.The pump has about 4k miles on it at most.
FPR is a fuelab.
Fuel lines are stock.
I doubt a fuel line is clogged. I run seafoam through the tank a few times a year to get the E85 goo out off the injectors. I mean its possible, but I feel very slim. Is there some settings in ECMlink that could have possibly got changed somehow to cause this?
I had the car running 11.5 afr on my mass air flow sensor at 30psi right before I installed the speed density kit. I switched to speed density, attempted to tune it myself and failed, then hit up kenny to tune and he said its broken.
So I know the car can flow the fuel I need on maf. Just the VE table is out of whack. Or its not making changes to my car for some reason when we up the number. Is it possible that I didnt tell the car to use the table or something? Maybe I didnt set up speed density properly?
Can you post the latest log ? Since getting everything in order.
Im sure we can check the data of the log and settings to see.
Maybe I'm seeing the info incorrectly..
(***)
The screen shot shows A linear wideband of 12.6 and your est: 11.5.
At 5k , 100% throttle .
I also opened your logs
Now i may have different raw values for my linear than you .
Maybe that's why what I'm seeing, may be different from you .
Also using the stoichiometric ratio of e85 of 9.85... With 1450's at base pressure of 47 .
Link calculated -55.7% global .
Your fuel logged values look good on link.wideband
For the most part it looks good at around 12.0 at wot...
Are you aiming for 11.5?
(***)
Fyi just because the wideband looks good at cruise means nothing.
I had to recalibrate my WB it didn't Match at wot only.
Once i got the raw values to match what i was seeing on the gauge
it turned out i can significantly lower the VE numbers and now my logged AF matches my gauge.
I hope any of this can help..
Edit, i removed some stuff....i realized i was making it complicated
Considered changing the global settings ?
Yes 880's is correct.Yeah but there already scaled way down to 880's which is not right. I just took the fuel sliders and jacked them way up and the car went to a 10.0 AFR. So it is completely capable of getting the fuel there, just not within reason on the VE table.
Attached I have a new log after all the changes as well as a settings file.
Yes 880's is correct.
That's the settings you have on the log with a 14.7 gas scale.
With 9.8 ethanol scale the global is different.
Which is what the wiki recommends.
So using them as 880 sets the global close to what it would be if you had used the ethanol stoichiometric ratio
Possibly a dying fuel pump. I've heard of knock-off 450s accidentally being sold to people. I'm sure somebody has an old fuel pump they can send you. Hell, I do.
I think this is exactly what i was trying to convey....Ran across this picture from FIC in regards to my injectors and E85. It looks like they flow less volume of fluid with E85 by 11%. Which would mean 1450 * 11% = 159. So that would mean they are actually flowing about 1291 with E85. Then 1291*.67=864. So that would mean that I should have to scale them even lower than I have them right now. So is it possible that I just need to adjust my global lower?
You must be logged in to view this image or video.
I think this is exactly what i was trying to convey....
Also the 11% difference is cited on the wiki that i mentioned before.
https://www.ecmtuning.com/wiki/e85fuel
https://www.ecmtuning.com/wiki/injdata-fueltype
Yeah, ECMlink says -55.7 should be your global value based on your current settings. So, you're already way off.
You must be logged in to view this image or video.
I was under the assumption global was already set rich because you were trying to sort out the lean condition. Setting it even more rich than it currently is doesn't seem like a great idea. If you're not seeing a change in AFRs by adjusting VE richer, I doubt a bump in global will yield any better results.
Did you not have the injectors flow tested when you sent them out for cleaning?
Post a good 3rd gear pull and I'll tweak your VE table, and set global where it should be. You can then do a pull on that tune and see where you're at. I also need a shot of your injecor flow rates, and the voltages if you have them.