I don't want to make timing or fueling recommendations at higher speed and load without AFR and torque curve data. However, there are 3 things that jump out at me right away that you could probably afford to improve:

1) At low speed and low load, a healthy amount of advance will improve your tip-in performance
2) Similarly, at low speed and low load, you can lean out the mixture well beyond stoich to improve tip-in performance
^^CAUTION: Make these changes modestly and don't carry them to far into the map as speed and load increase
3) In your timing tables, when you see one value that stands out as an outlier in either a row or column of an otherwise smooth 3D plot, my experience has been that these values will make an engine buck and stumble during transient operation. When I was calibrating race engines, we would typically tune in every base value at steady state, plot a 3D table of fuel and ignition, and then chop down the peaks and lift up the valleys. This is also very common practice for OEMs...

So what change do you suggest ?

This maps I have made them my self from 0 it’s my first car and my searching all day. All of the help that this forum will give it will be great.

Well I don't want to give you actual numbers, because tuning should be done iteratively in real time. However, your low speed and low load value in both the AFR table and the ignition table can be leaned out and advanced, respectively. Again, though, don't take these values to far into the map. As speed and load increase (especially higher load at lower speed), you're in a danger zone if you keep things lean and advanced. High load and low speed is the most dangerous part of a map because of a competition between flame speed and piston speed at those points that is a ripe recipe for severe detonation when you kick of your firing event too soon by using too much advance. The changes I'm talking about are very small changes that you can make at idle and right off idle that will improve the responsiveness of your engine.

Then there your ignition tables. I see a few rows and columns where you have nice steady rise in advance and a single point or two with a jump in timing. Usually those jumps in timing in one cell will lead to bucking during transient operation, even though they may look great when you're tuning at near steady state conditions on a dyno.

Does that make sense?

Yes thank you very much. How much leaner on idle and cruise are you suggesting ?

Here's a really good resource for someone just staring out. Jeff Hartman wrote a version 1 book back in 2004 which is one of the first ones I read. He speaks in a tangible way that makes the books seem less like a textbook and makes the calibration process a lot less intimidating. I highly recommend reading this or something similar before going too much further:

https://www.amazon.com/Modify-Autom...+to+tune+and+modify+engine+management+systems

Thank you again for the help

The AFR you lean out to varies a ton from engine to engine. Most of my experience is on highly strung, naturally aspirated race engines with high compression ratios and really high redlines. At part load the mixing was terrible so they would tolerate a ton of advance at low speed and load without detonation because there just wasn't much combustible gas available to burn. We would typically lean out to AFR's in the neighborhood of 17 or 18:1 and run advance up to 60 degrees BTDC. But there's no way these numbers are going to be the same for you. If you can find an article about the process for setting up idle on an old air cooled VW while messing with the carb adjustment and the distributor, mimicking that process is a good way to find where your AFR and timing ought to be at idle for an EFI engine.

TasosEclipse said:

Thank you again for the help

Click to expand...

No worries man. I really enjoy this topic so if you ever have any oddball tuning questions with respect to base map calibration or how things work during combustion, air handling, spark and fuel interaction, etc.. just shoot me a PM sometime