ECMlink First Start on Speed Density - Need some help

[greddy_1700]

Hey,

Just finished up my very delayed 1g build, where I upgraded some components on my 2.3 stroker, and swapped to speed density. Here are some of the mods:

2.3 Stroker engine, FP 76Hta Turbo setup, 1200cc High Z injectors (resistor deleted, and voltage based deadtime adjusted), Fuel pressure set 42.5, GSC R2 stroker cams, AEM 5 bar MAP, GM IAT, AEM x series wideband, retained factory narrow band O2.

Here is my first idle log after setting my base timing to 5 degrees, and adjusting my BISS to get IAC bouncing around 25-30. Can someone take a look and let me know why I am not cycling in closed loop, or why my wideband is showing around 12:1 vs AFRest being closer to 14-15?

I also saw my STFT was consistently -10 or less, so I tried pulling more fuel from the global adjust, but not having any affect there.

Ive been out of the game for a while so please be patient with me, plus this is my first time tuning on speed density vs the old GM MAF setup I had.

 

[nice97civic]

Your deadtime is set to 0. At idle, deadtime is going to adjust your AFR. Ideally you can find an injector sheet that will list your deadtime, but if not adjust that until your idle afr are in line.

 

[greddy_1700]

I was under the impression that if using the InjBatteryAdjust that I shouldnt play around with the deadtime at all separately? I adjusted those voltages based off the datasheet that came with my FIC injectors.

 

[jdxnc]

Your deadtime is set to 0. At idle, deadtime is going to adjust your AFR. Ideally you can find an injector sheet that will list your deadtime, but if not adjust that until your idle afr are in line.

He's using voltage based deadtime in DA, you would leave deadtime in fuel injection at 0 in that case.

 

[jdxnc]

I was under the impression that if using the InjBatteryAdjust that I shouldnt play around with the deadtime at all separately? I adjusted those voltages based off the datasheet that came with my FIC injectors.

Correct. Although the numbers on the sheet are a starting point, they're based on a perfect world and these cars are never that. You might need to adjust them slightly down the road for a finer tune.

 

[nice97civic]

He's using voltage based deadtime in DA, you would leave deadtime in fuel injection at 0 in that case.

Ah got it thanks for setting me straight.

 

[curt-s]

You also can't do per-injector adjustments in the DA Table as you can in the ECU config Fuel tab.

Any particular reason why the global fuel is for 1350s and not 1200s?

So your idle vacuum is -4/-5. That seems excessively low. That's putting you higher into the VE table and pumping your fuel into the 60s VE-wise.
In fact, your average VE at idle is about 62.5

 

[greddy_1700]

Sorry, was playing with Global Fuel to try and see if it would lower my STFT's, but forgot that doesnt affect idle. I have since reset it to -65.4%

Normal idle when the fans arent on is around 7in, which is low but I felt that just might be a cascading effect of the somewhat rough idle / inability to go closed loop cycling. Any thoughts on what could cause a low vac at idle like that, aside of vac leaks? I did do a boost leak test and didnt see anything significant, but maybe I need to go back and check again.

I also just noticed that my AirflowPerRev seems really high, up around 0.65-0.70 gm/rev, and on the ECMLink site it says I should be around 0.24-0.28 gm/rev on a 2.3 stroker. Anyone have any thoughts on why my airflow is calculated so high yet im running so rich?

 

[jdxnc]

Is this a fresh engine build with no runtime on it?

 

[greddy_1700]

No this is my old 2.3 stroker that I pulled from my previous build, but upgraded the turbo, cams, springs, injectors, etc. Should be fully broken in.

I did also do a leakdown and compression test after installing the motor and everything seemed healthy in that regard.

 

[curt-s]

Global still affects idle but deadtime affects it more because it's a coarser adjustment at the shorter pulse widths.

Did you fully degree your cams or were they dropped in straightup? I mean, -4 is damn near atmospheric pressure. For comparisons, stock, you're around -20. On BC 272s straight up, -12 is common.

Either or, I think your lack of vacuum is putting you into VE 15-20% higher than expected at idle. That's going to add a significant enough amount of fuel.
If you're certain your low vac is correct, just adjust those VE cells to 55 at that RPM column as a start and see what you end up with.

 

[CrackedDSM]

FWIW my vacuum at idle on my BC cams is -6/-4.

I have a long rich history of struggling with this. What solved it was using a combination of negative deadtime on the fuel tab and dialing in the VE table at the idle cells.

After that she idles and runs like a champ.

I’m not an ECMLink expert though, just giving my experience.

 

[curt-s]

Mine was -12 on a fresh build straight up. -20 now that I'm back on stock.

Negative deadtime is just pulling microseconds from the DA table values anyway, so it doesn't matter where you remove it. The fuel tab just affects every voltage equally but, depending on your injectors response to voltage, that negative value may need scaling as well. That's why the DA table is more "accurate". This is also why the values between voltages don't scale linearly. It's important to note that we spend most of our life halfway between 12V and 14V so the effect of voltage on the injectors is basically transparent, except for 12V when you're cranking. End result: the fuel tab is good enough for most "fine tuning" purposes, as long as you remember where your changes were made. They can be translated to the DA table later or not at all -- your choice.


The way I see it, you need to adjust your VE for those idle cells. Basically, your turbo is not actually providing the extra air mass at idle to reduce the vacuum, as it does in cruise or on a pull. That means that extra fuel is not needed. The VE cells in the idle RPM columns below -10 or so are basically unused for a standard 4g63 and is just a guess/starting point because nobody has run one at 950rpm at/near equilibrium or positive pressure (an electric turbo or supercharger could do it though) If you had stock cams, your engine would have been thoroughly done for anyway if you had -4/-6 and the cells wouldn't matter at all because you'd be rebuilding.

Since you're outside of the norms of what the stock VE table was developed to do, you'll have to adjust those cells yourself. You'll be changing the whole table anyway

I would think that to get such low vacuum, all valves must be open together on the intake stroke a lot longer.. so you'd be pulling in exhaust gas as well, including unburnt. This should also reduce your extra fueling requirement. Or am I misisng something..

 

[greddy_1700]

I will have to give the car another once over, but I might just start dropping the VE table once I confirm.

I did degree the cams as per the cam card, however, I couldnt get them perfect, and went with the centerline method as per GSC recommendations. I could maybe see it being a degree off one way or another due to that inaccuracy, but I doubt it would be enough to cause valves to have a significant overlap to the point I would be dropping that far in vacuum.

 

[curt-s]

Then it is what it is. All that's left then is to adjust your VE table where it idles.
Your NB O2 points to rich and this causes the ECU to try and adjust until it runs out of adjustment room, and that leaves you still at 12:1.
Given it's still pig rich even though the trim is trying to pull as much fuel as it can, this is why you're not entering closed loop.

1G Open loop mode (any one true)​

• Throttle position too high (varies by RPM)
• Airflow too low (units are tricky, but it's very low)
• Coolant temp < 87F
• The O2 sensor did not switch around 0.5v for over 20 seconds while running in closed loop mode. In that case, the ECU locks itself in open loop mode.

 

[Stapl3]

First of all, if you have a 2.3, you need to put LoadScale correctly. As suggested on that tab, it should be 87 instead of 100.
If you tell me your overbore on the engine I can give you a more specific number than 87.

Your timing table is absurd. Load in a stock 2g table. https://www.ecmtuning.com/wiki/v3configs

1) Put the global fuel % where you think it should be.
2) Put the base fuel pressure according to the gauge where you think it should be.
3) Do a WOT pull to at least 5500rpm
4) Post a log of that pull.

 

[greddy_1700]

First of all, if you have a 2.3, you need to put LoadScale correctly. As suggested on that tab, it should be 87 instead of 100.
If you tell me your overbore on the engine I can give you a more specific number than 87.

Your timing table is absurd. Load in a stock 2g table. https://www.ecmtuning.com/wiki/v3configs

1) Put the global fuel % where you think it should be.
2) Put the base fuel pressure according to the gauge where you think it should be.
3) Do a WOT pull to at least 5500rpm
4) Post a log of that pull.

Sorry, can you confirm where to adjust LoadScale? On the Speed Density tab did I need to do more than to change the displacement from 2.0 to 2.3?

Also, I have the standard 1g timing tables loaded, pardon my ignorance but is the 2g timing table that much different / better than the stock 1g timing table?

 

[nice97civic]

LoadScale is right above OpenLoopMaxOct in the direct access portion

 

[Stapl3]

Also, I have the standard 1g timing tables loaded, pardon my ignorance but is the 2g timing table that much different / better than the stock 1g timing table?

2g table would be a much better fit for now.

 

[DSMPT]

I did degree the cams as per the cam card, however, I couldnt get them perfect, and went with the centerline method as per GSC recommendations. I could maybe see it being a degree off one way or another due to that inaccuracy, but I doubt it would be enough to cause valves to have a significant overlap to the point I would be dropping that far in vacuum.

It's kind of normal that you have low vacuum if you have aggressive cams and the idle engine speed is set low for the aggressive cams. You won't have vacuum like with the stock cams or mild range cams. You would have more vacuum if set the idle target higher or/and advancing the ignition timing in the idle area.

 

[greddy_1700]

Thanks everyone, havent had a chance to get back to the car but hopefully this weekend I can make the adjustments and try a few things. So far my plan is as follows:

1. Reset global fuel to -65.4%
2. Increase target idle to 1000 rpm to help with some vacuum issues
3. Load the 2g timing tables
4. Adjust load scale to 87

Once I have that I will see how things act, and likely start pulling from the VE table at idle to get my AFR's in check and cycling in closed loop.

Can someone confirm what adjusting load scale will do? Does it change the overall VE calc such that it will put me in a different cell on the VE table? Does it change the scaling / values on the VE table? Just trying to get a better understanding of the relationships of these adjustments.

 

[nice97civic]

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

 

[greddy_1700]

So made my adjustments with no change, however, boost est and AFR est both started to match with my gauges. The one thing I did note now is that while BoostEST and my boost gauge match, my MAP is reading about half as much vacuum (ie gauge and AFREst show ~10-11in, but my MAP is reading 4-5). Would this indicate their is likely a problem with my MAP sensor, wiring, or overall setup of the sensor? Or is that likely just a coincidence? I know its hard to tell, just curious on peoples thoughts. I am debating ordering a new replacement AEM 5 bar to test, but dont want to spend a few hundred dollars on just a hunch if I can avoid it.

 

[Imback]

Just seen this post. Are you using ecmlinks plug and play SD cable? If so you the cables are wired up to read the map sensor off of the baro input so you need to switch sensor location under pin assignment. Also are you on pump or e85?