How does this target AFR table look?, VE table results after autotune |
|
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG.
This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way. Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners. |
|
How does this target AFR table look?, VE table results after autotune |
rwilner |
Mar 28 2012, 08:36 AM
Post
#1
|
No Ghosts in the Machine Group: Members Posts: 953 Joined: 30-March 10 From: Boston, MA Member No.: 11,530 Region Association: North East States |
I'm going to use the autotune feature of Microsquirt to set my fuel map (VE table). This system will automatically adjust the VE to achieve the mixture as defined by the target AFR table.
This is a 12x12 table. The Y axis is MAP reading (load), and the X axis is RPM. This table was auto-generated by this microsquirt calculator. What do you guys think? Is this a solid target AFR table or are adjustments needed? |
McMark |
Mar 29 2012, 12:02 PM
Post
#2
|
914 Freak! Group: Retired Admin Posts: 20,179 Joined: 13-March 03 From: Grand Rapids, MI Member No.: 419 Region Association: None |
You should do your own safe testing, because I haven't.
Here's what I see in the factory manuals... Which I read to be: +0° vac. adv. at 100 mmHg (33.8 kPa) and below +11-14° vac. adv. at 200 mmHg (67.7 kPa) and above What's your idling kPa? I'm not proposing that adding 14° of vac. adv. is a good idea. Just suggesting that, based on my interpretation, the stock dist. adds that much. I wouldn't go over you max. adv. (28°), but bringing your 100kPa @ 1200rpm bin up to quite a bit and then linearly degrading with dropping kPa. Something like the following, might be helpful. I distributed 14° between 45kPa and 100kPa, without going over 28° at any point. 8-22-26-28-28-28 8-20-24-27-28-28 8-18-22-25-28-28 8-16-20-23-26-28 8-14-18-21-24-28 8-12-16-19-22-26.5 8-10-14-17-20-24.5 8-8-12-15-18-22.5 And again, the above suggestion is based on speculation, not experience. Try it at your own risk and always listen for sounds of pinging or other problems. And only add as much advance as makes power. Watch your CHT & EGT. |
JamesM |
Mar 29 2012, 10:46 PM
Post
#3
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1,958 Joined: 6-April 06 From: Kearns, UT Member No.: 5,834 Region Association: Intermountain Region |
You should do your own safe testing, because I haven't. Here's what I see in the factory manuals... Which I read to be: +0° vac. adv. at 100 mmHg (33.8 kPa) and below +11-14° vac. adv. at 200 mmHg (67.7 kPa) and above What's your idling kPa? I'm not proposing that adding 14° of vac. adv. is a good idea. Just suggesting that, based on my interpretation, the stock dist. adds that much. I wouldn't go over you max. adv. (28°), but bringing your 100kPa @ 1200rpm bin up to quite a bit and then linearly degrading with dropping kPa. Something like the following, might be helpful. I distributed 14° between 45kPa and 100kPa, without going over 28° at any point. 8-22-26-28-28-28 8-20-24-27-28-28 8-18-22-25-28-28 8-16-20-23-26-28 8-14-18-21-24-28 8-12-16-19-22-26.5 8-10-14-17-20-24.5 8-8-12-15-18-22.5 And again, the above suggestion is based on speculation, not experience. Try it at your own risk and always listen for sounds of pinging or other problems. And only add as much advance as makes power. Watch your CHT & EGT. Mark, I had initially gone the same route and tried to translate the factory information into an advance table but then realized a couple things. One is that both vacuum advance and retard need to be taken into account and two is that the factory chart is listing the vacuum at the distributor ports which is not the actual manifold vacuum as these ports go to various locations on the throttle body so they dont translate directly into a table based on manifold vacuum. Also as far as the 2.0 motor goes, there was ZERO vac advance from 74 onward. even though the port was on the dizzy. I would say stick with the RPM only advance right now as that table appears to be close, if not exactly the same as specs I have seen Jakes RPM advance curve listed as and any adjustment beyond that should probably be done on a dyno. I am not sure running near full advance at low RPM, WOT conditions is a good idea. |
rwilner |
Mar 30 2012, 09:16 AM
Post
#4
|
No Ghosts in the Machine Group: Members Posts: 953 Joined: 30-March 10 From: Boston, MA Member No.: 11,530 Region Association: North East States |
One is that both vacuum advance and retard need to be taken into account This is an interesting point. The MS takes into account only Manifold Pressure "position", i.e. the instantaneous MP, to calculate advance. However, the factory arrangement takes into account MP"change in position", i.e. whether it's increasing or decreasing, to calculate advance. In this way, the factory setup is actually more sophisticated than MS! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) QUOTE two is that the factory chart is listing the vacuum at the distributor ports which is not the actual manifold vacuum as these ports go to various locations on the throttle body so they dont translate directly into a table based on manifold vacuum. This is also a great point. For the manifold vacuum sense pickup, I've connected the port on the plenum just downstream of the throttle body to the MPS. Is this the best place to measure manifold pressure? Would it be better to use one of the ports further down on the plenum (ex. where the vaccum elbow connects), or better yet to install a nipple someplace special? |
ChrisFoley |
Mar 30 2012, 09:43 AM
Post
#5
|
I am Tangerine Racing Group: Members Posts: 7,958 Joined: 29-January 03 From: Bolton, CT Member No.: 209 Region Association: None |
This is an interesting point. The MS takes into account only Manifold Pressure "position", i.e. the instantaneous MP, to calculate advance. However, the factory arrangement takes into account MP"change in position", i.e. whether it's increasing or decreasing, to calculate advance. In this way, the factory setup is actually more sophisticated than MS! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif) Analog vs digital. The sampling rate of MS should be fast enough that instantaneous mp measurements are sufficient to at least be the equal of an electro-mechanical device connected to a pcb filled with resistors and transistors. Ie., the MPS "sophistication" was needed to overcome the shortcomings of rudimentary electronic circuitry. |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th September 2024 - 06:21 AM |
All rights reserved 914World.com © since 2002 |
914World.com is the fastest growing online 914 community! We have it all, classifieds, events, forums, vendors, parts, autocross, racing, technical articles, events calendar, newsletter, restoration, gallery, archives, history and more for your Porsche 914 ... |