How does my tune look?

[twolf]

So I did a bunch of datalogging last night on 93, then turned around to get some e30 in the tank, and re-logged in almost exactly the same spots.

Gonna go ahead and post the v-dynos and datazaps, using the settings from the v-dyno thread...

First Pull: Link

This was a 3rd gear 93 octane pull. Here's the v-dyno:

Second Pull: Link

This was also a 3rd gear 93 octane pull, but it had some wheel spin and the v-dyno will reflect that... it's kinda pointless to post, but here you go:

Third Pull: Link

Alright, so this was a 4th gear pull from 2k RPM... lots of surging, the throttle closures don't look to be ideal... you can see how funky the boost curve looks, and you can definitely feel/hear this happen in the car. Is this a tune issue or would it be related to my stock WGA? v-dyno:

Fourth Pull: Link

This is the first of the E30 pulls (3rd gear), and had a little wheel spin... but on the bright side I made 400whp and 600lb/ft of torque. v-dyno anyway:

Fifth Pull: Link

Second 3rd gear E30 pull. v-dyno:

Sixth Pull: Link

Third 3rd gear E30 pull. v-dyno:

Seventh Pull: Link

Fourth 3rd gear E30 pull. v-dyno:

Eighth Pull: Link

E30, 4th gear. Doesn't have the issue that 93 has with the surging? Hmm. v-dyno:

Ninth Pull: Link

Strangely enough, this pull was slightly down hill (down an exit ramp, the only not-flat pull in this group) and it knocked and pulled timing. Wonder if it had to do with wheel spin? Bizarre. 3rd gear. v-dyno:

Tenth and final pull: Link

Actually, looking at it, same issue on this pull. Same cylinder. I have new plugs on order, though... :/ v-dyno:

 

[twolf]

[MENTION=930]dyn085[/MENTION] [MENTION=4567]Ryephile[/MENTION] I would love to hear your input on these

I also noticed my car takes longer to crank when on the e30 map, not sure why that would be...

 

[frankiefiesta]

Just from a quick glance at the graphs your afr looks a bit lean to me. I'm no expert though.

Also why post graphs with tons of wheel spin? Turn esc off and record from a roll when you have traction. Maybe you need new tires or something. Maybe start recording at 3,000rpms might help

 

[twolf]

I do need new tires. They're 400tw. This was completely dry outside with ESC all the way off. Sad state

 

[Hijinx]

I think your AFR looks fine... I have a couple questions though... How is your tuner monitoring fuel and wastegate?
And what intercooler do you have? Because it's doing work.

As far as the surging (throttle closures) the tune is def using the throttle to limit boost, I'd like to see your WGDC though. Because on 93, you're probably hitting a ceiling/meeting certain conditions and the throttle is trying to do its job.

For your fuel, it'd be nice to see the pressure and STFT at least.

Corrections/timing look fine, as they trend positive, except for on your E30 tune. What's up with cyl 2? Check your plug gaps with particular attention to cyl 2.

Also, speak with your tuner, but you can ditch all the cyl knock counts. It's redundant when logging the corrections. Also, you can ditch 2, 3 and 4 cyl timing. There are other things to be logged that are more helpful. But, again, it really comes down to the tuner.


Scent from Glade Air Freshener

 

[twolf]

I think your AFR looks fine... I have a couple questions though... How is your tuner monitoring fuel and wastegate?
And what intercooler do you have? Because it's doing work.

As far as the surging (throttle closures) the tune is def using the throttle to limit boost, I'd like to see your WGDC though. Because on 93, you're probably hitting a ceiling/meeting certain conditions and the throttle is trying to do its job.

For your fuel, it'd be nice to see the pressure and STFT at least.

Corrections/timing look fine, as they trend positive, except for on your E30 tune. What's up with cyl 2? Check your plug gaps with particular attention to cyl 2.

Also, speak with your tuner, but you can ditch all the cyl knock counts. It's redundant when logging the corrections. Also, you can ditch 2, 3 and 4 cyl timing. There are other things to be logged that are more helpful. But, again, it really comes down to the tuner.


Scent from Glade Air Freshener

I googled a bit when frankie mentioned it, and found a chart that says e30 should have an AFR of 11.2 when it looks like my tuner is targeting 12.2 (Same as on my 93 tune) so I wonder if he's right?

IDK, this was an in-person dyno/street tune, so I'm not 100% on how he monitored fuel/WG

Why, DHM IC/Crashbar of course

So when I went to get tuned, my car was not liking it... timing advance had huge disparities across the cylinders, so we decided to pull the plugs. Mine were horrible (no shock, I run a lot of e30 through the engine and I had 30k miles) and the only plugs my tuner had on hand came out of my other friend's car which only had like 300 miles on them. I gapped them myself, so I know the gap is fine. One of the plugs was actually brand new, I wonder if that's the plug I put in cyl2. And yeah, I know putting in a used set of plugs (even if only 300 miles) is kind of sketch, but they were very significantly better than my old plugs (and free).

Like I said, I have new plugs in the mail so we'll see if that fixes the issue. I only noticed cyl 2 knock once on two pulls out of like 6, so I'm not extremely worried about it. If it doesn't improve with new plugs, then I'll go from there :/

These datalogs were just for my own personal curiosity, I can log whatever you'd like if there's something you'd like to see. If you'd like to see more logs with STFT, FRP, WGDC, etc just say the word, lol.

 

[Hijinx]

I googled a bit when frankie mentioned it, and found a chart that says e30 should have an AFR of 11.2 when it looks like my tuner is targeting 12.2 (Same as on my 93 tune) so I wonder if he's right?

IDK, this was an in-person dyno/street tune, so I'm not 100% on how he monitored fuel/WG

Why, DHM IC/Crashbar of course

So when I went to get tuned, my car was not liking it... timing advance had huge disparities across the cylinders, so we decided to pull the plugs. Mine were horrible (no shock, I run a lot of e30 through the engine and I had 30k miles) and the only plugs my tuner had on hand came out of my other friend's car which only had like 300 miles on them. I gapped them myself, so I know the gap is fine. One of the plugs was actually brand new, I wonder if that's the plug I put in cyl2. And yeah, I know putting in a used set of plugs (even if only 300 miles) is kind of sketch, but they were very significantly better than my old plugs (and free).

Like I said, I have new plugs in the mail so we'll see if that fixes the issue. I only noticed cyl 2 knock once on two pulls out of like 6, so I'm not extremely worried about it. If it doesn't improve with new plugs, then I'll go from there :/

These datalogs were just for my own personal curiosity, I can log whatever you'd like if there's something you'd like to see. If you'd like to see more logs with STFT, FRP, WGDC, etc just say the word, lol.

The AFR reading will depend... It's calibrated on gasoline stoich and I don't think we can switch to lambda. Odds are you were tuned on lambda. I might be getting my thoughts mixed up here and hopefully [MENTION=930]dyn085[/MENTION] will correct me if so. Basically wideband sensors don't know what blend of ethanol you're running... If we could see the lambda I'm betting you'd be fine. Targeting 12.2 (a gasoline AFR) you're probably seeing 11.8 and that's just speculation since I haven't done any math. E30 has a 13:1 stoich (Lambda = 1), but the AFR will show gasoline stoich 14.7:1 (lambda = 1). Lambda is lambda, and the wideband converts that to gasoline AFR, get it? So when you're idling and you see 14.7, it's really 13, if you can keep that in the back of your head.

The short of it is what you're seeing displayed is a bit higher than what's actually happening.

 

[twolf]

The insight is much appreciated. I definitely want to learn a lot more about tuning.

 

[dyn085]

The AFR reading will depend... It's calibrated on gasoline stoich and I don't think we can switch to lambda. Odds are you were tuned on lambda. I might be getting my thoughts mixed up here and hopefully [MENTION=930]dyn085[/MENTION] will correct me if so. Basically wideband sensors don't know what blend of ethanol you're running... If we could see the lambda I'm betting you'd be fine. Targeting 12.2 (a gasoline AFR) you're probably seeing 11.8 and that's just speculation since I haven't done any math. E30 has a 13:1 stoich (Lambda = 1), but the AFR will show gasoline stoich 14.7:1 (lambda = 1). Lambda is lambda, and the wideband converts that to gasoline AFR, get it? So when you're idling and you see 14.7, it's really 13, if you can keep that in the back of your head.

The short of it is what you're seeing displayed is a bit higher than what's actually happening.

You can change the fuel blend stoich reading in one of the folders but I'm at work and not near my ATR to say which one. You can monitor lambda by swapping your gauges to metric, but then everything is metric so you'll be doing a lot of math for everything else. I swap to metric to verify I'm hitting the lambda I'm requesting, once that's confirmed I switch back for everything else. I only make fueling changes via lambda so I think there's a setting in ATR for that; I never see AFR anywhere but on the gauge.

You're exactly right about lambda, but I still would enrichen it a bit because I won't go leaner than .82 (~12.04 for 14.68) on FI, .8 (~11.74) at higher rpm. I get the fact of additional cooling due to DI, but until I see actual data substantiating the actual amount of it then I will err on the side of safety using the standard principles. Personal preference.

 

[dyn085]

So I just took a look at ATR and I'm not sure if the folder I was thinking about does what I thought it would do. It's the Fuel Scalar Stoich. Setpoint (Non 5-Way) in the Fuel Configuration folder in the Fuel Tables. I'll have to adjust it to verify but I think this would help correct known STFT/LTFT trims that are driven by changing ethanol content but I think it still reads on the gauge as though 14.7 is stoich.

The more I think about it I think I remember Cobb stating that they gauge will always reference 14.7 as stoich, but I don't remember 100%.

 

[Ryephile]

[MENTION=930]dyn085[/MENTION] [MENTION=4567]Ryephile[/MENTION] I would love to hear your input on these

I also noticed my car takes longer to crank when on the e30 map, not sure why that would be...

Datazap is taking an extraordinarily long time to load your files, so I can't see them right now. Overall looking at your vDyno's, things appear generally OK.

In ATR Cobb specifically notes that cranking pulsewidths are normally increased when running higher ethanol percentages. That's likely where I'd start with your long crank times.

I tend to agree that the E30 AFRs, assuming they're converted to G100 AFR via the recorded lambda, are a touch lean. 0.8 lambda is comfortably rich on a GDI engine. The power demand lambda should probably taper from 0.88 to 0.8 lambda from low to high RPM.

 

[twolf]

Datazap is taking an extraordinarily long time to load your files, so I can't see them right now. Overall looking at your vDyno's, things appear generally OK.

In ATR Cobb specifically notes that cranking pulsewidths are normally increased when running higher ethanol percentages. That's likely where I'd start with your long crank times.

I tend to agree that the E30 AFRs, assuming they're converted to G100 AFR via the recorded lambda, are a touch lean. 0.8 lambda is comfortably rich on a GDI engine. The power demand lambda should probably taper from 0.88 to 0.8 lambda from low to high RPM.

I'm starting to think it's a hardware issue. It only happens when car is warm and seems to be worsened if I idle for a while then turn it off/back on. Sensor possibly getting heat soaked?

 

[Ryephile]

I'm starting to think it's a hardware issue. It only happens when car is warm and seems to be worsened if I idle for a while then turn it off/back on. Sensor possibly getting heat soaked?

Hmm I suppose it's possible, it's not unheard of but admittedly fairly uncommon these days. Has anyone else had hot start problems specifically with higher than E10 mixes?

 

[twolf]

This is why I wish I had the ability/knowledge to self tune my car. I hate being reliant on a tuner.

As far as I know, no, and I've been searching to see if it's a common issue.

 

[dyn085]

The only people that I can recall having cranking issues were on one-step colder plugs.

 

[WeTheNorth]

The only people that I can recall having cranking issues were on one-step colder plugs.

Thought those were good for our cars?

 

[dyn085]

Thought those were good for our cars?

There's really no data to support that. Generally speaking, you want the hottest plug that works without pre-ignition. Going too cold leads to carbon-fouling from not getting hot enough to clean itself.

Admittedly, too cold is safer than too hot and will only result in poor starting/performance, but the OEM plug is not too hot for those on the OEM turbo. The general rule-of-thumb is to go one step colder for every 70-100 hp added, but we can't get remotely close to that without a bigger turbo.

 

[frankiefiesta]

[MENTION=930]dyn085[/MENTION] [MENTION=4567]Ryephile[/MENTION] I would love to hear your input on these

I also noticed my car takes longer to crank when on the e30 map, not sure why that would be...

My car also takes a noticeable extra .5 secs to start when on e30.

Never failed to start, just takes a split second longer

 

[twolf]

My car also takes a noticeable extra .5 secs to start when on e30.

Never failed to start, just takes a split second longer

it's more than .5 seconds I think, it's enough to make me worry it won't start. However it has always started..

It's only when the car is hot and I turn it off then on again, say for example when getting gas.

 

[WeTheNorth]

Wish we had ethonal near by -.-