would some one like to have a look at this shop tune i pulled out of a ba xr6t today, i was just having a look before we reflash to stock and retune but the injector data id1000 doesnt look right to me.
Printable View
would some one like to have a look at this shop tune i pulled out of a ba xr6t today, i was just having a look before we reflash to stock and retune but the injector data id1000 doesnt look right to me.
Tuner on drugs. Never tuned a BA but nowhere where it should be. Could this be a "dynowog" tune or you just named it as such.
Nar mate just the plates on the car, yeah looks way off to me.
Base fuel pressure can have effects too, my fg with stock 4bar xr6t reg has 140psi at idle with twin 044s.
140 psi? Sorry I don't follow. I would say we will be running 58psi.
The stock regs cant handle the increased fuel flow and pressure can go above preset base just something to be aware of. Mine gradually drops down to normal 60psi(+boost) at around 4000rpm. Unless you put a gauge on it you wont know.
Ok, yeah the first thing will do is put a gauge on it.
I keep seeing tunes like this with the low slope set lower than the high slope.
All I can think is the tuner is either retarded and just guesses that "low slope" should be a smaller number or they are trying to compensate for something else going on eg a non standard fuel regulator or possibly there is a problem that they are trying to put a band-aid on. If your fuel pressure is that high at idle changing the low slope is a terrible way to get around it as it is going to be close to impossible to approximate with two slopes. You really need to utilize pressure compensation, problem is we don't have a pressure sensor on our ECU.
Thoughts?
KPM and ID1300 & ID1700 have a low slope lower than the high.
Previously I used to run with the thinking that it's wrong to have a lower high slope, but with the release of the ID1300/1700 I have been proven otherwise!!
Back in the day when Nizpro injectors were the norm most people left the batt offset values and dropped the low slope to compensate. I was probably the only one raising the batt offset and maintaining a higher low slope. The Deka 60 was the opposite. Being a very fast reacting injector, you needed to lower the factory batt offset so the low slope wasn't rediculously high.
In the end of the day, there is a ton of ways to skin a cat. If the car runs great then just be happy with it and leave it IMO.
We can't be 100% confident that the Ford speed density calibration accurately represents the actual airflow either. The fact that when you compare factory calibrations, an FG F6 has a lower airflow compared to a BF F6....hardly realistic.
Regarding fuel pressure, it should be kept at a constant delta pressure....whatever your chosen base is.
Interesting, how do they flow more at a partial opening than full?
Curious what I am missing
It is plausible that it has less base aircharge, eg in the SD maps. This could be due to more restriction in their bigger (I assume they have a bigger) IC and all power gains then come from more boost/lower intake temp (increased density) or ignition timing.Quote:
Originally Posted by IH8TOADS
What is the basis for less airflow, the figures in the sd maps?
Yes.
Anyone want to run an experiment? Get a bone stock BF F6 and throw in FG F6 injectors and their scaling and check fuel trims and compare pre-cat lambda with commanded lambda.
The results would definitely be interesting, I wonder how much fudging Ford do vs actual calibration. Eg if they use their injector/airmass model and get it as close as possible according to the math and then simply apply a fudge factor to get it perfect.
I imagine there are some things the model simply can't account for and they do to some extent.