Been stuck on this for months... what in the world is this?

[Artorias]

Not sure why I had to change it to a HPL.
Thats much better than your first log. Goes lean when you let off and it should go to DFCO. Still needs some work. I will have too look into it more later.

Im not seeing where it went max lean, and its not going max rich anymore.

Attachment 154071

Ha, just saw that. When naming the file I deleted the extension on accident so I typed HPT out of force of habit. Meant to do HPL.

It does feel better letting off the pedal, slightly smoother. And regarding the max lean, I guess what I saw was the huge spike in STFT going positive during acceleration. Not sure what that was. A couple shorter spikes after that one too.

Startup was a little stronger. It achieved 1250 at idle quicker than the last log and was less jumpy. Still looks a bit slow in the first few seconds idling underspeed, but it got to 1250 much better. And a few misfires right at startup. I'm wondering if raising or lowering base pressure would provide further improvement, or maybe this is more of a transient fueling issue.

[murfie]

Can you do a step log? No need to drive it.

Just let it idle for 30 seconds while warm, then hold 1000 roms for 30 second, then 500, then 2000, then 2500, then 3000.

Doesnt have to be 30 seconds or right on those RPM values, but as long as you are comfortable with an as close as possible that allows you too hold a steady RPM. Make a staircase shape with RPM in the log.

Fuel control looks ok, if you want a bigger delta that usually is better and you should do that now.

[Artorias]

Can you do a step log? No need to drive it.

Just let it idle for 30 seconds while warm, then hold 1000 roms for 30 second, then 500, then 2000, then 2500, then 3000.

Doesnt have to be 30 seconds or right on those RPM values, but as long as you are comfortable with an as close as possible that allows you too hold a steady RPM. Make a staircase shape with RPM in the log.

Fuel control looks ok, if you want a bigger delta that usually is better and you should do that now.

Okay here's what we got, and this is regulator set to 58 engine off pumps on along with 43.3 injector data (so just base minus atmospheric) Inferred rail set to 58. Two logs, log one is a drive from dead cold start. Log two is a drive and has a the "staircase" attempt at the very end while I took the opportunity. Did the best I could without being a public noise complaint. Noticed a few misfires counted during the staircase. 1500 and up is quite easy to overshoot when trying to target it steady with your foot.

It does feel smoother overall. Cold behavior still seems a little erratic to me and fuel trims have a little correction needed but seem decent so far. I do notice on log 1 during cold start, my original concern still exists but it doesn't seem to be negatively affecting startup any longer. My concern being when closed loop kicks in trims go towards positive and then richen up as the engine warms and I feel like it should be the other way around. Rich trims on cold closed loop and leaning as the engine warms to operating temp. I could be wrong. I also notice in log 2 a "sawtooth" with spark and trims going on towards the beginning during idle. That's some new behavior I hadn't seen yet

Also don't know if this information matters but I'm using 3" intercooler piping all the way from turbos to manifold, so including the MAF housing.

Twin Turbski FIC1000 IMRC - V143 log 1 cold 58psi base 43.3 data.hpl
Twin Turbski FIC1000 IMRC - V143 log 2 58psi base 43.3 data.hpl
Twin Turbo FIC1000 IMRC - V143 58 base 43.3 data.hpt

[murfie]

Multiply your MAF transfer by 0.85, staircase log again.

Im not sure what those misfires are, but 10 over a minute isnt a lot.

The saw tooth pattern is normal behavior for catalytic converter operation. Its a good sign that its starting to controlling fueling well enough for the feedback from the O2 sensors to be valid.

3" MAF housing got it. You are running a intercooler correct not just piping? What BOV and where is it compared to the MAF? Seems like your airflow isn't consistent around idle, sometimes 1lb/min other times .65 lb/min. If the BOV is creating a leak allowing air in the MAF can't meter, that is bad.

Screenshot 2024-11-08 150048.png

[Artorias]

Multiply your MAF transfer by 0.85, staircase log again.

Im not sure what those misfires are, but 10 over a minute isnt a lot.

The saw tooth pattern is normal behavior for catalytic converter operation. Its a good sign that its starting to controlling fueling well enough for the feedback from the O2 sensors to be valid.

3" MAF housing got it. You are running a intercooler correct not just piping? What BOV and where is it compared to the MAF? Seems like your airflow isn't consistent around idle, sometimes 1lb/min other times .65 lb/min. If the BOV is creating a leak allowing air in the MAF can't meter, that is bad.

Screenshot 2024-11-08 150048.png

Yep, intercooler definitely. 5" core with 3" inlet/outlet. 3" all the way from turbos to manifold. BOV is a 50mm Tial q-series. MAF is mounted about 10-12 inches from the throttle body, has a honeycomb screen a few inches in front of the sensor to help straighten airflow, and the BOV is mounted about 6-8 inches in front of the MAF. So airflow reaches the BOV before it continues and reaches the MAF, then curves and enters the throttle body.

Side note, unsure if it may be ideal to disable emissions reduction VCT or other associated logic to improve the car given my exhaust is free flowing 3" all the way post turbo. Oh and this sounds like important info, but my upstream O2s are mounted in the exhaust manifold pre-turbo in essentially the exact same area as stock location on stock manifolds.

I'm trying to find the inconsistent airflow you spotted at idle. In Drive, airflow hovers around 0.95-1 lb/min but in Park driveline disengaged that's when I see airflow drop to the 0.65 lb/min you're seeing. I do have my target idle speeds set to 750RPM in Drive and 700RPM in Park (even though the car forcefully commands 725 when in Park so maybe that's another part of my issue). I'll give your next suggestion a shot and do another step log and post back. By MAF Transfer you mean the main MAF Period table correct? Taking away 15% seems like it'll really throw my fuel trims into the positive unless I'm wrong. Normal driving trims seem to be pretty darn good but I'll do this and log the behavior.

[murfie]

Ok that sounds good.

Its definitely on the rich side, not lean. Warming up, driving, idling... everywhere. The step logs eliminate a lot of variables and make it obvious, but you can see it in a wide over view of both the fuel trims and your wideband lambda values. Nearly all the spikes are rich, and the middle of the sawtooth is below the lambda 1 line on the rich side.

Log1.png

I would also just change the 0 in the axis of this table to 1000RPM. That way idle MAP is not affected by the SD compensating for boost.

Screenshot 2024-11-08 174149.png

[Artorias]

Ok that sounds good.

Its definitely on the rich side, not lean. Warming up, driving, idling... everywhere. The step logs eliminate a lot of variables and make it obvious, but you can see it in a wide over view of both the fuel trims and your wideband lambda values. Nearly all the spikes are rich, and the middle of the sawtooth is below the lambda 1 line on the rich side.

Log1.png

I would also just change the 0 in the axis of this table to 1000RPM. That way idle MAP is not affected by the SD compensating for boost.

Screenshot 2024-11-08 174149.png

Made the axis change as suggested and tried multiplying .85 at the MAF and it hovered around 150rpm under target and was rough. 15 misfire counts in about 5 seconds from starting and wanted to die so I shut if off. Assuming the MAF values were a bit too low... maybe this is where rail temp modifiers are supposed to help or perhaps some adjustment to the slope values?

Twin Turbski FIC1000 IMRC - V147 log 1 rough start.hpl

[murfie]

At 7 seconds of run time, there is not a whole lot in that log. Not sure what to advise.
Throttle angle is opening to 10-11*. MAF is reading ~2.75 lb/min which is close to normal for a coyote cold start around 60*. If anything that is still high. O2 sensors didnt even warm up to report anything the log/ run time was so short.

The misfire count goes up, but misfire detected still says no, and the misfire RPM doesn't register. Small tune changes causing misfires isn't really plausible. Misfires would be an indication of a physical problem. Im not convinced from that short log it is actually misfiring and the scanner isn't just reporting erroneous values in that channel. Maybe you are hearing it or feeling it, but I cant help you with that via tune changes and logs. Please dont go chasing phantom misfires because the log reports them. Use old school diagnostics to determine if there is a miss and what is causing it.

[Artorias]

Alright here's what we got, pardon the two logs I hit the space bar on accident and it stopped the first log which is an irritating feature of the scanner. Part 1 log is startup with idle, part 2 is idling all the way to 160 CHT and giving the steps in RPM as requested.

Oddly, when closed loop kicked on and trims started correcting the idle was incredibly smooth at 1000 rpm. Smoother than I ever remember it being. And in part 2 I noticed when revving and returning to target idle of 725, it was smoother in achieving 725.

Twin Turbski FIC1000 IMRC - V147 log 2 rough start part 1.hpl
Twin Turbski FIC1000 IMRC - V147 log 2 rough start with step part 2.hpl

[skythunder83]

If ever you think your MAF is not set well then you should not play with it in normal condition, you need to set the car for full OL then see the off value next fix it then go back to CL. Or else you are fighting the ECU logic

[murfie]

There's is nothing to tune in OL on a 2011+ mustang and you never need to put the car in 100% OL, just look at fuel trims as the ECU uses wideband data all the time.
It's mainly Maf transfer and injector slopes both of which manufacturers usually provide known good data for you.

You will need to change your Low slope value to make idle and just of idle line up more with 0% fuel trims. I want to say lowering it a small amount at a time. The MAF values for a 3" housing are quite small, so I don't quite trust you don't have some air leak.

[skythunder83]

I would research this info...

[Artorias]

There's is nothing to tune in OL on a 2011+ mustang and you never need to put the car in 100% OL, just look at fuel trims as the ECU uses wideband data all the time.
It's mainly Maf transfer and injector slopes both of which manufacturers usually provide known good data for you.

You will need to change your Low slope value to make idle and just of idle line up more with 0% fuel trims. I want to say lowering it a small amount at a time. The MAF values for a 3" housing are quite small, so I don't quite trust you don't have some air leak.

I'll check around for any air leaks post MAF and keep messing with the slopes and MAF values. I appreciate the help so far in pointing me in the right direction. I was also thinking the low slope needs adjustment to get this in check and I agree, small decreases in low slope should most likely get some improvement. I'll get some logs and post up progress

I would research this info...

The S550 platform is the most advanced Ford logic I've touched on, but I have researched high and low and have yet to find anyone anywhere saying you have to put the car in full OL just to calibrate the MAF. With factory widebands this is unnecessary.

[Artorias]

Feel like I'm still chasing my tail but I do feel like I'm getting somewhere. Lots of rain lately so took me a bit to get an actual driving log.

So I went ahead and started adjusting low slope after taking 15% away from MAF. I started with just 3% subtracted from low slope and still started rough, lots of misfires immediately. Took away 5%, same result. Took away 10%, felt much better but still odd starting. Took away 15% matching the 15% I took from the MAF and it started much better. Said fuck it and tried 20% from the low slope, went back to running weird so I ended up at 15% removed from low slope. Made a couple minor adjustments throughout the rest of the tune and I did also remove 15% from the high slope which I don't know if that was a bad choice or not, but the car does drive well. This is all with regulator set to 58psi with MAP reference, 43.3psi injector data. Feels better than before this entire thread started. I did also try adjusting idle throttle angle based on average values logged against airflow and that doesn't seem to help anything. I tried some minor VCT adjustments before this log also which didn't seem to change anything.

I noticed misfires are not really happening during driving anymore or at least being logged which is a plus. They do still pop a few during startup (and you can hear them) which was my original issue, but it's getting better. Below are two logs and the revised tune. New behavior I've noticed is some instances of KR so at least that confirms my changes made a difference somewhere. I still feel like there's more improvement to be made, just difficult to determine which direction to go.

I do notice more ETC throttle angle errors being logged on my graph which is new behavior also, where would I be applying throttle angle corrections? Should I also be looking into VCT adjustments to get further improvement?

[veeefour]

You take ID1000 data and give a try...

[Artorias]

Alright here's what we got, same exact story but with ID1000 data. So 58 regulator and 43.3 data. I did take 2% from the high slope during some testing because during my research I read somewhere here that cold starts typically use high slope which helps point towards my original issue.

Car feels good still, no major differences it seems but again I'm still learning this platform. Here's a long log from cold start to driving and the calibration
Still thinking all this has to do with injector data so I've been playing around with that the most. I haven't gone back to messing with temp modifier yet because I'm nearly certain the temp modifiers do nothing on the Coyote. My prior attempts have shown that no matter what you put in the temp modifiers, it only cares about what's multiplied against specifically 60 degrees but I could be wrong.

Twin Turbo FIC1000 IMRC - V163 id1000 data 2% removed from high.hpt
Twin Turbski FIC1000 IMRC - V163 id1000 data 2% removed from high.hpl