post more pictures, cant get enough..haha

 

damn, nice job. you're going on record time. haha

 

Good work now ........................ be carefull LOL

 

yeah, no kidding....

I've been screwing around with the Cobb some (since I'm runing stock primary's/ secondaries and 840cc P2's now). No matter how much I read I can't for the life of me figure out some of this stuff. It's driving me nuts. I did however get the idle set perfect. STFT are at 0% and AFR's are at 14.8. Cruising at 50ish mph, it just pulls 25%+. I've tried adjusting maf, and it helped a little but it's still way to rich. Tomorrow I'll look into the latencies for sec/aux injectors. I may call KG parts to see if they record them when they clean/modify/flow test. MAF scaling/injector latency is really screwing with me. I'll play with it a bit more tomorrow.

What a learning curve compared to piston motors.

 

Did you adjust the Injector size #'s for your p2's?

If you did....what value did you use.......

Latencies should be close enough to stock to be OK....

 

I used 1025 as the value for the P2's (Bank 3 position) (840/390)*476 = 1025.2307. Everything else is stock, even the latencies.

I know my issues are in the maf scaling, I just havent gotten a grasp on how to scale it properly yet.

Edit: I'm a dumbass... just saw I need to do it in open loop... I'll try that tomorrow and see what happens.

 

Maf scaling the easy way :


you have three LTFT points for clarity I'll call them :

idle up to 8g/s approx
cruise 8g/s-18g/s approx
load 18g/s + (but adjusted in closed loop up to around 40g/s )

if your LTFT has settled down all you need to do is adjust each of those areas by whatever LTFT is reported in that flow range .

EDIT : The P1s are the only injectors that operate in any of those ranges .....

 

You might find they flow different than expected...

Also....are your trims +25%....

Is the WBO2 reading rich?

 

STFT reads -25% not + even after cruising around for 30 minutes or so LTFT only show -.16 on the logs.

WB02 reads pig rich if I give it much gas while cruising... it pegs at 10.1 as soon as pressure hits atmosphere. If I drive just to drive, very carefully cruising, it runs in the high 13's - mid 14's. Not bad until you give it a little gas to get up a hill or something. Could be a bit leaner while crusing of course, but its a start.

I don't know how this map was created, so I'm shooting in the dark on adjusting it properly. The guy I use to work for made it for me. If I knew more about "tuning" I'd create my own base map. Tons of info here, just trying to dig through it all and figure little bits out. I'd like to atleast get it setup myself before taking it to a tuner or buying the MM tune for fine adjustments. I'd actually like to learn how it works. Maybe it's time for me to join one of the web sessions on how to play with this gadget.

I'll post a log tomorrow.

 

wow... a ton of activity in no time at all. subscribed

 

Got the low load cells scaled today. Cruising much better, and relativly close to 14.7. Gonna start working on the WOT/BOOST scaling tomorrow. Which tables in Cobb represent "throttle enrichment?" Is it the "throttle fuel gear maps?" The help says that has to deal with closed loop, so I'm a bit skeptical about messing with them since I'm running in OL right now. Trying to follow the "how to scale your maf" thread, so bear with me! Thanks guys!

Oh, how I wish the Live Tuner would work for our cars. It would make things MUCH easier!

 

Just tried breaking a stock apex seal in a vice - those things are extremely brittle .
I really think a softer seal has got to be better in an FI engine - increased wear accepted .

 

By bending it, I take it?

Yeah, that's a perfect analogue to detonation.

 

I wasn't trying to do any test that replicates detonation . Just wanted to see how brittle they are .
I'm guessing that Mazda made them that way because they had their warranty in mind and were less concerned about detonation than wear .
In an FI application the reverse is applicable . I don't expect my engine to last 100,000 miles but would like that the seals don't snap in two should detonation occur under boost .
So , as long as the Esmeril seals don't totally bend out of shape and jump out of the groove I think they have potential to be a superior choice for FI engines .
You must be getting sick of pulling your engines out every 6 months by now so why don't you give them a shot ? Pretty sure they are much the same price as Mazda seals (in my case they were ).

 

I haven't broken an apex seal in over two years.

 

/\ interesting . How have your latest failures manifested ?

 

Last two have been blown coolant seals. The first was from sudden overheating on the track (Firebird West last May) from loss of coolant through a blown hose. No cloud, no warning and nearly instant 260°F engine temp. The second just un-sandwiched at the track (Arroyo Seco in New Mexico in January) after more than 90 straight minutes (and a full tank of gas) of nearly constant WOT.

I'm studding the next motor and converting to a top-mount IC to combat this issue.

The third back was something that passed through the motor (last "What Happens in Vegas meet) leaving all the seals intact, but destroyed an iron and a housing (and the turbine of the turbo). Probably a piece of debris caught in the IC or cold-side plumbing. Never found it, just the massive gouges.
I reused those apex seals since they were still in good condition.

Detonation is a tuning problem. I don't have those.

 

hmmm- makes me wonder if there is any hope for this engine with fi .....

 

Well, its rotaries in general - keeping them cool has always been an issue.
Here in the desert, driving 10/10 in 90°+ for hours on end at 400g/sec+ can be a bit problematic.
Hanging the IC out front isn't helping. I'm also going for fully-lined and steel-braided hoses for everything for which I can't make a hard-line.

BTW - both coolant seal issues happened on the combustion-side (not at the exhaust ports). So much for the Pettit theory on turbo rotary failures.

 

Did you read my intercooler comparison test ? I have run with both the Greddy and an oversize 12" deep intercooler and ended up going back to the Greddy because of cooling issues . Pretty sure you could still run a front mount 9"deep X 4" wide without compromising airflow to the rad.


Any sign of the burning around the exhaust port that they claim ?

 

Why not try Air to water IC similar to The style of the Pettit SC? I think That would be a cool with the Greddy turbo.

 

My current IC actually has a better flow section than that (9x3) and it still isn't enough. The rad needs a TON of constant, high-velocity airflow.
Even with the IC out of the way it might not be enough.

BTW - my IC outlet temps are near ambient when speed is elevated.

Not any more than a stock motor, which shows "burning" there.
"Burning" is normal for the side port exhaust and has nothing to do with the turbo. As long as the irons don't warp, they can turn purple with no ill effect.

Because they are only good for very short periods of use.
On the track, they immediately saturate.
They are also heavy and have plumbing concerns and still need a heat exchanger as big as an FMIC to work, anyway.

I'm making a modified "V-mount" setup for my car. Best of both worlds.

 

this thread is not letting me get any work done... I have always been more of a fan of the air / water ones ... placement over fans....

 

A/W has its advantages, but it is really best suited for boats and drag racing.

 

I knew Air to water exchange is efficient but I didnt know it was very suseptable to heat soak but it makes sense. Actually I would like to see a V mount too. In what way is your design modified? I assume it has to do with placement and angle.