Yes, it doesn't change anything.KATwo40 wrote:
I'd say, most likely, the ECU is tuned with the same timing values in the upper load/rpm ranges. Chances are, even though you altered the MAF signal, thus pitching the ECU into the wrong load cell, you saw no timing change becaue the timing values were the same in those cells. Remember, the ECU interpolates between cells, in a square area of a few cells.
Decisions Decisions Decisions...............Constructive Input Wanted
-
nissanfanatic
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 8:41 pm
- Car: 1992 Nissan 240sx SE
- Contact:
Re: (KATwo40)
Re: (nissanfanatic)
You're missing my point. On an ECU more finely tuned in the upper areas, with different timing in the load cells, or even on an ECU with expanded maps, you'd see the changes.
The result of your testing does not conclude that the SAFC2 doesn't change the load input to the ECU, resulting in timing factors from the wrong cells being read. The result of your testing merely shows that the Enthalpy ECU is loaded with the same timing values up high, and the maps probably aren't expanded.
The result of your testing does not conclude that the SAFC2 doesn't change the load input to the ECU, resulting in timing factors from the wrong cells being read. The result of your testing merely shows that the Enthalpy ECU is loaded with the same timing values up high, and the maps probably aren't expanded.
-
nissanfanatic
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 8:41 pm
- Car: 1992 Nissan 240sx SE
- Contact:
Your point has no bearing on this subject. My recommendatin to Jookmasta was to get an Enthalpy tuned ECU, bump base pressure if ever needed, and trim out fuel using the SAFC. Where a more finely tuned ECU comes into play, you tell me....
And OF COURSE it changes the load calculated by the ECU, but not enough to change timing values as described. Hence, it doesn't effect anything enough to matter. If Air, Fuel, Compression, and Timing are correct, then what else matters..?? ECU load calculation isn't one of the main factors in how much power an engine makes. Whether or not the correct "load cell" is being read, if it is the correct timing value, then timing is correct. IE, don't tell the blind man his hooker is ugly.
And OF COURSE it changes the load calculated by the ECU, but not enough to change timing values as described. Hence, it doesn't effect anything enough to matter. If Air, Fuel, Compression, and Timing are correct, then what else matters..?? ECU load calculation isn't one of the main factors in how much power an engine makes. Whether or not the correct "load cell" is being read, if it is the correct timing value, then timing is correct. IE, don't tell the blind man his hooker is ugly.
Re: (nissanfanatic)
Not really worth arguing over, but...you're concluding that the SAFC2 doesn't cause timing changes period based on your experience with an ECU that has a timing map that simply doesn't have a difference in timing values in the areas you monitored.
It's like saying, "I was in 2ft of water without a flotation device and didn't sink, therefore, flotation devices don't really keep you from sinking."
Anyhow, to each his own, I suppose.
It's like saying, "I was in 2ft of water without a flotation device and didn't sink, therefore, flotation devices don't really keep you from sinking."
Anyhow, to each his own, I suppose.
-
nissanfanatic
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 8:41 pm
- Car: 1992 Nissan 240sx SE
- Contact:
^I'm concluding it based on 4 different episodes....
Antony stock ECU(timing was pulled in the correct direction on that)Anthony JWTTat JWTMe Enthalpy
Many people use SAFC with both stock and tuned ECUs pulling up to 50% MAFS voltage and thier cars run great.
And as for your analogy, I'm saying you don't need a liferaft for 2ft of water. IE, you don't need a retune for a bump in fuel pressure.
And the difference between my arguement and yours is I have proof whereas you guys just have ECU function theory to work off of.
Antony stock ECU(timing was pulled in the correct direction on that)Anthony JWTTat JWTMe Enthalpy
Many people use SAFC with both stock and tuned ECUs pulling up to 50% MAFS voltage and thier cars run great.
And as for your analogy, I'm saying you don't need a liferaft for 2ft of water. IE, you don't need a retune for a bump in fuel pressure.
And the difference between my arguement and yours is I have proof whereas you guys just have ECU function theory to work off of.
-
deviousKA
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 5:04 pm
- Car: 90 240sx NA /72 Datsun 510 NA /86 corolla GTS NA
- Contact:
Re: (nissanfanatic)
nissanfanatic, you have no idea what you are talking about. I dont really want to argue with you either, it is pointless. We are not talking ecu "theory", we are talking about the facts, very simple stuff. If you do not understand the operation of load and rpm lookup on an ignition or fueling table, you need to do some reading before you go defending a piggyback controller.
When decreasing maf voltage to trick the ecu into fueling differently, your chopping massive amounts of resolution off of your main efi controller. You do not see timing change, dont you mean "it doesnt change very much". Well if you would look at any given timing table for any given efi controller, you will see how timing advance relates to load. By decreasing load you are shifting timing that would normally be used by medium load, to full load as defined by the signal that is modified by the piggyback. This may only be a couple degrees, maybe only 1 degree, but the drop is resolution is still very drastic and extremely inferior to working with full or even increased/shifted resolution. You are basically neutering the capability of the original (or tuned) ecu.
Now, like you, a lot of people do not care about things like resolution and fuel control. As long as afr is decent at full boost and your engine does not explode, you are content. This mentality is your limiting factor, there is more to efi than idle and wot, the more resolution and fine tuning you can provide the more power you will make, reliably, simple as that.
Whats with all these damn knuckle draggers in the ka-t forum, seriously? Go drink some beer and work on your ka-t, lol.
When decreasing maf voltage to trick the ecu into fueling differently, your chopping massive amounts of resolution off of your main efi controller. You do not see timing change, dont you mean "it doesnt change very much". Well if you would look at any given timing table for any given efi controller, you will see how timing advance relates to load. By decreasing load you are shifting timing that would normally be used by medium load, to full load as defined by the signal that is modified by the piggyback. This may only be a couple degrees, maybe only 1 degree, but the drop is resolution is still very drastic and extremely inferior to working with full or even increased/shifted resolution. You are basically neutering the capability of the original (or tuned) ecu.
Now, like you, a lot of people do not care about things like resolution and fuel control. As long as afr is decent at full boost and your engine does not explode, you are content. This mentality is your limiting factor, there is more to efi than idle and wot, the more resolution and fine tuning you can provide the more power you will make, reliably, simple as that.
Whats with all these damn knuckle draggers in the ka-t forum, seriously? Go drink some beer and work on your ka-t, lol.
-
nissanfanatic
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2004 8:41 pm
- Car: 1992 Nissan 240sx SE
- Contact:
Quote »This mentality is your limiting factor, there is more to efi than idle and wot, the more resolution and fine tuning you can provide the more power you will make, reliably, simple as that.[/quote]Hence my unreliable, low power, daily driven setup... I've replaced one headgasket in the two years its been boosted and for the past week, I've been running 18-20psi. Thursday nights, I run THE **** out of my car. Orion can vouch for that... I hardly think more power or reliability are problems with my setup. And it drives like stock. :
Quote »You do not see timing change, dont you mean "it doesnt change very much".[/quote]I watched timing in "real time". IDK what more you want... As I said, I thought the same thing the two of you are preaching. I asked Anthony about it. I was nervous about timing changing when I pulled fuel. So I messed with my SAFC while I had the Techtom. No change in WOT. Drivability is the same as it was before.
Quote »Whats with all these damn knuckle draggers in the ka-t forum, seriously? Go drink some beer and work on your ka-t, lol.[/quote]My car doesn't break once a week like most of the setups on here. Whether that has to do with me not knowing what I'm talking about, IDK...
Quote »You do not see timing change, dont you mean "it doesnt change very much".[/quote]I watched timing in "real time". IDK what more you want... As I said, I thought the same thing the two of you are preaching. I asked Anthony about it. I was nervous about timing changing when I pulled fuel. So I messed with my SAFC while I had the Techtom. No change in WOT. Drivability is the same as it was before.
Quote »Whats with all these damn knuckle draggers in the ka-t forum, seriously? Go drink some beer and work on your ka-t, lol.[/quote]My car doesn't break once a week like most of the setups on here. Whether that has to do with me not knowing what I'm talking about, IDK...
-
deviousKA
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 5:04 pm
- Car: 90 240sx NA /72 Datsun 510 NA /86 corolla GTS NA
- Contact:
Re: (nissanfanatic)
It shows up on a map/TP trace, that is the only way to verify and it has been done.
If you were to have a maptrace setup and monitored while adjusting your afc or anything else that modifys the maf 0-5v, you will see the trace shifting.
But that is just how it works. This is a silly argument as this is exactly what a piggy back is supposed to do, and does.
If you were to have a maptrace setup and monitored while adjusting your afc or anything else that modifys the maf 0-5v, you will see the trace shifting.
But that is just how it works. This is a silly argument as this is exactly what a piggy back is supposed to do, and does.
actually to add to this, the timing maps at WOT dont change much if any at all, only on part throttle. I pretty much came up with this from datalogging with an OBD-II scan tool.
Load is based off TPS and MAF voltage, so a stock ka goes up to 4.3v (for sake of arguement, I havent seen a stock mafs in a while ) So when you are at full throttle on a stock KA it reads 4.3v and 100% tps so its calculates MAX LOAD (if it went any higher than 4.3v it would still be max load) and then it puts the LOAD signal against RPM on the timing tables and spits out the right timing.
Now on a boosted KA you run the mafs up to 5v. Even with the injector correction it will only knock back the voltage to the low 4v areas (same as a non boosted stock ka). So now it is at 4.x v and again at 100% tps so again it calculates max load again and puts that against rpm and you get the stock KA timing figures at WOT.
Part throttle is different and there will be more timing changes since the voltages for the mafs are not in the max end of the spectrum as far as calculating load in concerned and the tps % is obviously not at 100.
Load is based off TPS and MAF voltage, so a stock ka goes up to 4.3v (for sake of arguement, I havent seen a stock mafs in a while ) So when you are at full throttle on a stock KA it reads 4.3v and 100% tps so its calculates MAX LOAD (if it went any higher than 4.3v it would still be max load) and then it puts the LOAD signal against RPM on the timing tables and spits out the right timing.
Now on a boosted KA you run the mafs up to 5v. Even with the injector correction it will only knock back the voltage to the low 4v areas (same as a non boosted stock ka). So now it is at 4.x v and again at 100% tps so again it calculates max load again and puts that against rpm and you get the stock KA timing figures at WOT.
Part throttle is different and there will be more timing changes since the voltages for the mafs are not in the max end of the spectrum as far as calculating load in concerned and the tps % is obviously not at 100.
well to update yall, i will be sticking with the 480s and gettin the enthalpy tune. i did get in contact with him so im trying to get the ecu to him asap. to give u my reasoning as to y i stuck with the 480s, my turbo was the deciding factor (not the wallet). the current t3 i run CANNOT make 400wrhp and i do not plan on upgrading the turbo for quite a while. i'll be happy with a consistent 13 second car that is as reliable as my 2 legs. power wise, it would be nice to lay down 300wrhp at what ever psi the turbo can do. thanks for all of the suggestions and opinions.