The definitive EcuFlash Evo 10 thread

[Mellon Tuning]

true those numbers are arbitrary once you modify the car especially, but you probably will see 9's afr on the stock X, it's extremely rich from the factory.

[razorlab]

Originally Posted by Mellon Tuning

true those numbers are arbitrary once you modify the car especially, but you probably will see 9's afr on the stock X, it's extremely rich from the factory.

Yup low 9's 100% stock.

With a good drop-in filter (K&N, HKS, etc) it will lean out about .5-.7 or so.

I dyno tested a HKS drop-in filter last week and it gained 20whp/15wtq just dropping it in.

An AEM intake with the whole upgraded intake tube and MAF housing will lean the car out over 1 full AFR point.

[Mellon Tuning]

these X's are pretty damn amazing when you look at how well they respond to some basic bolt on, a good part of that is likely due to it leaning out a bit like you mentioned. The good news is that the stock ignition is likely pretty damn good considering it can cut through fuel in the 9's at 20psi + from the factory.

[razorlab]

Originally Posted by Mellon Tuning

these X's are pretty damn amazing when you look at how well they respond to some basic bolt on, a good part of that is likely due to it leaning out a bit like you mentioned. The good news is that the stock ignition is likely pretty damn good considering it can cut through fuel in the 9's at 20psi + from the factory.

I wouldn't say cut through. More like try and get through.

Every single evo 10 that has been on the dyno running low 9's have bucked and tugged pulling through the rev range choking on it's own fuel. All goes away once the car is leaned out.

[Mellon Tuning]

ok so more like saw through then

[dustin03]

So when will we be able to flash our cars and tune with this program?

[RogueValley]

I'd hate to ask this, but I figure i might aswell. Is the X running out of injector or pump on the high end. If the target AFR is say 9.2:1 at the cross section load (220) @ 7000rpm, and mods manage to lean it out to say, 11.3:1 at the same cross section, with the stock MAF housing does that mean the X is running out of fuel for the target AFR?
Also, I assume that you can higher the target AFR at lower RPMs if the above statement is true in order to try and attain an 11.3:1 AFR to try and smooth the powerband instead of just having ridiculous top end?

PS:Great work and diligance, razor!

[SiC]

Originally Posted by RogueValley

I'd hate to ask this, but I figure i might aswell. Is the X running out of injector or pump on the high end. If the target AFR is say 9.2:1 at the cross section load (220) @ 7000rpm, and mods manage to lean it out to say, 11.3:1 at the same cross section, with the stock MAF housing does that mean the X is running out of fuel for the target AFR?
Also, I assume that you can higher the target AFR at lower RPMs if the above statement is true in order to try and attain an 11.3:1 AFR to try and smooth the powerband instead of just having ridiculous top end?

PS:Great work and diligance, razor!

From what I have seen from my own testing, the AFRs lean out due to lower load values after changing the intake. When you change your intake, the MAF incorrectly senses the amount of air and your ECU will calculate the loads lower than it is suppose to be. This in turn will lean out your AFR and increase your IGN timing by hitting lower load cells.

[xPRimNT]

Originally Posted by SiC

From what I have seen from my own testing, the AFRs lean out due to lower load values after changing the intake. When you change your intake, the MAF incorrectly senses the amount of air and your ECU will calculate the loads lower than it is suppose to be. This in turn will lean out your AFR and increase your IGN timing by hitting lower load cells.

This may seem like a silly question, I certainly hope not but here goes anyway:

With the tuning, you are basing your maps on "correct" load values, of which MAF readings are part of the equation. If you put an aftermarket intake, which skews the MAF reading, what should be done? Is there a mechanism to "correct" the MAF readings so that they are accurate again? Or is it simply enough to simply shift all your adjustments to the lower load levels?

I hope that made sense, I'm tired.

[mrfred]

Originally Posted by xPRimNT

This may seem like a silly question, I certainly hope not but here goes anyway:

With the tuning, you are basing your maps on "correct" load values, of which MAF readings are part of the equation. If you put an aftermarket intake, which skews the MAF reading, what should be done? Is there a mechanism to "correct" the MAF readings so that they are accurate again? Or is it simply enough to simply shift all your adjustments to the lower load levels?

I hope that made sense, I'm tired.

That was a good question. There is a correction system that is typically called MAF scaling and is usually in the form of a 2D table of relative air flow vs MAF frequency. If the intake only skews the value a little bit, its usually ok to just shift all the table values.

[razorlab]

Yes there is a maf scaling table which the 10 has, I just haven't posted it yet.

[SilverEvoX]

Originally Posted by Slo_crx1

You won't see sub-9's in the true AFR readings, it's only the way that EcuFlash shows the data to appear like an afr table. If you correlated a wideband to that table you'd see that what would appear to be in the 9's afr range would actually be closer to high 10's or so on a wideband. Keep that in mind when the program is released, you wouldn't want to set your tables to what you "think" they should sit at AFR-wise and end up with extremely lean conditions at high boost settings.

I don't understand why it displays it as the AFR then. Does the load just not get to a high enough percentage relative to that graph to hit the 8:1 AFRs? Also I realize it won't be anywhere near the 8000rpm range either. This is the graph I have. I will be tuning once I have a wideband installed to make sure that I'm not going too lean/rich but am just confused why it wouldn't be right on the map I have. Based on the knock maps they peak at 240% load so is that peak load in actuality on the fuel map? That shows 8.8:1 AFR according to the map, does anyone know what the cars actual AFR is then at 7k rpm per a wideband if it's not right around 9:1? Thanks and sorry for all the questions. ~Trent

[SiC]

Originally Posted by SilverEvoX

I don't understand why it displays it as the AFR then. Does the load just not get to a high enough percentage relative to that graph to hit the 8:1 AFRs? Also I realize it won't be anywhere near the 8000rpm range either. This is the graph I have. I will be tuning once I have a wideband installed to make sure that I'm not going too lean/rich but am just confused why it wouldn't be right on the map I have. Based on the knock maps they peak at 240% load so is that peak load in actuality on the fuel map? That shows 8.8:1 AFR according to the map, does anyone know what the cars actual AFR is then at 7k rpm per a wideband if it's not right around 9:1? Thanks and sorry for all the questions. ~Trent

The highest loads I hit are around 260 at the highest boost range which is around 3800RPM. By 7000RPM it's usually in the 200-210 range.

One thing you have to remember about the fuel map is that it does not display real AFR values. If you see the map reading 11.1:1, it will not be 11.1:1 on a wideband most of the time. In my case, if my map reads 11.1:1, it'll usually read around 10.5:1 on a wideband, the actual values are richer for me than what is represented on the map. This may not always be the same for everyone, it can vary due to mods, climate, elevation, etc. The only way to see your actual values are to hook up a wideband.

[mrfred]

Originally Posted by SilverEvoX

I don't understand why it displays it as the AFR then. Does the load just not get to a high enough percentage relative to that graph to hit the 8:1 AFRs? Also I realize it won't be anywhere near the 8000rpm range either. This is the graph I have. I will be tuning once I have a wideband installed to make sure that I'm not going too lean/rich but am just confused why it wouldn't be right on the map I have. Based on the knock maps they peak at 240% load so is that peak load in actuality on the fuel map? That shows 8.8:1 AFR according to the map, does anyone know what the cars actual AFR is then at 7k rpm per a wideband if it's not right around 9:1? Thanks and sorry for all the questions. ~Trent

Based on whp figures, a stock 10 ought to be hitting about 220-240 load at around 3500 rpm and then tappering down to around 180 load at 7000 rpm.

At any rate, there are many factors (e.g., engine temp, air temp, barometric pressure, VE, etc) that must be accounted for by the ECU program when converting an AFR value in a table into a fuel pulse width. Its very difficult for the ECU programmers to to get the actual AFR to match the table AFR over the full range of RPM and load. There's always some difference. That's why its imperative to tune using a WB O2 sensor.

[Rguy]

I think a lot of you will find some nice gains with the JDM MIVEC maps. You can find them here.

http://filebox.vt.edu/users/brjones5...%20Exhaust.jpg

http://filebox.vt.edu/users/brjones5...t%20Intake.jpg