---===The Official MAFT-Pro Thread===---

[UCSB VR4]

Originally Posted by UCSB VR4

I think it might be a blend between cells issue, even though free revs literally stay between 29.x - 30.x MAP. The difference between the values in the 30 MAP row and 20 MAP row are so significant that I think the 20 MAP values might be causing a problem, I'll try to increase those by 10% later and report the results. Here is the current difference between 20-30 MAP rows:

56.5 60.5 60.5 63.5 70.0 73.5 76.0 76.0 75.0 70.0 69.5 64.5 64.0 63.5 63.0

46.0 46.0 47.0 53.0 53.0 53.0 55.0 54.5 49.0 47.0 46.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0

Jeff

Guys I just increased the MAP 20 cells by 10%, MUCH BETTER, I can notice a huge difference!

- Jeff

[Rogue_Ant]

Awesome!


-Rogue

[davebearclaw]

I bought a VR4 with the MAFT Pro, however it has lost its tune, or perhaps never was tuned properly. I need some help getting it set up. I am sure I won't be able to provide enough info in this post but I will try.

It will start up fine, and I have finally managed to get it to idle, however it oscillates between rich and lean ~12 to ~16. (Possibly a vacuum leak?) I have mainscale at -27 to get it to a point where it will idle, however based on the size of the injectors (660cc) shouldn't it be around -42.

I need the Tpro4002.xdf file. I think I also need the .ads file. Or do I just create one?

Once I get Tuner Pro working I can get more info...

[Rogue_Ant]

davebearclaw,

Since you're starting from scratch, update to the newest version Translator-Pro version first:
T-Pro 5.03

And here is the XDF/ADS files for TunerPro:
v5.xx Update files

Here is the updated Translator Pro Manual:
T-Pro v5 Manual

And here is a good base to start with:
Bob's 5.03 .bin

How is the Translator Pro wired? The above .bin is for direct timing control. If you don't have direct timing control wired, then you will need to switch the Vehicle Select to 1.

Once you get everything updated, I would start with a Mainscale of -35 or so. Larger injectors are usually a little lazy at low loads, so you typically have to add a little bit of fuel in those ranges. Use the Mainscale to get a good compromise between idle and cruising. Then use the User-Tunes (low, mid, high) to fine tune the car. Also, in TunerPro, make sure you use the correct XDF file for whichever Vehicle Select you've chosen.


-Rogue

[EastWingedBeast]

I've been tuning using the standard MAP table for 12 months. About a week ago I switched to the user defined table, and setup my MAP entries thus:

0, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 80, 100, 120, 140, 160, 180, 200, 220, 240, 260, 280

All in kPa of course, and I didnt touch the rpm scale. I have found that this arrangement makes idle, cruise and part throttle acceleration much easier to tune, and get accurate.
It means that the table tops out at 26psi of boost, but who needs more than that?

It especially helped with idle and free reving, as that is at around 30kPa, so with only 20 and 40 (as standard), it would affect part throttle cruise too.

On another front, I've been talking to RC Engineering, who make my injectors, and they say that the "lag" of the 550cc injectors is about 1.1ms at 13.5 volts. They also said that this wouldnt be significantly different from standard injectors. But we all have to ramp the low manifold pressure fueling to compensate for injector "lag". The lag is constant (its a coil), so why no compensation throughout?

Paul.

[Rogue_Ant]

Hmm, adding a dead-time compensation would be interesting. Something to bring up with Bob.


-Rogue

[EastWingedBeast]

Originally Posted by Rogue_Ant

Hmm, adding a dead-time compensation would be interesting. Something to bring up with Bob.


-Rogue

It might make the VE map look better at idle MAP.
Also, while we are on the subject of MaftPro "upgrades", why not have an
AFR scale for the part throttle tracking?
Instead of having just one target, lets have a target for each MAP entry?
And interpolate between. The guys who removed the stock O2 input to the ECU (myself included) could then track an appropriate AFR right up to when the WOT AFR tracking takes over. For example, 14.7:1 is ok for part throttle cruise, but when I part throttle accelerate and MAPs get close to 100kPa, I wannit more like 13.5:1, and not 14.7:1 which is too lean.
Or am I missing the point of the VE table ? LOL

BTW, TurboBob is pretty silent these days. BIG changes in the pipeline?

[Rogue_Ant]

East,
The current PTT is actually quite flexible. You can have it track up to the WOT tracking. Its all on how you set it up. I.E. while tuning a friends car, I set up the PTT lean at 14.7:1 up to ~100kpa, and the PTT cruise to 13.5 up to ~139kpa. The WOT AFR tracking started at 140kpa.
So basically the tracking worked like this:

load < 100kpa = 14.7:1
load < 140kpa & load >100kpa = 13.5:1
load >140kpa = 11.5:1

I don't think a full AFR target table is currently needed. Unless the Bob comes out with a cool self-tune feature, what is needed is to properly tune the car.
This is what the VE table is for, fine adjustment and control. I simply use AFR tracking to help me tune the car, and for lean-burn (~17:1) to save fuel. What we don't want is people completely relying on AFR tracking instead of tuning.

Keep the good ideas coming though! If nothing else it can only help everyone understand the current T-Pro better

This is Bob's busy time of the year. He is around. But there are a couple of us who try to help out when we can.

BTW, I would remove the 00kpa row in your user-defined table. It isn't really used, since that load would only be during drop-throttle conditions. And you have another row to play with.


-Rogue

[EastWingedBeast]

Originally Posted by Rogue_Ant

East,
The current PTT is actually quite flexible. You can have it track up to the WOT tracking. Its all on how you set it up. I.E. while tuning a friends car, I set up the PTT lean at 14.7:1 up to ~100kpa, and the PTT cruise to 13.5 up to ~139kpa. The WOT AFR tracking started at 140kpa.
So basically the tracking worked like this:

load < 100kpa = 14.7:1
load < 140kpa & load >100kpa = 13.5:1
load >140kpa = 11.5:1

I don't think a full AFR target table is currently needed. Unless the Bob comes out with a cool self-tune feature, what is needed is to properly tune the car.
This is what the VE table is for, fine adjustment and control. I simply use AFR tracking to help me tune the car, and for lean-burn (~17:1) to save fuel. What we don't want is people completely relying on AFR tracking instead of tuning.

Keep the good ideas coming though! If nothing else it can only help everyone understand the current T-Pro better

This is Bob's busy time of the year. He is around. But there are a couple of us who try to help out when we can.

BTW, I would remove the 00kpa row in your user-defined table. It isn't really used, since that load would only be during drop-throttle conditions. And you have another row to play with.


-Rogue

What happens at a drop throttle MAP of 18 'ish? With no "zero" VE to start
interpolation from?

If it wont go bang, I'll do it. Thanks for that Rogue. Good plan.

[Rogue_Ant]

If MAP drops below the lowest row, then that row is used static.
So, in your case, anything below 20kpa, the 20kpa row is used.


-Rogue