Is the L and R side suppose to run about the same or will the be reading totally different numbers all the time?Mine are spread pretty far apart.Example:968/115,959/306,133/910 there are times where they are close but maybe this is normal i dont know.Also what do you shoot for on your BLM's(good #)?Thanks for replies!

Billy

 

Well just read another post that gave me a little info but need advice to see if my car is doing ok.

WOT RESULTS
1.L an S term counts:128
2.02mV:950 to 970 both sides
3.MAP KPa:94 to 99


Getting a poop load of spark retard,i think when my wife drove it the other day she put regular unleaded in it.Got up to 8.1 at one point.

 

The O2 readings will jump around 10 times per second I think, so I'm not sure if they are supposed to be in unison somewhat, or not. I think mine generally are close to each other, but sometimes split apart like yours...

Are you using something to log this data? I use Freescan, and you can set the delay... seems to be the lower the number, the more data you will log per second. I have mine set on 10 or 100, I forget, but it logs around 20 readings per second. Anyways, you can try lowering the delay so you'll have more info, maybe you are losing some data if it is set too slow.

The WOT BLMs and Integrators will be locked at 128 if you are running rich, no matter how much, which you are. So those numbers could have been 117 and 118, but it locks into 128. But if you were running lean, I've heard that it will lock into whatever those last numbers were... 132 and 134 for example.

890 mV is a good number if you're NA. You're running rich, and 999 mV is the max... I have the same problem, and I've actually leaned out my WOT air/fuel ratio tables (based on RPM) and that hasn't helped... I've seen no change in my O2 readings. I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong, or if it's because the O2 sensors are crappy, compared to wideband?

The MAP is good, it should be a tad bit under the barometric pressure... it was probably 102 KPa or something, right? I'll bet it dropped from 99 to 94 through the RPM range at WOT, mine did. I thought that was something wrong, but Fred explained it as more airflow lessening the manifold vaccum, so less pressure.

8° of knock retard isn't good, hopefully it's just the crappy gas.

 

I use datamaster to log my info with.Your right about the MAP it went to 100 and then went down to 97,94 and then kind of bounce around in that area.I am n/a so im looking for an 890 range for 02mV,correct?When you changed your air/fuel ratio you didnt see any change on 02 readings.Did you make just a slight change?Could you tell if it ran differently?How much did you go on the a/f ratioDid you keep it the same down low and make adjustments(subtract i take it and how much?)up around 4800 to 5600 rpm.That table just looks wierd to me,at 2000 and 2400rpm it has.8 then at 2800 rpm it jumps to 3.1 and then goes down to 0.0 at 3200,1.6 at 3600,.8 at 4000,2.3 at 4400,8.6 at 4800,9.8 at 5200,6.6 at 5600 and then down to2.7 thru 6800.That just looks screwed to me but im new to all this so maybe im the screwed up one!?

What do you use to tune with?Im using tunercat.Im just trying to get some numbers to shoot for when i go to the track sunday so i can see if there is any performance difference.First i got to get this tank of gas run out and put 93 in her.These cars dont like 87 from what my log says.


Billy

 

Yep, 890 mV is what I'm aiming for.

I use Tunercat too. Edited the %Change To Fuel/Air Ratio Vs. RPM at WOT Basically, I sort of flattened out the graph/curve... I only changed it at the higher rpms, above 3000 I think. But I made it like this:

-rpms-------stock--------#1----------#2

0400---------4.7---------4.7----------4.7
0800---------4.7---------4.7----------4.7
1200--------=0.8-------=0.8---------=0.8
1600--------=0.8-------=0.8---------=0.8
2000---------0.8---------0.8----------0.8
2400---------0.8---------0.8----------0.8
2800---------3.1---------1.6----------1.6
3200---------0.0---------0.0---------=0.4
3600---------1.6---------1.6----------1.2
4000---------0.8---------1.2----------0.8
4400---------2.3---------1.6----------1.2
4800---------8.6---------1.6----------1.2
5200---------9.8---------1.6----------1.2
5600---------6.6---------1.6----------1.2
6000---------2.7---------2.7----------2.3
6400---------2.7---------2.7----------2.3
6800---------2.7---------2.7----------2.3

I made those changes at the track, and ran pretty much the same times. Looked at my logs and saw that the O2s were still 900+. I didn't try to do much more, I figured the O2 sensors suck and I'd need a wideband to figure it out correctly.

If you looked in the Help section of Tunercat, you may have seen where it talks about that table, and what the numbers do...

Example... So if at 4000 rpm and the coolant temp is at 50° C, the computer would use -5.1 from the rpm table, and it would use 22.7 from the coolant table.

cool = the coolant table data for a/f ratio
rpm = the RPM table data for a/f ratio

WOT A/F ratio = 14.7 ÷ ( 1 + cool/100 + rpm/100 )

WOT A/F ratio = 14.7 ÷ ( 1 + 22.7/100 + -5.1/100 )

WOT A/F ratio = 14.7 ÷ ( 1 + .227 -0.051 )

WOT A/F ratio = 14.7 ÷ ( 1.176 )

WOT A/F ratio = 12.5

I don't think its worth it to mess with the coolant tables. Editing the RPMs is what you want to do... but I haven't had much luck so far. I actually followed some LT1_Edit guide, I didn't really guess... but I can't find it. I think it was here. Thats basically what I followed, and why I leveled off that huge curve in the a/f table.

 

15.6 is the stock coolant% table number, for usual operating temps... 80-100° C

So according to the tables, the stock PCM tries for air/fuel ratio of:

12.6 :1 @ 2000 rpms
12.6 :1 @ 2400 rpms
12.3 :1 @ 2800 rpms
12.7 :1 @ 3200 rpms
12.5 :1 @ 3600 rpms
12.6 :1 @ 4000 rpms
12.4 :1 @ 4400 rpms
11.8 :1 @ 4800 rpms
11.7 :1 @ 5200 rpms
12.0 :1 @ 5600 rpms
12.4 :1 @ 6000 rpms

I'm sure other sensors and readings affect the true outcome. I think around 12.5:1 to 13.0:1 is a good air/fuel ratio for NA cars. From 4400+ rpms it richens out a good bit...

Both my 1.6 and 1.2 (from 4400 to 5600 rpms where it was rich... 8.6... 9.8... etc) would make it 12.5:1, I guess I should have went lower, 0 or into negative numbers maybe even?

In any case, watching your O2s may not really help, mine didn't change much.