Jump to content


Donating Members
  • Content Count

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback


bradyzq last won the day on October 12 2018

bradyzq had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

13 Good

1 Follower

About bradyzq

  • Rank
    HybridZ Supporter
  • Birthday 11/18/1968

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  • Interests
    Dyno tuning (it's what I do), standalone ECUs, Webers, Datsuns, old Audis, pretty much any cool car

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Wheel size and offset, tire size, ride height all look PERFECT!!!
  2. Yup. Your main fueling is calculated from the AFM voltage and RPM. No VE. Though there may be an as yet undiscovered WOT fuel map that is unrelated to or a further multiplier of AFM fueling. @Gollum, sorry. I thought the MS logs stupid_fast was referring to were yours. Also, if one is trying to figure out how this stock file works on a modified engine, you may get some weird things going on, such as going off the end of tables. You can see that a stock boost 280ZX likely would have followed a slightly leaner AFR trace, and maybe not hit the last TP column.
  3. I was referring to your Megasquirt VE table. If you don't have "include AFR" active, it isn't a VE table, but rather a rescaled pulse width table. Maybe this was the issue. Everything is an approximation anyways, but if the fueling table doesn't look at least a bit like the torque curve, there's an issue.
  4. Interesting that the AFM output is inverted from normal. Just a quick correction on VE though... If VE stays the same from 4000 to 6000, airflow would increase by 50% across the same range. So, either the MS VE table in question is hiding a fueling issue, or it's not a true VE table, or both.
  5. Also worth a look, IMO, is the Porsche 944 Turbo (951) ECU, or DME in their P-speak. It has both boost to deal with, and a similar AFM. Note that it has a WOT fuel map. I haven't tuned one in awhile, so don't remember if it's a multiplier table, or a direct pulsewidth table. It's on the tunerpro dowloads page.
  6. Well, since airflow, by flapper door or MAF, is proportional-ish to power, if you max the AFM, it will stay maxxed for awhile, possibly til redline, so logging is not needed, just an observant passenger to tell you at approx what rpm it hits 5V or whatever the max is. This itself is testable by simply pushing the flapper fully open manually with the ignition on and noting the max voltage indicated. While roadtesting, you can backprobe at the ECU, since it seems to be pulled down anyways. This obviously saves many feet of DVM wire extensions to the AFM connector.
  7. That calculated TP drops after 4000 is completely normal, if that's when peak torque is. In a general way, manifold pressure is proportional to injector pulse width is proportional to torque. To check if the AFM is maxing out, you can use a DVM and some backprobes. The Quattro is a mechanical continuous injection system with tweaks from the ECU for closed loop (in some markets) and boost. The ignition is crank triggered and completely ecu controlled.
  8. Another thought: on other older ECUs, thinking Porsche 944 here, there was a separate WOT fueling table unrelated to the AFM input. It would have been only a 2D table, not your typical 3D, since it was dependent only on RPM. Might have escaped your search due to that. This being a turbo application of course means this table will be way off if boost or other breathing changes have been made!
  9. Very cool! Absolute pressure and theoretical pulsewidth will be proportional to each other, assuming VE and target AFR or lambda are constant. That's why they're both often used as Load axes. Older BMW ecus use the theoretical pulsewidth concept too, if you're looking for more to compare to. The Audi Quattro ecu though similar, has a mechanical fuel metering head and flapper door, so fueling will be different as the injectors are continuously on. Have you checked to see when the AFM maxxes out? I wonder if it's around the same time as you have to start requesting a richer target than you actually want. Of course you'll see how far spring tension tweaks will get you!
  10. You could always try a BBE coating on the calipers, and maybe the drums.
  11. BTW, good job on your YouTube channel. I subbed.
  12. Those are crank degrees. So swapping leads around won't help. According to msextra.com you should be ok at zero, running in "next cylinder" mode. http://www.msextra.com/doc/ms1extra/MS_Extra_Ignition_Hardware_Manual.htm#MSnS How about the physical position of the rotor to the pin on the cap? Maybe it's firing off the edge of the rotor. I would suggest lining the rotor up so that the rotor is pointing directly at the pin on the cap with the engine at about 30Deg BTDC. That way, your entire operating range of 15-45 degrees-ish, is as far away from the corners of the rotor as can be.
  13. Re: the ignition wall, what is your trigger angle set to? Sounds to me as if it might be in the mid 30s,which is a no-no. If this is the case, try reclocking the distributor so you can achieve a trigger angle NOT between 20 and 50 degrees.
  14. First, I suggest setting the itbs so that you can achieve a warm idle of say 900 rpm as mentioned, WITH IAC BLOCKED OFF. That way, you know the absolute lowest rpm you can achieve with the IAC. Now unblock it. Try to incrementally increase duty cycle in 5% steps starting from zero. If the idle starts to drop towards 900, you are on the right track. Find the lowest point and make that your minimum DC. Edit: umm, basically, what madkaw said...
  • Create New...