Anyone with my same combo (see sig), or close enough, have EEC tuning done? I'm looking for a close starting point .BIN file. I installed my Moates Quarterhorse, and I've fed it a stock A9P calibration so it'll run. All I really wanted was to kill the speed limiter, and software calibrate for 30# injectors, but it seems like it's going to be more involved than that. Also, I'm still waiting for a license code for EEC Editor, I've been fumbling with TunerPro RT to get this far. Anybody skilled?
I had Willy from http://www.dirtydirtyracing.com do mine.
I'm still running the initial tune he did for me and it runs great, perfect idle.. I'm really happy with his tune. Once I get around to installing the wideband o2 and send him the data logs he'll fine tune it for me further.
Going off of the A9P tune, punch in the correct injector slopes and MAF curve for your parts, and it should run alright. You can then do more tuning to dial-in everything. Turn off adaptive and get KAMRF around 1.0 and adaptive will function well. Then you can dial in AFRs. Beyond that, further tuning is all about getting it back to a stock-behaving motor with throttle response and other variables.
If you have 30lb injectors and a MAF sensor that is "calibrated" for them, the car should already run with the stock tune. If not, there may be some mechanical problems. Unless you were running a larger motor, forced induction, or had a injector-setting issue, the motor should run with a stock tune.
It does run with the stock tune, but not well, something seems different. I tried the 19# sample tube with the slopes for the 30# injectors, but it was terrible. I didn't do anything with the maf transfer tables, I didn't think I'd need to, but I'm a greenhorn with this. In the end, I put the 30# tube back in, loaded an A9L bin, the GUFB xdf and the GUFB adx. After that, I entered the breakpoint for the injectors I have (I figure a calibrated MAF can't compensate for breakpoint), set the transmission type correctly, set idle specs from the A9P calibration and deleted EGR, tuned the dashpot, and bumped the rev limit to 6500. The biggest thing that smoothed out the fuel_error, KAMRF's, and LAMDSe's was entering the correct breakpoint for the injectors. It's now smother and less rich smelling then before I started screwing with it, AND, with all the adaptives and fuel trims hanging at around 1.0 at idle, the injectors are finally getting less than 3.3ms PW (around 2.4 to 2.6ms). Now I need to learn how to manipulate the spark curves and adders. Maybe once I get EECEditor licensed. I hear it's easier to use than TunerPro RT. Keep the advice coming, I can use it all.
Sell that meter and get a lightning mass air meter you can get a brand new one for under $100 and you'll get better results.
80mm or 90mm, there were 2. I have a 73mm MAC housing with a sample tube and a factory 94 Mustang GT sensor (edit:rechecked part# on sensor, see below).
My meter has a sensor with part number F2VF-12B579-AA I've traced this to early 4.6L Crown Vic, etc. Should I install the MAF transfer from that? Or should I keep the Table that's stock in A9L?
I would think that if the MAF is not one of the ones that are "calibrated" for the 30lb injectors (C&L, PRO-M, etc) then yes you need to put the transfer table in for the MAF. I run a 2001 Mustang GT MAF on my 93 Coupe with the 331 in it. I was going to run the 90mm lightning but the guy that tuned my car said I did not need it and that the 80mm would support up to 450 fwhp which is about all my 331 could make on a good day...a very good day. Here is a pretty good thread on this topic:
http://www.eectuning.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=18048
Darren
My MAF is calibrated to 30, and it's a MAC 73mm (like C&L), even calibrated to match the MAF transfer tables in the A9P, the sensor itself is a Ford unit, but it's not the part # the EEC is matched to. So my question is, is the "calibration" of the MAF valid, or do I need to feed the EEC the transfer table that matches the sensor I actually have?
So what you have is a ized MAF consisting of a 73mm MAC housing with a MAF sensor that is for a 94/95 Mustang or a 92-94 4.6L Crown Vic. I am not sure where this MAF is "calibrated" for 30 lb/hr injectors being that is has a factory Ford sensor in it? If it were me I would just get the 70mm housing out of a 94/95 Mustang or 92-94 Crown Vic and see if I could get the transfer function form one of the tuning forums. It is supposed to be almost identical to the Fox Mustang 5.0 55mm MAF transfer function but according to a lot of folks will need some tweeking when the hp levels get past 250 or so.
You need to start with a known and matching MAF so that you are not chasing your tail.
Darren
The calibration isn't with the sensor, it's about tuning the sampling tube size to spoof the reading.
I'm going to sound grumpy here. :grinno: It's 2015, "calibrated" MAFs are un-needed relic of the past when consumers didn't have the ability to adjust parameters in their ECUs.
A MAF is simply a sensor. You flow X kg/hr, and the sensor outputs Y voltage. Simple.
Screwing up the sampling tube location to spoof readings to adjust for injector size is just dumb. It's quite easy to change injector size directly in the ECU binary.
I'm not advocating for calibrated MAFs, but that's what I could afford to deal with at the time. Now I'm trying to figure out how to straighten it out. Maybe I'll try to source a F1ZF sensor. Then I can install the stock calibration tube verify the correct MAF transfer, and try setting the slopes and offsets for my injectors.
Foe,
Just making sure that you understand what I am trying to communicate. The MAF housing and the MAF sensor (the electronics) need to be from the same car that you are utilizing the MAF transfer function for. The way I understand it is a person can put that F1ZF sensor in a variety of different MAF housings (different bore diameters and internal profiles) and the flow rate versus voltage output will be different thus requiring different transfer functions. Starting with a known meter and sensor like one from a 94/95 GT Mustang (70mm MAF) and dumping that transfer function into your tune along with the correct data for your injectors will get you in a better spot a lot quicker than mixing and matching housings with sensors. Again, this is just how I understand it to work from when I moved up to an 80mm MAF from a 2001 Mustang GT on my '93 Coupe with an A9L and switch chip. Took my tuner no more than ten minutes to change the tune for the MAF and new 42 lb/hr injectors and the car fired right up.
Darren
This makes my brain hurt! It's like tuning a SD motor by using "calibrated" ACTs to make up for larger injectors! :rollin:
So, you have a 73mm C&L housing, and a 94/95 Mustang sensor. If I've got this right: You should be able to use the purple tube (099) and input the MAF curve from the '94-95 GT. Don't use the MAF curve from the A9P A9L (Although from Googling, they seem pretty close). Keep the injector size at 19 lbs, and scale the load% by (30/19) = 1.58 (or scale displacement) to make up for the fact that you're adjusting the MAF signal via the purple tube. When you use "calibrated" MAFs, you screw up the load tables since you're tricking the ECU into thinking it has less air coming in than it really does to make up for the larger injectors you're running.
http://www.cnlperformance.com/Calibration-chart.php
Edit: You stated the 19lb tube with 30 lb injector slopes, which should work - and not require modifying for incorrect load if you used the '94-95 GT MAF curve. Are you using the correct 19lb tube for the '94-'95 GT? (Gold [096])
If you want it to run right before you tune the car you need a F1VF sensor (89-93 5.0 Mustang sensor), the red 103 sample tube (you'll have to buy the equivalent tube from MAC), and you'll need a conical K&N filter RE0920. The 30lb calibration will NOT work with the stock air box or cold air kit. I've got a 76mm C&L MAF with a purple sample tube 099, K&N RE0920 filter, and 30lb red top FRPP injectors. My Thunderbird runs and drives like stock without any sort of tuner. Is it the right way to do it? No but it does work ok. At some point I plan on putting a 90mm Lightning MAF on the car and tuning it. I bet it will pick up a couple of HP with a tune over the calibrated MAF.
If you need a F1VF sensor I do have a spare one that works fine. PM me if you can't find one locally.
I think I have the 19# tube for the F1ZF (MAC #101). I ordered a F1ZF (and for good measure a 55mm stock maf housing to put it in for baseline if necessary) on ebay yesterday. On the other hand, fiveologyracing provided me with the maf transfer table for the F2VF in the 73mm unit with the 19# tube today, they gave me a .xls with both the 19# table, and the difference between the 19 and 30 pound tubes, so I can do a little simple math and have the values for the 30# tube. We'll see how it goes over the next few days.
What tubes do you have? The 101, 099, and 096?
I have 101 and 106. Right now, I'm running the 106, with the F2VF maf transfer, the 30lb breakpoints, and scaled displacement. Scaling the displacement smoothed the idle and radically improved the power curve and response. I don't know yet what the whole curve feels like, as my morning drive is through 6 miles of neighborhoods.
What's the 106? Don't see it on C&L's site.
Obviously, your setup is in the ballpark, even with the odd mix of bits.
I guess the mac part #s are CT1 and CT6. Sorry for the mixup. http://shop.macperformance.com/MAC-Ford-Mustang-50L-V8-1986-1993-73mm-Mass-Air-Meter-MA7386.htm (http://"http://shop.macperformance.com/MAC-Ford-Mustang-50L-V8-1986-1993-73mm-Mass-Air-Meter-MA7386.htm")
From my continuing email exchanges with Brian of Fiveology Racing:
Mike,
I did confirm with your original order that you should have received a 73mm housing calibrated for 30lb injectors. I only made reference to our 70mm housing to illustrate the use of the F2VF-AA in lue of the F1ZF-AA sensor. Both sensors can be used, each requiring a different calibration tube regardless of the aftermarket housing diameter, to account for the OEM calibration variations between the 55mm and 70mm housings. Therefore you should have received a "CT9" tube with your 73mm housing using F2VF-AA. If it is a "CT9" it should have a dot underneath the number to differentiate from a "CT6". If there is no dot present then the housing was labeled incorrectly. A "CT6" is a 30lb calibration for the F1ZF-AA sensor, which might explain the issues you have experienced using it with the F2VF-AA sensor. I can send you a "CT9" tube if you like. The "CT1" calibration tube you purchased from MAC is not compatible with F2VF-AA. If you want to ensure the mass air meter is set to the factory transfer function using a 19lb calibration you need to obtain a "CT3". Please let me know if I can assist you further
And my reply:
Thank you very much, Brian, that is the single most useful collection of information I have read since I started this last week. My calibration tube does indeed NOT have a dot anyplace near the number which appears to be 6 when oriented the same as my CT1 tube. The 1 stamping has a characteristic "base" at the bottom and "flag" at the top similar to the times new roman font, which leads me to believe I'm an viewing the other tube correctly. This answers every question. I gladly accept your offer to send me a CT9 calibration tube. Do you have my shipping info from my previous order? If so, I'm in the same place. You have been incredibly helpful.
I'll report back when I have something to add. I should have an F1ZF-AA showing up as well, So I should be able to try it both ways.
That's what I've been saying, with C&L part numbers.
If you want the car to run correctly with 30lb injectors and the 73mm MAF you have you need to set it up as follows:
73mm MAF
CT6 tube
F1VF sensor
K&N RE0920 conical filter clamped directly to the end of the MAF
That is how that particular setup is designed to run. A C&L MAF (or any imitation of it, IE a MAC MAF) is designed so that 30lb and larger injectors require a conical filter clamped directly to the end of the MAF ONLY. You can not use a stock airbox in that situation unless you tune for it. The 19lb calibration is for a stock airbox, there are two different 24lb calibrations depending on whether a stock airbox or conical filter is used as well. See here for more information: http://www.cnlperformance.com/MAF_info.php?section=15
Option 2 would be
73mm MAF
CT1 tube
F1FV Sensor
Stock Induction
Use actual 30lb injector slopes
Option 3
73mm MAF
CT9 tube
F2VF Sensor
Conical Filter
Use 19 lb injector slopes, scaled to account for 30 lb differences
Scale displacement (30/19)
My plan is to try each option 2 and 3. I really want to run the CT1 (which I have) with a F1ZF-AA (which is coming) with the 30lb slopes (which I have). Alternately, a CT9 is coming, which will allow me to try the F2VF-AA with it and the breakpoint for the 30lb injectors, but the 19lb slopes. I'd rather run the CT1 and the F1ZF-AA with the 30lb slopes, etc. Reason being is that this way, load should calculate correctly on its own and I don't have to screw with it. This setup should also bring me the best running tune, potentially better than I've had yet since getting the new build running last summer, later I can get wide-bands and fine-tune.
Interesting side note: turns out the factory digital tach is not only inaccurate (as we all knew already), but it's REALLY shagING INACCURATE. at 70MPH it registers 3200RPM for me, Tunerpro RT has the EEC reporting 2100RPM I got the car with a non standard diff ratio that I always figured (based on the tach) was 3.73:1, it's not. It's 3.27:1, because the digital tach is SUPER EXTRA DREAMWORLD shagED UP INACCURATE.
Could have told you that: http://www.foxtbirdcougarforums.com/showthread.php?38600-The-stock-digital-tach-is-apparently-very-inaccurate&highlight=
There's got to be a way to fix it, all I'm saying. Like a pulse selection jumper, or an IC to replace, or something.
On my cars with digi dash and 2:73 gears, they always read 1600Rpm's at 65 and 1800 at 75mph. Seems about right to me?
If you figure out what it is let me know. I'd love to make the one in my car more accurate.
So I got an F1ZF-AA sensor, swapped to the CT1 tube and set my slopes and offset, and it ran terrible. then I realized that 30lb/hr is at 43.5psi. I did some scaling with the slopes and ofsets and at 27.15 for the high slope, it seems to be straight, I bumped the spark sea-level table 8 degrees across the board, and now I think I'm pretty close. Tomorrow I'll get my adjustable FPR, so I can reset the pressure to 43.5 with no vac. I'll rescale my slopes back to 30ish and try again.
If you're using the Ford "Red Top" EV1 30lb injectors (like me) then they flow 30lbs/hr at the stock 39psi fuel pressure. I'm running a stock replacement Motorcraft fuel pressure regulator and fuel pressure at the rail with no vacuum on the regulator is 39psi. My 30lb injectors run fine at the stock 39psi fuel pressure.
BTW I'm thinking about picking up a Quarter Horse next year and tuning my car. At that point I would also be swapping to a Lightning MAF. Hopefully you figure out the Quarter Horse so I can copy you later on ;).
But I'm not. I'm using red tops from a late 90's flex fuel 3.3l Intrepid. They're 30lb, but at 43.5 They're made by Siemens, who has referred me to Continental, who I'm waiting to hear from. It would be incredibly helpful to have a calibration summary for them.
Well that will account for the difference :hick:. I've got 30lb Ford EV1 red tops, which have a know slope. You may have to figure out the proper slope for the injectors you're running.
I've been homing in on the slopes little by little. Overall, the steep learning curve was expected, so I'd say it's going well. I made a few good hard runs this afternoon that pulled very hard and didn't give me any detonation or spark knock, so tomorrow I'll up the pressure, adjust the slopes more, and see where I land. I just wish the idle was smoother. I'm beginning to suspect GT40P's were a poor choice to pair with domed pistons, there's very close clearance between the spark plug boss and the top of the piston, and I suspect that's giving me burn problems.
Oh, dear lord! I started reading this tread because I am interested in the Quarterhorse system. Now I learn that you are using Chrysler parts on your Bird. I have a hard enough time making parts from all different year models of Ford work in harmony, to add in something from a Chrysler? Whew! Not meaning any disrespect here. Foe, if anyone can do it, you can.
I wish I had bought the FRPP red tops, but only because the calibration data is available. I bought the set I have, because at the time the price was good and I didn't know I'd need so much info when it came time to tune it. After I raised the pressure to 43 or so, I was able to set the high slope to 30ish and then do some math to determine the low slope. I found that using an A9L bin makes injector breakpoint a fine fuel adjustment rather than an actual injector breakpoint. That made fuel easier to dial in. I still have no idea what my voltage offset should be, but I've left it stock so far. I made a huge breakthrough last week when I decided to copy and paste the A9P spark sealevel table to the A9L bin I'm using and then add 6 degrees to the whole thing (may go back to 8 when I feel safe to do so), then copied it to the altitude spark table and the base spark table. I had lost most of my low-end punch, but that brought it back. Who would have thought running the automatic spark tables on an automatic car would have made a difference. I had to tell the A9L bin it had an automatic trans, and set the neutral and drive idle speeds from the A9P as well. I'm getting really close to a good base tune. Once I get there, I'll probably end up having someone else tune it on a dyno for the fine tuning, I just don't want to show up with a ragged ass base tune and have the dude be like "how did you even make it here?".
So how's this going? I'm thinking of picking up Quarterhorse and BE and tuning the car myself vs having someone else do it next year. It's going to be cheaper to tune it myself.
It's going well, I'm still struggling a bit to iron out my low range spark. For my summer daily, though, it's really fairly good now. I was driving everyplace with my laptop open for a while, but now only fiddle with it a couple times a week. If I can get my low end punch back to where it was, I'll feel pretty good about my tune.
Are you using Binary Editor? I've heard it has a steep learning curve. If all I really have to do is enter the injector slops and MAF transfer function to get up and running that would be great.
I use tunerpro rt. I thought it would be that simple, too. There's a bit more involved.
Nuts. If you don't mind asking how much did the whole works (Quarterhorse and software) cost you? I can get a tune from a renowned local tuner for around $400 but I like the idea of being able to make changes on my own as time goes on vs paying for another dyno session later.
The emulator itself was 250, tunerpro rt is free.
Geesh Quarterhorse and BE is only $50 cheaper than taking the car to my local tuner to have it done......
except that changes don't require another $400 visit. Don't waste your money on BE, either. It's not that great, not for $100, anyway.
Not having to pay for changes is nice. I've looked at BE before. It looks like I could easily input a MAF transfer function and injector slopes in BE. Problem is I look at things like load and spark advance and I have no idea what I'm doing there. I feel like even if I buy a Quarterhorse I'm going to have to have someone besides myself look at it or tune it anyway. I don't think I have quite enough knowledge to do it myself. At least to get maximum performance out of the engine.
Heard about THIS little guy (http://"http://www.moates.net/neptunedemon-bluetooth-module-addon-p-298.html?cPath=31") the other day and picked one up. So it took about 20 minutes to add it to my Quarterhorse today, then I paired my laptop (has Bluetooth) to it and played with my tune wirelessly, which was indescribably awesome. After that, I datalogged it all the way home on my phone (http://"https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.linszter.tunerview&hl=en_US&rdid=com.linszter.tunerview"). I have arrived in the future.
That's awesome. I was wondering if there was a way to do that
That's awesome. I was wondering if there was a way to do that.
Links are dead, so the phone app is called TunerView in the play store.
(I'm commenting on on my important tech threads with updates and other info so that they show up to Gumby as recent posts and finding the tech info on my car from the board is easier)