RE: Changing 165 fuel delivery was "General tuning question - fue l economy"

["Marteney, Steven J." <smarteney@xlvision.com>]

"Nope, with the "hot" engine there is less engine vacuum, so hence at a
given
TPS value, less air is being drawn in.

The VE at certain ranges will be greater, and at others lower."

Hmmm... I think I understand.  However, I think the latter statement about
the VE being lower or higher in different areas also applies to the TPS
value.  Above, it sounds like you are saying at EVERY TPS value less air is
being drawn in, but if VE increases in some places then air being drawn in
MUST increase at certain TPS voltages.  I think I'm just being picky about
wording, sorry.  I'm just trying to get a handle on this.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Plecan [mailto:nacelp@bright.net]
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 4:05 PM
To: gmecm@diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: Changing 165 fuel delivery was "General tuning question -
fuel economy"




> Not sure what you mean here.  It is MAF, but I also think it is right.
With
> the increased lift and duration of the cam, at a given rpm and throttle
> angle the engine will be taking in more air than it would with the stock
> cam.

Nope, with the "hot" engine there is less engine vacuum, so hence at a given
TPS value, less air is being drawn in.

The VE at certain ranges will be greater, and at others lower.

The engine also will need more / less fuel at specific gms/sec, the idea of
14.7:1 being ideal is just for emissions....

>To keep the AFR right, the injectors would have to deliver more fuel
> and thus BLM goes up.  My point in trying to change the injector constant
or
> MAF tables or whatever would be to obtain the "holy grail" of tuning, the
> 128 BLMs and BLIs.

There are lots of things to consider.  Use what the IC are supposed to be,
and then start calibrating.  When using an ecm that's been hac'd there is no
need to get sloppy (for lack of a better word) in how you do things, IF YOU
WANT IT RIGHT............
Grumpy

>
> Also, haven't read the long email you sent previous.  This response may be
> way off base since I haven't read it yet.  Sorry :-(
>
> Steve
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mike Rolica [mailto:mrolica@meridian-mag.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 1:52 PM
> > To: 'gmecm@diy-efi.org'
> > Subject: RE: Changing 165 fuel delivery was "General tuning question
> > - fuel economy"
> >
> > So if it is maf.. obiously the maf is not right.. or you injectors are
not
> > actually putting out what the constant is in the prom......
> > Mike Rolica
> > Plant A,
> > Magnesium Products Division
> > Strathroy
> >
> > (519)-245-4040  Ext. 265
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Marteney, Steven J. [SMTP:smarteney@xlvision.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 1:38 PM
> > To: gmecm@diy-efi.org
> > Subject: RE: Changing 165 fuel delivery was "General
> > tuning question - fuel economy"
> >
> > In other words, the block learns would come back to 128 (or
> > wherever they
> > settled.)  Isn't that the goal?  They are at 145-150 now and
> > everyone says
> > tune for 128.  That's only one way I've thought of doing it,
> > but didn't know
> > if it was considered cosher.
> >
> > Steve (damn the excess overlap, I still want a blower!)
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rick Lindstedt [mailto:rick@mafb.org]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 1:21 PM
> > To: gmecm@diy-efi.org
> > Subject: RE: Changing 165 fuel delivery was "General tuning
> > question -
> > fue l economy"
> >
> >
> > Marteney, Steven J. wrote:
> > >Congrats on a nice right up in GM High Tech Performance
> > mag!  I enjoyed
> > >reading it.  Hope it was you, guess it could have been
> > another Rick
> > Linstedt
> > >that "tunes his own chips."
> >
> > Yuppers..thats me... =) Thanks!
> >
> > >On the injector flow rate, I had thought of telling it I
> > had smaller
> > >injectors than I really do.  Seems that would fire them
> > longer, but I'm in
> > >the dark.  Thought I would try it and see what happens.
> >
> > Yea..it might work @ first but I would think the ECM would
> > slow them down
> > to get the correct AFR after awhile of learning. ..maybe Im
> > wrong here...
> >
> > Rick
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------


>