No the table you mention at 11:50 uses airflow look at the table it says grams per sec when you turn off the mat look up as you did and only use the counts table the car will run lean or rich at low speed idle or off throttle bc thats when there is no air flow only using one table as you did will require tuning other parameters to compensate when the engine isnt drawing air like at idle or when your off throttle this is why i sent you the both updated tables in the other video those values are better values when using sensor in air box use those two tables and keep the check box checked on like factory
I attached a link to what I go by Like I said in the video everyone has there own way of tuning. www.thirdgen.org/forums/diy-prom/265869-mat-pw-compensation-8d.html
@@E.T.GARAGE correct everyone has there own way but even from your link it describes it as using airflow grams per sec. not as you describe at 11:50. when you turn this table off you have to adjust other paramaters to get the fuel correct. they way i do it is still use both tables but insert new vaules for both when the sensor is relocated a user from those forums spent two years testing to get those values he went through all the temps summer and winter to come up with the new values
It’s been awhile since I used the older XDF’s, but normally we would relocate the MAT to avoid heat soak, the readings themselves don’t change, both read correctly whether under the plenum or in the air tract. These ECM’s have a hard coded timing retard when air temps are excessive, as that’s why we relocate them because the heat soak will skew the feedback and pull timing. Honestly has nothing to do with fueling. The bias between the CTS and MAT is just a bias….
you mean you can’t avoid timing retard based on MAT from the bin file? about the fuel delivery, last time when I’ve checked the bin there was little change in AFR based on MAT like 11.5 vs 12. I don’t think you can feel that. And you simply do the logging when it is fully warmed up and take the AFR values where you need. when you datalog timing you should be able to see the heat soak timing adjustment or can you?
Summarized observations: Inverse MAT Term Lookup "IMTLU" 1. Disabling IMTLU always resulted in more fuel. 2. At higher MAT temps, the fuel difference was minor. (e.g. BPW 2.59 vs 2.64 ms at 66°C MAT; a 2% difference) 3. At lower MAT temps, the difference was much more significant. (BPW 3.25 vs 2.79 ms at 5°C MAT; a 16% difference) 4. Whether or not IMTLU was enabled, had a big deal to do with the other two MAT tables. MAT Compensation Counts vs. MAT Table let's call it "Comp Counts" for short: 1. A lower number in the table gets you more fuel. 2. Comp counts had a larger impact on fuel than Delta Mult. 3. If IMTLU is enabled, the comp counts table value that has the impact, is NOT the table entry that corresponds to the MAT value. It's the next two or three higher temp entries that have the effect! (this might be why it'd been previously posted that Comp Counts has only a minimal effect -- if IMTLU is enabled, and you mess with the table value where you'd expect it to matter, i.e. corresponding to your MAT temp, nothing happens. This was definitely the biggest surprise of the evening. Edit: actually, leirch mentioned it two posts above this one, but I had no clue what he was talking about until now ) Example, when MAT is 4°C, IMTLU enabled, BPW is 2.79 ms. Go into the Comp Counts table, and change the closest value, which is 8°C. Nothing happens. Matter of fact, change ALL the entries all the way from -16°C to 32°C. Push 'em up to 255, or whatever. No change in BPW! Now change only the table entry for 44°C from the stock value of 84 to 42, and BPW jumps to 3.17 ms, a 12% change! Gonna have to stare at the hac for quite awhile before I understand that one! 4. If IMTLU is disabled, the Comp Counts table value that causes the change, corresponds to the real MAT value. i.e. if MAT is 44°C, and you change the table entry for 44°C, BPW now DOES change. And in this case, chopping the 44°C value in half as above, from 84 to 42, makes for almost the same change in fuel, with BPW increasing 13%. Inverse MAT Term Lookup Delta Mult. vs. Airflow Table I'll refer to it as "Delta Mult" for short. 1. A lower number in the table gets you more fuel. (as stated in previous posts) 2. If IMTLU is disabled, this table has no effect. (as one would expect) 3. Scaling the table, appeared to make much more of a % change in fuel at low MAT temps than high.
Love the l98.
Yes I did .. to the airbox happy with results 90 ..174k no rich fuel issues
No the table you mention at 11:50 uses airflow look at the table it says grams per sec when you turn off the mat look up as you did and only use the counts table the car will run lean or rich at low speed idle or off throttle bc thats when there is no air flow
only using one table as you did will require tuning other parameters to compensate when the engine isnt drawing air like at idle or when your off throttle
this is why i sent you the both updated tables in the other video those values are better values when using sensor in air box use those two tables and keep the check box checked on like factory
when you click on sort by newest comments in other video you will then see the new values i use for both tables
I attached a link to what I go by Like I said in the video everyone has there own way of tuning. www.thirdgen.org/forums/diy-prom/265869-mat-pw-compensation-8d.html
@@E.T.GARAGE correct everyone has there own way but even from your link it describes it as using airflow grams per sec. not as you describe at 11:50. when you turn this table off you have to adjust other paramaters to get the fuel correct. they way i do it is still use both tables but insert new vaules for both when the sensor is relocated
a user from those forums spent two years testing to get those values he went through all the temps summer and winter to come up with the new values
Did you recently clean your engine bay, looks good. Thanks
No didn't clean it
It’s been awhile since I used the older XDF’s, but normally we would relocate the MAT to avoid heat soak, the readings themselves don’t change, both read correctly whether under the plenum or in the air tract. These ECM’s have a hard coded timing retard when air temps are excessive, as that’s why we relocate them because the heat soak will skew the feedback and pull timing. Honestly has nothing to do with fueling. The bias between the CTS and MAT is just a bias….
you mean you can’t avoid timing retard based on MAT from the bin file?
about the fuel delivery, last time when I’ve checked the bin there was little change in AFR based on MAT like 11.5 vs 12. I don’t think you can feel that. And you simply do the logging when it is fully warmed up and take the AFR values where you need.
when you datalog timing you should be able to see the heat soak timing adjustment or can you?
the tables alter fuel in $8d
Summarized observations:
Inverse MAT Term Lookup "IMTLU"
1. Disabling IMTLU always resulted in more fuel.
2. At higher MAT temps, the fuel difference was minor.
(e.g. BPW 2.59 vs 2.64 ms at 66°C MAT; a 2% difference)
3. At lower MAT temps, the difference was much more significant.
(BPW 3.25 vs 2.79 ms at 5°C MAT; a 16% difference)
4. Whether or not IMTLU was enabled, had a big deal to do with the other two MAT tables.
MAT Compensation Counts vs. MAT Table
let's call it "Comp Counts" for short:
1. A lower number in the table gets you more fuel.
2. Comp counts had a larger impact on fuel than Delta Mult.
3. If IMTLU is enabled, the comp counts table value that has the impact, is NOT the table entry that corresponds to the MAT value. It's the next two or three higher temp entries that have the effect! (this might be why it'd been previously posted that Comp Counts has only a minimal effect -- if IMTLU is enabled, and you mess with the table value where you'd expect it to matter, i.e. corresponding to your MAT temp, nothing happens. This was definitely the biggest surprise of the evening. Edit: actually, leirch mentioned it two posts above this one, but I had no clue what he was talking about until now )
Example, when MAT is 4°C, IMTLU enabled, BPW is 2.79 ms.
Go into the Comp Counts table, and change the closest value, which is 8°C. Nothing happens. Matter of fact, change ALL the entries all the way from -16°C to 32°C. Push 'em up to 255, or whatever. No change in BPW! Now change only the table entry for 44°C from the stock value of 84 to 42, and BPW jumps to 3.17 ms, a 12% change! Gonna have to stare at the hac for quite awhile before I understand that one!
4. If IMTLU is disabled, the Comp Counts table value that causes the change, corresponds to the real MAT value. i.e. if MAT is 44°C, and you change the table entry for 44°C, BPW now DOES change. And in this case, chopping the 44°C value in half as above, from 84 to 42, makes for almost the same change in fuel, with BPW increasing 13%.
Inverse MAT Term Lookup Delta Mult. vs. Airflow Table
I'll refer to it as "Delta Mult" for short.
1. A lower number in the table gets you more fuel. (as stated in previous posts)
2. If IMTLU is disabled, this table has no effect. (as one would expect)
3. Scaling the table, appeared to make much more of a % change in fuel at low MAT temps than high.
search google for thread "MAT question" on third gen org
Why not have both