EE

iTrader: (9)

Based on the little experience i've had so far with mapping, i cas say i couldn't get out of my evo 9 exactly the power output i was expecting.

i'm runnig high boost (load goes from 260 at 6000 rpm, 250 @ 6500, 235 @ 7000,
217 @ 7500), using a modified pill in the vacum line & the wgdc & load error corrections to control load at different rpms / gears... mods are limited to 3" tbe (greddy decat down pipe + testpipe & HKS cat-back) along with exst manifold...
i haven't dynoed my car yet, but believe power is abt 340 or 345 @ the flywheel


I hv some questions in mind, hope to get some answers:

1- AFR & timing: í m using 98 octane (eq to 93 fuel in USA), what should the afr be
from 6000 all the way to 7600?? (kindly be as specific as possilbe,
as i hv an idea abt the afr but need specific numbers if possible)

It is straight forward that leaner afrs would lead to less timing,
so i assume you should start with afrs then run the max timing
allowed before knocking, is that correct?? consequently lower afrs
& higher timing will mean less power than higher afrs & less
timing?? what abt if i increase the octane rating (without using
methane or water inj.), should i run leaner afrs & then adjust
timing, or should keep the afrs the same and adjust timing?? if
i should run leaner then adjust timing, how leaner should i go
(say for each 2 pts higher octane number)???

2- MAF vs MAP: i assume MAP mapping is better than MAF mapping, is that
correct?? if yes why?? (ie what are the limitations when not
using MAP??) is it worth to go with all the trouble to switch to
MAP (bhp gain wise..) we're taling here abt my car, with my
current mods, not abt a heavily modified car...
my point is, i should be getting 360 or 370 bhp on my evo 9, is
it possilbe that my limitation is due to using the MAF, or i should
be able to get this power WHILE using MAF?? (370 @ the flywheel)


Thx

jcsbanks

Are you quoting 2 byte load? If so that sort of load should be sufficient for about 400 BHP - at least it would in the cool temperatures of the UK on several of our dynos, holding 1.5 bar or nearly 22 PSI at 6000-6500 RPM. If you are quoting other estimated loads from the loggers they are a waste of time and usually overestimate the real load.

I like 11.5 AFR on 99 RON.

MAF isn't a restriction at this level, but the standard airbox inlet is.

jcsbanks

By the way, my FQ340 which runs 345 BHP as standard runs only about 210 load at 6500 RPM.

EE

iTrader: (9)

im quoting 2 byte load... 1.5 bar @ 6000 ~ 6500 it is, according to load logs & my boost gauge... do u think i should use a "drop in filter" while keeping the original airbox (ie HKS or similar...) ??? i prefer not going to the open suction filters as i believe should modify maf scaling table...

11.5 AFR all the way from 6k to 7.6k?? my question #1 still holds considering afrs changes vs octane rating. 11.5 afr is irrelevant of the octane rating, or should i change afrs while changing octane rating (once again w'out using met or wat), and how??

EE

iTrader: (9)

may you send me yr timing / fuel maps along with boost or load logs?? & if possible afrs (boost/load & afr only for 6k to 7.6k, in case it's not too much trouble for you to send them...)

EE

iTrader: (9)

maybe there is a bit of difference i power output due to the "crap" fuel quality we have, but definitely not enough to cover for 40 unit load @ 6500 rpm while getting the same bhp output!!!!

jcsbanks

I personally like and run 11.5 from 3500 to 7600 RPM on 99 RON running 1.8 bar from 2600-5000 RPM, 1.7 bar at 6000, I let it drop to 1.4 at 7500 because VE drops dramatically. I only run like this when the ambient is <15C, and then I can run about 4 degrees timing at 4000, rising to 9 at 6000, about 15 at 7500. I can still run this in our summer with 25C ambients if I add 10% methanol to the tank (modified FPR to raise fuel pressure to 3.6 bar) and I adjust the injector scaling to keep the wideband lambda about the same (in fact I can add another few degrees timing on top). Otherwise I drop the boost to 1.7 dropping to 1.6 at 6000, 1.4 at 7000.

Temperature makes a massive difference and I tune it to the edge as I use dashboard logging on Pocket PC, so I know if it even dreams of detonation

Spec is FQ340 (which is a JDM IX GSR plus turbo inlet pipe, intercooler pipes, 2.5 inch exhaust), 3 inch exhaust, turbo elbow, airbox lid mod (search on this, it does drop the inlet restriction dramatically - if you log your baro sensor at idle and compare with 6500 RPM on full boost you'll see what I mean - really uncorks the top end without affecting MAF scaling or increasing inlet temps - at least in the UK - you might be better with a completely sealed upgrade airbox $$$), HKS panel filter, AVC-R used for boost control, Walbro.

EE

iTrader: (9)

well im a bit confused now. Let's take your boost @ 6500 rpm. According to you it should be 1.6 or 1.5 (depending on which setting you run). But previously you said you hv 210 units of load @ 6500. I have 1.5 bar @ 6500, & log 250 units of load... i assume on 1.5 @ 6.5k u should be seing 250 loads...

plz lemme know

PS: i don't the evo 9 fuel pump is a restriction befor 370 or 380 bhp... what do u think??

jcsbanks

As standard the FQ340 is about 1.1 bar or 210 load at 6500 RPM and does 345 BHP. In the UK it is widely accepted that you can get about 400 BHP on 99 RON at 1.5 bar at this RPM. I run a bit more because it performs better, but I haven't been back to the dyno since I got 399 BHP and 345 WHP on just about a standard FQ map with MBC, airbox mod, 3" exhaust before Ecuflash became available on the IX. All dynos are different, BHP extrapolations vary, WHP figures vary. I take them with a pinch of salt, but in your case you need something local if possible to compare to.

The previous owner fitted a Walbro, I would have done anyway to raise the fuel pressure for meth.

EE

iTrader: (9)

wow, 400 bhp @ 6500 250 load!! it makes sense, but sadly im far away...
nyway... hope if i get answers for all my abv questions i would be able to be close to 370 bhp on standard pump...

thx for yr info, i really appreciate

jcsbanks

Well the FQ360 does 366 BHP with the same spec as the FQ340 plus a sports cat (but still 2.5 inch), fuel pump upgrade and a different map, but it still doesn't use as much boost as you are running.

If you're fuel is remotely comparable, with more boost and a better exhaust you should unless it is as hot as hell get your 370 BHP on standard pump with 1.5 bar/11.5:1 AFR at 6500 RPM if it will take ignition timing - 11 or 12 degrees would be about right on our fuel. Also make sure you have no boost leaks etc.

That is about all the info you need for mapping.

EE

iTrader: (9)

it's not hot at all, actually it's abt 3 or 4 degrees...
nyway, 1 final question: let's say i hv 97 octane fuel (instead of 99),
how would that affect my AFR? (ie should i be running less than 11.5?? if yes how much?)

jcsbanks

I only tested 95 and 99 RON on the Evo. On 95 RON I turned the boost down to 1.5 bar and kept the AFR at 11.5 and it went OK and didn't knock on my usual timing map (my lift-off timing is a little retarded to get rid of lift-off knock, so when I turn the boost down the timing doesn't go up as much as you would expect). You can push it nearer to 11 if you want, I probably put a small amount of 95 RON in once a year when I can't get 99 RON, so I haven't tested in detail.

The other backup for a genuine 400 BHP is that when tuned like this in the UK they keep up with the FQ400 even at the top end as proven on track logging, and obliterate them on "instatorque". They are also competitive in a straight line on timing gear compared with other cars of similar power to weight.

EE

iTrader: (9)

so for the lid mod airbox, u make an opening in the left side of the airbox??? any other mod for the airbox or that's it?