FIC 1050s installed today - observations and a question
Feb 28, 2009, 08:57 PM
#106
Evolving Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Kansas
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're getting wierd fuel trim values because the fuel trim scaling in the version of EvoScan that you're using is wrong. The correct scaling formulas are:
<DataListItem DataLog="N" Color="" Display="LT Fuel Trim Low" LogReference="LTFT_Low" RequestID="0C" Eval="0.1953125*x-25" Unit="%" MetricEval="" MetricUnit="" ResponseBytes="1" GaugeMin="-13" GaugeMax="13" ChartMin="-13" ChartMax="13" ScalingFactor="1" Notes="" Priority="1" Visible="false" />
<DataListItem DataLog="N" Color="" Display="LT Fuel Trim Mid" LogReference="LTFT_Mid" RequestID="0D" Eval="0.1953125*x-25" Unit="%" MetricEval="" MetricUnit="" ResponseBytes="1" GaugeMin="-13" GaugeMax="13" ChartMin="-13" ChartMax="13" ScalingFactor="1" Notes="" Priority="1" Visible="false" />
<DataListItem DataLog="N" Color="" Display="ST Fuel Trim" LogReference="STFT" RequestID="0F" Eval="0.1953125*x-25" Unit="%" MetricEval="" MetricUnit="" ResponseBytes="1" GaugeMin="-25" GaugeMax="25" ChartMin="0" ChartMax="200" ScalingFactor="1" Notes="" Priority="1" Visible="False" />
The car has to be driven for a least 10 minutes to see any change in the long term fuel trims. At least a 1/2 of stop and go driving is needed to get any feel for where the trims are going.
<DataListItem DataLog="N" Color="" Display="LT Fuel Trim Low" LogReference="LTFT_Low" RequestID="0C" Eval="0.1953125*x-25" Unit="%" MetricEval="" MetricUnit="" ResponseBytes="1" GaugeMin="-13" GaugeMax="13" ChartMin="-13" ChartMax="13" ScalingFactor="1" Notes="" Priority="1" Visible="false" />
<DataListItem DataLog="N" Color="" Display="LT Fuel Trim Mid" LogReference="LTFT_Mid" RequestID="0D" Eval="0.1953125*x-25" Unit="%" MetricEval="" MetricUnit="" ResponseBytes="1" GaugeMin="-13" GaugeMax="13" ChartMin="-13" ChartMax="13" ScalingFactor="1" Notes="" Priority="1" Visible="false" />
<DataListItem DataLog="N" Color="" Display="ST Fuel Trim" LogReference="STFT" RequestID="0F" Eval="0.1953125*x-25" Unit="%" MetricEval="" MetricUnit="" ResponseBytes="1" GaugeMin="-25" GaugeMax="25" ChartMin="0" ChartMax="200" ScalingFactor="1" Notes="" Priority="1" Visible="False" />
The car has to be driven for a least 10 minutes to see any change in the long term fuel trims. At least a 1/2 of stop and go driving is needed to get any feel for where the trims are going.
Thanks MFred.
Now, how do I get these, I assume corrections, entered to my Evoscan to read correctly. Sorry, I'm quite new to these stuff.
Should I just go to the evoscan Data Settings and update Data file using Notepad with your correction above? Is the LTFT High correct and don't need correction?
I was hoping to get the Low fuel trim set by just idling it as some snow and stock tire don't go very well. Tomorrow will be warmer and so I can do some driving.
Thanks again.
Last edited by gunhaha; Feb 28, 2009 at 09:27 PM.
May 18, 2009, 09:50 PM
#107
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I installed my FIC 1050's this last weekend, they seem to act like everyone elses. They start fine hot and cold, but it takes a few extra cranks when its warm. Has anyone found a solution to this yet? I have played with the Idle stepped table all week, and that doesn't seem to affect it at all.
Here are the settings that I used. My trims were pretty close. I should be switching to e85 later this week.
scaling: 1008cc (pump gas)
4.69 4.512
7.03 3.408
9.38 1.896
11.72 1.320
14.06 0.936
16.41 0.672
18.68 0.480
Here are the settings that I used. My trims were pretty close. I should be switching to e85 later this week.
scaling: 1008cc (pump gas)
4.69 4.512
7.03 3.408
9.38 1.896
11.72 1.320
14.06 0.936
16.41 0.672
18.68 0.480
Sep 17, 2009, 08:54 AM
#108
Me and routybouty have been tinkering on the warm starts. He found that bumping up the timing advance a little helps a lot. The confusing thing is that when you log a startup, it will take it a second to hit the timing value that you changed it to and then it will start. It still keeps trying 5 no matter what I change the value to for like the first second. Is there like a base number or initial value that I can change thats not in the timing maps or something?
Sep 17, 2009, 09:36 AM
#109
Me and routybouty have been tinkering on the warm starts. He found that bumping up the timing advance a little helps a lot. The confusing thing is that when you log a startup, it will take it a second to hit the timing value that you changed it to and then it will start. It still keeps trying 5 no matter what I change the value to for like the first second. Is there like a base number or initial value that I can change thats not in the timing maps or something?
Sep 17, 2009, 09:51 AM
#110
mrfred, I have a quick question that's sort of related to this, so this may be a good place to ask, instead of uncovering the older thread...
The ISCV tables that you found...one of them was for statup CTS demand. Was this table just for cranking or was it for some set amount of time after engine start?
The reason I ask is because I reduced the amount of cold start ignition trim, but now at cold start, then engine revs a bit too high for around 30 seconds or so. I assume that I can simply use one of the appropriate ISCV demand tables to readjust, but not certain on which one.
Eric
The ISCV tables that you found...one of them was for statup CTS demand. Was this table just for cranking or was it for some set amount of time after engine start?
The reason I ask is because I reduced the amount of cold start ignition trim, but now at cold start, then engine revs a bit too high for around 30 seconds or so. I assume that I can simply use one of the appropriate ISCV demand tables to readjust, but not certain on which one.
Eric
Sep 17, 2009, 10:33 AM
#111
mrfred, I have a quick question that's sort of related to this, so this may be a good place to ask, instead of uncovering the older thread...
The ISCV tables that you found...one of them was for statup CTS demand. Was this table just for cranking or was it for some set amount of time after engine start?
The reason I ask is because I reduced the amount of cold start ignition trim, but now at cold start, then engine revs a bit too high for around 30 seconds or so. I assume that I can simply use one of the appropriate ISCV demand tables to readjust, but not certain on which one.
Eric
The ISCV tables that you found...one of them was for statup CTS demand. Was this table just for cranking or was it for some set amount of time after engine start?
The reason I ask is because I reduced the amount of cold start ignition trim, but now at cold start, then engine revs a bit too high for around 30 seconds or so. I assume that I can simply use one of the appropriate ISCV demand tables to readjust, but not certain on which one.
Eric
Sep 17, 2009, 11:40 AM
#114
Me and routybouty have been tinkering on the warm starts. He found that bumping up the timing advance a little helps a lot. The confusing thing is that when you log a startup, it will take it a second to hit the timing value that you changed it to and then it will start. It still keeps trying 5 no matter what I change the value to for like the first second. Is there like a base number or initial value that I can change thats not in the timing maps or something?
All 4g63 cars revert to 5* of timing during startup (base timing) for easier cranking. It'd be cool to be able to adjust that.
Sep 17, 2009, 11:57 AM
#115
I have a couple of cold-start logs from this morning that show a related 5-degree behavior; I've been getting terrible lean stumbling during initial warm-up, and the logs show that when I drop below about 600 RPM, timing immediately drops down to 5 degrees, even though the car is still struggling to run. Once the car is warm, the stumbling disappears. I'd only just started looking into it to see if I could correlate the behavior with anything other than coolant temp and AFR.
Not that this has anything to do with FIC 1050s, mind you.
Not that this has anything to do with FIC 1050s, mind you.
Sep 17, 2009, 04:23 PM
#116
Evolving Member
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a couple of cold-start logs from this morning that show a related 5-degree behavior; I've been getting terrible lean stumbling during initial warm-up, and the logs show that when I drop below about 600 RPM, timing immediately drops down to 5 degrees, even though the car is still struggling to run. Once the car is warm, the stumbling disappears. I'd only just started looking into it to see if I could correlate the behavior with anything other than coolant temp and AFR.
Not that this has anything to do with FIC 1050s, mind you.
Not that this has anything to do with FIC 1050s, mind you.
Like mentioned earlier, if there was a table to adjust the base timing during start up from 5 I think that would solve the starting issues for some. It seems (SEEMS) like it has 5 advance until after 500rpm. In my logs, either the next frame over 500rpm or the second frame after 500rpm it kicks into the table.
Sep 24, 2009, 10:04 AM
#117
im having the same exact problem with my FIC 850 injectors. I unfortunately am not the one doing the tuning because i can't get my evoscan and ecuflash to work properly (nor am i even close to a beginner at tuning). But i am trying to get as much useful information to help my tuner when it comes to fixing this, or maybe resolve the issue myself if someone can help me get my computer reading my roms and things like that. But anyway, Fred or anyone else have any new info on getting these issues fixed? Possible warm start and cold start tables updated???
