ID2000s/FIC 2150s on MAF? Anyone doing this?
Aug 19, 2010, 03:37 AM
#1
ID2000s/FIC 2150s on MAF? Anyone doing this?
Just wondering if any of you guys are running the ID2000s/FIC 2150s on the MAF? If so what are your scaling and latency settings?
The reason I ask is I installed some High Z 2000s last night and used JohnBradley's scaling and latencies (derived from an SD car) and my car would not start at all... We chatted a bit last night to get a game plan going, but we can't remember if anyone with a MAF is actually running these or not...
The reason I ask is I installed some High Z 2000s last night and used JohnBradley's scaling and latencies (derived from an SD car) and my car would not start at all... We chatted a bit last night to get a game plan going, but we can't remember if anyone with a MAF is actually running these or not...
Aug 19, 2010, 07:48 AM
#2
EvoX + MAF + ID2000's
Minimum IPW (currently still being tuned) = 1.136ms
Injector Scaling = 1539
Injector Latency =
4.69v 2.01
7.04v 1.38
9.38v 0.915
11.73v 0.660
14.08v 0.495
16.42v 0.405
18.70v 0.285
That's with the new latency scaling formula for EvoX (0.015 instead of 0.024)
Minimum IPW (currently still being tuned) = 1.136ms
Injector Scaling = 1539
Injector Latency =
4.69v 2.01
7.04v 1.38
9.38v 0.915
11.73v 0.660
14.08v 0.495
16.42v 0.405
18.70v 0.285
That's with the new latency scaling formula for EvoX (0.015 instead of 0.024)
Aug 19, 2010, 07:53 AM
#3
Evo IX + MAF + ID2000's
E-85
Minimum IPW = 1.3ms
Injector Scaling = 1218
Injector Latency =
4.69v 5.232
7.03v 2.400
9.38v 1.368
11.72v 0.888
14.06v 0.600
16.41v 0.456
18.68v 0.360
Pump gas
Minimum IPW = 0.9ms
Injector Scaling = 1624
E-85
Minimum IPW = 1.3ms
Injector Scaling = 1218
Injector Latency =
4.69v 5.232
7.03v 2.400
9.38v 1.368
11.72v 0.888
14.06v 0.600
16.41v 0.456
18.68v 0.360
Pump gas
Minimum IPW = 0.9ms
Injector Scaling = 1624
Last edited by buchnerj; Aug 19, 2010 at 08:02 AM.
Aug 19, 2010, 07:55 AM
#4
Are you running e-85, 93, 91? Here are the initial settings that I used -
Scaling 1949 on pump, 1539 on e-85. Keep in mind these settings were used and the car started right up and idled great, albeit rich. It could be a good starting point to get it to fire up at least. I'm not saying that these are the ideal settings to use long term, but they should get it to fire up.
5.208
3.504
1.512
1.104
0.96
0.648
0.384
Side note - are you resetting the ECU? After trying 3-4 different latencies and scaling numbers and it not working I reset the ECU and then tried one of the ones that didn't work when I was trying different maps going back to back and it worked fine after I had reset the ECU. Coincidence? Perhaps, but it's happened twice now so I only try two latency and scaling sets before resetting the ECU. You should check out this thread for ideas also -
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...llllppppp.html
Scaling 1949 on pump, 1539 on e-85. Keep in mind these settings were used and the car started right up and idled great, albeit rich. It could be a good starting point to get it to fire up at least. I'm not saying that these are the ideal settings to use long term, but they should get it to fire up.
5.208
3.504
1.512
1.104
0.96
0.648
0.384
Side note - are you resetting the ECU? After trying 3-4 different latencies and scaling numbers and it not working I reset the ECU and then tried one of the ones that didn't work when I was trying different maps going back to back and it worked fine after I had reset the ECU. Coincidence? Perhaps, but it's happened twice now so I only try two latency and scaling sets before resetting the ECU. You should check out this thread for ideas also -
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...llllppppp.html
Aug 19, 2010, 08:06 AM
#7
Are you running e-85, 93, 91? Here are the initial settings that I used -
Scaling 1949 on pump, 1539 on e-85. Keep in mind these settings were used and the car started right up and idled great, albeit rich. It could be a good starting point to get it to fire up at least. I'm not saying that these are the ideal settings to use long term, but they should get it to fire up.
5.208
3.504
1.512
1.104
0.96
0.648
0.384
Side note - are you resetting the ECU? After trying 3-4 different latencies and scaling numbers and it not working I reset the ECU and then tried one of the ones that didn't work when I was trying different maps going back to back and it worked fine after I had reset the ECU. Coincidence? Perhaps, but it's happened twice now so I only try two latency and scaling sets before resetting the ECU. You should check out this thread for ideas also -
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...llllppppp.html
Scaling 1949 on pump, 1539 on e-85. Keep in mind these settings were used and the car started right up and idled great, albeit rich. It could be a good starting point to get it to fire up at least. I'm not saying that these are the ideal settings to use long term, but they should get it to fire up.
5.208
3.504
1.512
1.104
0.96
0.648
0.384
Side note - are you resetting the ECU? After trying 3-4 different latencies and scaling numbers and it not working I reset the ECU and then tried one of the ones that didn't work when I was trying different maps going back to back and it worked fine after I had reset the ECU. Coincidence? Perhaps, but it's happened twice now so I only try two latency and scaling sets before resetting the ECU. You should check out this thread for ideas also -
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...llllppppp.html
Trending Topics
Aug 20, 2010, 12:01 PM
#8
Aight, using tephras settings and dropping the IPW minimum to 1.040 the car idles at 14.7ish and can actually use the fuel trims to keep up. Just got done retuning the car on pump gas at 30 psi, feels good. I will run 1 more tank of 93 through to clean the injectors some more, and it is time for E85 again!
Aug 20, 2010, 08:52 PM
#14
No, as soon as it transitions into closed loop if the trims are negative (on my setup anyway) it slowly works its way down to 11.9/12.0 afr and stays there...even bumping the injector scaling way up didn't help, due to the IPW minumum. May be different on the IXs as they have a lower IPW minimum already set up in the rom...
