mrfred

iTrader: (50)

This is 3dman1's ERL 2.3L Evo 10 currently running E85. He got the injector kit with the PnP electrical adapters. When we tried the PnP adapters, we got consistent injector misfire, but after hardwiring the injector power plugs to the vehicle harness, the injector misfires went away and we moved onto dialing them in. Using the fuel trims to guide the injector tuning, we are currently at 943 cc/min on the injector size and injector latency values of

2.625
1.395
0.825
0.660
0.600
0.555
0.540

Fuel trims are +/- 3%. The latency values are quite a bit lower than expected based on the few people running these on Evo 8/9s, so I'll be watching the fuel trims over the next few weeks to see what they do. So far, they seem like very nice injectors. Can't directly compare to the DW1300s because we are on E85 with the FIC1680s, and he was on 92 Oct on the DW1300s.

fostytou

iTrader: (15)

Nice! Last time I looked these weren't for sale yet on FIC's site... but that was months ago.

mrfred

iTrader: (50)

I think we got the first set sold for an Evo 10.

scheides

iTrader: (10)

Muahahaha I love you mrfred! Are these values done with the latancy 'fix' in place for the X or not?

I've heard these can run on pump gas too, please let me know if you try it. These are on my list, they'll probably run pump first and then e85. Please share driveability, starting (cold/warm/hot) and tuning feedback as much as you can! How would you say they compare noisewise (tickyness) to the DW1300's?

mrfred

iTrader: (50)

We did run briefly on pump gas, but with one of the injectors misbehaving due to the connector issue I mentioned in the first post. In some instances we were able to get all the injectors firing reasonably well, and after a bit of injector scaling and latency tweaking, pump gas idle was at least as good as the DW1300s, and probably better. We'll for sure have more drivability comments by the end of next week.

The 1680s actually push the IPW min on E85, and on pump gas, it was clear that the IPW needed to be below the 1.28 ms min. When we were fiddling around on pump gas, we did not have the latest AP updates, so we weren't able to try reducing the min IPW. We did have it for the E85 fiddling, and oddly, lowering the IPW min didn't seem to allow a lower IPW during idle. Either I'm missing something in how to set the values in AP (seemed pretty obvious), or their patch isn't working as intended.

I have no idea what the AP "injector latency fix" is. I was expecting to see something in the AccessTuner interface or feel some difference after updating the AP, but there are no new tables (except for the IPW min tables) related to a "latency fix".

EDIT: 3dman1 says the FIC1680s are louder than the DW1300s. I didn't notice anything in the cabin though.

scheides

iTrader: (10)

Uhhhh, what is this 'AP' and 'AccessTuner' you speak of? Is this the same mrfred or did someone steal his login? LOL!

Anyways, I was referring to this:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...hm-change.html

Def keep the updates coming!

tephra

iTrader: (6)

latency fix:

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...hm-change.html

beaten by edit? :P

tephra

iTrader: (6)

Yeh there are two places that need to be updated for minimum IPW.

When the patch is working you should definitley see the lowest IPW logged drop to 1.0xxx whatever..

I am not sure if Cobb copied my patch properly in the AP...

zing :P

kozmic27

Were the pins on the connectors soldered or crimped prior to you hard wiring the injectors? I have heard of this issue with other jumper sets, and wonder if soldering them would fix.

The AP injector latency fix is the single value adjustment called "Injector Latency (Base Multiplier)". It allows you to select wich value you use. Default is 15. Unfortunately when you change this value, it changes the math, but not the displayed latency. Could you post the value in this table?

Cobb's minimum IPW patch also has a minimum IPW versus RPM table. I have not tested it however.

Oh, and thanks for sharing this.

tephra

iTrader: (6)

Yes the MinimumIPW vs RPM table in my patch is jumped over, because there is another bit of code there from memory... rather than having lots of little patches I opted to just skip all the different ways of calculating the minimum..

kozmic27

I can attest that your way of doing it works perfectly. On multiple cars.

BTW, did you get a chance to look at the email I sent the other day?

mrfred

iTrader: (50)

lol. ap def ain't my first choice. 3dman1 had an ap before i met him. i raz him about it fartly often, and he's almost jumped ship a few times. the latest ap update with tephra's ipw min feature was very timely. however, they need to get ahead of the curve rather than lag behind open source if they want to stay in the game.

anyhow, the latest update is that i've done a bit more tuning, and these injectors def idle very nicely on e85. more info will follow after further tuning next week.

i had cobb on the phone this afternoon, and they have the software engineer reviewing their patch. i kinda wonder whether they tested it on an evo 10.

i didn't do the hardwire job, so i didn't get a peek at how the adapter plugs were assembled. i'm reasonably certain though that the issue was poor mating between the harness plug and the adapter plug.

i don't have my tuning laptop handy, so i'll have to get that val for you later.

tephra

iTrader: (6)

Aww I was so tempted to say something *****y hehe

tephra

iTrader: (6)

Cool!

and I replied today ?

probably just gmail being a bit laggy!

mrfred

iTrader: (50)

didn't think i was being too hard on them with my comment. perhaps a more biting comment is that i can't help but ponder what other features of yours they may copy (as they'll need to if they want to have any chance of staying in the evo 10 game).