Ignition only table?

Moderator: Tom Notch

Post Reply
User avatar
Piledriver
Moderator
Posts: 21751
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 3:01 am
Location: Van Alstyne, Texas

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by Piledriver » Sat Aug 04, 2012 6:27 pm

It looks like I finally got ~35MPG (US) out of it. (maybe more)

I reset my old JAW and the MS to use the JAWs full range (using the voltmeter calibration, with minor tweakage to the MS read the same as the digital out) and discovered I was running as lean as 24:1 in places... With the "LC1 default" calibration settings I was bouncing along at (what it and the MS said) was ~17.5-18:1. It was at the upper end of the range and lying.

The low end to ~stoich was consistent with the old setup, the lean side however reads much different.

It gets into lean surge about ~22:1 <4K, , although it doesn't seem to mind it at higher RPMs, and I'm not seeing any misfires on the JAW (it can see single cycle misfires, at least <5K, know that from an bug in the pre-3.2 firmware that only effected sequential on certain setups, it would intermittently "forget" an injection cycle)

All VEAL'd in at 20:1 (indicated) and running great, most of the map <87 KPA is 20:1 >2600 RPM.
>90 KPa, it's set for 13.4:1 now, and 14.1 near idle.
(I reset the rows for 80/83/87/90 KPA so I could get a sharp change when I got on it, did same for timing table)

I'd post it back up but I'm in the midst of converting over to MS3 with a new harness, it's too hot still.

I need to get some calibration test gasses if I'm going to play this lean so I can really trust the WB, although the CHT has never been lower at cruise.
I, for one, regularly embrace our new robot overlords, as I am the guy fixing the robots...

User avatar
volksbugly
Posts: 613
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:09 am

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by volksbugly » Sat Aug 04, 2012 7:10 pm

panel wrote:http://www.vwspeedshop.com/product.php? ... 507&page=1

To complicated :?

Get a Dub Shop one from Mario :!:

+1

Also if your having trouble Mario is a Super great resource, he can talk you through your issue. :)
And he just went into business for himself, so we should do anything we can to help support him! a fellow STFer!

Steve Arndt
Posts: 7186
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2001 3:01 am
Location: Go Boise State, ID
Contact:

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by Steve Arndt » Sun Aug 05, 2012 12:02 pm

8th level mario brothers!

I am still dialing in my barometric ignition offset curve. I live at 2700 ft ~92 Kpa. When I go up a few thousand feet it is low 80 Kpas barometric pressure. This puts me into high advance zones that I normally cruise in but now hit under full low. I've been slowly tweaking the barometric offsets to return the total advance to numbers that the engine likes.

A high strung engine like mine would be hard to tune without active barometric compensation.

Steve

User avatar
andy198712
Posts: 1601
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by andy198712 » Sun Aug 05, 2012 3:14 pm

panel wrote:http://www.vwspeedshop.com/product.php? ... 507&page=1

To complicated :?

Get a Dub Shop one from Mario :!:

needs to clear a drysump pump :( i'll send him a message though :)

User avatar
andy198712
Posts: 1601
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by andy198712 » Sun Aug 05, 2012 3:24 pm

volksbugly wrote:
panel wrote:http://www.vwspeedshop.com/product.php? ... 507&page=1

To complicated :?

Get a Dub Shop one from Mario :!:

+1

Also if your having trouble Mario is a Super great resource, he can talk you through your issue. :)
And he just went into business for himself, so we should do anything we can to help support him! a fellow STFer!

your right 8)

User avatar
andy198712
Posts: 1601
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by andy198712 » Sun Aug 05, 2012 3:31 pm

Piledriver wrote:It looks like I finally got ~35MPG (US) out of it. (maybe more)

I reset my old JAW and the MS to use the JAWs full range (using the voltmeter calibration, with minor tweakage to the MS read the same as the digital out) and discovered I was running as lean as 24:1 in places... With the "LC1 default" calibration settings I was bouncing along at (what it and the MS said) was ~17.5-18:1. It was at the upper end of the range and lying.

The low end to ~stoich was consistent with the old setup, the lean side however reads much different.

It gets into lean surge about ~22:1 <4K, , although it doesn't seem to mind it at higher RPMs, and I'm not seeing any misfires on the JAW (it can see single cycle misfires, at least <5K, know that from an bug in the pre-3.2 firmware that only effected sequential on certain setups, it would intermittently "forget" an injection cycle)

All VEAL'd in at 20:1 (indicated) and running great, most of the map <87 KPA is 20:1 >2600 RPM.
>90 KPa, it's set for 13.4:1 now, and 14.1 near idle.
(I reset the rows for 80/83/87/90 KPA so I could get a sharp change when I got on it, did same for timing table)

I'd post it back up but I'm in the midst of converting over to MS3 with a new harness, it's too hot still.

I need to get some calibration test gasses if I'm going to play this lean so I can really trust the WB, although the CHT has never been lower at cruise.
congrats man!! so is that imperial? what engine is it?

think how much money we throw away running a dizzy!! i've easily thrown away £100's in my 2 years with the bug! never again :D

blimey, be you had a shock when you saw the real AFR figure!

i need to sort out a AFR and wont be using a LC-1 heard a few bad things about them.

i'm tempted to use the top few rows and smooth out my transitions between the kpa but there's only so much playing you can do with a carb and no AFR....

hats off to you though bud! keep it up

User avatar
Piledriver
Moderator
Posts: 21751
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 3:01 am
Location: Van Alstyne, Texas

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by Piledriver » Mon Aug 06, 2012 7:35 am

1.8L T4 in a Squareback, stock 914 runners on a widened to match Vanagon plenum/TB (~1L more volume in plenum)

Runs pretty stout for what is essentially a 1.8L bus motor with a web73, mostly used parts.
(the 2L 914 heads/runners probably help :twisted: )

I have NEVER heard anything bad about the setups from 14point7.com.

I'm running an old JAW 1.03 I picked up used/borken here for $25 and fixed it/repackaged it.
It blew up again when I lost a voltage regulator and hit ~30V.
(didn't take out the MS as it is an old 1.01 mainboard, the FET driver runs off 5v regulated so no damage, not sure if the later boards would have survived w/o damage, there is no crowbar circuit in the power supply to blow the fuse if an overvoltage is present)

Blew a couple traces on the board in the heater circuit--- patched it up, still chugging along.

The new SLC2 units look sweet, ~$200 for the DIY setup (it's barely a kit, looks like a 30 minute job) has tons of logging inputs like the preassembled SLC2 as well, and nice logging software.
(The newer units are YEARS more advanced and actually have fuses in the right places)
I, for one, regularly embrace our new robot overlords, as I am the guy fixing the robots...

User avatar
andy198712
Posts: 1601
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by andy198712 » Tue Aug 07, 2012 1:42 pm

is something i need to do!

have you seen those EGT thats wrap about the header? any good or a crock o shi.....

i'm nearing the end of my tank of fuel after the jump from 112 to 120 main jet, i do get hesitation when i get back on the throttle i've noticed so i do think its a tad rich.... the figures will tell!

need to knock my idle back down a bit too, turned it up when i was over heating....

also need to knock up a circuit to run my tacho as it wont run off the edis pins 2 or 11 :(

Steve Arndt
Posts: 7186
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2001 3:01 am
Location: Go Boise State, ID
Contact:

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by Steve Arndt » Tue Aug 07, 2012 2:11 pm

The wrap around probes still require drilling a hole in the pipe. They avoid having to weld a bung in.

Check out

http://thesensorconnection.com/egt-prob ... robe.shtml

Image

User avatar
andy198712
Posts: 1601
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by andy198712 » Wed Aug 08, 2012 4:16 pm

Steve Arndt wrote:The wrap around probes still require drilling a hole in the pipe. They avoid having to weld a bung in.

Check out

http://thesensorconnection.com/egt-prob ... robe.shtml

Image

There quite cool, will have to find something like that in the UK does that plug into a gauge or MS then?

Thanks for all your help guys!!

well you know i richened it up a bit, i ran out of fuel today at 300miles, so although i couldnt brim it, i think the tanks are 40 litres on this, and i know you normally have a little left in there... but either way i think i've lost a little milage there, so will try and find a jet inbetween the 112 and 120, 115 or something will be right (still need to to check my plugs which i may try and do in the morning before work if i get chance :)

User avatar
Piledriver
Moderator
Posts: 21751
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 3:01 am
Location: Van Alstyne, Texas

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by Piledriver » Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:41 pm

The MS needs a TC preamp to read that. or you can run it to a (preferably temp compensated) gauge on the dash (or seat)
I have one in my MS2 on an *error board, but an IOX (Ioexpander from JBPerformance) can have up to 8 IIRC (plus a herd of other sensors, can also talk i2c and serial for Innovate bits or 14point7.com WB digital comms) talks via canbus to the MS2/3 box.

You can extend TC wire without accuracy penalty with more TC wire. (up to quite a distance, depending on wire size)
I, for one, regularly embrace our new robot overlords, as I am the guy fixing the robots...

User avatar
andy198712
Posts: 1601
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by andy198712 » Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:47 am

Piledriver wrote:The MS needs a TC preamp to read that. or you can run it to a (preferably temp compensated) gauge on the dash (or seat)
I have one in my MS2 on an *error board, but an IOX (Ioexpander from JBPerformance) can have up to 8 IIRC (plus a herd of other sensors, can also talk i2c and serial for Innovate bits or 14point7.com WB digital comms) talks via canbus to the MS2/3 box.

You can extend TC wire without accuracy penalty with more TC wire. (up to quite a distance, depending on wire size)

Thanks bud, i think the nice thing about using a gauge is that i dont need the laptop hooked up to read it ect, thinking of hiding a pannel of gauges in the glove box....

User avatar
andy198712
Posts: 1601
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by andy198712 » Sat Aug 18, 2012 4:29 am

also Pile, did i see you write something about high advance at idle was good?

User avatar
Piledriver
Moderator
Posts: 21751
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 3:01 am
Location: Van Alstyne, Texas

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by Piledriver » Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:52 pm

andy198712 wrote:also Pile, did i see you write something about high advance at idle was good?
I found on MY motor that running much more advance than stock greatly lowered idle CHT, given the same idle speed.
YMMV.

The stock setting made for hot heads. This was intentional for emissions purposes.
I, for one, regularly embrace our new robot overlords, as I am the guy fixing the robots...

User avatar
andy198712
Posts: 1601
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Ignotion only table?

Post by andy198712 » Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:59 pm

Piledriver wrote:
andy198712 wrote:also Pile, did i see you write something about high advance at idle was good?
I found on MY motor that running much more advance than stock greatly lowered idle CHT, given the same idle speed.
YMMV.

The stock setting made for hot heads. This was intentional for emissions purposes.

i see, probably one i should test for MY engine with some gauges then....

at the moment i'm running 10 degrees which is very standard..... then 200 rpm lower then my desired rpm for idle i'm up at 27 (no need for choke, saves on fuel!)

so still with the 120 main jet, filled up today, 33mpg.... i really need something like a 115 or 117 maybe! 112 was pretty lean

Post Reply