Home Tuning Vipec And Link G4 Skyline Plug In Ecus Thread .

[STATUS]

Compared to the tuners initial settings I changed a couple of reference modes around so the plug in controls a few things differently . Firstly cam solenoid control went from TPS to MAP and accel load from MAP to TPS .

The next one I'm thinking about is the warm up enrichment which at the moment is TP referenced . I'd like to have a go at using manifold pressure as the reference because it doesn't take a lot of throttle movement to reach 100 kpa/atmo pressure so MAP load may give better mixture control .

Also I find that once it's fired up it doesn't need AFRs like 0.85 L to idle as well as it's going to . Off idle is a different story and you probably have a scale of around 40-100 kpa to work with .

Guilt one thing you may be able to tell me is how to turn some of these single row scales into tables because I think having two dimensional control of some things would be better than just one . I know there are limits to how many tables you can have and I have a few free .

Thanks for your input , cheers Adrian .

should also check actual mapping tables... do both map and tps on a gtr on map only on gts

ooh populate your inj latency vs voltage table before tuning.

[Hanaldo]

Not so much a tuning question as such, but figured this is possibly the most relevant place to ask;

I'm currently setting up my ethanol content sensor, and am a bit unsure of how to set it up on PCLink. Just for clarification, the sensor is the Continental flow-through type (13577394). First of all, I am using the sensor in conjunction with the Zeitronix ECA, and I currently have it wired as per the ECA instructions with the sensor outputting to the ECA, and the ECA outputting an analog signal which I have pinned into the Volt 6 position on the XS Loom.

However thinking about it, I do believe I should redo this so that the ECU gets its signal in digital form straight from the sensor. Am I correct in thinking that doing so would provide me with both the ethanol percentage and fuel temperature readings? As well as freeing up what is my last analog input... Would there be any issue in running the signal wire from the sensor to the ECA, and then splicing into that wire to get the signal to the ECU? Just not totally sure how the signals work, digital vs analog, don't want to do something that could cause a misreading or something like that

Secondly, I had a look at how to configure the sensor in PCLink if I were to use the digital input. I assume I need to turn the "Pull-up Resistor" setting to on? What about the active edge, what does that do? Do I set that to rising or falling?

[scotty nm35]

Apparently the Continental sensors don't need the pull up resistor, as found out by a customer of mine with his Link G4. Try it out both ways I guess.

[Hanaldo]

They don't need an external 2k2 pull up resistor like the GM Siemens sensors, I knew that much. I thought that was because they used the internal pull up though...

What about the active edge? Leave it on rising?

[scotty nm35]

Try it out, it's not like it will blow up, it's just a pwm output. I am interested to see how you go, I am about to buy a sensor and Zeitronix unit for my Fcon.

[Hanaldo]

Ok, so I finally got round to setting the ECA up in PC Link, but I'm a bit confused. The way I have it connected, is the sensor output wire runs to the ECA kit, and I then spliced into that wire and pinned it into the DI5 position in the XS Loom. Then in PCLink I have selected the Siemens Ethanol Sensor option from the list, as that is the one the guys at Link say to use. However, I can't get the ECU to read the same as the Zeitronix display.

For example, the Zeitronix display shows the fuel temperature at a steady 11° Celsius and ethanol content at 1% (should be 0 but that's what the display shows). With the internal pull up turned OFF, the ecu reads fuel temp as 132° Celsius, so that obviously needs to be on. With the pull up resistor ON and the active edge set to 'RISING', the fuel temp reads 20°. With active edge set to 'FALLING' the fuel temp flickers between 16 and 17 degrees. But I can't get it to read the same as the display no matter what setting I use. Also the ethanol content in the ecu displays 0% no matter what.

Any tips?

[Hanaldo]

No-one?

[Bunta]

Hello Link gurus, I recently picked up a Link G4 plug in for my R32 GTR. I was wondering if it is possible for someone with not a whole lot of tuning knowledge to install one of these and get it to the point where I am able to drive it to my tuner. I read through the install manual and downloaded the PClink and most of that seems quite straight forward. the car is modified, the main thing that will effect it on the start up/light driving plan i have is the fact it has 750cc Sard injectors I guess. Possible or too much of an ask?

[89CAL]

Have a question, think it will be an easy answer. I've got my car to the stage where I can start it and it will idle and do a bit of revving (It's still not 100% finished so havent taken it any further)

What is happening though is as the car is hunting (This is while it is still cold and ECT lockout is still active) the check engine light is solid and then off as it hunts. Seems to be around 1000rpm its on then when it goes above this it turns off then comes back on. Also noticed I revved it to about 3000rpm or so and I think it was coming on there as well. Light is on solid, no flashing. No Fault codes present either

I changed AUX7 from a GP Output to CE Light and I'm wondering if its just as simple as I should have left it as a GP output. Not really sure why this would be the case but might just be one of those things

Thanks

[Adriano]

Quick question, are the new plugins with the v88 top board waste spark or 6 ignition output?

[discopotato03]

Supposed to have 6 outputs my tuner tells me .

I've been doing more road tuning with mine for better round town consumption , I'm getting closer to what I think is the right mixture control on transients but consumption is hard to improve . It seems mixtures higher than 0.93 L (E70) are a waste of time and I am trying to get the transients more like 0.88 rising to 0.93 and not spiking rich when lifting off .

I'm no gun tuner but I think having the AFR target table right and seeing how much correction the system uses and minimising this on the load table is the way to go . Also playing with the temp correction helps because traffic driving makes for wide variations in IATs .

One place that is proving hard to get right is around 2200 revs going into boost in high gears , as the engine loads up the AFR climbs rather than falls and trying to add fuel in the load table doesn't seem to work . Next try is to play with timing in this area to get mixtures to go richer rather than leaner . Further up the rev range this isn't a problem .

It would be interesting to try lower ethanol ratios but since you can't buy anything between E10 and E70 it's a bit pointless .

A .

[ARTZ]

Quick question, are the new plugins with the v88 top board waste spark or 6 ignition output?

full sequential..

[Dale FZ1]

I've been doing more road tuning with mine for better round town consumption , I'm getting closer to what I think is the right mixture control on transients but consumption is hard to improve . It seems mixtures higher than 0.93 L (E70) are a waste of time and I am trying to get the transients more like 0.88 rising to 0.93 and not spiking rich when lifting off .

One place that is proving hard to get right is around 2200 revs going into boost in high gears , as the engine loads up the AFR climbs rather than falls and trying to add fuel in the load table doesn't seem to work . Next try is to play with timing in this area to get mixtures to go richer rather than leaner . Further up the rev range this isn't a problem .

I think you'll always get that momentary rich reading on throttle-lift. The system will react to the load change but it won't/shouldn't take more than a fraction of a second.

On the 2200rpm point you might find that reviewing your data stream will identify need for a small change in an adjoining cell. Also you might see that the accel enrichment settings are having some impact.

[discopotato03]

I partially solved the rich spike problem by changing timing settings at manifold pressures below that at idle , lift off low pressure spikes if you know what I mean . It sort of works but not at very low revs .

I think my side feeds are a bit lazy at very small pulse widths , it shows about 1ms at warm idle .

Also by retarding the cold start timing (Ign angle vs ECT table in ignition corrections) I got it to warm up faster .

I suspect theres something in this slightly rich slightly retarded settings at times when trying to generate a bit more heat and pressure and not just for warm up .

A .

[Dale FZ1]

Are you chasing economy improvements? That seems to have been the thrust of recent posts. Not sure that the momentary richness on throttle lift is an economy issue. You've got a certain air mass going into the engine, ECU calculates injector pulsewidth and delivers while you suddenly strangle the engine. I'm thinking there is a lag time (fraction of a second) where the AFR reading will momentarily spike, then the ECU corrects. I can't see why you would retard ignition in attempting to make the AFR show less rich.

The question I have is whether that strategy makes any difference (positive or negative) to how the engine feels? More, or less "happy"? I have chased tunes through concentrating only on the AFR, and then made changes according to feel. I found some capacity for improvement that way. Rider: I am talking about idle quality and engine behaviour on gearchange with accel enrich, tuning on pump 98 only.

[wolverine]

Yep^^

[discopotato03]

Well I think it's a challenge to remove these rich spikes if I can though I doubt it makes much difference consumption wise . Dunno - maybe slightly less ends up in the sump ?

The reason I mentioned at manifold pressures below what it idles at is because the engine is not under any kind of load there so you don't get any drivability issues . This is in the sub 2500 rev band BTW . Don't remember off hand which way I went with timing at sub 37 kpa (absolute) , whichever burnt the fuel rather than sending it through unburnt giving a momentary rich reading . I really like the way you can set up your own table reference numbers with the Vipec because it lets you experiment with things when you can expand resolution in narrow ranges .

My issue with consumption is that for a car that's not ordinarily driven real hard 16/100 isn't very good . As you know there are different ways of achieving measured AFRs because alterations to timing affects mixtures . Charge air temperature/density does too . Its trying to strike a balance of good drivability and throttle response without using any extra fuel if it doesn't do anything worthwhile . Obviously the roads to good consumption are getting the most heat/pressure from the least fuel in part throttle use . Part throttle meaning partially strangled engine that can't fill it's cylinders too well resulting in a low dynamic or effective CR . This is probably why ethanol gives worse consumption - needing more of it (to a point) to generate enough heat to get acceptable combustion pressure in low effective CR situations . The modern trend is towards higher CRs because they lead to higher effective compression at part throttle meaning better combustion efficiency and consumption .

Using a smallish turbo doesn't help much because the hotside is trying to spin it up and its right where I spend a lot of time round the burbs ie 2100-2300 revs . So , low effective compression and a waste gate that isn't open because it isn't running at full boost forming an exhaust restriction . Loose loose . It is amusing being able to squeeze the throttle in higher gears in that rev rage and get boost and torque but it's questionable if an RB25 needs help in that area .

I suppose I could look at the boost table and back it off to actuator pressure in the low 2000 rev band to see if it helps there .

Like all self taught tuners I get better results than I used to and reasonable settings get better part throttle performance than in the past . Having got that I need to move to a bigger turbo hot side to let the engine breathe out and work more efficiently off boost or actually where it doesn't need it .

Nowdays you wouldn't buy a GTRS new when say a GTX3067R can get same or better performance and be better flowing on the exhaust side .

Lastly yes on "feel" always prefer the drive characteristics to feel good . Foot/butt dyno is a good reference to how well your car drives in round town use . My experience is that if drivability is poor consumption usually is too .

A few things to try , cheers A .

Edited December 1, 2013 by discopotato03

[Dale FZ1]

I think it's a challenge to remove these rich spikes if I can though I doubt it makes much difference consumption wise . Dunno - maybe slightly less ends up in the sump ?

The reason I mentioned at manifold pressures below what it idles at is because the engine is not under any kind of load there so you don't get any drivability issues . This is in the sub 2500 rev band BTW . Don't remember off hand which way I went with timing at sub 37 kpa (absolute) , whichever burnt the fuel rather than sending it through unburnt giving a momentary rich reading . I really like the way you can set up your own table reference numbers with the Vipec because it lets you experiment with things when you can expand resolution in narrow ranges .

Having got that I need to move to a bigger turbo hot side to let the engine breathe out and work more efficiently off boost or actually where it doesn't need it .

Nowdays you wouldn't buy a GTRS new when say a GTX3067R can get same or better performance and be better flowing on the exhaust side .

Again, I don't know that the spikes you are seeing are necessarily a problem from either a tuning or reliability issue. Oil sampling might tell if you are getting excessive fuel contamination in the sump, but then you have to go to some lengths to identify if it's a low-load or high-load related problem, maybe engine condition more than radically out of kilter fuelling. Too many variables.

Try playing with your decel fuel cut settings and see what that does, but I've found it needs a little lead-time before the taps are shut off otherwise it becomes a bit jerky and not as clean to pick up especially in on/off throttle.

It's going to be interesting to hear your views on the GT30 upgrade but it's not going to be a magic cure-all that gives extra torque at 2-2500rpm and light throttle. Interestingly I did achieve improved light load fuel consumption going from the GT2871 high flow up to the GT3076, but the engine did not perform the same at those low rpm.

The Vipec/Link gives great flexibility for tuning, but really what you want for driveability is to achieve optimum fuelling in your main table, "enough" accel enrichment to feed the beast, and a good whack of timing to capitalise on the anti-knock capabilities of your alcohol fuel.

With 90s spec technology and not running an engine mechanically optimised (ie high CR) to alcohol fuel I think your consumption figures aren't ridiculous. Lithium did post up a suggestion to run at a 40-50% E-content which I think is the way to achieve your goals of fewer l/100km. Clearly there are practicality barriers to doing that with your daily driver but I think his suggestion is valid.

Edited December 2, 2013 by Dale FZ1

[discopotato03]

Earlier on I played with the over run fuel cut but found it to be hit and miss .

I'm kind of not expecting a lot of turbo response with a 0.82 GT30 hot side in that 2000-2500 area but time will tell . In the past someone else here used the same 3076R 52T 0.82 combo and reckoned it spooled like a GTRS but that's a big call I reckon .

When I got back to work in the dark hours this morning I altered the closed loop boost parameters so it activates at 2400 revs rather than 2000 , does feel better at part throttle in that area now . Also put more fuel in the warm up table in the 50-70C areas to go with the warm up ignition retard , bonus as drives much better and feels as good or better than factory . Warms up faster too .

I haven't in the past paid much attention to how this V66 (44 with 88 top board) was set up in the active boost table , it uses RPM vs throttle position and I'm still trying to get my head around that approach .

A .

[Dale FZ1]

In the past someone else here used the same 3076R 52T 0.82 combo and reckoned it spooled like a GTRS but that's a big call I reckon .

When I got back to work in the dark hours this morning I altered the closed loop boost parameters so it activates at 2400 revs rather than 2000 , does feel better at part throttle in that area now .

I haven't in the past paid much attention to how this V66 (44 with 88 top board) was set up in the active boost table , it uses RPM vs throttle position and I'm still trying to get my head around that approach .

Anyone claiming similar spool between GT2871 and the GT3076 is having a lend of you. They are different and feel different. You would run them for different expected outcomes. That's been covered many times over, and you'll be kicking yourself for not having fitted yours much earlier.

I kept my boost control simple, open loop and just a single 3D table with MAP vs rpm. Datalogging helped with fine tuning the duty cycle, job's done. I do use a ECT and IAT correction so it won't give full stick if one is too low, or the other too high.

The Vipec tutorials even recommend keeping it simple so if you're messing with TPS etc for your boost control mapping, you might be unnecessarily complicating things. I have seen it used successfully on a big power SR, along with gear position to make the thing driveable off corners. But that was a 600+ rwhp time attack type car, not highly relevant to a full weight 350ish hp R33.

I'm sure nobody minds sharing experiences or ideas, but could I suggest you look to knock over one issue at a time with understanding how to tune to achieve results? Dancing from topic to topic makes it difficult to follow what you're wanting.