I have yet to try it out as I had to start over on my tuning. I finally got around to installing my Mugen header and 70mm hfc.

Anyone give this a shot yet? It isn't in the help file which has me a wondering if I should wait.

 

Was this added in a recent release? There have been WOT target lambda tables in FlashPro Manager forever, but I've never been able to make any sense of them, and they don't seem to have any effect on the datalog at all.

 

You're right - I did not include the notes in the help file, and will update them shortly.

Don't confuse target lambda with WOT lambda adjustment. Target lambda is the closed loop target mixture. WOT lambda adjustment is the additional fuel the ECU puts in under high load, which happens to be expressed in terms of lambda because of the way the ECU is mapped at the factory.

On my Civic I've found that 15.5:1 AFR gives worse fuel economy around town but slightly better on the freeway.

I earlier testing I found that going much leaner than stock was not beneficial:

 

Would 15.5 on the highway cause damage to a high flow cat?

 

I can't say. I've run my Civic for several months at 15.5:1 with a stock cat, but have switched it back to 14.7:1 recently as I did not see any improvement in economy, and the car is less smooth when it is leaner.

 

Man, I really, really wish I would have put more time into figuring out the purpose for the WOT lambda adjustment tables a year ago! I have spent hundreds of hours and countless miles / dollars trying to tune fuel around those tables!

The default values for those tables create a stair-step in WOT fuel compensations that are added to the regular fuel tables. Since I have always tried to tune for a flat AFR by adjusting ONLY the fuel tables, the stair steps in the WOT fuel compensations were introducing oscillations in the AFR that caused my AFR curve to have a saw-tooth pattern. It also made my injector pulse width graph not match my fuel tables like I thought it should.

However, after adjusting the WOT lambda adjustment tables to what I actually want to run, it was MUCH easier to tune the regular fuel tables to get a very smooth and pretty AFR curve. Once I get the Fuel tables right for my setup, it seems that I can easily change my AFR curve to whetever I want by using the WOT lambda adjustment tables INSTEAD OF the fuel table. Honestly, it seems that the "Fuel Low" and "Fuel High" tables should really be renamed to "Air Low" and "Air High", since it seems that they really just define the air flow characteristics of the engine, and the other tables define how to add fuel based on that.

 

I'm not sure if you're aware, but it has to do with the way the engines are tuned at the factory. This is also how the knock control tables are made.

What happens is that engine is put on an engine dyno and is tuned using an automated process on a test fuel to achieve stoichiometric everywhere (even at WOT). These are the 'fuel tables' - so yes, they will essentially be linear with airflow. Then the WOT compensation tables are used to get the right AF under full load. This also is how AFM (MAF) logic works. The ECU calculates airflow from AFM, and then uses a WOT compensation table to determine the additional fuel to get the AF right under full load.

Knock ignition limit tables are also tuned in the same automated process using spec 90 and 100 octane fuels.

 

Thanks for clarifying it (again). BTW, could you give an option in FlashPro Manager to use the WOT lambda adjustment tables for the open loop AFR targets for the suggested fuel changes?

 

Good idea. I'll add it to the list.

 

I usually charge $1 for good ideas, but Tuesdays are 50% off! Please remit $0.50 via PayPal to gernby2002 at yahoo.com.