Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl Morris
One thing that has bugged me about the fuel maps in general for the N54 is how they run 14.7:1 even at full boost at lower rpms. Maybe I'm just a neanderthal that wants everything to stay like it used to be, but I suspect that those choices are more about emissions and economy than performance. I don't know for sure, but I suspect that performance including spool would be better if the air/fuel ratio was more like what you would choose for max power.
So what I did was take my fuel maps and starting at the load column that was just less than 100 (which I assume is zero boost/zero vacuum, at least at sea level) and set all the cells in that column and to the right that are set leaner than 13:1 to about 13:1. I left all the other cells alone.
Driving it that way to work this morning I can feel the transition point because I didn't smooth the transition, but once I'm at WOT it feels to me like I'm getting boost a bit quicker and I don't get the annoying stumbles at low rpm and high boost that I think come from running boost at 14.7:1.
Still need to log, though, and see if it's doing what I think it's doing, or if I'm imagining it :-). Does anybody know if a load of 100 is different for different ambient pressures? In other words, does the load scale move in response to changes in barometric pressure? Or is it absolute? If it's absolute then WOT/zero boost might only be a load of about 80 for me here in Denver.
|
You will need to make adjustments in the fuel spool table IMO. Personally i would compare a few things between different cobb tunes to get a good idea of what is going on. I just got the cobb link about 10 min back and figured out a bunch of differences already. This is exciting stuff !!!
Harry