Can't get my tune down, 09 si usdm

[EFICU]

Looks really good. Had one little part throttle knock so I touched up the ignition there. The fueling looks really good, there is one area around 5000 that won't lean out and I've pulled fuel a few times. I am going to change the cam angle map around that area because now I think lowering the cam angle there might get us a little more power there, then I will ramp in the cam angle again. At this point, that area wants more fuel on the 40* cam than the 45*, so we'll see how it goes.

Glad you like the pedal map. Same datalog and driving style in this one. Pretty much just checking the WOT fueling now and making sure no knock pops up.

Jcoul72.SD.Rev10.1 (Blended)(Vtec4300)(SportPedal).fpcal

(23.62 KiB) Downloaded 74 times

[jcoul72]

Been super busy but managed to capture ~24 min:

[EFICU]

No problem. That one looks really good. I made a couple fuel adjustments, and some in the comp tables for the temperature. I also made some ignition adjustments for the two knock. One was from the cam angle adjustment we made, and another was part throttle.

It looks like the cam angle worked out well. I ran that pull through the VD and it was up over our other revisions. You might run it through on your VD and see if you agree. Either way, that midrange cam angle adjustment looks like it helped out a lot.

Here is the next one. Same datalog and driving style, and no rush getting it. I'm just nitpicking stuff at this point.

Jcoul72.SD.Rev11 (Blended)(Vtec4300)(SportPedal).fpcal

(23.68 KiB) Downloaded 69 times

[jcoul72]

Evening. Got another datalog today:

[EFICU]

Man, so close. No knock which is great, it only needed a couple half or one percent changes to a view areas. We might be there on this one. At some point, we might make datalogs only when it's cooler out so we can dial the fuel in one temp range, and then tune the compensation tables for the hot weather using warmer weather datalogs. It's very close between 90* and 118* temps, but I like to get them as close as possible. We'll see how the next one looks and go from there. Either way it's looking really good.

Jcoul72.SD.Rev12 (Blended)(Vtec4300)(SportPedal).fpcal

(23.69 KiB) Downloaded 81 times

[jcoul72]

I'm back in FL now. While in NC I noticed during some of my WOT pulls in 3rd-4th gear the wideband guage displayed 14:1 in Vtec. I wish I had captured it but with the hilly terrain I didn't even bother datalogging (whoops).

Here's my datalog:

[EFICU]

Hard to say without a datalog. Usually higher elevation runs on column 8, which I tune in parallel with columns 9 and 10 on everything for that very reason. Your car runs on columns 9 and 10 for normal elevation. So tuning 8-9-10 in parallel makes it run just about anywhere as far as elevation. Do you know how high you got in elevation? Other than that, I couldn't say for certain without a datalog. Do you remember what RPM it was at?

To the datalog here, you have a lot of new knock. Not sure if it's bad gas or what, but I addressed them in the new revision. There wasn't a clean third gear pull that I could find, so I didn't make any fuel adjustments. What fueling I could see was pretty good. Take this one for a spin and we'll see how it looks.

Jcoul72.SD.Rev13 (Blended)(Vtec4300)(SportPedal).fpcal

(23.69 KiB) Downloaded 80 times

[jcoul72]

Been super busy, but I went on a little sunday morning cruise. The first 3rd gear pull was slightly uphill. I'd like to see some better MPG's since I drive my car for work. Can we go somewhat lean (safely) while cruising? Also if we go this route should map based wot determination be turned back on to prevent damage?

[EFICU]

What are you seeing for MPG's when calculating how much gas you put in versus how many miles you drove? What kind of driving are you doing to work, freeway/highway or in town? What is your goal MPG you would like to see?

[jcoul72]

I'm seeing around 25 combined when I do my math at the pump but having had a k24 si w dw injectors in the past get closer to 30 I know it's got to be possible right?

[EFICU]

I'm seeing around 25 combined when I do my math at the pump but having had a k24 si w dw injectors in the past get closer to 30 I know it's got to be possible right?

What would you say is your percentage of city vs highway driving, how much city and how much highway percentage? What speed are you driving on the freeway and are you using cruise control? There are a lot of variables to a fuel mileage calculation if you're wanting to calculate combined fuel economy. If you're driving 90% city and 10% highway, that's going to be very different from 90% highway and 10% city.

When you were getting 30 with your K24, would you say you were getting 40mpg on the highway for 35mpg? To get a 30mpg combined average figuring exact 50/50 driving you have to be getting 20mpg city and 40mpg highway, or 25mpg city and 35mpg highway to get a 30mpg average? If you were getting 30 mpg combined, you would have have to be getting 20/40 or 25/35 to get that 30mpg combined

What was the K24 in, an old EG hatch or something? Remember that DW injectors don't mean it adds more fuel as a stock injector for normal driving, it just means it can flow more fuel if needed for increases air such as boost. Just like RDX don't make more power on their own, they allow you to make more power if you have more air coming in. If the K24 is in a lightweight car like an EG or something you will get better mileage.

A decade ago I was tuned by VitViper and got 37 on the freeway and 22 in the city in my 8th gen. You would have to do a complete tank of city driving to get a good city mpg, and a complete highway tank to get a good highway mpg. Then see where we land. With so many variables, I don't know if we can get an accurate count.

[jcoul72]

The driving I do probably is close to 50/50 city/highway. The k24 was a '12 si coupe which is somehow lighter than the 09 fa5. I get the concept of fuel injectors. I think the spray pattern is better on the dw or something, possibly leading the the better mpgs? Those were dw ~550cc, and these of course are 1000's so maybe the same applies?

[jcoul72]

I usually drive cruise control at 65 on the highway. In the city I'm shifting before 2.5k and babying it 95% of the time.

[EFICU]

When you say 50/50 city and highway, are we talking miles or drive time? With a 13 gallon tank, are you saying you are using 6.5 gallons on the street and 6.5 gallons on the highway?

My main question is that I don't see how you can only be getting a best case scenario of 30 mpg on the highway, especially at 65mph. Using your calculation you must be getting 20/30, 32/18, or I guess 28/22. To get a 25 combined average you would have to be getting terrible highway mpg which I just can't imagine. Could it be possible, I guess, but I just can't imagine it. The only other thing we could try is to use OEM cam angle in the low cam, but looking at an OEM cam angle map you would be on a similar cam angle anyways. Running it lean for fuel economy doesn't really work out too well, say we lean it out 5% which in theory gives you 5% better fuel mileage, still only gives you a slightly better fuel economy form 30 on the highway to 31.5. I don't think that's worth it.

Let me know what you think. My main thing is I just don't see at 50/50 assumed fuel consumption that you're getting 30mpg at 65mph with cruise control. I think maybe picking a day and making a datalog of just highway driving with cruise control on at 65 would be ideal. Pick a day and time when you think you can run at 65 with cruise control for a half hour or something and let's see how it all looks. Then we can game plan on how to get you to your goals.

[jcoul72]

You're a lot smarter than me haha I reckon my calculations could be wrong, or straight up bad math 😅. I'll get a good log of highway cruising at some point this week. In the meantime, part-wise what do you think is limiting my engines performance? The header is plms kidd racing clone.