A9L 2.3 turbo?

[MikeSVO]

In the A9L definition file there are parameters that seem to allow you to change the number of cylinders and displacement of the engine it's controlling. I've heard here and there about 6 cylinder cars running A9Ls, so why wouldn't it work on a 2.3?

Just is case you're wondering the 'Why?' part, it's because I'd like to run a mass air setup on the 2.3 turbo that's not conversion but with factory code. I think that would help with some issues that people doing draw-throughs have. I'm currently running a blow through setup, but the MAF seems to peg at about 24 psi, so we're looking to other options.

[QWKSNKE]

Interesting question and I have wondered this as well.

Please elaborate more on your setup and what tuner you are using.

[MikeSVO]

Here's a video!

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/3...a90187917f.htm

In that video the setup was an EEC Tuner, 5.0 mass air sensor removed from the housing and put in the intercooler end tank (small NPR), 55 lb injectors, rotated intake, ported E6, some head cleanup I did at home.

We used a TwEECer to dial in the mass air, then put in the EEC Tuner with the same settings since the TwEECer wasn't mine. I'm getting one soon though, because it's so much nicer to be able to dump changes without having to turn the key off.

The problems with pegging the meter have only really come up since we've been tuning for the Big NPR I/C I just put in, though the logs from the track seemed to indicate that we were already getting very close to the limits of the mass air sensor. I just find it hard to believe that we're pegging that thing at about 260 (or whatever) whp, when 5.0 guys must have been making more power on the same sensor. I've never had a 5.0, so I don't know what they tune like. We're ready to try some of the workarounds for the pegging issue (and no, we never even tried to run the sensor in the housing. Maybe we should have...the main passage looked pretty restrictive though...)

I sent an e-mail to a guy about this, and he already got back to me. He told me which parameters to change to run the A9L, so now I guess I need an A9L...LOL.

[sailorbob]

Originally Posted by MikeSVO

I sent an e-mail to a guy about this, and he already got back to me. He told me which parameters to change to run the A9L,

Can you post these changes? Be interesting to see what's suggested

[QWKSNKE]

Originally Posted by MikeSVO

Here's a video!

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/3...a90187917f.htm

In that video the setup was an EEC Tuner, 5.0 mass air sensor removed from the housing and put in the intercooler end tank (small NPR), 55 lb injectors, rotated intake, ported E6, some head cleanup I did at home.

We used a TwEECer to dial in the mass air, then put in the EEC Tuner with the same settings since the TwEECer wasn't mine. I'm getting one soon though, because it's so much nicer to be able to dump changes without having to turn the key off.

The problems with pegging the meter have only really come up since we've been tuning for the Big NPR I/C I just put in, though the logs from the track seemed to indicate that we were already getting very close to the limits of the mass air sensor. I just find it hard to believe that we're pegging that thing at about 260 (or whatever) whp, when 5.0 guys must have been making more power on the same sensor. I've never had a 5.0, so I don't know what they tune like. We're ready to try some of the workarounds for the pegging issue (and no, we never even tried to run the sensor in the housing. Maybe we should have...the main passage looked pretty restrictive though...)

I sent an e-mail to a guy about this, and he already got back to me. He told me which parameters to change to run the A9L, so now I guess I need an A9L...LOL.

I can see where you are pegging the meter. Think about it, you have a meter originally calbrated for draw through and set it in a situation to where it will see more air rush by. The 5.0 meter was not calibrated for the amount of cfm you have tripping the sensor now

[coupe]

I can't help but think the positioning of that sensor in the end-tank is causing an issue.

[MikeSVO]

Originally Posted by sailorbob

Can you post these changes? Be interesting to see what's suggested

Here it is.


"This is an email I sent to a guy making one in to a V6 car.

Here is how to change to make an A9L work with anything from a 1 to 8 cylinders.

Change the following:
Number of HEGO Sensors:
Number of Cylinders:
Firing Order:
Fuel Injector HEGO Selection:


STOCK A9L 302:
Number of Hego Sensors: 2 ( 1 or 2)
Number of Cylinders: 8 (1 to 8, new processors to 10)
Firing Order: 1-3-7-2-6-5-4-8 (which is done sequentially left to right)
Injector EGO Selection Port: 0,0,0,0,2,2,2,2 (sequentially read left to right ie, for inj 1,3,7,2,6,5,4,8) where 0=EGO1 and 2=EGO2

To make this same A9L use one EGO1 only, set the entire bank of EGO selection port values to 0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.
To make this A9L use EGO2, set them to 2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2.
Note, you can change any 1 port to use either side, as long as the hego is on that injector side.
Note, if number of EGOs is set to 1, then EGO1 is used only and all data should be set to
0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0. Note, that the eec uses the number of cylinders to loop through the firing order and ego selection port.
Keep in mind the selection port always contains 8 ports in the bin file, however depending on the number of cylinders programmed in
will say where the eec stops using ports. For example, for a V6:

V6 EXAMPLE (the xample you sent looks correct) for 2- O2 SENSORS:
Number of Hego Sensors: 2
Number of Cylinders: 6
Firing Order: 1 4 3 6 2 5 0 0
(NOTE! The eec does not care what is programmed in the last two slots, ie 0 is ok and will be ignored)
Injector EGO Selection Port: 0,0,0,,2,2,2, 2(not used), 2(not used)

V6 EXAMPLE (the xample you sent looks correct) for 1- O2 SENSOR:
Number of Hego Sensors: 1
Number of Cylinders: 6
Firing Order: 1 4 3 6 2 5 0 0
(NOTE! The eec does not care what is programmed in the last two slots, ie 0 is ok and will be ignored)
Injector EGO Selection Port: 0,0,0,0,0,0, 2(not used), 2(not used)

Let me know if you need more help. The DEF is attached to this email.



Paul B."


QCKSNKE - The sensor is a thermistor. The more the wire cools (by air going by it) the higher the output voltage is. So if you take it out of the sample tube and put it in a pipe with a smaller diameter, it'll max out very soon because the velocity inside the smaller pipe will be higher than if it was in a larger pipe in the same system. So, the seemingly logical conclusion was that the end tank of the intercooler is probably larger than the opening in the stock MAF housing by a good amount - IOW, the velocity will be lower, the MAF range *should* be higher. And it worked out great like that for the whole time that setup was on there. It's only when we changed I/Cs that the issue came up.

Coupe - as for the positioning, it wasn't arbitrary. What we did was drill the hole and put the sensor in with me holding it. We turned the car on and checked the data logger. We'd watch the MAF output voltage to see how smooth it was and then rotate the sensor a little bit to fine tune it. When we got a really nice output voltage, we fastened it down.

This setup worked out really, really well up to this point.

[SvoBrown]

Neat stuff. I am still in a holding patten on my maf but hope to get back up and tuning sometime soon. I have the 80mm cobra maf in mine and at 22 psi it shows 4.79 volts on datalog. 286 hp. More timing would help me out I know.
Will be watching for more information.

[QWKSNKE]

Originally Posted by SvoBrown

. I have the 80mm cobra maf in mine and at 22 psi it shows 4.79 volts on datalog. 286 hp. .

You, sir, are on the very edge of pegging that meter

[QWKSNKE]

Originally Posted by MikeSVO

Here it is.


[FONT=Courier New]QCKSNKE - The sensor is a thermistor. The more the wire cools (by air going by it) the higher the output voltage is.

True, but I was under the impression that the thermistor is different between certain models of MAFs especially between a draw thru and a blow thru setup.

In my opinion this very theory is what makes C&L meters junk. You do not see C&L's on many forced induction cars because they do not work well. From what i have seen, they don't even work that well on stock 5.0 engines. They use the factory thermistor pack and change the sample tube. PMAS/Pro-M used a thermistor more calibrated to the sample tube which in turn makes for a more effcient meter