After Market Injection - 4.6V8 - Page 2 - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum
 
Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum  

Go Back   Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum > Brand Specific Tech > Land Rover
Notices

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-24-2014, 03:17 AM   #26 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Member # 12499
Location: In a Snap-On truck tryin' to make it pay
Posts: 25,560
The efficiency of any combustion reaction (redox of carbon-fueled combustion in air for the true purists) is measured by the ability to reduce the input fuel and air to water and carbon dioxide. Wasted spark contributes to increasing the efficiency of these reactions.
PTSchram is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-24-2014, 04:16 AM   #27 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Member # 161728
Location: Dallas
Posts: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by DasLandRoverMan View Post
Just like Dinosaurs never existed and the moon landing was a hoax?

Reduced emissions and greater efficiency go hand in hand.
More efficient use of the fuel going in means that less is required to produce the same output.
Less in and a more efficient/cleaner burn produces less emissions.
We measure emissions in ppm in this country. You can tune for high efficiency and make everyone behind you choke, or sacrafice efficiency for lower ppm of offending gasses
robertf03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Old 03-24-2014, 05:20 AM   #28 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Member # 161728
Location: Dallas
Posts: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by PTSchram View Post
The efficiency of any combustion reaction (redox of carbon-fueled combustion in air for the true purists) is measured by the ability to reduce the input fuel and air to water and carbon dioxide. Wasted spark contributes to increasing the efficiency of these reactions.

That is not the efficiency that anyone is talking about.

potential power in vs power out. Unless your wasted spark is creating an afterburner effect it is wasted input in ( .1 millijoules or whatever the spark power requirements are)
robertf03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2014, 01:04 AM   #29 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Member # 120813
Location: describes where something is
Posts: 223
After Market Injection - 4.6V8

Quote:
Originally Posted by robertf03 View Post
That is not the efficiency that anyone is talking about.

potential power in vs power out. Unless your wasted spark is creating an afterburner effect it is wasted input in ( .1 millijoules or whatever the spark power requirements are)
Spot on Robert - efficiency of an internal combustion engine is a measure of how much of the fuel is turned into USEFUL work.

Anyway, back on topic what order are we recommending the O/P do?

14CUX to start with then try megasquirt or similar system?
__________________
100SRV
100SRV is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-25-2014, 02:38 AM   #30 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 165977
Location: Canberra Australia
Posts: 98
Well I have been offline for a few days and it looks you boys and girls have been having fun off topic.

I was offered two complete Thor manifolds with wiring looms for a really good price so that is the direction I will be going.

Just need to sort the ECU aspect - most likely MS but happy to hear from anyone who is running a Thor on their 4.6 with a different ECU.

As I paid some decent money for the cam that will go in my new engine I don't want to stuff up its running in so I will move the carbies across from my 3.5 to just run in the engine and cam as they work perfectly. The cam needs to be run for half an hour at greater than 2500rpm and must not spend time cranking. I don't want to be stuffing around sorting injection systems with the new cam.

Once the engine and cam is run in, I will but the injection system on and go through the issue of sorting it to run properly on petrol. When it is running on petrol I will then install the LPG system so that it will run on dual fuel.

One step at a time.

Garry

Last edited by garrycol; 03-25-2014 at 02:40 AM.
garrycol is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-27-2014, 12:16 PM   #31 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Member # 212466
Location: Scotland
Posts: 571
Still unclear as to why coil packs are needed for misfire detection, nor why someone is calling bullshit at PT's explanation of how the various sensors are used for misfire detection, which was a pretty accurate rundown.
__________________
Proudly supporting Black Jewish Gays since 2005.
DasLandRoverMan is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-27-2014, 12:36 PM   #32 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Member # 161728
Location: Dallas
Posts: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by DasLandRoverMan View Post
Still unclear as to why coil packs are needed for misfire detection, nor why someone is calling bullshit at PT's explanation of how the various sensors are used for misfire detection, which was a pretty accurate rundown.

bummer
robertf03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 03-29-2014, 06:51 AM   #33 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Member # 12499
Location: In a Snap-On truck tryin' to make it pay
Posts: 25,560
Quote:
Originally Posted by DasLandRoverMan View Post
Still unclear as to why coil packs are needed for misfire detection, nor why someone is calling bullshit at PT's explanation of how the various sensors are used for misfire detection, which was a pretty accurate rundown.
I'm not one of the cool kids.

I do have pocket protectors still, but no longer have a calculator on my belt.

(and yes, the rumors are true, I really do have several slide rules, but don't bother to use them much as pocket calculators are so much faster)
PTSchram is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-03-2014, 02:12 PM   #34 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Member # 42753
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,725
I was able to remap my 14cux ecu yesterday. It's quite simple with the free software tools that have been developed.
Dougal is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-03-2014, 04:06 PM   #35 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Member # 12499
Location: In a Snap-On truck tryin' to make it pay
Posts: 25,560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dougal View Post
I was able to remap my 14cux ecu yesterday. It's quite simple with the free software tools that have been developed.
Go on!

Share with the rest of the class.
PTSchram is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-03-2014, 10:04 PM   #36 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Member # 42753
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by PTSchram View Post
Go on!

Share with the rest of the class.
Sure.

I had to remap my 93 RRC because it was running far too rich. This is a hotwire injection with no cats and no O2 sensors. It runs open loop the whole time. If I had O2 sensors it should have corrected itself.

I've taken ~10% off the injected fuel map and it's looking quite good, but I might do some fine-tune later. I've now got hot idle ~13.5:1, mild acceleration around 14.5:1, lean cruise ~15.5:1 and hard acceleration around 13:1.

If anyone else is interested in doing the same, here is the guide: SteveSprint Remap 14CUX

You need Roverguage to see which part of the fuel-map you are currently running in.
You need a wide-band oxygen sensor and gauge to know how rich/lean you are currently running.
You need TunerPro (free tuning software) and the TunerPro 14CUX definition (XDF) file to easily identify maps and edit them.
You need "14CUX Toolkit" to correct the checksumms and duplicate your changes to the rest of the chop.
You need a chip-burner an 28C256 EEPROM chips (28 pin) to write and re-write with your changes.

One bit which wasted a bit of my time, Rovergauge said i was on "Map 1". But in the Tunerpro XDF that was referred to as "Map 0".
Making changes to Map 1 acheived nothing, but Map 0 responded as it should.
Steve covers this in the fine-print on the page linked above.

I'm now looking forward to burning less than 20 litres/100km for the first time since I've owned this thirsty beast.
Dougal is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-05-2014, 07:50 PM   #37 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Member # 161728
Location: Dallas
Posts: 235
Nice, any idea why it started running rich?
I'm very happy with the tune I got on my 4.6. Averaged 13.5 mpg with 35s, roofrack, and probably 1500 lbs of crap out to Moab and back.
robertf03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-05-2014, 09:21 PM   #38 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Member # 42753
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertf03 View Post
Nice, any idea why it started running rich?
I'm very happy with the tune I got on my 4.6. Averaged 13.5 mpg with 35s, roofrack, and probably 1500 lbs of crap out to Moab and back.
None at all. It's low km (~100,000 miles) and when I got it would run so rich it would paint the ground black under the exhaust.
It also had the wrong tune resistor fitted, dead thermostat, unsealed plenum, idle set wrong etc. This is open loop so no O2 sensors to correct it.

For some reason it's currently still switching fuel maps. I'm wondering if I accidentally had it tripped into limp mode and remapped the limp-mode-map to run normally. So it runs rich when it trips out of limp.

I'll fix this by writing the same values into limp and normal running.
Dougal is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-05-2014, 10:23 PM   #39 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Member # 161728
Location: Dallas
Posts: 235
There was some confusion when I set up the original XDF that stuck through all the revisions, hopefully you didn't tune the limp mode which I intended to be map 0. Were you using the trace function in tunerpro? That could cause some confusion since it just looks for row and column, not map number. Response time was awful so I recommend sticking with rovergage.

I was only concerned with our NAS locked in map 5 and eventually I'll switch to the the green tune resistor map to see if I can squeeze a little more MPG out of it.
robertf03 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-06-2014, 01:48 AM   #40 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Member # 42753
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertf03 View Post
There was some confusion when I set up the original XDF that stuck through all the revisions, hopefully you didn't tune the limp mode which I intended to be map 0. Were you using the trace function in tunerpro? That could cause some confusion since it just looks for row and column, not map number. Response time was awful so I recommend sticking with rovergage.

I was only concerned with our NAS locked in map 5 and eventually I'll switch to the the green tune resistor map to see if I can squeeze a little more MPG out of it.
Yes I'm using your XDF, not using trace functions, I am using roverguage to view map locations in real-time. But I haven't got down to tuning individual cells yet. I'm still changing big blocks.

Roverguage has always said I'm on fuel map 1. But making changes to fuel map 1 gave no change in displayed values or in wideband O2 readings. So I changed Map 0 and those did change both Rovergauge and O2 readings.
So far, so good.

Then a day or so later I went for a drive without rovergauge running. On the way there it behaved just like it should. But after restart on the way home it went back to running horribly rich.
Still no rovergauge (laptop was flat) so I pulled power from the ECU, reconnected and did the same drive.
This time it was rich on the way there but after restart on the way home was running like it should.

Current theory was running well was in (tuned) limp-mode (map 0) and running rich was untuned map 1.

I've now burned a chip so map 1 duplicates map 0 into map 1 position. Haven't tested it yet.
Dougal is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-08-2014, 11:31 PM   #41 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 165977
Location: Canberra Australia
Posts: 98
Despite Megasquirt for the Thor systems being advertised on the relevant website I have just found out that development is not yet complete. So despite acquiring the relevant manifold, injectors, rails and looms I will not be using them and may do that sometime in the future when all items have been developed and on the market for a while.

So we are back to carbs or 14CUX with a electronic dizzy. If I go the 14CUX I will need and ECU and airflow meter and someone did say to use a Jag airflow meter to provide the right airflow for a 4.6.

Dougal - do you know if the 14CUX ECU will respond appropriately with a jag airflow meter and in view with your recent programming adventures have you any advice.

Cheers

Garry
garrycol is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-09-2014, 02:00 AM   #42 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Member # 42753
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by garrycol View Post
Dougal - do you know if the 14CUX ECU will respond appropriately with a jag airflow meter and in view with your recent programming adventures have you any advice.

Cheers

Garry
I haven't had to get into that. But I've heard that the MAF linearization tables have been identified. At that point you could swap it for anything with the appropriate electrical output. You'll just have to write the new calibration values in.
Dougal is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-09-2014, 04:52 PM   #43 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 165977
Location: Canberra Australia
Posts: 98
Thanks

Garry
garrycol is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-10-2014, 08:36 PM   #44 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Member # 165977
Location: Canberra Australia
Posts: 98
To provide ignition on the engine that does not have a dizzy I will need something like Megajolt but that system is becoming expensive for what it is (at least when costs are converted to Aussie money).

So does anyone know of an electronic programmable ignition system that runs off a crankshaft sensor or something similar.

Thanks

Garry
garrycol is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

** A VERIFICATION EMAIL IS SENT TO THIS ADDRESS TO COMPLETE REGISTRATION!! **

Email Address:
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.