Pirate 4x4 banner

21 - 40 of 44 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,560 Posts
1: The presence/absence of coil packs versus other ignition coils adds absolutely nothing to the ability to detect misfires. Misfires are detected in both GEMS and Motronics EMS by the actions of the CkPS, CmPS and to a lesser extent, knock sensors. If you disagree, take it up with the Land Rover engineers who wrote the textbook on Engine Management systems.

2: The benefit of wasted spark is the presence of an ignition spark in the cylinder during the exhaust stroke to improve the consumption of any unburned fuel in the cylinder. Reduces emissions=greater efficiency.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
550 Posts
This is also false, though many would like you to believe it
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
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.
True but an ignition event with the exhaust valve open is only burning off HC to reduce emissions - the fact that unburnt HC is present in the exhaust gas is a direct result of an inefficient/incomplete combusion process.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,560 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
235 Posts
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
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
235 Posts
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)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
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?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
Discussion Starter · #30 · (Edited)
Well I have been offline for a few days and it looks you boys and girls have been having fun off topic.:p

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
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
550 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,560 Posts
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)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,725 Posts
I was able to remap my 14cux ecu yesterday. It's quite simple with the free software tools that have been developed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,725 Posts
Go on!

Share with the rest of the class.
Sure.:smokin:

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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
235 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,725 Posts
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.:confused:

I'll fix this by writing the same values into limp and normal running.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
235 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,725 Posts
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.
 
21 - 40 of 44 Posts
Top