Request: EGO Control to add but not remove
Moderators: jsmcortina, muythaibxr
Request: EGO Control to add but not remove
I would like to see an option in the EGO control to be able to add in fueling but not remove. Or say be able to add up to 10% and only remove 5%. Or is there that option now?
Re: Request: EGO Control to add but not remove
Reason being last time I had my car out ego control was taking fuel out in boost enough though it was already on the lean side. So I'd like to take off negative correction while in boost.
-
- Super MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 1986
- Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Eureka, NV USA
- Contact:
Re: Request: EGO Control to add but not remove
Hmmmmmm......... I (for one) would be interested in seeing your MSQ and log files.LSXCutty wrote:Reason being last time I had my car out ego control was taking fuel out in boost enough though it was already on the lean side. So I'd like to take off negative correction while in boost.
Ken
1979 Corvette - 383 CID SBC w/ Holley Pro-Jection 900 CFM TBI, 4-85 lb lo-z injectors & Walbro 255 pump
MS2 v3 w/extra 3.4.2 Release
36-1, Delphi LS2/7 coils in wasted spark, driven by v2.0 logic board from JBPerformance
Spartan Lambda Sensor from 14point7
TinyIOX from JBPerformance
MS2 v3 w/extra 3.4.2 Release
36-1, Delphi LS2/7 coils in wasted spark, driven by v2.0 logic board from JBPerformance
Spartan Lambda Sensor from 14point7
TinyIOX from JBPerformance
Re: Request: EGO Control to add but not remove
+1 for separate min and max limits.LSXCutty wrote:I would like to see an option in the EGO control to be able to add in fueling but not remove. Or say be able to add up to 10% and only remove 5%. Or is there that option now?
The man behind MS Labs
2005 Audi A3 2.0L TFSI DSG AWD - Extreme MS3
2002 Mazda Miata 1.8 6sp - Enhanced MS3 1.4.0, sequential injection, sequential ignition, big turbo, lots of boost
2005 Audi A3 2.0L TFSI DSG AWD - Extreme MS3
2002 Mazda Miata 1.8 6sp - Enhanced MS3 1.4.0, sequential injection, sequential ignition, big turbo, lots of boost
-
- Experienced MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:12 pm
- Location: Manassas, Virginia
Re: Request: EGO Control to add but not remove
I'd also like to be able to command separate limits (+10%, -5% for example).
I'm in the VA/DC area! Let me know if I can help you locally! I offer tuning and troubleshooting services.
http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 37&t=64269
Email me directly at CRSTune@gmail.com
Personal Vehicle:
'92 Nissan 240sx, KA24DET, GT2860RS, MS3X, Coil-on-Plug
http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 37&t=64269
Email me directly at CRSTune@gmail.com
Personal Vehicle:
'92 Nissan 240sx, KA24DET, GT2860RS, MS3X, Coil-on-Plug
Re: Request: EGO Control to add but not remove
I can upload the tune file later. But I have no logs of that event. The car is away for the winter. I'm going to try and replicate it in the summer.
-
- Master MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 581
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2014 4:57 am
- Location: New Haven, Ct, USA
-
- Super MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 1986
- Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 8:02 pm
- Location: Eureka, NV USA
- Contact:
Re: Request: EGO Control to add but not remove
Works for me! I HATE working in the snow!LSXCutty wrote:I'm going to try and replicate it in the summer.
Seriously...... Perhaps I am not understanding the issue! Shouldn't a correctly functioning O2 controller and properly tuned AFR/VE table insure the engines not going lean save some other intervening factor.
Ken
Last edited by kjones6039 on Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
1979 Corvette - 383 CID SBC w/ Holley Pro-Jection 900 CFM TBI, 4-85 lb lo-z injectors & Walbro 255 pump
MS2 v3 w/extra 3.4.2 Release
36-1, Delphi LS2/7 coils in wasted spark, driven by v2.0 logic board from JBPerformance
Spartan Lambda Sensor from 14point7
TinyIOX from JBPerformance
MS2 v3 w/extra 3.4.2 Release
36-1, Delphi LS2/7 coils in wasted spark, driven by v2.0 logic board from JBPerformance
Spartan Lambda Sensor from 14point7
TinyIOX from JBPerformance
Re: Request: EGO Control to add but not remove
why are you relying on EGO control to ADD fuel on boost anyway?
on a properly tuned VE map, ego mostly be removing fuel (ie tune on the rich side) and also EGO should really only be active under 90kpa.
Dont rely on closed loop EGO at atmospheric or on boost, what happens if your sensor/controller drops out or fails??
on a properly tuned VE map, ego mostly be removing fuel (ie tune on the rich side) and also EGO should really only be active under 90kpa.
Dont rely on closed loop EGO at atmospheric or on boost, what happens if your sensor/controller drops out or fails??
-
- Master MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 581
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2014 4:57 am
- Location: New Haven, Ct, USA
Re: Request: EGO Control to add but not remove
if thats the case, why would we need ego correction at all?
BootlegTuned
-
- Experienced MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 299
- Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:26 am
- Location: Frankfurt / Germany
Re: Request: EGO Control to add but not remove
Because of the I-Part beeing the only which uses lambda deviation, this can actualy happen.
Even if it should not in a major amount if VE and EGO parameters are tuned properly.
But i can understand the thread-starters wish.
The argument that VE might not be tuned perfect does not count for me, because this is what a good lambda controller should be able to deal with (my personal oppinion). Of course it should not be used as a fix for beeing lazy to tune VE as good as possible.
But tollerances are always there, and there is nothing like a <1% perfect VE under ALL external conditions.
Just a ansymetric EGO limit would make it safer in a general manner.
+1 from me for this as well ;-)
Even if it should not in a major amount if VE and EGO parameters are tuned properly.
But i can understand the thread-starters wish.
The argument that VE might not be tuned perfect does not count for me, because this is what a good lambda controller should be able to deal with (my personal oppinion). Of course it should not be used as a fix for beeing lazy to tune VE as good as possible.
But tollerances are always there, and there is nothing like a <1% perfect VE under ALL external conditions.
Just a ansymetric EGO limit would make it safer in a general manner.
+1 from me for this as well ;-)
Honda CRX B16A1 Turbo | MS3 running | pre1.5.1 beta7 Firmware | 24/1 Dual Wheel | COP ignition | 725cc ID injectors
Re: Request: EGO Control to add but not remove
Just wondering if this is going to be considered for a future update? I know you guys have been busy getting 1.5.0 out for use with the new pro-ultimate coming out.