It’s getting richer but in fact it is too lean where you don’t want it to in the high load range between 4,200 rpm and 7,000 rpm.
Yup a muppet who built the most powerful 2ZZ engine Lotus on the freakin planet is telling you that the great 2bular 4-1 header is flowin more air causing your car to run fucckin lean as hell in the midrange …
There is no ECU correction factor for the AFR under load in the Lotus tune…
Enjoy your car as it is for now in the cool weather…
This is not going to change no matter how many times you look at the graph or call people names… I’m sensitive and have a very short fuse… :whistle:
[quote=Boothy][quote=frank] JFK’s AFR’s are dangerous under sustained loads…
[/quote]
So what about mine? they look the same and thats a stock Lotus 260. Are we really saying that Lotus sell dangerous tunes on their cars? [/quote]
This is what I have asked and no one seems prepaired to actually answer the question, as people are too busy giving John a hard time, the fact is (i will repeat again) "Are we really saying that Lotus sell dangerous tunes on their cars? "
I don’t think there is anything wrong with the Lotus 260 map because that map assumes a Stock Cup 260 engine with relevant pieces. The problem is that a 2Bular 4-1 is not standard which effects gas flow and back pressure in a BIG way.
[quote=Exige77][quote=tom_gulf][quote=frank]
Enjoy your car as it is for now in the cool weather…
[/quote]
But in the cool weather the engine runs leaner as on hot days because of the air density.
It seems that the Lotus tune is very lean because of the emission limits. I think a little richer will give more power and it will be safer.[/quote]
This is what Ronin is saying
Ex77 [/quote]
Ronin is saying the opposite…I agree with tom. In the cold weather the air is more dense so more oxygen available for combustion. More fuel is often required for the extra oxygen available (which is why power is often up in cold weather), and the car will generally run a slightly leaner afr. On a hot day the car is not as efficient and less fuel is required, often causing slightly richer afr.
On a hot summes day I get 30% less climb rate In a plane because of the very reason you state …
Warn air is indeed less dense and a motor will tend to run richer…
[quote=Whiteysback]“There is no ECU correction factor for the AFR under load in the Lotus tune…”
This says it all really. With the higher flowing manifold/exhaust and no correction under load you’re in lean city. [/quote]
Good God … Another one !
Q.What do you think the MAF is monitoring ?
A. Airflow … it senses increased flow and adjusts fueling…this is why I,m running richer than Boothys which has an identical ECU …
I think you will find, at least on most OE ecu’s, that on full throttle, there are no compensation maps in effect, other than air/water temp, as these have a huge reflection on the engines performance and knock control.
For instance, what would happen if you were driving along with a MAF/lambda sensor that was reading 10% or more incorectly? Too much air being sensed, not the end of the world, not enough air, not good.
Most early Subarus still use the MAF sensor at WOT, and the tuned ones can’t cope - they are only meant to be measuring a certain amount of air anyway, more boost, more air, out of range, melted pistons. Most the aftermarket ones ditch the MAF as they have proveed to be so unreliable in use when modded.
[quote=jfk][quote=CIN]
One question. Is the supercharged exige using the same injectors/fuel pump as the N/A one? [/quote]
No, ALL CN converted cars use larger pump and 260 spec injectors. [/quote]
Thats very good. Looking at the graphs though, it still seems that the tune is a bit lean even the stock Lotus one. If it was my car I would re-tune anyway just to be on the safe side. The major problem with the 2ZZ is the knock in mid range as I already explained. The tune in mid range is a bit lean for my liking on a boosted engine. I don’t have a Lotus ECU on mine so can’t look but maybe the ECU is pulling a lot of timing to keep the engines alive?
Anyone who can connect a logger to it to verify? Frank any idea about this?
Ok ,look at mine and Boothys readings …
Identical maps , mine is producing 25bhp more and staying a fair bit richer to boot.
Now where do we all suppose this extra fuel is being sent from ?
It’s sure as hell coming from somewhere and if it ain’t the ECU I’ll show my arse in Woolworths !!
Ok, think we need to cut through the crap now. The point was to see if you could fit a manifold to a 260 without having to have the car custom mapped. Johns overlay showing his car actually running slightly richer than before would suggest to me you can. That was the point of the exercise.
Nobody has ever said a custom map would not give more power but the point is it can be done and it does show a healthy improvement.
In my opinion, it shows an increase in hp. Only time will tell if it is a healthy increase, as not enough info. They both show the lambda readings on the braver side of things, but some engine do like it leaner than others. I personally wouldn’t want a customers car leaving here like that, without some cast iron gaurantees from the mapper.
Yes, slightly lean gives more hp, but everything else has a harder time. As said above, would be interesting to see what the ECU is doing with the timing to protect the engine. There is a dip in the torque reading at the cam switchover point that coincides with the really lean spike, but its difficult to tell if thats down to AFR, timing or just the cam switch.
Would also be interesting to see if the same map is in both ECU’s. Just because they are both sold as 260 maps, doesn’t mean that one isn’t a later version. Only way to tell is same car, ECU, day, dyno operator, then mod from there to see where the gain really is. But as Frank would say, mucho R$D
I will never give advice to anyone on this forum again, if anyone wants to really talk Lotus performance you can see me on www.LotusSport.org [formaly Monkeytuner] where aftermarket Lotus performance began…
I’ve been working with cars for the last 31 yrs. and have never had anyone argue against engine safety and performance before…
You are missing half the gains the headers can give and over time what little gains you do have will be gone as the ecu corrects back to its base tune, It does not correct foward for add ons…
Who do you think helped crack the dam thing in the first place…?
This belongs in the Muppet section much like the BS Bemani and Komo-Tech crap of the past…
