Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members
JMR_AW11 wrote:But it might be that I've still missed something and somehow made an error as 36 to 37deg seems really high?
lot of advance for high load/rpm! I guess the 4AGE just likes a lot of advance! maybe short stroke and relatively low compression contribute? . . 6 . 7 . 8 5 . . . . i . . 9JMR_AW11 wrote:Yes you read the maps right.
However,
However, I have put the ECU on a virtual
The ECU thinks it is in a running MR2 and I can measure the timing on a scope.
Also, I can find the bit of code that sets the timing to 10deg BTDC for the service mode
This shows the right value for 10deg BTDC.
But it might be that I've still missed something and somehow made an error as 36 to 37deg seems really high?
I did wonder if the cambelt stretches slightly at high rpm and Toyota compensate for this in the map? So the 36 deg is really a couple of degrees less than this as a stretched belt will retard the timing?
Apologies in advance if this theory is pants
(10degree) marker, with the gun set to 10 degrees, I see the first (0) marker. I can do the same trick with 16. When I hold the revs at about 5500, the advance I get is... somewhere between 50 and 55. 
. . 6 . 7 . 8 5 . . . . i . . 9
- Circuit Pack 
. . 6 . 7 . 8 5 . . . . i . . 9cam timing Also, on the dyno printout, my peak torque rpm is quite high... The exhaust cam peak lobe position (maximum valve opening) is 110deg BTDC. The stock exhaust cam peak lobe opening point is at 111degBTDC (source: club4ag.com technical section). So the exhaust cam recommended timing is 1 degree earlier than stock, and this is what I think you get if you put it in the stock exhaust cam gear. The recommended peak lobe position for my cam is 105degATDC. For the stock cam, it is 111degATDC. It would do this when slotted into the stock cam gear, and this would be it's recommended base setting.However I am using the exhaust cam, which has only one degree of advance built into it, i.e. it will reach peak opening one degree earlier than stock, when slotted into the stock cam gear.(on the intake) is opening 5 degrees later than the recommended setting for the proper HKS intake cam. In other words I have 5 degrees of retard on my intake cam timing. Retard on the intake cam gives you.... a peak torque shifted to higher RPM! . . 6 . 7 . 8 5 . . . . i . . 9 Run 002 is one of the runs with the modified ECU; run 006 is with the stock ECU. The AFR changes were not significantly different from the slight variation between runs. There did seem to be a slight difference in power, which makes me wonder if I am getting the alternate ignition map but not the increased fuelling. It's only very slight so it's hard to be sure. After I got back I rechecked the pin to make sure it was still being grounded and it was. Jeremy, if you read this, please let me know if you think of any other checks I should do! 
(:
In fact, at around 12.5 I think there is some margin for a little more duration! At this stage I expect I really will need cam gears; this would let me advance the intake cam timing and reduce overlap with exhaust until the idle was OK. I wonder if I would need a mod to give me extra fuel at this stage, too. . . 6 . 7 . 8 5 . . . . i . . 9 I don't know how much the change in pwer would be. That doesn't make sense.vashy wrote:I've got some results from a decent dyno! Ajec Racing, who now come highly recommended by me.
I did some runs with my modified ECU and then changed to a stock ECU from Limeymk1 to see if there was any change in AFR which might indicate increased fuelling, but there wasn't, unfortunately.
The ECu is well enough to support the cams. The only thing you have to be careful is the EGT numbers. Retarded car may cause high EGT's. I can tell you that richer ratio over 12.3 is not needed. Because I have the Wideband I can see exactly what happens. If your map sensor is reading correctly than the ecu provides enough fuel without any issues. I have seen 10.5 AFR, when I started acceleration from 4th gear 2000 RPM. The afr numbers were like 16.5 (I made it like this for economy) while cruising, but when I started acceleration, it first went down to 10.5, than 11.2. than 12. than 12.3 and stayed around 12.3 and 12.5 at WOT. ECU can arrange the amount of the fuel needed by the cam setup up to 272, totally correct but we have to be careful about the timing and EGT. The cam followers were not staying at the top of the valves and this was causing different valve opening at different times. I ordered 16 cam followers and waiting for them 
JMR_AW11 wrote:Hi Vashy
If the pin is grounded you will get both the extra fuel map and the ignition map.
They switch together and you can't have one without the other.
Is there any way you could check to see if the injectors are going 100% duty on a flat out run? If they are then the extra map can't add any more fuel.
Can you check AFR on a part throttle run and maybe switch the logic level in and out?
The non stock map should give less advance so I assume it will give less power as long as you don't get detonation.
Have I read the AFRs correctly because it looks like the modded ECU is running slightly weaker than the stock one?
Also, is the rpm scale shifted to the left by one box?
(richer) as long as 13.0 to 12.5 is the optimum AFR to get the most out of the engine with setups like Vashy and I have. We are not going to get anymore HP without raising the Limiter cut and with a richer AFR at WOT is not giving additional power. Just thinking loudly please correct if I am wrong. for a turbo setup optimum is around 11.8 - 11.2 AFR (not very high boost) and 13.0 to 12.3 for N/A applications. (mild upgrades) 34atm85 wrote:JMR_AW11 wrote:Hi Vashy
If the pin is grounded you will get both the extra fuel map and the ignition map.
They switch together and you can't have one without the other.
Is there any way you could check to see if the injectors are going 100% duty on a flat out run? If they are then the extra map can't add any more fuel.
Can you check AFR on a part throttle run and maybe switch the logic level in and out?
The non stock map should give less advance so I assume it will give less power as long as you don't get detonation.
Have I read the AFRs correctly because it looks like the modded ECU is running slightly weaker than the stock one?
Also, is the rpm scale shifted to the left by one box?
Hi Jeremy
Do we need higher AFR
I may have wrong info or misunderstanding, please correct me.
Warm regards
Erin.
The graphs didn't really seem to agree eith the changes. It is possible that the stock ECU they were using was defaulting to the same maps as the 17070 ECU can swap between the regular map and the safer map on its own. eg if there is a fault code etc.(both Exhaust cams) (which the seller didn't even mention)@ 7000 rpm (spares), Mk1b Mica blue T-bar Mar90, Mk1b Mica blue T-bar,full climate control,Jan90, 5 mk1's 
LeSpank wrote:144whp! Wow that would be fantastic.
Strangely enough I was reading this thread again the other day and was feeling embarrassed that I still haven't done anything with my cams and pulleys
so the engine will be coming out when my back is better 
he finds these.(spares), Mk1b Mica blue T-bar Mar90, Mk1b Mica blue T-bar,full climate control,Jan90, 5 mk1's - You did read the AFRs correctly. We did three runs with each ECU, and the AFRs changed a bit on each run. Could this be coolant temperature differences making the ECU change the fuelling slightly do you think? Anyway the change you see is typical of this variation, so I don't think it's significant. Perhaps the fuelling increase is too small to see..? I'm not too worried as it looks like the stock ECU gives enough fuel anyway. I have gone back the stock ECU since the dyno and the low rpm throttle response feels slightly different now. I think that the modified ECU actually felt more responsive at low rpm. And the stock ECU does give more power on the graph from 4500rpm, like you suggested might happen. So perhaps I was getting the alternative map..? (also - let me know what you meant by 'rpm scale shifted to the left'..?)- So you got 12.5 at high rpm/WOT too, it's good that we confirmed each other's results! and that's a nice lean economy cruise AFR. I hope your new cam followers solve your problem. Hey you have cam gears don't you? How much difference does it make when you change the timing? - I would get 4 throttles (just for the noise!), if this wasn't such a budget tune. It would be good though; you could tune the intake length to whatever you want, because you can just cut a hole into the boot. Then you've got plenty of space for some fat ass filters, then just feed the boot with cold air. ZX10, is that carbs or fuel injection?- what cams have you got then?- Wow, what a find! get it running!! why are you taking the engine out/rebuilding?! Can you not just fit a new HG in situ? Maybe a good project for the resto show..? . . 6 . 7 . 8 5 . . . . i . . 9 Will be controlling it all with DTA....surely you could stretch to a set ob GSX-R carbs (£70ish off ebay) and a home made intake manifold of some description (or £150 from bogg bros)
If you remember earlier on when you posted the thread I was asking all manner of 'noob' questions about vernier pulleys (I also own a set) and additional set-up.- carbs haha! Thanks for looking them up for me though. ActualIy I shouldn't laugh; I remember yours was doing pretty well with carbs..? I guess what I should do is fit a big filter off the throttle body; I still have the mk1b pipework that goes round the boot. I like it because it feeds cold air and the filter has a large surface area, but I think the restriction to the flow probably becomes significant when peak power is at 7600rpm 
- I just went back to read your other posts; ah yes, that was it, you found them in a rolling shell you bought for pretty much the same price I got my cams for LeSpank wrote:From your dyno results have you proved that an increase in fuelling isn't essential because of the way the car over-fuels by default at high revs?
Erin actually discovered this first, and I confirmed it with the dyno above. If anything needs clarifying, please let me know! . . 6 . 7 . 8 5 . . . . i . . 9- Wow, what a find! get it running!! why are you taking the engine out/rebuilding?! Can you not just fit a new HG in situ? Maybe a good project for the resto show..? be a later lump (AE92???) with the oil squirter's etc.(spares), Mk1b Mica blue T-bar Mar90, Mk1b Mica blue T-bar,full climate control,Jan90, 5 mk1's oukie wrote:
I felt the best way would be to drop the engine because it warrents further inspection because its not the original engine and its not even a UK car engine as it has JDM stickers on it and may
Chris
