Alfa Romeo Forums banner

61 - 78 of 78 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,837 Posts
For that matter - I would be extremely leery of any tuner who doesn't want to work with other systems! They are just trying to sell you their system of choice! It takes a few hours of your effort to install things properly and tuck the wires away and to make it all look nice and stock. It takes some time to play with the software to "get it" and then after that it should not take more than a few hours on the dyno to get it running well.

You ma come back for a second session to fine-tune some things and you may have to play with it a bit next winter to get the cold-start dialed in.

There are many dyno-operators who will gladly work with you, once they know what buttons adds fuel in milliseconds and what reduces fueling - and conversely - how to advance timing or decrease it! Period. After that it is all basics of tuning, no matter what the system. I am available by phone here in the US and so are the guys in SA (on the same time-zone as your Euros!)
As much as I don't read all of these threads, and barely get on them out of interest....

This bears repeating.

I've looked at various systems, all with their schemes on cacluating fuel. If someone is really familiar with EFI, they should be able to do any system, any time. If all they know is their system, and don't want to learn anything else- that's not good- as problems may not be solved in the right way, but in the convienent way. I know I prefer systems that don't use time for the injection map, but I can deal with them...

In the end, it is just fuel, air, and spark.

(on the funny side, our systems now are running in the 2.5 MB range... holy cow- so many sources of fuel, air, and spark do deal with.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,269 Posts
The reversion problem I am talking about occurs when the supercharger shuts off and the throttle is NOT closed.
I see. I wasn't aware that the m62's drive wheel was on a clutch. Perhaps then, the smart way for giuliettaevo to go is aftermarket MAP and get rid of the AFM/MAF altogether - which is probably best for blown applications anyway (SDS/GoTech/Megasquirt).

For that matter - I would be extremely leery of any tuner who doesn't want to work with other systems!
If someone is really familiar with EFI, they should be able to do any system, any time.
I agree with these notions, but I think in terms of professional tuners sticking with what they know is what one would want. I mean if you come to them with a new system, that learning curve is going to be on your dime. As a professional, that's not how you want to do business. Especially if some chap brings you a used MAF, CPU and harness and then has to chuck-up for three hours labor - just to find out some component is faulty. I don't know any professional that would want to touch those scenarios. Tuner buds are another story.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,462 Posts
Digital Fuel adjuster

Well it's been over a year since the last post. I was planning on getting a split second (am still planning). I got sidetracked for a while. When I got back on track I bought a Zeitronic data logging system with a wide band O2 sensor. I haven't hooked it up to see how it works yet. I got my exhaust plumbed with a bung. I have the 4.6 L Ford MAF. And things slowed down. I'm regaining interest. Did anyone get on in the interim? JJ?

I also found a couple of articles in AutoSpeed, an Australian net magazine, about an item called a Digital Fuel Adjuster, or DFA. It's an $80 build it yourself (like Megasquirt) item, along with a $70 build it yourself hand held adjuster. It only adjusts one signal and you keep the AFM. They pair that with another article about not worrying about the AFM restriction and just add an air filter down stream of the AFM so the engine can suck as much as it wants, and you use the AFM signal as a proportion of the air flow and do the adjusting with the DFA accordingly.

I wanted to see what people thought of it. It doesn't have a tack input like the split second, but if the AFM is retained with the bypass concept, the intake temp issue is moot. I still think the split second is more tunable with the tack input, but it seems interesting none-the-less.

See these articles - each has a two parts. If the links don't work - go to Autospeed.com.au and search for DFA and Airflow Bypass.

Browser Warning

Browser Warning
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,501 Posts
Discussion Starter #64 (Edited)
Nope - haven't done anything with the Split Second system yet...

I just fired up my little street 24 valve Milano on the GoTech Pro-X stand-alone here this past weekend and I am once again stunned, amazed, happy - and at the same time - intrigued and puzzled by how simple the initial process can be to get going without any of the complications that we have discussed here in this thread! And yet - the draw to piggy-back the OEM system is still there!

I know that I am kind of bastardizing my own thread here, but again - compared to the amount of dollars and time - just to keep the OEM Bosch maps, why? Yes - there is the trade off; the time that it takes to fine-tune all of the new maps from scratch, but then you are done - no AFM and now you have full control over fuel and timing forever! It would be hard to match the range that Bosch has in their map-scenario repertoire, but still.

I love this because of the simplicity; NO AFM - just a little air-temp sensor tip (plumbed into the intake), the water-temp lead that plugs right onto the standard Alfa water-temp sensor, a MAP take-off (if you so choose), a TPS plug-lead (if you so choose), or even both - blended 50/50 for best results (but you need at least one or the other or - like I said - both for best results)!

At some point I will do a Bosch Motronic with the Split Second AFM-delete - just to compare them! Cost-wise, between the SS AFM delete and the hot-wire pass-through tube and then a UniChip piggy-back to gain some control over fuel and spark, you end up much higher than just going with a GoTech Pro or Pro-X (or some other stand-alone)! Now you can likely sell your AFM and stock Bosch ECU to off-set some of the cost too.

By contrast - for the guy looking at buying the stock Bosch Motronic ECU and harness, PLUS the SS AFM-delete for a 24v conversion into a Stratos or a Milano/GTV6 for example, the savings are even GREATER just doing the stand-alone! There is always the effort to tune it though!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,706 Posts
Split Second is so expensive, I think it's not even worth getting one. I'd rather go with a standalone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
I also found a couple of articles in AutoSpeed, an Australian net magazine, about an item called a Digital Fuel Adjuster, or DFA. It's an $80 build it yourself (like Megasquirt) item, along with a $70 build it yourself hand held adjuster. It only adjusts one signal and you keep the AFM. They pair that with another article about not worrying about the AFM restriction and just add an air filter down stream of the AFM so the engine can suck as much as it wants, and you use the AFM signal as a proportion of the air flow and do the adjusting with the DFA accordingly.

I wanted to see what people thought of it. It doesn't have a tack input like the split second, but if the AFM is retained with the bypass concept, the intake temp issue is moot. I still think the split second is more tunable with the tack input, but it seems interesting none-the-less.
I have used the DFA on my MR2 when I fitted a larger airflow meter (vane/flap type). It worked perfectly once tuned (on the road) with a wide band A/F meter.
I used the larger airflow meter after trying the bypass method, but (read the last letter) Letters to the Editor
Deffinately better value than the Split Second thingy with much better mapping density. Don't be scared off by it's apparent simplicity, it works and very well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,462 Posts
Another curious thought came to my head. If you had a TPS with a variable output, could you not tap this signal (not intercept it, but split it) run it into the DFA, re-map it accordingly, and send it through the AFM pigtail to the ECU? Then chuck the AFM altogether? One cold also add an IAT to the intake somewhere and feed that directly to the AFM pigtail too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Split Second

I tried the Split Second 004 with an AFM and had no luck. The signal was all over the place, also had trouble getting a clean tach signal. Could get the car to run with reasonable air:fuel ratios but it was rough as guts. Could never get to the bottom of it and eventually gave up.

Simon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Another curious thought came to my head. If you had a TPS with a variable output, could you not tap this signal (not intercept it, but split it) run it into the DFA, re-map it accordingly, and send it through the AFM pigtail to the ECU? Then chuck the AFM altogether? One cold also add an IAT to the intake somewhere and feed that directly to the AFM pigtail too.
Without a 3D voltage output map, such an approach wouldn't work. Full throttle at low RPM would be a very different AFM voltage than full throttle at peak torque RPM.
Try : PERFORMANCE MOTOR RESEARCH LTD :.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,462 Posts
This is an interesting product. They claim the MAP sensor can be remapped and sent to the AFM signal to the ECU. Everything I've read so far on the net about this is that it is not possible. No one could map that. Have you any experience with the product, or have you communicated with them? It sounds like the ideal way to get rid of the AFM without installing a MAF.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
This is an interesting product. They claim the MAP sensor can be remapped and sent to the AFM signal to the ECU. Everything I've read so far on the net about this is that it is not possible. No one could map that. Have you any experience with the product, or have you communicated with them? It sounds like the ideal way to get rid of the AFM without installing a MAF.
I've not used that product, as it didn't suit my preferance to control larger injectors by modifying the injector signal rather than tell blatant lies to the engine management system to try and get it to deliver potentially unavailable short injector open time.
IE: An injector open time that doesn't exists within the factory computer mapping to try and achieve desired low RPM and Load AFRs.
The other side effect of modifying AFM voltage to try and get desired air/fuel ratios is the effect it has on ignition timing.

All of that probably won't effect you, tho.

I don't see why people say that it couldn't be done.

I did attemp to do it with my E Manage Ultimate on my MR2, but I was a bit slack and gave up. The EMU doesn't log the modified AFM adjustment map, only the AFM input so the big AFM adjustment map isn't included. It also doesn't apply any autotune feature to the AFM output map (the voltage output map that the EMU uses to do away with the factory AFM).

In theory it isn't hard to achieve and the MAP ECU looks to be the most thorough, because it uses atmospheric pressure compensation mapping.
The only thing I'd do my way, is to take the IAT sensor out of the AFM and put it in the intake plumbing. That way that part won't require mapping. You could still use the MAP ECU IAT sensor to do any fine tuning, but you wouldn't have to do that part from scratch.
Chances are you will only remember when the car is running like [email protected], because the weather that you installed the thing is completely opposite to the day you notice the [email protected] ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,501 Posts
Discussion Starter #73
Finally had time to finish the first startup after dumping the stock Bosch Motronic and engine wiring harness on my 1995 164 LS / Super last night in favour of a GoTech ProX fully-programmable, stand-alone engine management system! Done - no converters, no Split Second, no flapper-crapper AFM, no MAS hot-wire or hot-film pass-through tube!

I will plumb from the stock, large accordion before the throttle-body straight to the air-box (with only the hole where the AFM used to bolt to it enlarged and a nice big round venturi-style trumpet on the inside of the box to replace the smallish square trumpet in there now... !) You could opt for a cone-style filter right to the large 24v rubber accordion neck (like I did on the Verde running the same setup - or duals like I did on the race car), but I will try the stock, large box that is already well-filtrated, vented and scoop-fed from down below...

Video posted here - http://www.alfabb.com/bb/forums/164...-3-45-litre-164-ls-conversion-anybody-12.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
This is an interesting product. They claim the MAP sensor can be remapped and sent to the AFM signal to the ECU. Everything I've read so far on the net about this is that it is not possible. No one could map that. Have you any experience with the product, or have you communicated with them? It sounds like the ideal way to get rid of the AFM without installing a MAF.
That's a vast subject and not simple.
To use MAP you also need TPS and vice versa. You need both to predict transients that AFM observes. You also need a 3D map and Kalman filters to make prediction good. I did that few years ago, took me 2 years to make it work on 75TS. Idle was a special problem. Basically you need a piggy back ECU and map extraction tools on the PC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
I tried the Split Second 004 with an AFM and had no luck. The signal was all over the place, also had trouble getting a clean tach signal. Could get the car to run with reasonable air:fuel ratios but it was rough as guts. Could never get to the bottom of it and eventually gave up.

Simon
That's interesting. I've always been wondering if it works. Because I don't believe it can work this way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,018 Posts
I tried the Split Second 004 with an AFM and had no luck. The signal was all over the place, also had trouble getting a clean tach signal. Could get the car to run with reasonable air:fuel ratios but it was rough as guts. Could never get to the bottom of it and eventually gave up.

Simon
Holy thread revival, Batman!
But I had to say something about this.
Razzo, if you actually did what you say in this post, then it didn't work for you because you did it wrong. The PSC-004 is a translator from what the ECU is used to hearing from an AFM when using a MAF. The drivability problems you experienced was because the -004 was never meant to work with an AFM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,501 Posts
Discussion Starter #77
Renaldo is first to have this figured out now.

I drove his car on Saturday with the SplitSecond conversion, the open MAS sensor converted and the flapper-crapper removed. He is still running the stock ECU and it needs more tuning from the SplitSecond setup, but he is VERY close!

Initial power gains are amazing! It really helps that we bumped his 3.0 from 10.0:1 to 10.4 / 10.5:1. The compression bump, together with the free-flowing exhaust, the larger GTA injectors, the 44mm Q/GTA intake runners, the GTA cams and the open intake really brings it all together well!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
776 Posts
now i have a 82 2.5 gtv6 jetronic and i just found this link.it's analog of course and won't correlate to the motronic exactly which is digital but i want to be connected to this so i'm putting an entry here.i'm interested in the hot wire to replace the afm.
 
61 - 78 of 78 Posts
Top