EFIDynoTuning Forum

I have a READ0 definition from CoreTuning and I've been able to tune my '00 Mountaineer with it, but have run into a roadblock. The definition doesn't properly expose the base spark tables and they are currently clipping the MBT and Borderline tables which have been tuned, causing the engine to run significantly more retarded than it should based on a list of extensive engine modifications. I've reached out to CoreTuning to see if that can be fixed, but something I've had in the back of my mind for a while is replacing the EEC-V currently in use for READ0 with a CDAN4 strategy instead.

I've tuned an old Mustang project of mine using CDAN4 successfully (SailorBob's definition) and I have to say it was the best tuning experience I've had thus far. One major difference is the fact that SailorBob's definitions include PIDs which are deliberately removed from CoreTuning defs. Just wanted to see what others might have to say about "reverting" to an older strategy simply because the definition is easier to work with.

thats a horrific idea

why not just add the spark table ?

or if anything upgrade to an 03/04 luxury sedan ecu

LOL why is it such a bad idea? My recollection of CDAN4 is that it runs an SBF and 4R70W perfectly fine.

CoreTuning is looking at the spark situation - of course, READ0 or REAC4 are definitely not the most popular strategies to mess with, so they have less mileage and there's still work to do. That being said, I do have this thing running fairly decently. I did have to tune the shit out of it, but I'm able to drive it to work and back now.

The other thing is that sometimes the midrange and top end (haven't been to the top end yet, about to hit 200 miles) reveals that something's not right with the fueling. I'm running Ford LU24A injectors at 65 psi, which Ford publishes all the data for at that pressure and the part throttle and startup is great. But get much further than 3500 RPM sometimes, the engine feels lean and doesn't make the power it ought to. More recently, it's pulling almost cleanly through 3500 up to a bit past 4000 RPM, so maybe the engine is just breaking in? No idea... didn't have any issues with this exact same engine block and rotating assembly with a different set of heads and intake in an old Fox body (I guess there's potentially a 1300 lb advantage, though!). The MAF is the typical 90mm LMAF with data from your MAF reference page. Chucking the wideband on it is kind of a pain, but might have to do it.

well for starters youd have to go backwards to an analog mlps, youd have to swap backwards to the hall effect cam sensor. There would be no calculated vehicle speed so youd need to swap an older cluster in if you want a speedometer. You also wouldnt have the ability to upgrade to real coil on /near plug.

why not just upgrade to an 03/04 ecu? its almost plug and play and has significantly more control than cdan4. Not to mention the datalogging is far beyond what BE is capable of. Oh and its all free and best yet your not software restricted either.

regardless of all that if its just that one issue your having just simply read your tune out with tunerpro and adjust the spark from there.

I downloaded your Marauder tune and the def to peruse it in TP. Looks fairly comprehensive. What hardware code EECs does RZASA work with?

FYI, I'm fairly certain I had a digital MLPS and VR sensor in my Mach 1 when I did the conversion using CDAN4. You can select the sensor types in the definition (at least the one from Derek).

hardware code search box is on the homepage >> supported ecus

cant use digital mlps as the ecu physically doesnt have enough digital inputs. VR sensor is different hardware as well. Software doesnt change hardware.

Well, the car is gone, so I can't check the transmission, but it was definitely running a VR sensor with CDAN4. The circuitry is simplified with VR anyway, it's just a zero crossing detection at low voltage that might need amplification, but the '96 Mustang that the EEC-V came out of had a VR sensor on the 4.6 in it. 2-wire variable reluctance sensor, not the Hall effect 3-wire deal.

yep, now that i think about it thats right. It was the explorer that got the vr in 98.

Word. Now I’m curious about the MPLS, though.