decipha wrote:your fueling is inconsistent because your maf needs to be dialed in.

Ok, so once I realized that I was doing some incorrect math I decided to start from scratch. I used the factory provided data for the MAF flowrates/voltages. I went out for a drive and held my MAFV at 1.5, 1.75, 2 and 2.25. I did two "pulls" for each voltage value and used the data logs to calculate my fuel error (Lambda-LAMBSE+KAM).

The

(Pre-Mod) data logs are with the

factory flow data. The

(Post-Mod) data logs are

after I did the MAF curve corrections using the fuel error calculation mentioned above.

Pull1(Pre-Mod).xdl - Average fuel errors for each MAFV value.

1.50 - 1.120

1.75 - 1.154

2.00 - 1.136

2.25 - 1.100

Pull2(Pre-Mod).xdl - Average fuel errors for each MAFV value.

1.50 - 0.995

1.75 - 1.012

2.00 - 1.007

2.25 - 1.051

Pull1(Post-Mod).xdl - Average fuel errors for each MAFV value.

1.50 - 0.837

1.75 - 0.925

2.00 - 0.943

2.25 - 0.888

Pull2(Post-Mod).xdl - Average fuel errors for each MAFV value.

1.50 - 0.824

1.75 - 0.911

2.00 - 0.939

2.25 - 0.940

On my steady pulls (Pre-Mod) data logs I had a fuel errors between 10%-15% then on the very next attempt I had fuel errors between 0%-5%. Both LEAN.

On my steady pulls (Post-Mod) data logs I had fuel errors between 6%-17% then on the very next attempt I had fuel errors between 6%-18%. Both RICH.

So...

- (Pre-Mod) logs don't agree. They seem very different between the two pulls.

- (Post-Mod) logs agree. They are pretty close at each MAFV point.

I feel like i'm missing something in this process. The Lambda-LAMBSE+KAM in CL seems very straight forward and I feel like I understand why it works and i'm doing the math correct now. Why is my fueling so erratic?

I posted the logs. They are short, but if anyone can see anything funky in there let me know.

Thanks in advance!

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.