Alright guys here is my dyno graph from this past summer. Sorry for the poor pics..

Closer of the HP/Ft*Lb

Closer of the A/F


Here is my set-up....
DC Sports 4-2-1 Stainless header
Ebay test pipe
Thermal Classis Stainless cat back
AEM CAI
magnecore plug wires
NGK-R plugs
custome ground wires
90k on the clock

Now to me this is cool, but other have said its low for the motor. I know my a/f is all out of wack and im not sure why. I figured i shouldnt stop making hp at 7500, i would think it would continue right up to redline. Any advise?

 

them number seem very low for a b17 with some mods. ive seen stock b16 with stock air box and all make more power .

 

My b16 made 151whp/106 a while back.
The setup and proof

Do you have an adjustable fpr and a chipped ecu?

 

what ecu?

 

stock ecu and stock fpr. I would also think my car to makin some more power, but the fuel seems to be out of control and i dont understand why

 

maybe the test pipe is doing something to the a/f readings?

you could probably use a VAFC to help lean some of the richness out over 5500rpm and smooth out that vtec spike.....

 

how is the compression ?

 

Yea I was going to do a leak down test before i put her away but never had the change. Something i will be doing during the spring.

Also, here is a noob question, why is the vtec spike such a bad thing. I have noticed many pple say to smooth that out, or get this to eliminate it. Why is this?

 

its pig rich , there 99% of the problem.

 

Have you looked at your chart at all?

First off you A/F starts at 12.3:1. That's too rich for 99.9% of NA engines. It only gets worse trailing off to a nice ringland saturating 11.1:1.

You need tuning period. Contrary to popular belief even the slightest mods, such as bolt-on's and especially with a test pipe, will richen out your stock A/F mixture substantially as shown here.

Set you base timing to 18 degrees, get some cam gears, FPR and an AFC of some sort at a minimum.

If you got the money Hondata S200.

If you are a baller. AEM EMS. Only way to fly.

Just in case you are wandering look at your A/F chart at aprox. 4750rpms. Notice the spike in the A/F up to about 13.2:1 (right about where you should be across the board anyways)? Good. Now look at your dyno plot at the same spot. You gained a solid 10whp there.

That's huge. And you guys thought those doohickeys were just for looks.

 

as everyone is saying lean up to end a little.
But against popular belief, tunning fuel will not give you 15 more hp. As your graph shows 1.some change in AF will give you like maybe 5 hp
Its running rich like that because at full throttle the ecu only reads off the maps without o2 correction

You should check the health of your engine.

edit: spelynj obns mi

 

Im surprised about the negative comments toward this graph. Its a bit low but its smooth. Remember the B17's have the lowest CR of the b-series VTEC engines (9.6:1, I believe) so they aren't going to respond like a higher CR motor.

Most dyno around 135 on G2IC, this is a marked improvement for just I/H/E (and a DC header to boot)

I guess im trying to tell you not to worry about it unless your compression test is very screwy.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mmuller &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">as everyone is saying lean up to end a little.
But against popular belief, tuning fuel will not give you 15 more hp. As your graph shows 1.some change in AF will give you like maybe 5 hp</TD></TR></TABLE>

Did you look at the graph? I mean actually look at it?

If you notice the point I was talking about. The spike @ 4,750 you will see the graph jumps from 90whp to 100whp. 100-90 = 10whp. That's only going from a turbo friendly 12.3:1 to a more NA happy 13.2:1. I'd LOVE to see the gains in the upper range from going to his 11's into the 13 range.

I tuned my old 99 Civic Si B16A2 with just and FPR, Cam Gears, Timing and Fields controller. Not even an APEXi unit. All I had was all bolt-on's. I/H/C/E, TB, IM, Pulleys. 156whp. Range of 13.1-13.4 flat across the board. Baseline - 143whp. So I gained 13whp peak and up to 22whp in the mid range. All from tuning.

I also helped tune a friend's '94 GSR B18C1. Well over 100,000 mile engine. Same bolt-ons as me minus the pulleys. Tuned to 13.4-13.6 flat across the board using same methods as mine but VAFC1 instead. 171whp.

Just in case anyone was wandering those were the sweet spots for those engines. We went leaner and started loosing power. So we bumped it back down. I wish I could find his dyno graph. Flatest powerband on a GSR I've ever seen.

 

the jump in torque is about 5 not 10.

I never sayd its not important, but i was saying that all the power that he thinks he should have will not be gained just by adjusting fuel.

you say you tuned your b16, what changes did you made to gain those 22whp? timing+gears+ fuel?
timing; you just advanced the dizzy a little?

As you prolly know timing has WAY of a more effect on power output than fuel.; 2 deg. can change power output greatly. and the ONLY way to really tune timing is by steady state tuning on a dyno.
Hold rpm at different loads and add untill no more power is made.

Anything else is guessing.

when you add headers/ ex/in, etc. your improving on the VE of the engine, so as needs for timing to finish the combustion process at the optimal crank angle.
Fuel/head/compression; etc. have effects on what tiing the engine is going to like.
You could get lucky and add a couple of deg. of timng and make the engine happy; but then again you could add a couple and loose some power.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mmuller &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">the jump in torque is about 5 not 10.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Again all I can ask is if you actually looked at the chart. Apparently you didn't. Each little line goes up 5 units be it HP or TQ respectively. So let's try this again. First off I said HP not TQ. So you see where the beginning of the hump starts. It's at 90whp and where it peaks 100whp. That's a gain of 10whp. Now you said TQ which I didn't, BUT if you look at the TQ it's ever more! TQ starts at 75wtq and peaks at about 87-88wtq. That's a gain of 12-13wtq. If I need to paste the photo into MS Paint and draw straight lines across I guess I could.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I never sayd its not important, but i was saying that all the power that he thinks he should have will not be gained just by adjusting fuel.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Actually it will come from subtracting fuel. Obviously that's not the only answer as you see from my original post I told him at a minimum to get FPR, Cam Gears and AFC or some sort.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">you say you tuned your b16, what changes did you made to gain those 22whp? timing+gears+ fuel?
timing; you just advanced the dizzy a little?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Base timing set at 18 degrees, cam gears @ +3 -2 and then correction with the Fields Controller. That's it. Amazing huh?

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">As you prolly know timing has WAY of a more effect on power output than fuel.; 2 deg. can change power output greatly. and the ONLY way to really tune timing is by steady state tuning on a dyno.
Hold rpm at different loads and add untill no more power is made.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'm talking Base timing only. It's a little hard to tune static timing with an FPR, some Cam Gears and 80's technology fuel controllers. Base timing has very little effect on power gains. Now if you have Hondata, AEM etc... we have another topic to discuss, but we aren't in this case.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">when you add headers/ ex/in, etc. your improving on the VE of the engine, so as needs for timing to finish the combustion process at the optimal crank angle.
Fuel/head/compression; etc. have effects on what tiing the engine is going to like.
You could get lucky and add a couple of deg. of timng and make the engine happy; but then again you could add a couple and loose some power.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes that is precisely what you are doing and the benefiting factor in doing so. I'm not debating this. However it's a pretty well known fact that Honda B-Series like 18 degrees ignition timing in a stock - NA configuration. It's the uppermost limit of the specified service interval and is good for 1-3whp across the board MAX. Again base timing changes has little effect. You won't loose any power. It's been tested up to 26 degrees that power gains seem to peak at about 19 degrees and plateau till the 26 degrees. No loss recorded. This is in a stock - mild NA configuration.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mr Hammond &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Again all I can ask is if you actually looked at the chart. Apparently you didn't. Each little line goes up 5 units be it HP or TQ respectively. So let's try this again. First off I said HP not TQ. So you see where the beginning of the hump starts. It's at 90whp and where it peaks 100whp. That's a gain of 10whp. Now you said TQ which I didn't, BUT if you look at the TQ it's ever more! TQ starts at 75wtq and peaks at about 87-88wtq. That's a gain of 12-13wtq. If I need to paste the photo into MS Paint and draw straight lines across I guess I could.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Thats a great idea; i put it in paint and yes your right...its not 5 wt, its more like 6.5 and if you feel frisky maybe 7.

-1st i think your getting torque and hp confused.torque is the flat part that peaks a lil over 100 ft-lbs.
FYI you look at the torque curve, since hp is based out of torque and rpm.
so yeah. And dont forget he's using an AEM aka''hump'' intake


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mr Hammond &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Actually it will come from subtracting fuel. Obviously that's not the only answer as you see from my original post I told him at a minimum to get FPR, Cam Gears and AFC or some sort.
</TD></TR></TABLE>
yeah i was actually thinking more along the lines of a custom chip; i personally think afc's and such piggyback fuel controllers are obsolete nowadays..but to each his own.
cam gears? yeah but i think not worth it with stock cams. but ok.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mr Hammond &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I'm talking Base timing only. It's a little hard to tune static timing with an FPR, some Cam Gears and 80's technology fuel controllers. Base timing has very little effect on power gains. Now if you have Hondata, AEM etc... we have another topic to discuss, but we aren't in this case.</TD></TR></TABLE>

tune timing with an FPR? hope your being sarcastic..
Base timing? you do know that if you advance the dizzy you are advancing the whole timing map right?
but yeah your right, we are not talking about timing here.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mr Hammond &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Yes that is precisely what you are doing and the benefiting factor in doing so. I'm not debating this. However it's a pretty well known fact that Honda B-Series like 18 degrees ignition timing in a stock - NA configuration. It's the uppermost limit of the specified service interval and is good for 1-3whp across the board MAX. Again base timing changes has little effect. You won't loose any power. It's been tested up to 26 degrees that power gains seem to peak at about 19 degrees and plateau till the 26 degrees. No loss recorded. This is in a stock - mild NA configuration.</TD></TR></TABLE>


yes setting the dizzy 2 deg. more advance from stock 16 deg btdc will give you a more peppier engine in MOST cases.
again base timing when changed from the dizzy does have an effect on the power band; once again your changing the whole map.
what are you talking about timing degrees? what rpm and load?engine size? compression? piston design? fuel octane?
please take a look at stock b-series timing maps before making assumtions..they are different from each other.

 

I'm sorry you don't see it. It's there in black and white.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">-1st i think your getting torque and hp confused.torque is the flat part that peaks a lil over 100 ft-lbs.
FYI you look at the torque curve, since hp is based out of torque and rpm.
so yeah. And dont forget he's using an AEM aka''hump'' intake</TD></TR></TABLE>

Actually I think YOU were the one getting the two confused. I was speaking solely of HP in previous posts, but it was you that brought up TQ. So I compared the TQ gain and it was greater then that of the HP gain. I'm also well aware he is using an AEM intake. Kinda funny how that "hump" in HP AND TQ gain also corresponds to an equal "hump" in his A/F graph.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">yeah i was actually thinking more along the lines of a custom chip; i personally think afc's and such piggyback fuel controllers are obsolete nowadays..but to each his own.
cam gears? yeah but i think not worth it with stock cams. but ok.</TD></TR></TABLE>

The only reason they would be obsolete is because of how cheap Hondata is. They still serve there purpose though, but no need for them unless rules do not allow them, as was my case on my previous car. I'm glad you feel that way about cam gears. It's shame there are numerous cases which prove otherwise. But to each his own.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">tune timing with an FPR? hope your being sarcastic..
Base timing? you do know that if you advance the dizzy you are advancing the whole timing map right?
but yeah your right, we are not talking about timing here.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Ok, I'm not sure if I should question if you ever stepped foot near a dyno or your reading comprehension skills are just sub par. Look I'm trying to not be an ******* here. Really I am.

In your previous post you were talking about steady state tuning. Partial throttle tuning. Best done on a Mustang Dyno. A good load baring dyno. Well that's in another league. The OG Poster at hand has NOTHING to tune ignition maps or fuel maps with. The two cars in questions I posted about had NOTHING to tune ignition maps or fuel maps with.

The comment I made about tuning ignition maps was it's a little hard to do when all you have to tune with is an FPR, Cam Gears and 80's technology AFC's. So you tell me which one of those allows you to do that? I'm aware the answer is NONE. Are you?


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">yes setting the dizzy 2 deg. more advance from stock 16 deg btdc will give you a more peppier engine in MOST cases.
again base timing when changed from the dizzy does have an effect on the power band; once again your changing the whole map.
what are you talking about timing degrees? what rpm and load?engine size? compression? piston design? fuel octane?
please take a look at stock b-series timing maps before making assumptions..they are different from each other.</TD></TR></TABLE>

In ALL cases with B-Series engines. Period. Slight hp and tq increase and increased throttle response.

Again is this a reading comprehension thing or what? Obviously I am talking about BASE timing. Meaning at the distributor. You know that funny looking thing sticking out of the cylinder head hovering over the transmission? In case you were wondering, it is measured in degrees. Turn the car on, warm up, jump the service connector, hook up a PGM Tester (if available ) or a Timing Light set to the desired DEGREES will work and adjust accordingly. There is no RPM, no Load no nothing. It is BASE timing. I'm really unsure how much more clear I can be.

We are talking about Base timing. Not separate timing maps within the ECU. I am well aware of stock B-Series fuel and ignition maps and their differences. Anyone who has used Hondata, AEM etc... is familiar with this. Again we have nothing to control those because we WERE NOT talking about Hondata, AEM EMS and other models that allow you to adjust this.

Again not trying to be an *******, but are you either not really reading or comprehending what I'm saying? Or are you just trying to nit pick, bend and obscure what I'm saying into something different in your head to debate about? Honestly? Seriously?

One last thing though.....

Edit: I am an idiot and reversed the two in Paint. Swap HP for TQ. Simple mistake.









Modified by Mr Hammond at 9:49 AM 3/9/2005

 

im not going to keep doing the quote game cause it gets me dizzy.

dude, you are getting torque and HP plots mistaken your making yourself look like an idiot. Well i hope your getting them mistaken..
Im really not going to type all that mambo jambo. Most of what your typing is nothing but looking to argue; wich does not really bother me.
No facts...
tell me how giving someone advice to buy a piggy back fuel controller and a frp is better than chipping the ecu along with the hardware to burn the chip is better?

I know that advancing the dizzy 2 deg. will make of a more peppier car, because you are also shifting the WHOLE timing map 2 degrees
but that whole 26 degree plateau thing is crap and typical internet ''tuner''

- with fuel adjustment you will NOT get magical numbers. Fuel does not have such a big impact on engine output as most think.
- When you change base ignition timing with the DIZZY you change the timing map also..

 

You are right. I reversed the two in MS Paint. I'm an idiot and added a comment to my last post. Simple Mistake. Just switch the HP and TQ.

I'm not trying to argue with you in the least bit. You are failing to see my point entirely. I AM NOT arguing that a piggyback and fpr and cam gears is better then chipping the ECU or using something rewritable like Hondata or going with AEM EMS etc...

Actually I RECOMMENDED THAT TO HIM!

Ok. I think the problem is we are just not seeing eye to eye here. Whether you are not comprehending anything I am saying or you just plain don't want too.

I am well aware your BASE timing at the distributor shifts the entire ignition curve. Hence the BASE timing name. With what I was talking about is that I told him to set his timing to 18 degrees. BECAUSE it has been tested before that there are no benefits to advancing timing beyond that. It was tested up to 26 degrees and showed no improvements both on the dyno and feel. However there were not any negative effects. So 18 is a generally accepted figure to go with.

I guess all my "magical hp" increase then came from my cam gear settings which don't work with stock cams, and my 80's technology AFC, and my FPR set to 36psi because my 80's technology AFC didn't like to go past 10% correction or it would overload the MAP sensor.

Good thing this scenario came up in my "Internet Tuner" class. :rolls eyes:

Look man I'm not arguing with you what's better and what's not. I gave him three options based on price range. The first being the cheapest way in the long run because most do-it-yourselfers can install and if they know what they are looking for, can tune themselves. Obviously not as easy with Hondata or AEM without the proper equipment and/or software.

Will Hondata or AEM gain more power and better fuel economy due to increased combustion efficiency because of the ability to alter ECU fuel and ignition maps? Absolutely. If he has the money GO FOR IT! It's better. I never argued that.

To be honest I don't really think we are arguing here. I was just showing a point and you seem like you are arguing that I am saying I can alter ignition maps with AFC, fpr etc... and that I am saying those basic tools are the way to go. I never said either.

Been nice chatting with you. I'll let you get back to your busy REAL WORLD tuning job. I'll get back to by INTERNET tuning.

 

oh ok, i see that a lot of this came from missunderstanding each other.

your right about setting 18deg. base timing on the dizzy; thats why it is within specs.
But that whole 26 deg. this and that; you cant guesstimate what an engine will like in timing. period.I really would not dare advancing mechanical timing up to 26 deg nor even close to that. but thats just me i guess.
there is a lot of factors that go into timing needs.
thats what im trying to show.
haha, i never sayd cam gears dont ''work''(how can they not work); since you can gain power by shifting the power band depending on settings. I just think they are not worth the trouble for stock cams.
Im really glad you god MadZ 22 whp by tuning your with your 60's fuel controller and cams gears; must be your supa dupa tuner skillz. You get a chocolate chip cookie WITH whip cream on top. good job.

Getting he ecu chipped and buying the hardware to make your own roms is the chapest way. No need for hondata or stand alone ecu..
you can get a chipped ecu for pretty cheap(or chip it yourself for about $7) and there is eeprom burners for a low as 40-50 bucks nowadays. + you have the ability to later on upgrade to real time programming and such.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mmuller &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">oh ok, i see that a lot of this came from missunderstanding each other.

your right about setting 18deg. base timing on the dizzy; thats why it is within specs.
But that whole 26 deg. this and that; you cant guesstimate what an engine will like in timing. period.I really would not dare advancing mechanical timing up to 26 deg nor even close to that. but thats just me i guess.
there is a lot of factors that go into timing needs.
thats what im trying to show.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'm not "guesstimating" anything. I'm sure you are aware that factory timing specs for B-Series VTEC engines is 16 degrees BTDC +/- 2 degrees. So 18 degrees. Haven't you ever wondered if advancing the timing further would give you any benefits? Since after all it is free. Well I did too. It has been tested in 2 degree increments up to 26 degrees. Anything more and I think you would have needed a dremel. Results were no improvements, but no decreases either. So 18 is fine. Just a simple test.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">haha, i never sayd cam gears dont ''work''(how can they not work); since you can gain power by shifting the power band depending on settings. I just think they are not worth the trouble for stock cams.
Im really glad you god MadZ 22 whp by tuning your with your 60's fuel controller and cams gears; must be your supa dupa tuner skillz. You get a chocolate chip cookie WITH whip cream on top. good job.</TD></TR></TABLE>

And you are entitled to your opinion. I'll continue to use them and produce gains. Mmmmmm that sounds good. Can you make sure it's an Uncle Ralphs with the Icing on top. Those are the w1n!!11!!1111

Honestly though you can crack jokes all you want, but how do you explain it? I'm no master tuner and surely my equipment wasn't the case so I guess magic is the only reason then. Look I'm not discrediting anything your saying, so I don't see how you can just brush off what I'm saying with sarcastic remarks when it works plain and simple. Is it the best method? Nope. Does it work? Sure.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Getting he ecu chipped and buying the hardware to make your own roms is the chapest way. No need for hondata or stand alone ecu..
you can get a chipped ecu for pretty cheap(or chip it yourself for about $7) and there is eeprom burners for a low as 40-50 bucks nowadays. + you have the ability to later on upgrade to real time programming and such.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Bare with me here. So you can an eprom burner for $50. You get a ton of blank chips which are inexpensive I know. So now you have you new fangled burner and chips. So what do you do now? Honestly?

I am not knowledged on the chipping game so what do you use to manipulate the factory ECU until you find the settings you want to burn onto that chip? Please school me.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mr Hammond &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I'm not "guesstimating" anything. I'm sure you are aware that factory timing specs for B-Series VTEC engines is 16 degrees BTDC +/- 2 degrees. So 18 degrees. Haven't you ever wondered if advancing the timing further would give you any benefits? Since after all it is free. Well I did too. It has been tested in 2 degree increments up to 26 degrees. Anything more and I think you would have needed a dremel. Results were no improvements, but no decreases either. So 18 is fine. Just a simple test.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Who performed this test?

 

dude, im not here to argue nor crack jokes on you. Neither to brush off what you say.
What im trying to do is prove a point that there is a right and a wrong way to do things and will work and what not.

for example this; i understand that you wanted to see what happens and such. but do you really look at what going on inside the engine?
More timing does not in any way mean more power...what your trying to do with timing is to end the combustion process at the right crank angle(usually 15-25 deg. atdc).
you say you did not loose power at + 10deg. from base timing. what dyno did you use to correlate to that thought? brake or inertial dyno?

Well as far as the chip thing.
even by just having a eeprom burner you have lots more starting possibilites than with piggyback methods.
there is plenty free rom editors out there that can get the job done and some. For example adding little nifty cool things like FTS/FTL cel shift lights and such.
You can add real time programming to the stock ecu for about 150 bones or a lot less is you know where to look..
Of course the best way would be tuning on a dyno.
make a run, look at the graph and make changes. just like you would with any other fuel management.
Street tuning. wideband.

you can make it easy on yourself by doing some calculations and go from that point.
Lets take a b18a/b for example.
you have:
- displacement of 112 in3
-injector size of 23.5 lbs/hour

so with that information you can calculate necessary injector pulse with for any certain VE.
lets take 100% VE and 7600rpms

at 7600rpms the engine will theoretically move 246.24 CFM at 100% VE
Basing yourself at stardard atmospheric conditions(14.7 psi and 60 degF) with an all motor car. We know that one cubic foot of air weights .076 lbs.( skipped the math writing part cause im too lazy)
So:
246.24 x .076= 18.71 lbs/min of airflow.
You divide that # by 4 since we have 4 cyl. and come up with 4.678lbs/min for each cyl.

Now with that # and knowing the target A/F you can get the amount of fuel required.
lets say 13:1
4.678/ 13= .36 lbs/min of fuel
so you would need .36lbs/min of fuel to obtain a 13:1 A/F ratio.

the injectors are rated at lbs/ hr so you just divide by 60 to get lbs/min

23.5/ 60= .391 lbs/min
So .391 is the max amount of fuel the injector can dump in a minute.

Now you calculate the max amount of time you actually to hold the injector open.

rpm/2= cycles per minute of the engine
divide by 760 again and get cycles per sec.

so:
7600 rpms/2= 3800 3800/ 60= 63.3 cycles per sec. you divide 1 sec. by 63.3 to find sec. per cycle.
so 1 sec./ 63.3= .0158 seconds per cycle
So you have a max. time of 15.8 milliseconds at 7600 rpms to open an injector.

We know that we need .36lbs/min of fuel to obtain a 13:1 A/F ratio.
We know that our injector flows .391 lbs/min at 100% duty cycle
So:
.36/ .391= .92
That means we have to turn the injector at 92% duty cycle to get a 13:1 A/F ratio
We know there is a total of 15.8 milliseconds to open an injector
So:
15.8ms x .92= 14.54ms

So it would take 14.54ms of injector pulse at 100%ve at 7600 rpms to get a 13:1 AF ratio.

With that info lets say you dyno the car and get a 12.5 Af instead of 13:1
13/12.5= 1.04
that means there is 4% too much fuel
we can roughly realize that VE was around 96% instead of a 100.

we multiply our 14.54ms that we got before by .96 to get the right amount of injector pulse to feed a 96% VE.

14.54ms x .96= 13.96ms to get back to 13:1 AF


MY head hurts now.
This might me kinda OT but i felt like doing the math.

 

Maybe you are trying to over complicate things? :sigh: One last time. Look man I'm not trying to argue what is best and what is not cool? I put my car together and set up a date to go dyno tuning. It was on Dynojet 248C Inertia dyno. You are already aware of the particular tuning methods as I have repeated them a good half a dozen times. While I was there before I did anything and after tuning was done I wanted to see FOR MYSELF if 14-18 degrees (factory recommended range) was really the optimal position for timing. I didn't care what other people said, I didn't care what the service manual said, I didn't care about formulas and paper engineers. While they are VERY useful and I use them every day of my life, sometimes you just gotta learn on your own. While I had 2 hrs of time to kill what not use them? So I measured pulled runs from 16-26 degrees BTDC BASE timing with ample cool down times and as controlled as I could make an experiment etc... It was just a simple test. I had nothing to bother with ignition or fuel maps anything you want so say about that is a moot point because they DO NOT apply to that application. That's all I'm saying. I'd say probably 99% of the stuff you are saying is all correct for the most part, and is a better method, but wasn't really applying to anything I was saying. If the guy gets Hondata or AEM or wants to burn his own chips. That would be AWESOME, because it would be so much better. However not everyone (actually I'd say most) have no idea how to use such devices and would have to pay someone to tune for them.

The method I gave is cheap, easy to install and east to tune for the do it yourself person and they can get a basic understanding of what's going on and what they are doing and they work pretty well for basic bolt-on guys. However if he wants to spend the money or if anyone for that matter, on someone else tuning it or if they want to learn that's great for them and a better solution.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Well as far as the chip thing.
even by just having a eeprom burner you have lots more starting possibilities than with piggyback methods.
there is plenty free rom editors out there that can get the job done and some. For example adding little nifty cool things like FTS/FTL cel shift lights and such.
You can add real time programming to the stock ecu for about 150 bones or a lot less is you know where to look..
Of course the best way would be tuning on a dyno.
make a run, look at the graph and make changes. just like you would with any other fuel management.
Street tuning. wideband.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Forgive me. I was not thinking on the same line as you. I was thinking you were recommending him getting a chipped ECU and then just trying different chips out. You know like getting the software programs (i.e. m00gen, skunk2, etc...) and doing it that way. Which would be kind of pointless. I wasn't thinking you meant doing it yourself.

This goes back to what I was saying before though while it may be the same price or cheaper as the other, if you don't know how to use it, it can get very expensive that's all. But probably your best bet for cost vs. benefits.


Yeah I would agree it was off topic. I mean it's pertinent to the topic at hand, but basically just shows that you took as good a notes at EFI-101 as I did.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mr Hammond &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Maybe you are trying to over complicate things? :sigh: One last time. Look man I'm not trying to argue what is best and what is not cool? I put my car together and set up a date to go dyno tuning. It was on Dynojet 248C Inertia dyno. You are already aware of the particular tuning methods as I have repeated them a good half a dozen times. While I was there before I did anything and after tuning was done I wanted to see FOR MYSELF if 14-18 degrees (factory recommended range) was really the optimal position for timing. I didn't care what other people said, I didn't care what the service manual said, I didn't care about formulas and paper engineers. While they are VERY useful and I use them every day of my life, sometimes you just gotta learn on your own. While I had 2 hrs of time to kill what not use them? So I measured pulled runs from 16-26 degrees BTDC BASE timing with ample cool down times and as controlled as I could make an experiment etc... It was just a simple test. I had nothing to bother with ignition or fuel maps anything you want so say about that is a moot point because they DO NOT apply to that application. That's all I'm saying. I'd say probably 99% of the stuff you are saying is all correct for the most part, and is a better method, but wasn't really applying to anything I was saying. If the guy gets Hondata or AEM or wants to burn his own chips. That would be AWESOME, because it would be so much better. However not everyone (actually I'd say most) have no idea how to use such devices and would have to pay someone to tune for them.

</TD></TR></TABLE>

you got a point, i guess we are missunderstanding each other after all.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mr Hammond &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Forgive me. I was not thinking on the same line as you. I was thinking you were recommending him getting a chipped ECU and then just trying different chips out. You know like getting the software programs (i.e. m00gen, skunk2, etc...) and doing it that way. Which would be kind of pointless. I wasn't thinking you meant doing it yourself.
This goes back to what I was saying before though while it may be the same price or cheaper as the other, if you don't know how to use it, it can get very expensive that's all. But probably your best bet for cost vs. benefits. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Yeah i defenetely ment doing it yourself. those ebay chips...ugh.
I mean really, people should not be scared to fiddle around with this; its really not hard.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mr Hammond &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">but basically just shows that you took as good a notes at EFI-101 as I did.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I really dont know if your being sarcastic with this remark, but oh well.
Hehe, notes? yeah
i would describe better as understanding and applying
i mean i did go to class to learn.right?