scorp508

So it's been about ohhhh 5 years since I was doing any chip tuning or playing with my car at all and nearly everything has melted out of my head to make room for other stuff.

I've come across claims in the past that said the extra tables exposed in $6E actually exist in $32B, but they were never properly documented in the definition files to gain access and that since $6E was so much more refined we all just went that way anyways.

Maybe it's a load of crap and $32B only wishes it had them, but figured I'd throw it out there to see if anyone has another opinion on it.

Otherwise I'm looking at converting my $32B 4+3 to $6E. I'll have to hardware the overdrive swich to the O/D relay (keeping the pressure sensor in the loop), and probably accept that the [D] light will always be lit up on the dash. There's probably something else I've long forgotton as well.

I just threw ARAP on my Ostrich emulator (I may start with APYP since it's the stick version) and the car started/idled fine besides an overfueling issue (fuel smoke at idle) I already know I need to deal with which is what started this whole thing. I haven't tried taking it for a ride yet, have other things to get done around the house first today. Yay yardwork.

Thoughts?

tequilaboy

$6E includes highway mode fueling which gives you the option to run a leaner AFR target in cruise. That's about it for benefits over $32B.

You also lose the bpw table with $6E, so for some applications, this is more of a hinderance than a benefit.

JackDidley

Do you still have the cold start injector ? If so, make sure its not leaking causing the rich condition. You dont need it anyway now, with the 6E.
I'll be mowing tomorrow.

scorp508

I should have mentioned that in my original post. One of the other reasons for considering the move to 6E is for better cranking fueling. My cold start injector has been gone and blocked off for probably 7 years.

I need to pick up some new gear. My EASE Diagnostics requires a serial port and my Pocket Programmer 2 requires a Parallel port; neither of which my laptop have and the USB adapters seem to iffy. Thankfully the ostrich still works.

tequilaboy

$6E Crank fueling is easily duplicated in $32B. You just need to double the scalar and edit the crank fuel tables accordingly.

$32B:

LC372 FDB 6554 ; Scale Factor for Max Crank P.W.
;---------------------------------------------
; Crank Fuel vs Coolant Temp.
;
; Table = Msec * (65.536 * 256) / LC372
;---------------------------------------------

$6E:
;----------------------------------------------
; CRANK PW vs COOLANT TEMP
;
; TBL = (msec * 256)/(SCALAR)
;----------------------------------------------
LC371 FDB 13108 ; 200.01, SCALAR FOR MAX PW
; CAL = SCALAR * 65.536

scorp508

Ahh there she is, thanks for the copy/paste. I added LC732 to the XDF and it does show up as 6554.

The documented math in the HAC is different...

$32B / TBL = Msec * (65.536 * 256) / 13108
$6E / TBL = (Msec * 256)/(13108)

If I use 75 Msec, a 13108 scaler for each, and normal math order of operations I get...

$32B = 95.99
$6E = 1.46475

In $6E there's a comment line in the HAC just beneath that says.

; CAL = SCALAR * 65.536[/QUOTE]

If we multiply 1.46475 * 65.536 we get the same 95.99 as $32B. Would you agree it is just the HAC commenting that seems incorrect or am I just interpreting the HAC incorrectly?

My interpretetion of that comment line would be...

(75 * 256)/(13108 * 65.536) = 0.011175

scorp508

FWIW... two of the cranking fuel tables differ in some ways.

Crank Fuel Multiplier vs. Reference Pulses
$32B = 17 rows (Matches the HAC)
$6E = 24 rows (Only 16 shown in the HAC)

Values in Reference Pulse Row Column for each...
Crank Fuel Pulse Width vs. Coolant Temp
$32B = 14 rows, but see below...
$6E = 14 rows, but see below...

Values in Degress C column for each...

scorp508

I put the APYP and ABTB tables on top of each other and came out with this for ABTB.

tequilaboy

Just copy the values directly from APYP (assuming that the scalar and conversion in the xdf have been corrected for 200 ms range). What you have shown will likely flood during crank. Way too rich.

APYP example (Please forgive the reversed table orientation and unit differences in this example):

Crank Fuel PW vs. Coolant Temp

Deg F PW(msec)

241 7.81
219 7.81
198 7.81
176 7.81
154 7.81
133 7.81
111 7.81
90 11.72
68 15.63
46 25.00
25 35.16
3 75.00
-18 139.85
-40 160.17

JackDidley

Scorp, every number in the left collumn = the right collumn if converted F* to C*.

scorp508

Oh geez... <facepalm> Thank you.

JackDidley

scorp508

Just to confirm then in $32B...

• Increase Max Crank Pulsewidth Factor from from 6554 to 13108
• Modify the conversion in Crank Fuel PW vs. Coolant Temp from 0.39065*X to 0.781300*X to match APYP/ARAP
• Copy the ARAP/APYP Crank Fuel PW vs. Coolant Temp values to ABTB

tequilaboy

Looks good to me.

tequilaboy

$6E also makes more use of the MAT sensor than the older masks.

For example in closed loop, the MAT is substituted for the coolant temperature for use with both crank fuel and Accel Enrichment tables.

There is also a unique start-up enrichment offset vs MAT and a couple tables that can optionally use the MAT as an input in place of coolant temp based on the switch/flag setting. (same switch that is used to calculate pw or use table in the older masks).

I see no real advantage in doing so, but these features are at least unique to $6E.