View Single Post
Old 09-20-2012, 10:32 AM   #13
Joesixpack
 
Joesixpack's Avatar

Name: Joesixpack
Title: Pull'n it.
Status: Not Here
Join Date: Apr 2008
Member`s Gallery
Posts: 4,118
"For me using an ECU with a defined control structure is like sitting in prison looking at the walls of limitation so yes I’m spoiled."

So using a "boxed tuner" on a factory ecu would be equivalent to being strapped down in a straight jacket.....


I absolutely agree on the fuel control strategy, this "predictive map" was a heated topic in another post that I tried to get across to another tuner on this forum, in the end I think he was on the same page. I'm not going to link it as we both ended up acting like children!!!!

It would be impossible to control the fuel rate on only a PID in a very quick way and your right, the closer this predictive map is, the easier it is to achieve this very fast response.

Nira uses this strategy, as well as what I have seen with the Bosch ecu's and the map's of the factory Cummins ecm in our 5.9l application.


However I can see the difficulty in very quick response to a set governed RPM limitation at full load, not so much full load but very large changes in load.

Now watching your video's it makes more sense, what almost seems like a dead miss is pulling the fuel very quickly. We do not have an RPM limitation we only limit to what we feel our hard parts can handle but we want to clip very fast in case of a drive line failure. I see the advantage in staying as close to this governed speed as possible.

This pump at 250cc/second is a very good rate! With some quick math effectively moving close to both my pumps combined.
__________________
Basically stock if I would have built it at the factory.....

Last edited by Joesixpack; 09-20-2012 at 10:34 AM.
  Reply With Quote