What is it that TVUB does?

Answer that, and all of the rest of your questions should become easy to answer.

Consumption measured how? By what the ECU thinks the actual fuel volume is (likely wrong if both KRKTE and TVUB are wrong)? Over the course of an entire tank vs distance traveled?

Too many variables. Also, the more lambda control you see, the less likely the motor is always running at best fuel efficiency.

Stop worrying about fuel consumption. At this point it is quite literally the least useful metric there is.

Ignore consumption, get your lambda trims under control. If KRKTE and TVUB are wrong, te_w is wrong and indicated consumption is wrong.

You could also be running lean, which you don't want anyway. Unless you want to break things.

You will need to tune KFKHFM and/or KFFVS, preferably on a dyno at various load/rpm points.

You'll never have anything close to stock fuel consumption. If you are worried about fuel economy go back to stock.

Without a dyno and 3-4 months of calibration efforts you won't get there.

In any case, with trims at zero and lambda control at 1 at idle, you should not be seeing bad fuel consumption unless there is something wrong with your fueling and/or O2 setup.

Absolutely, there is no reason to use FKKVS if you can get the job done with KFKHFM.

Technically, FKKVS/KFLF is there to compensate for nonlinearity in fuel delivery, KFKHFM in MAF nonlinearity

Please, stop wondering about indicated fuel consumption. It's useless data *unless you are a OEM calibrator with access to a dyno*, because I have a hard time believing you'll get both fuel and MAF corrections perfect.

I don't even seem to be getting through here in conveying the relationship between calibrating all of FKKVS/KRKTE/TVUB/KFLF and KFKHFM at the same time and indicated fuel consumption. Can you see it?

So much fail...

Of course your INDICATED consumption is higher with lower TVUB and lower with higher TVUB.
TVUB is injector offset, it is not part of consumption calculation in the ECU.
The actual consumption is exactly the same.

The consumption in these ECU's is primitive. There is only a multiplication of opening time (te_w) via a constant. If you increase TVUB artificially so far that it does not represent the dead time when injector is not spraying, then of course the consumption figure is drastically lower, because the ECU sees a much lower te_w even if ti_w is exactly the same in both cases.

Looking at the consumption display on the cluster when tuning is the most idiotic thing you can do.
Tune your injectors correctly, after that measure consumption based on full tank to empty tank and miles/km driven method and correct the constant by the discrepancy. This is the LAST thing you do, after the car is fully tuned.

Really good to learn how an engine works before trying to tune it, so brainfarts like these are avoided!

TVUB is not something that should be tuned. You put the injectors on an injector bench, you increase the IPW until they start spraying liquid.
The last IPW where they don't spray liquid is the TVUB figure. You then change the voltage and repeat the measurement.
Because you are messing around randomly with something that should NEVER be messed around with, of course everything looks wrong.

If you are really so anal about seeing some small numbers on the display, just set the consumption constant to half of what it should be, and boom low consumption right?

PRJ, thanks to show me how must calculate the tvub. IPW is the puls in ms not pwm, right?
I don't see the low consumption only on my indicator but the consumption was bad, trust me at the highway between 100-150km/h speed after 520 km i had 13% consumption.....is not so good, and was made with full tank calculation and it was exactly what instrument cluster shows me!
vladvlad, i have the same issue with lambda control , i think in that area my boost and yours goes over 1554 and lambda control is under control. PRJ, NYET can tell me if i'm wrong?