xxx8indxxx
Full Member
Karma: +0/-0
 Offline
Posts: 115
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: April 17, 2012, 04:12:38 AM »
|
|
|
are you just deleting the dtc for this ? i am trying to do the same thing for my aeb m5.92 i believe the location for my lamda is somewhere in dhls does anyone have any information about where i could start on the m5.92 ecu?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
s5fourdoor
|
|
« Reply #16 on: April 17, 2012, 03:37:35 PM »
|
|
|
Sweet, thanks for the location/XDF info. I'll see if this reduces my gas stank.
omg this... did this work for you? i am changing this immediately upon returning home... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
berTTos
Full Member
Karma: +24/-0
Offline
Posts: 91
|
|
« Reply #17 on: April 17, 2012, 05:08:42 PM »
|
|
|
thx for sharing Snow Trooper!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
imolasb5
Jr. Member
Karma: +5/-1
Offline
Posts: 38
|
|
« Reply #18 on: April 17, 2012, 06:04:07 PM »
|
|
|
Such a small thing, but yet so epic at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
s5fourdoor
|
|
« Reply #19 on: April 18, 2012, 08:00:18 PM »
|
|
|
hey - I tried this out and its made my idle less stable especially while cold.
snowtrooper, what were the other things you suggested turning off for regular twin-turbo apb/bel engines in conjunction with this? obviously (or not?) we wouldn't turn off interchange diagnosis with this, or would we? please advise...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jibberjive
|
|
« Reply #20 on: April 18, 2012, 08:33:54 PM »
|
|
|
I did this a few weeks ago, and honestly I didn't notice any difference at the time. My file revisions since then rev to 2k RPM at cold startup, but I haven't had time yet to track down what changes might have caused that (not sure if it was this or not). Just thought I'd input.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
s5fourdoor
|
|
« Reply #21 on: April 18, 2012, 09:09:41 PM »
|
|
|
I did this a few weeks ago, and honestly I didn't notice any difference at the time. My file revisions since then rev to 2k RPM at cold startup, but I haven't had time yet to track down what changes might have caused that (not sure if it was this or not). Just thought I'd input.
This is likely your changes in KFMIRL/KFMIOP... at least that's what I took from a recent thread on here about torque. Something about changing timing tables when altering KFMIRL. I didn't have any idle issues before changing my KFMIRL from stock to berttos's table. It became worse with cat heating turned off. However I think its optimal to have it off, so I need to figure out where the causal tuning issue is located... <unknown> |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jibberjive
|
|
« Reply #22 on: April 18, 2012, 10:10:58 PM »
|
|
|
Any link to that discussion? I bet that is it (as I first noticed it after I made the major KFMIRL/IOP changes), and I have my plan of how I'm going to track it down, I just haven't had time yet. I'm likely to start doing a lot more refining over the next few weeks though. What I found interesting though, is that it's just the cold startup sequence that was affected (Revs to 2k for x-secoonds, then down to like 1200 or something for a few more seconds, then down to normal), and the rest of my idle is as rock solid as it ever was. I don't think it's going to be too hard to figure out what to tweak when I have a minute to put in some work.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
NOTORIOUS VR
Administrator
Hero Member
Karma: +58/-7
Offline
Posts: 1056
|
|
« Reply #23 on: April 19, 2012, 07:05:23 AM »
|
|
|
I did this and it didn't seem to change anything.. I still get O2 oscillation @ idle as if it is active.
I don't get it, this is the 2nd thing I've tried on my ECU that doesn't work (the first thing being the KVB calculation factor)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Snow Trooper
|
|
« Reply #24 on: April 19, 2012, 11:27:05 AM »
|
|
|
No idea, my idle afr and even then as a result my idle speed use to swing around, now they don't.
I never ran it with the original idea of editing the actual Target values for the heating cycles.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
cartoons?
6A 61 72 65 64 40 76 6C 6D 73 70 65 63
|
|
|
|
s5fourdoor
|
|
« Reply #25 on: April 19, 2012, 04:48:00 PM »
|
|
|
Just a heads up. I originally did this as described above, in conjunction with a change of KFMIRL/KFMIOP/KFZWOP/KFZWOP2 + misc. axis values relating to torque tables. I experienced a nasty idle. I then switched back these other tables to stock M-box and still left cat heating off. This time, the desired result was achieved. The car no long reeks of gasoline and the idle seems perfectly fine. Definitely do this to anyone that hasn't where conditions apply to your particular setup...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Snow Trooper
|
|
« Reply #26 on: April 19, 2012, 07:04:54 PM »
|
|
|
All of my maps you describe are edited too, not with any calculators though. Those things don't work.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
cartoons?
6A 61 72 65 64 40 76 6C 6D 73 70 65 63
|
|
|
|
Snow Trooper
|
|
« Reply #27 on: April 19, 2012, 07:06:48 PM »
|
|
|
Actually I don't edit kfzwop/2 just the axis data.
I have been told not to edit those.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
cartoons?
6A 61 72 65 64 40 76 6C 6D 73 70 65 63
|
|
|
|
s5fourdoor
|
|
« Reply #28 on: April 19, 2012, 08:35:37 PM »
|
|
|
Actually I don't edit kfzwop/2 just the axis data.
I have been told not to edit those.
optimally these would be taylored to your turbo setup via a variable-efficiency simulation. it just depends on where MBT occurs - right? isn't this directly related to the "alpha" of your ignition curves? the interpolated changes from the s4 to rs4 are quite drastic; we are getting mildly OT, but yeah - i've definitely seen big-name tunes which have altered axis values, altered table values, and both in combination. the kfmirl/kfmiop mystery hasn't been solved on the other thread. rick apparently knows... |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 19, 2012, 08:39:15 PM by nehalem »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
dantt
Full Member
Karma: +0/-1
Offline
Posts: 148
|
|
« Reply #29 on: December 19, 2013, 01:53:16 AM »
|
|
|
hi
from wiki
Catalyst Heating
FKHABMN (0x1937D) - set to 0 if you do not have cats.
i need to change FKHABMN only if i have second lambda after cat?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
