eec analyzer and caledit...v1.30

[cbarr300]

alright,

Whenever I use EA to calculate my maf and import it into caledit it gives me all kinds of funky number.....ones that aren't even CLOSE to what eec gave me......sometimes 200 points off. It completely changes voltage numbers and flow numbers. I know that the numbers change slightly but I'm pretty sure they aren't supposed to change this much.

Also, I noticed the EA gives a 27 point maf curve while cal edit uses a 30 point. Could this be why its messing up or do I have something set up wrong?

Thanks for the time

 

[final5-0]

I really don't know much about CE V1.30

but

Here is a kind of unwritten rule about working with the maf curve

It has always been a thing since the Tweecer's inception ......
no matter which version of CE has been currnet at the time

Hand Load ALL maf cell values
Refresh
Check ALL of them again
Save the file
Check All of them again to see if all is well for a final time

DO NOT in/ex port the values

Take your findings from EA, eec_editor, or whatever program you are using to build the curve and manually load em in your new file.

Yes, the values can and sometimes will change a little
but
usually not more than 1/4 to 1/2 of 1 percent of the desired value

Grady

 

[cbarr300]

hmm.....didn't know that one

thanks grady, I'll do that...

one more question, however. EA uses 27 points from what I counted...and caledit uses 30 points. Do I just use 0 volts and 0 kg/hr for my first 3 data points?

Thanks

 

[WhiteDevil]

hmm.....didn't know that one

thanks grady, I'll do that...

one more question, however. EA uses 27 points from what I counted...and caledit uses 30 points. Do I just use 0 volts and 0 kg/hr for my first 3 data points?

Thanks

YOu just have to write in the correct voltage curve into EA. I thought that too but count all the cells and you will see there are 30. I just used it a few months ago to create my new 30pt 30# injector curve and it worked great. Like grady said i tried to import export once and it gave me jacked up numbers. I have always put them in by hand for that past two years and had no problems.

 

[final5-0]

Well I can say you want your 30th point kg value to match your 29th point kg value.

The 29th point voltage is gonna be 5.0 volts where as the 30th point is gonna be 16.0 volts.

That might give you one more point or a total of 28

I have my lowest or 1st maf point kg and volt value at 0.0 so that could give you one more point for a total of 29

Seems like I remember ................
some of the oem curves have the first couple of maf points at the zero value

That could give you 30 points.

Don't be afraid to kill one of those points for better definition at a part of the curve if you need it btw
You know what I mean Vern

Please understand, I am just thinking out loud here so check to see if I am way out in left field here

Grady

 

[cbarr300]

hmm, I see what ur saying grady and whitedevil. Makes perfect sense now. oh yeah...When I was in the maf fitting section of ea it only showed 27....guess I didn't notice I should be able to scroll down.

There are 30 points in both, everythings good..

Thanks for the patience
Clay

 

[final5-0]

hmm, I see what ur saying grady and whitedevil. Makes perfect sense now. oh yeah...When I was in the maf fitting section of ea it only showed 27....guess I didn't notice I should be able to scroll down.

There are 30 points in both, everythings good..

Thanks for the patience
Clay

No prob Mr. Clay

I can't imagine any self tuner doing the thing

I know it has never happened to me

Many times I've said to myself

I see the prob now

Grady

 

[cbarr300]

lol, many a time while trying to learn this whole tweecer thing I've said, ".....Oh" shortly followed by a "d'oh"

I must say though, over the last month or so I've learned a lot about that little silver box. It's actually rather fun figuring that thing out

 

[cbarr300]

dp

 

[blksn955.o]

After playing with the 98 maf alittle I dont think its all that "must do" that the last point (30) match the second to last point (29). The 98 mustang gt maf I am useing has a diff. end setup than the stock 94-95 meter.

the last 3 points are

4.7019--5.0000--5.0048
988.94--1201.7--1201.7

Now the flow number does match so maybe that is the biggie but I think Ford came to the conclusion that as long as it was outside the absolute 5v max things were good. After all at points above 4.7-4.8 you need a bigger maf anyway.

 

[final5-0]

After playing with the 98 maf alittle I dont think its all that "must do" that the last point (30) match the second to last point (29). The 98 mustang gt maf I am useing has a diff. end setup than the stock 94-95 meter.

the last 3 points are

4.7019--5.0000--5.0048
988.94--1201.7--1201.7

Now the flow number does match so maybe that is the biggie but I think Ford came to the conclusion that as long as it was outside the absolute 5v max things were good. After all at points above 4.7-4.8 you need a bigger maf anyway.

I could or would not say this info is incorrect

I mainly base my above post on the days before the Tweecer was even around and we all were working with the EEC Tuner. Everybody was just trying to figure out ... something ... anything ... about how the pcm worked.

There were a handful of peeps back then that were smart .........
VERY SMART

There were also a few peeps who had access to proprietary info from Ford.

It is important to remember back then, not a lot was known about how the pcm did its thing.

I picked up on the stuff those kinds of guys discussed the best I could and I do remember one thing for sure.

They stressed over and over with functions such as the maf curve and similar other functions ...................

You wanted to keep the same original first values and the same last values. You made your changes between those first and last points. It had something to do with how the pcm determined what to do if things got really far out of hand.

Now ... Having said that

I've already told ya'll more than I know about that
but
I've always followed those smart peeps advice
and
It has served me pretty well up to this point in time

Grady

 

[Methodical]

I would say that you should match your MAF curve voltage with what you have the MAF voltage set in Caledit. In other words if you have it set in Caledit as 0-4.9v then you should have the 0 on your MAF curve. I say this because I discovered, when I first began tuning, that they were different and seemed that may car was like falling off a cliff when it idled down low. So I set it to 0 and actually use the stock flow numbers for the first 2 positions. It worked for me. Again, I think your MAF curve voltage figures should match that in Caledit.

 

[blksn955.o]

My scaler for the min maf voltage would not take 0 it reverted it to .03 or something. Preaty common for that also.

I would agree with the first 2 or so points in the transfer seem to be as close to 0 as possible for the mafs I have seen transfers of. IIRC the 98 mustang gt maf has like the first 4 points at the basicly 0 figure, and the stock 94-95 mafs (both gt and cobra) have a few of the first points at the "as close to 0" figure. It does seem that for some reason on the 4.6 mafs they dont have the table top flatline from 5v to 16v I think ford found it not needed and they could just get the flow numbers to match the 5.0 to make it less table top-ish.

With as many of the points down low were they are needed most..since the non-wot eec controled (moreso than at WOT) part of the maf is VERY important and you would want as much detailed info or points in those areas. Yet another reason to match the meter to the combo to get the most out of those 30pts.

 

[final5-0]

All this talk about the maf curve ................

I just remembered something that happened a couple years ago.

I was working on the upper part of the curve on my final af ratio.

I had a point in the curve where almost always ...........
it dipped a bit more than I wanted

If you did the average thing, it really was not all that bad
however
Some Tweecer peeps tend to be a bit perfectionistic

I confess Guilty as Charged

anyway .............

I had several points of the curve below my idle point.

I took one of them away and used it to split the diff at the problem wot dip point of the curve

I then had an additional point to play with ... to kill the dip

Worked ............. Perfectly

Grady

 

[blksn955.o]

damn good point and thing to bring up grady...as always .

I have thought about this but never tried or have needed too...always wanderd if you could "use" a point and move it around "sorta" elsewere.

I guess the low and high end of the transfer is more or less setting the absolutes of the curve how you choose to get it from point A to B is up to us self tuners .

 

[final5-0]

You kinda lost me on the absolute thing on the low & high end of the maf curve.

All I know is how I do it

The lower end of the curve I guess is kind of out of my hands.

As we all know, it is all about CL and the adaptive system. I just try to help it be as efficient as possible which I believe most do as well.

The upper part of the curve is nothing more than tweecs to make the commanded values of the fuel table match the wb values

after I make sure ................

the pcm does not + or - fuel (enrichment function)
the high load fuel table row is consistant (default goes too fat)

Afterwards ..................

You just change the table to change the ratio

Grady