EFIDynoTuning Forum

Im wondering what should be the desired target value(s) for the MAF correction histogram? 0.98? 1.01? And/or when to consider it corrected?

Following up: After reading reports of others having similar concerns with the AEM failsafe gauge I confirmed that the correct WBo2 transfer function was present and updated the equation by a factor of X.XX as outlined in your write-up. Now the Dashboard reading compared to the gauge is on the money. Thank you for the assistance.

I’m currently working off of the TP_IMAF_AEM-FS histogram to dial the MAF transfer function in.

Just curious as to what the x axis column designations represent ( -1, 0, 1) , I’m guessing it is something like CT, PT and WOT?

I will take a look at that write-up in the link and see if I can validate that the WB transfer is correct. I noticed the 5% difference under acceleration conditions as well. Thanks

As far as the dialing in the MAF transfer function goes, which histogram should I be looking for? I'm guessing there is one that shows the 30 MAF points and and a correction factor at each? Admittedly, figuring out which tool in the tool box and how to use it seems to be most of my challenge.

Currently my car has an AEM failsafe wideband gauge/ sensor and the gauged output has been wired to the EGR input as to data-log the reading in the dashboard. I selected WBo2 AEM_FS on the dash board as it seems to most closely match the digital gauged readout. I noticed that the digital gauge reads approximately .99 - 1.0 Lambda while the dashboard PID reads approximately 1.03-1.04 Lambda or about a 5% difference. I'm concerned as I don't know which one to trust. The digital gauge readout seems to be representative of the Closed Loop "switching" around stoich... Is there a way to calibrate this PID so that the two match? I'm getting ready to start spending some seat time and work on getting my "tune" dialed in and I one of my goals was to calibrate the MAF transfer function by making "Open Loop" corrections. I'm concerned that fighting a WB PID with 5% difference from actual will negate efforts there. Also, Is there a histogram or way to graph MAF voltage and/or A/D counts during a forced "Open Loop" condition that is convenient for figuring fueling error at each MAF breakpoint? I'm just starting to learn and get more familiar with the TunerPro RT data logging tools. Any insight and feedback is greatly appreciated. Thanks

I’m also interested in being able to work with this strategy.

How is catalyst protection invoked? I noticed when I’m in boost at times the ECU/PCM was demanding .7 Lambse when logging data. This was odd considering my base fuel table (FN1362LX) does not contain a value of .7 Lambse. So I did a little digging and found the catalyst protection Lambse values in the tune and they are .7 Lambse. My wide band readings are very close to Lambse so I’m operating under the assumption that my fueling is appropriate. Is this a red flag? Perhaps the catalyst temperature calculation needs correction now that the car has a supercharger and making more power? Any insights and/or recommendations are appreciated. Thanks

I executed those 2 steps and things are now looking familiar again. Thank you much -

I downloaded the latest version of TPrt and found when I loaded any RZASA bin file I chose, the values shown for MAF air mass and Injector values were very different (higher) than what they show with an older version of TunerPro RT. Automatic scaling percentage was different too. Am I missing something here? I’m guessing I’m not the only one whose ran into this. Any support is appreciated and thank you.