Page 1 of 1


Unread postPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2018 10:19 pm
by dleach1407
I am building a 57 f100 and am dropping a 302w or 351w based engine into it with a 4r70w. Since I am assembling the engine and trans control system from scratch I am trying to decide which strategy would best suit my needs so I can decide on the ECU. I already have a QH and BE. My build will consist of the following:

302 or 351 (have a couple 302s laying around)
F cam
Remote TFI distributor
High Rise intake drilled for bosch style injectors
4 barrel throttle body (PWM IAC)
2600-2800 stall converter
4r70w from a 96 explorer
Aluminum heads around 190-205cc depending on block choice
ECU controlled electric fan preferred
Needs to support A/C (shouldnt be an issue)
Twin Turbos are the eventual goal though single turbo or blower could potentially happen

Ive read threads that the 4r70w can be controlled by the 94-95 mustang ecu with changes to the gear ratios and potentially other changes like pressure changes. I havent been able to find info on what those settings are and honestly I know nothing about automatics regarding tuning them. I just rebuilt the trans so I dont want to burn it up because I didnt tune it correct or have the proper settings in the ECU. Every mustang i have tuned and owned were all t5 cars. My mustang is a turbo 331 T5 combo. I read on the Moates site today that the 94-95 F150 came standard with the 4r70w and is supported by Moates as well. Can someone tell me the positives and negatives of each or if one would be a better choice for me? I know for sure one positive of the CBAZA is that there is the simplified base tune I am using in the mustang (T4M2), and datalogging appears to only be supported on the CBAZA. I dont think the same tune or logging exists for the CBAZ0


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2018 6:24 am
by decipha
yea sailorbob has both of those complete defs for BE

but regardless, for anyone doing a retro mod I highly recommend using a 2003/2004 luxury sedan ecu it is the most supported and the newest not only that its the most plentiful in the yards and cheapest.

Not to mention the obdii port makes life easier for reading codes and doing simple checks etc..

all u need is to toss on a 35 tooth reluctor on the crank along with a crank sensor and a cam sensor. If you get an explorer 5.0L engine then it will have all of it already.

U can snatch the ecu from the yard along with the engine harness and obdii port

go through the harness with the pinout guide on the homepage and simplify it down, get rid of anything your not using to clean it up. Not to mention any unused outputs can be reassigned to serve other functions if you become a premium member.

Make sure u snatch the ford coils from the yard u get the ecu and harness out of. Simply rip the covers off and u can toss an ls1 mini plug wire on there.

Presto! It is just that easy.



Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2018 11:25 am
by dleach1407
Forgive my ignorance. Does the luxury ecu have the j3 port? Also how much different is the tuning strategy from CBAZA? Im really familiar with the 87-95 mustang ECUs... Just wondering how much of a learning curve it will be. Ironically I have a complete 96 explorer engine and drivetrain accessories and all. I am pretty sure the ECU harness is there too. I was just trying to avoid those ugly giant ass coil packs and I already have a spare 95 distributor. I know it sounds stupid but the coilpack mounted on the engine looks horrible to me but it sounds like your recommending I use the coilpacks from the luxury car? I'm not really opposed to the idea and I do already have just about everything. Also when you say luxury car can you give me an example? Are you talking Crown Vics or more like Town cars? Is it possible to add a flex fuel sensor to the luxury ecu? I would love to be able to scale the tune based on ethanol content or when i switch from e85 to gas when i go on a road trip. Also what does one do to become a "Premium Member" I use this site all the time..


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2018 12:12 pm
by decipha
yes it has a j3

tuning all 1983-2018 fords is basically the same

not much learning curve

not coil packs, 8 individual coils near plugs with short ls1 plug wires ~6 inches in length

2003/2004 crown vic, town car, marauder, grand marquis, continental, etc... they all have the same ecu, 2004 preferred as its almost guaranteed to be the faster 27mhz processor, some of the 03s have the slower 24mhz but its all the same regardless but might as well get the best

they don't have support for flex fuel sensors from the factory but it could be coded in

premium member details


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2018 2:08 pm
by dleach1407
Thanks, I was planning on tuning the car myself. I am assuming the only way to add the flex fuel functionality is to pay for a remote tune? I was hoping to have the feature added and then dial it in myself but we can discuss that through PM if you would like. I will start looking for the ecu and wiring harness I need. Is there a list of ecu codes that I would look for? i tried checking the site and I didnt find anything. I also checked inventory at the local upullandpay yard and there is only 1 2003 crown vic so its going to take some time to source those parts. Im not expecting to have this thing running for a few months so I have some time.


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2018 7:12 pm
by decipha
cool i always recommend DIY tuning as it is most rewarding

yep that's the only way, I am working on but it will be a good while before I can get back to it. Your best bet would be to just wait til I finish it and release it free.

no need for a list of ecu codes just simply get an ecu out of any 2003/2004 luxury sedan they are all the same.

If you need to verify which ecu you have the eec-v master hardware list at the top of this section lists the hardware codes



Unread postPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 5:42 pm
by dleach1407
Thanks for the list.. With the UpNp yard sometimes the wrong parts are in cars so its best to verify before I pay and leave. I was reading through the supported options of the luxury car ecu and it says it supports MAP sensor. Is it possible to eliminate the maf and run speed density with this ECU? Im assuming no but i figured its worth asking...The reason I ask is because while it is N/A, I dont want to have to run a carb hat and maf.. I would much rather just run an air cleaner so it looks more "Vintage".. well, as vintage as it can with coil on plug, fuel rails and no distributor :-). Im running the short deka 80s to reduce the look of the fuel injection as much as possible.


Unread postPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 6:05 pm
by decipha
no its not that kind of map, it can be done but i wouldn't do it, not worth the time and effort to make it work as well

you can run it fine without a maf just force it in to maf failure state and dial in the failed maf, I've done it before no prob, RZASA would be the best candidate to do it the best

you'd have to live with slight fuel inconsistencies but the hegos will take care of closed loop fueling no prob


Unread postPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 6:47 pm
by dleach1407
Very interesting idea.. I think ill have to try and give it a shot. I figured the Map was most likely used for atmospheric pressure/baro readings for the ecu to make corrections. The junkyard got a couple 04s in this week so I am going to try and run down and get those parts this weekend. Ive been putting in a lot of time on the truck and things are coming along faster than I thought they would. Ill have the engine and trans mounted early next week so I can then start on getting things situated for the ecu and wiring. Oh yea.. one more question. Will I need to change the transmission sensor to the later version? I have the analog version and not the digital version. I really appreciate all of your help.


Unread postPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 6:52 pm
by decipha
yea swap to the newer digital mlps. All of the MLPSs are the same any 98+ should have a digital one you can swipe. Might as well snatch it from the vehicle you snatch the ecu out of.


Unread postPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 6:58 pm
by dleach1407
cool, ill get one while I am there.


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2018 12:50 pm
by dleach1407
I grabbed an ecu, engine harness and an MLPS today but I have a couple questions about the ecu portion of harness. I saw the engine harness connects to the body harness which has the ecu plug and what I am assuming is a relay box like the 94/95 mustangs. Do I need the whole body harness too? If not, do I just cut out the ecu plug after the body side of the harness basically keeping from the ecu to the engine harness plugs? I didnt grab coils.. They want 10$ a piece for them LOL... Brand new a whole set is 40$


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2018 4:02 pm
by decipha
where do u get a whole set for $40 new? Usually they are at least that for each one for knock offs.

Go through the harness and clean it up, the pin outs are listed on the homepage for RZASA, keep only those you need

I should have told you to snatch the obdii port from under the dash as well so you could wire that up too, no big deal


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2018 7:33 pm
by dleach1407
So then i need the ecu connector from the body harness? The coils I am looking at are not factor Motorcraft ones.. They are 3rd party.. I did a google search and came up with more hits than i can count.. Many are 40$ or less for a complete set. Is there a legend for the list of connections? I am able to figure out many of them but there are quite a few I do not understand the code for the connection. A few examples would be scp+, scp-, dtr2, dtr4, FPDM... There are quite a few of them I have never heard of..


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2018 7:52 pm
by dleach1407
The ones I am struggling with are listed below. I am sure there are others but these are the ones that stand out. I put stuff next to the ones I think I know.

13 DLC
15 SCP
16 SCP+
17 RX
18 TX
34 DTR TR1
37 TFT
49 DTR TR2
50 DTR TR4
54 TCC
55 KAP 12V+
84 OSS


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2018 8:02 pm
by decipha
iyes u need the harness, all u need is the ecu connector and the wiring going to the engine, everything else you can cut as your going to be cleaning it up anyway

the two scp wires go to the obdii port

dtr2 and dtr4 go to the mlps digital switches

fpdm is fuel pump diagnostic module which is for returnless that u wont be using

nope i never put a legend together never thought of it

check out the carb to efi swap write up i have the specifics in there

from your list

trans contril indicator lamp - dont need
dlc goes to pin 13 of the obdii port dont need
rx and tx is for pats e module dont need
cyl head temp overheat lamp u can wire up as a spare
trans control sw for shifter od on/off
dtr tr1 is mlps switch 1
trans fluid temp
fp relay goea to just that
fuel level dont need
dpfe is egr dont need
dtr2 and 4 mlps
torque converter clutch to trans
keep alive power 12+ battery fused
fuel tank pres dont need
fuel rail pressure sensor is a good one to hook up, will need a fuel rail pressure sensor from a ford and an adapter
dpfe is egr dont need
cyl head temp sensor dont need
fuel pump diag monitor dont need
oss is oss on trans
brake on off switch to unlock conv when u hit brake dont need


Unread postPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 12:24 am
by dleach1407
Thanks, I did grab the body wiring harness from the relay box to the square plug on the engine harness and Ive aleady removed all the sheathing and started depinning. The only thing I dont have is the OBD2 port which I will get the next time. Are the 3rd party coils junk?

I looked over the article you recommended but I have a couple more pins I am not sure on. I have identified about 95% of them, i just need verification on a couple and explanation on a couple others.

Pin7 Alternator. regulator pin 3?

Pin 41 Alternator Low Charge SW regulator pin 2?

Pin 8 FRT. meaning and use?

Pin 32 Power Steering pressure. Is there a benefit to this on a V8? I tend to set my idle pretty low and I am assuming this would help with bumping up the idle slightly when turning the steering wheel?

Pin 66 CHT/ECT. Is this the cyl head temp sensor? There is another ECT on pin 42 so I assume this is not needed

Do you know of anywhere I can source the ECU pins? There are going to be a few circuits I want to run without any interruptions. I plan on running shielded MAF wiring as an example and I would like to make one continuous run.


Unread postPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 4:55 am
by decipha
You cannot get any better than oem motorcraft ignition components. Everything else is junk. Just keep in mind that if a coil fails you can destroy the engine.

dont need any of the alternator pins

frt is fuel rail temp, dont need

psp dont need, yes it gives it a touch more air when the power steering is loaded, u can toss a power steering pressure switch on your ps line if u want but its not needed

cyl head temp isn't needed just ECT

you can source them from your harness, just re-use one you remove


Unread postPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:16 pm
by dleach1407
Do I need to user Tuner Pro to tune the RZASA strat? If not where can i download the RZASA strat for BE? I already own BE.. I dont want to learn how to use another piece of software. The files I am finding are all .xdf and .adx files.


Unread postPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:33 pm
by decipha
im pretty sure u can buy the rzasa strat for BE from popsracing but its not going to have anywhere near the support nor datalogging abilities that tunerpro offers

tunerpro is far easier than BE for a beginner


Unread postPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 1:58 am
by dleach1407
I really wish that was mentioned before i went and bought these parts....I also read the RZASA ecus dont have a fan output? Based on that, RZASA is not going to meet my needs so looks like im back to the original question then.. CBAZA or CBAZ0? I already have Binary Editor, and a QH. I want electric fan and to be able to control a 4r70w from a 96 explorer. Which would you recommend?


Unread postPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2018 8:09 am
by decipha
are you serious? your going to scrap the best ecu you can get and the mostly highly supported because you don't want to switch software?

tunerpro is free and is a significant upgrade over BE and has more support for the eec-v than any other software out there ...oh yea its FREE

rzasa is the most supported strategy and has far more support than cbaza or cbaz0

I have no idea what your talking about not supporting a fan. Did you think ford forgot to put fans on those vehicles? Rzasa natively supports a variable speed fan that came on the luxury sedans if u do not wish to use that then you can simply rewrite the pin output to control a regular fan relay.

As with any unused pin it can be rewritten to control other things.

cbaza or cbaz0 id choose cbaza just cuz its more plentiful, the ecus are the same


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2018 8:54 am
by dleach1407
Im only going by the documentation you posted above... It specifically says this with the 03/04 luxury ecu "note: although these ecus can run the FBxxx tunes, these ecus physically do not have fan outputs nor a starter interrupt output if not used factory equipped in the ecu". Am i not understanding the note correctly? I wont be running a variable speed fan. I understand I can have you recode pins but as I said before, im tuning it myself and not paying someone else to do it. So if that option is not something I can do without paying for a tune, its not an option for me. I asked earlier and you said recoding only comes with a tune. Am I misunderstanding? Maybe its an already available option in your tunes but I have not been able to find documentation that explains what options are stock, what options have been added, what is planned or what makes it the best. I keep seeing its the best and most supported but I need to know what that actually means. Im not going to update my truck tune every time an updated version comes out. I havent touched the tune in my mustang since I dyno tuned it. It will be the same with the truck so if an option becomes available after i do the final tune... it wont be added unless I make upgrades requiring a retune.

Regarding BE VS TunerPro... You say TunerPro its better than BE and there are others saying BE is better so I think its personal opinion. Ive read threads where users say TunerPro is a step backwards if you use BE so like I said.. I really dont want to learn an entirely different software just for the sake of running a newer ecu. If there is an advantage to using it, Ive read I can convert my .bin over so Im not saying I wont use it. If I find a reason to run the newer ECU then i guess I have no choice but at this point why would I run the new ecu? What options in the new ecu make it necessary for my application? What in your opinion makes TunerPro better? So far I am not seeing a good reason to change so what am i missing? I mean you do this professionally so obviously there is a reason.

I also want to say, I am not trying to be difficult, disrespectful or rude. I need to understand why you think this is the best option with specifics. Without the specifics I cant make an educated decision. Its just the way my brain works...


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2018 11:35 am
by decipha
the note is correct, the 03/04 luxury sedans use a variable speed fan controller so the fan is a "soft on" and doesn't put a hit on the electrical when it comes on. As that note says that applies to running an FBxxx tune on one as it will not actuate the fan pins natively as the fbxxx tune is set to.

With rzasa it all works as it should, u simply take the fan output pin and wire it up to a relay. Then have the fan come on and off at 100% duty cycle i.e. a value of 31

you can download the rzasa def and tunes off the homepage open it up and have a look around

its the best because it is the most supported has the most features and the fastest hardware. That means there is not only more parameters and options that exist but they are available in my def file for you to adjust. And the datalogging is by far the fastest and most in depth than any other software offers. Not to mention the histograms do all the tuning for you so u simply apply the corrections.

I have no idea what your talking about an updated version coming out needing to update anything?

Tunerpro is far superior in every aspect. There is not a single one thing that BE can do better than Tunerpro. If someone tells you different its just because they are ignorant and dont know any better. Next time someone tells u that ask them for details I would be interested in hearing it.

just off the top of my head, tunerpro has no dot net dependencies, doesnt break def files every update, calculates the correct checksum, has an actual binary editor in it, doesnt do that encrypted crap, datalogging is significantly faster, doesnt require any dashboard setup or payloads selected to datalog, has the option to start and stop logs whenever u want without stopping the polling, doesnt corrupt the qh memory at random times, doesnt drop out communications where u have to fight the tune selection to get it to work again.

I am what one would call a "power user". I cannot use BE cuz it does not give me access to do any development. I have to use Tunerpro because its much more powerful, not to mention free and I can do anything I want with it.

It should be pretty obvious comparing a 2004 ecu to a 1994 ecu, not only is the ecu faster better developed newer and less prone to failure. The ignition system is significantly better and the ecu is significantly better supported with far greater control and datalogging abilities. There is just no comparison.


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2018 3:14 pm
by dleach1407
I dont know man.. i have been looking at it for a while now and I cant even figure out where to set the commanded AFR with TunerPro. I looked at both CBAZA and RZASA cant find it.. Looked at t4m2 in BE and there they are. It took me all of 1 day to find all of the information about setting up TM42 in BE. I had the entire base tune set within a few hours of hitting this site when i tuned my car. Ive been all over this site and I cant find any documentation at all on RZASA. I looked and looked for a writeup on the minimum things required to change. I can find it for the FBXXX series, CBAXA, GFUB but not RZASA... Really frustrating

I cant find anything usefull for fuel in tunerpro. I cant find cranking pulse width, or any fuel tables to command fuel ratios. I havent looked at BE in a couple years now. I literally just loaded it, pulled up CBAZA, found the fuel tables in about 2 minutes. Ive been looking for over 3 hours now in TunerPro. I did find the maf transfer, found the injector settings.. cant find any tables for commanding fuel ratio, In fact I cant find anything AFR.. its all Lambda which is dont like but its probably easier for dialing in fuel after going back through the fuel write-up.

Edit: I kind of found the fuel tables in T4M2... So as far as I can tell in TunerPro the fuel tables are based on engine temp and load instead of RPM and load??? WTF? That makes no sense to me...


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2018 6:20 pm
by decipha
I never wrote a minimum changes wrote up for rzasa

however, everything in the fbfg2 write up applies

as with all my defs the majority of what you need is in the tuning menu, a pictorial is in the getting started write up

under tuning >> fuel
you'll see the maf transfer along with the startup table and primary base ol fuel table

there is no cranking pw in rzasa, the ecu calculates the crank fuel required based on airmass and injector parameters

yes I have the fuel tables in lambda as they should be, AFR is too erroneous and confuses too many people. Lambda can never be wrong.

I dont know what rmp is?

fyi you can hold ctrl and press f to bring up the find box, simply type in what your looking for


Unread postPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2018 6:48 pm
by dleach1407
Sorry I meant RPM. It appears tunerpro uses Load and ECT for scale on the base fuel table. When I look at BE the fuel table is Load and RPM for the scale. Load and RPM makes sense to me, Load and ECT doesnt. It seems the way the 2 tuning softwares work are different and the tuning theory is different. Im primarily looking at T4M2 at the moment since I am familiar with it and trying to make comparisons in BE. The Tuning section in TunerPro is nice. I do like the way youre able to clump the important stuff together. If Im going to make the switch, Im going to fully switch and retune my mustang. Im finding things I like but it looks like Ill need to do some reading to understand better how to tune with TunerPro. The reason I dont like Lambda is because I dont know off the top of my head how safe .8 lambda is at say 10# of boost... but I know 11.5:1 is. About the only thing I can remember in Lambda is 1 = Stoich. Ill just use a converter until I make the association.


Unread postPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2018 1:28 am
by sailorbob
decipha wrote:There is not a single one thing that BE can do better than Tunerpro. If someone tells you different its just because they are ignorant and dont know any better. Next time someone tells u that ask them for details I would be interested in hearing it.
Without having to think to hard about it, how about being able to see multiple scalar values without opening multiple windows? Or being able to have parameters displayed or hidden according to the setting of a switch. IMHO both tuning packages have advantages and disadvantages and if you prefer one over the other that is fair enough and, as the saying goes, each to their own.
decipha wrote: AFR is too erroneous and confuses too many people. Lambda can never be wrong.
A/F ratio can never be wrong either and lambda confuses some people. IMHO letting people use which ever they feel most comfortable with is best.


Unread postPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2018 5:15 am
by decipha
simply press f7 or click on view >> parameter summary list, shows all scalars at once their location hex value and calculated value along with an adjustment slide

as far as hiding parameters you can define the level in the scalar to being always visible or level 1 through 10 to hide levels if you wish

as far as hiding parameters based on another parameter unlike binary editor tunerpro allows binary arithmetic. No need in making 3 sarchg scalars for a 4cyl 6cyl or 8cyl simply multiply sarchg by numcyl and its always correct only need 1 sarchg scalar

as for hiding a table thats not used, i personally much prefer to leave the table visible but mask its values to all 0s using the switch scalar that enables/disabled it so you can easily tell if a table isn't used by not having any values in it. Thats another problem BE has if a table has different values than a comparison table while comparing two tunes you have to re-enable the table change its values then disable it again. Yet another reason why tunerpro is better.

You are correct some people prefer binary editor thats their choice. But until someone tells me one single thing binary editor can do better than tunerpro I will continue to assume and say tunerpro is better. Having used both extensively I find tunerpro significantly easier with FAR LESS user setup required by a long shot. Just yesterday my tuning laptop died in the middle of tuning an 03/04 cobra while on the dyno. I grabbed one of our shop guys personal laptop and in less than 120 seconds I had tunerpro installed, read the tune off the qh and resumed datalogging and tuning exactly where i left off without ever shutting the car off. To do the same with BE would have taken long enough that I would have had to at least stop the dyno and shut the car off. In any case, I have yet to ever here of a single thing that BE can do better. I'll admit I haven't been able to use it in quite some time so I do not know if they have improved on it. I remember when i switched from BE to TunerPro I was reluctant to learn new software as well; perhaps I would still use binary editor too if clint didn't remotely disable my dongle over the internet one day. Again something else very note worthy you don't have to worry about with tunerpro. Since its free and u don't have to license it you also don't have to worry about it not working one day because some one else pushed a button somewhere. I really should thank him though as TunerPro is much more powerful and much better designed for the developer or for those that do more in depth tuning.

I say AFR is wrong simply because here in the U.S. fuel blends vary station to station. Just here locally our e85 varies from 69% to 92% ethanol depending on when you get it. Our e10 pump gas ranges from 6.5% to as high as 13%. If you don't use lambda your AFR is always wrong unless you want to keep changing your wideband output every fill up to report the correct AFR.

dl... tunerpro and BE are just viewing software they are only showing you whats in the bin (tune). If you have the same tune open then you will see the same values if you do not then your not looking at the same table. The only exception is with tunerpro I have patches that will allow you to change the axis scaling input on some tables. Another significant advantage that tunerpro has over BE.

theres no reason to retune your mustang if its running fine. You can simply open up your existing tune in tunerpro and continue tuning it if you make changes to it one day.

The sooner you get accustomed to lambda the more efficient of a tuner you'll be. Lambda is percentage. So if your commanding a lambda of 1 and you are getting a lambda of 0.8 you simply multiply your airflow at that maf count by 0.8 and you'll be dead nuts every time. Assuming of course your injector data is correct and your dialing in the maf.


Unread postPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2018 6:16 am
by dleach1407
I see what I was doing wrong now. I just started putting a 331 in it with a different cam so it will need a retune. There are a few other things I am changing up as well. Im not positive but I started thinking about it and its a good possibility I lost the tune on the QH. The car has been sitting now for a little over a year and the battery in the QH is 3 or 4 years old so it might be dead. I am not sure if the tune I have backed up is the right tune and truthfully I am not sure how right it is.. Im pretty sure my maf and injector scaling is wrong. Since I am running E85 from day 1 I started with scaled injectors to compensate for E. I still havent found a straight answer as to how far I should scale the injectors. Ive read anywhere from 20 to 30%. I think i did 25% and then the maf curve was way off even though I used the HPX calculator for the inner diamater of my maf. I think i should have scaled my injectors more one way or the other before making the maf curve changes. I had to scale the shit out of the maf curve to get it close. Since I am going to try and use TunerPro its a good way to see if I can use it before committing on the truck. My AFRs were really steady and really close to what I was commanding and timing was dialed in. I just never made it to the last step. I never ran closed loop in the car because i never figured out a bucking issue it had at cruise. I drive it so little it wasnt a concern to me. I should have the mustang together in the next month or so. I hear you on the e85. I only get it at 1 place. They always use summer blend (even in the winter) and I have an e85 meter in my car so I can verify the content each fill up. I learned my lesson filling up at a different station once. I ended up getting e70 and I had to keep it out of boost and low load until I burned the fuel out of it.


Unread postPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2018 8:14 am
by sailorbob
decipha wrote:I say AFR is wrong simply because here in the U.S. fuel blends vary station to station. Just here locally our e85 varies from 69% to 92% ethanol depending on when you get it. Our e10 pump gas ranges from 6.5% to as high as 13%.
This, to me, is an example of why using lambda or A/F ratio makes no difference to tuning.

For example, if you are using E85 your stoichiometric A/F ratio is 9.77:1 at 85% ethanol but with E10 your stoichiometric A/F ratio is 14.1:1 at 10% ethanol so regardless of whether you tune using those A/F ratios or a lambda value of 1.00 when you switch fuels your desired A/F ratio will be incorrect unless you change the nominal AFR parameter in the calibration (which may not be available depending on the strategy and assuming it was correct for the fuel being used in the first case). Changing the nominal AFR parameter seems like it's the easy fix option but as the maximum power A/F ratio is different for the fuels you will still need to adjust the desired A/F ratio when changing the fuel. For tuning normally aspirated cars you would typically start off aiming for an A/F ratio of 7.0:1 for E85 (a lambda of 0.72) and for an A/F ratio of 12.0:1 for E10 (a lambda of 0.85). As can be seen, simply changing the nominal AFR parameter doesn't allow for these differing requirements except at the stoichiometric A/F ratio.


Unread postPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2018 12:22 pm
by decipha
By using lambda your wideband cannot be wrong. Regardless of the fuel your using stoich is always 1. The wideband requires no adjustment going from e5 to e15 to even e85. The wideband will be correct no matter what.

If you use AFR the only way to know the actual AFR is to determine the stoich AFR value of the fuel. Then you must update your wideband to report that AFR value for a lambda of 1 (since wideband's work in lambda). Not only do you have to update the wideband transfer you have to update the softwares transfer too in order to reflect that new value. This is subject to change slightly tank per tank depending on that stations ethanol percentage.

So for example if your actual stoich of the fuel your running is 14.06 and you have stoich set at 14.1 your wideband is wrong albeit not much but still wrong. Using lambda its 1 at stoich which can never be wrong.

Lambda is far less error prone and does not require reconfiguring of the wideband for fuel changes making it easier.

Commanded fuel is part of tuning I don't see how that ties in with datalogging. If your changing the stoich AFR value appreciably then you should be changing the commanded enrichment as well.


Unread postPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2018 2:13 pm
by sailorbob
So, in a nutshell, the only advantage to using lambda over A/F ratio is that you don't need to change a wideband O2 sensor's transfer function when swapping between fuels :D That is fair enough but it in no way means that tuning in A/F ratio is any less accurate than tuning in lambda.

TBH, changing the wideband's transfer function isn't hard and is less work than having to change the various parameters affected by a fuel change (which you have to do anyway).

Apologies to the original poster for the deviation from his subject.


Unread postPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2018 3:35 pm
by dleach1407
Assuming I am understanding this correctly, the advantage I see with Lambda is that once I have my e85 and 91 tunes dialed in I will be able to switch between the 2 without having to go into my wideband and change the fuel setting. That makes it a lot easier for someone like me who needs the ability to switch between fuel types.


Unread postPosted: Sun Sep 23, 2018 3:42 pm
by decipha

no its not any less accurate tuning in AFR but it is less correct.


Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 7:00 pm
by Frank Derouke
decipha wrote:im pretty sure u can buy the rzasa strat for BE from popsracing but its not going to have anywhere near the support nor datalogging abilities that tunerpro offers

tunerpro is far easier than BE for a beginner

I dont agree here. If you do your research, and reach out to the right people, you will find out how truly awesome BE is. As far as stock ecm goes, its the only one I have used (SCT, HPT, Cal edit, and Epec ) that has all of the tune and dl features in one window, plus some kickass features like MAFerror (makes dialing a curve super quick !! ) in the Dl. BE has the ability that other software does as well, ut is super intuitive and has one feature that NO other tuning software does : Customer support . You can actually speak to the people who have written the strategies, and wrote the software for BE, and they are very friendly and super quick to respond.
Don Lasota himeslf reccomeded it in his book, so I went that route and never went back. I have tuned with BE : 1990 Vortech blown mustang GT 490 H.p ., 1999 Blown cobra that has a stock engine and gets 123 miles a day put on it, a 2014 mustang GT 5.0, and a big whipple 003 cobra .

Imho, BE has more intuitive features, and WAYYY better customer support than ANY software on the market. Stay with BE Dude


Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:50 pm
by decipha
You sounded just like me when I was naive and didn't know any better. I too used to drank the BE kool-aid until one day Clint remotely disabled my dongle. It forced me to use TunerPro exclusively and if I could do it over again my biggest regret was not using TunerPro exclusively much sooner. Everyone should probably thank Clint for disabling my dongle as it caused one of the biggest advancements in the open source DIY ford tuning community. I was reluctant to use TunerPro as well since at that time it had no real in depth support. But since I had no choice but to use it, I created support for every vehicle I've ever had to tune since then and since I'm such a nice guy I share it for FREE and ask nothing in return. Lets see BE compete with that for customer service?

Its obvious by what you posted you haven't used TunerPro in quite a while. TunerPro has come a far far far far ways in the past few years. TunerPro has a maf error histogram thats more comprehensive than BE's autotune. Not to mention I have a histogram to dial in inferred load. I have a histogram to dial in the fuel pump voltage table. I have a histogram to dial in peak load. I have a histogram to dial in the injectors. I have a histogram to dial in the knock sensor. I have a histogram to dial in idle air. I have a histogram that creates the actual spark table. I know cuz I wrote all of this and share it FREE with the world. I guess this forum isn't technically considered customer support since I don't charge anything and since tunerpro is FREE and all of the support here is FREE. Being that I am the person that continues to write the strategies and support for TunerPro I guess I don't count? Don Lasota's book is pretty outdated as compared to today's offerings. That's a nice little mix up of vehicles you've done with BE but I have to admit I've tuned significantly more than that with TunerPro not to mention all of the non ford vehicles I've tuned with TunerPro as well.

But hey if BE suits your needs and your happy with it thats all that matters.

And btw, you made a major mistake specifically quoting my response about RZASA with TunerPro. FYI rzasa is the most highly developed USA eec-v strategy and also the most supported tunerpro definition ever made. If anyone ever swapped from BE or any other tuning software to TunerPro when tuning an RZASA ecu they will never want to use any other tuning platform ever again. Yea its THAT good. And whats the best part? Its free.


Unread postPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 10:42 am
by dleach1407
For my Mustang I am using BE. I personally prefer BE. Maybe when I start tuning RZASA ill change my mind.. We will see