[crystal_Imprezav]

Haha you can say that again. I am messing around with an FXT with a VF39, 04STi ecu, and WRB FMIC, and he is displaying the same thing. He has perrin 816cc injectors and is hitting a daggering 10.2:1 afr from 3000-3300rpms. Its not just us! And he also has -80% FIBTE so that def. does not just apply to our cars.

[WolfPlayer]

Originally Posted by crystal_Imprezav

Haha you can say that again. I am messing around with an FXT with a VF39, 04STi ecu, and WRB FMIC, and he is displaying the same thing. He has perrin 816cc injectors and is hitting a daggering 10.2:1 afr from 3000-3300rpms. Its not just us! And he also has -80% FIBTE so that def. does not just apply to our cars.

I hate to say this ... but sweeeet. I like seeing more and more people with this issue because that populates a user-base that illustrates this issue.

I hit 9.8:1 on spoolup most of the time. Yes, it suxorz. Yes, I have lost torque on spoolup. Yes, I don't like this. .... ... .. . Yes, I am a glutton for punishment and am keeping my FMIC.

I want Speed Density. Screw the MAF in setups like this.

t

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by WolfPlayer

I want Speed Density. Screw the MAF in setups like this.

t

Dont go weak on us!

Then again, I was yelling and making noise form the rooftops about tip-in inconsistencies with a Front mount or a blow-through for a long time and I got alot of brush-offs from the tuning pros and their software designers.

The TMIC was in some ways a great excuse to go back to a nice smooth throttle response.

[WolfPlayer]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Dont go weak on us!

Weak? lol. I just want some spoolup torque back Somebody needs to uncover some more tables or else there really isn't a choice. I'm willing to experiment and change stuff. But, I have changed everything possible (I think) at this point. So, there is nothing left for me to try - except to convert to blow-through ... and, honestly, after seeing your issues with blow-through and hearing about how a lot of tuners are now shying AWAY from blow-through and converting back to pull-through, I am really hesitant about moving in that direction until more tables are opened up.

t

[sirwilliam]

Originally Posted by crystal_Imprezav

Haha you can say that again. I am messing around with an FXT with a VF39, 04STi ecu, and WRB FMIC, and he is displaying the same thing. He has perrin 816cc injectors and is hitting a daggering 10.2:1 afr from 3000-3300rpms. Its not just us! And he also has -80% FIBTE so that def. does not just apply to our cars.

Man, that sounds like a sweet setup on an FXT!

[crystal_Imprezav]

Originally Posted by WolfPlayer

I want Speed Density. Screw the MAF in setups like this.

t

We have similar minds, I was just thinking the same thing. Come on Cobb SD can not come soon enough! I was even looking into a semi-stand alone fuel management to have complete control over my fueling but thats some more serious $$$. Ive been now pushing 24psi and 22* of advance at 3000rpms and still bite the 10.2:1 afr!

[sirwilliam]

Originally Posted by crystal_Imprezav

We have similar minds, I was just thinking the same thing. Come on Cobb SD can not come soon enough! I was even looking into a semi-stand alone fuel management to have complete control over my fueling but thats some more serious $$$. Ive been now pushing 24psi and 22* of advance at 3000rpms and still bite the 10.2:1 afr!

Will the v.1 APs be able to utilize SD or am I going to have to go to the v.2?

[WolfPlayer]

I think everyone will be really surprised how well SD works in situations like this. I've tuned SD setups for a long time. I actually really like them (once tuned). IMHO, SD setups are more for tuners who like futzing with stuff and MAF setups are more for people who like the ECU to have more control.

t

[WolfPlayer]

Originally Posted by sirwilliam

Will the v.1 APs be able to utilize SD or am I going to have to go to the v.2?

No way will v.1 do it. V.2 will be necessary.

t

[TheLimitedProject]

I just can't see myself installing my FMIC now.
1) Lack of throttle response;
2) Lost low end torque and;
3) Rich spikes between shifts.

Nice.

WP, if you had all this experience with tuning your FMIC before installing it, would you still have put it on? Do the benefits of the FMIC (after getting going) outweigh the negatives?

[WolfPlayer]

Originally Posted by WhyteSTI

WP, if you had all this experience with tuning your FMIC before installing it, would you still have put it on? Do the benefits of the FMIC (after getting going) outweigh the negatives?

This is probably the best question I have been asked to date. It gets to the heart of the matter.

With the pump gas VF39, I would not install a FMIC again. I would install a larger TMIC. With a big turbo, I would keep this FMIC because the safety benefit outweighs the negative things previously mentioned. At this moment, the negative aspects outweigh the gain in safety with this little VF39.

The nice thing about the VF39 is the torque onset. It hits nice and good at a low rpm when tuned that way. When adding a FMIC, the rich spike gets rid of some of this. The gain in the topend doesn't make up for this (IMHO). Now, with a bigger turbo, all of that goes out the window. The gains and safety will outweigh the slight loss in torque due to rich spiking and mid-rpm lag.

t

[lackskill]

Originally Posted by WolfPlayer

This is probably the best question I have been asked to date. It gets to the heart of the matter.

With the pump gas VF39, I would not install a FMIC again. I would install a larger TMIC. With a big turbo, I would keep this FMIC because the safety benefit outweighs the negative things previously mentioned. At this moment, the negative aspects outweigh the gain in safety with this little VF39.

The nice thing about the VF39 is the torque onset. It hits nice and good at a low rpm when tuned that way. When adding a FMIC, the rich spike gets rid of some of this. The gain in the topend doesn't make up for this (IMHO). Now, with a bigger turbo, all of that goes out the window. The gains and safety will outweigh the slight loss in torque due to rich spiking and mid-rpm lag.

t

VMIC ftw!

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by lackskill

VMIC ftw!

Being rich enough for a VMIC and still owning a Subaru FTW!

Being willing to try something not many others have... FTW!

[crystal_Imprezav]

Originally Posted by WolfPlayer

The gain in the topend doesn't make up for this (IMHO). Now, with a bigger turbo, all of that goes out the window. The gains and safety will outweigh the slight loss in torque due to rich spiking and mid-rpm lag.

t

I will have to agree to disagree with you on this one. On pump I say semi-yes because the spike really does suck the big one but being able to add that extra timing and pull a tiny bit of fuel and still have manageable EGT is a very good thing. However I must 100% yes to the top end on my meth setup now since I was able to add about 4* more timing up top and run close to a 12:1 afr and am tuning my car like it is on c16 now!?! Once I somehow figure out (ha possibly never w/o converting to SD or another EM) how to create a delay the benefits will be awesome. I would expect to pick up at least 10ft/lbs. of torque there lost to that extra burst of fuel. Those hot summers will also def. put the IC to the test. Anyone ever thing about adding a resistor or something to the MAF (I am not an electrical engineer to no flaming, lol) to create a delay in the MAF to equalize the differences?

[daemon]

Originally Posted by crystal_Imprezav

Anyone ever thing about adding a resistor or something to the MAF (I am not an electrical engineer to no flaming, lol) to create a delay in the MAF to equalize the differences?

I've thought about it. In the absolute simplest form, a resistor and a capacitor could be used to "smooth" out voltage transitions. However, I believe you'd actually only want to smooth out an increase in voltage and not a decrease (since when the throttle slams shut, it slams shut). For that, possibly add a diode to allow the voltage to bypass the resistor when discharging.

However, I'm not an electrical engineer either and there are a decent number of unknowns for me. I tried running a few numbers to see just how big a resistor and capacitor would need to be to get a ~100ms delay (a basic starting point), and the values seemed a bit higher than I would like. To use a small resistor so as to not effect the amount of current in the circuit would force us to use a pretty darn big capacitor. To get the capacitor to a reasonable size would require a large resistor (not physically large, but large enough in value to possibly hose the current levels). Of course, I could have gotten the numbers all wrong.

Either way, the circuit is a simple one, so it might be "fun" to just throw on some components and hope I don't fry anything important. Actually, frying wouldn't be likely IMHO, for whatever that is worth.

And, fwiw, a capacitor's charge time is not a linear slope. The proper solution might be a microcontroller with an onboard ADC/DAC and then just write a mini-program to translate and delay as needed.