For some time now, I've been wondering about my wb I got it sometime between 4 & 5 years ago so I was wondering about how it would compare with something one might be using today. Chad (zenboy99) was kind enough to send me a datalog sooooooooo I just fired up Log Analyst and did the ole comparo thing My motivation for this was to see if the newer wb's of today might display a bit more smoother results. My thinking was there might be more filtering on todays wb's The comparo is not exactly apples to apples as I had more data events. It goes without saying, fewer data events will yield smoother displays. My gut feeling here is Chad's displays a bit smoother however I thought the difference would be greater I thought you guys might like to see what turned up Chad db file PLX-300 wb wot 2nd 2800 to 6200 Grady dbf file FJO wb wot 3rd 2800 to 6200 Grady
Interesting. One thing I forgot to mention is that I never added the noise filter that was included with the wideband. Its suppose to go to the input wire (EGR wire) for datalogging. I never got a real answer from people on how much that would help. I've got 3 more WOT datalogs that I ran today if you're interested in those too.
We may have talked about this before, I don't remember. But was a 12.5:1 air:fuel ratio optimal for you?
Yes I made three baseline pulls with the sig combo. IIRC, the first one was about 13.5 to 13.75 or thereabouts. I then saw the maf was pegged but the dyno guy wanted to see if I could lower the ratio. I did nothing for the 2nd pull but knock it down to a tad over 13.0 For the last pull it was about 12.5 Each pull ... the power went up Grady
I remember reading/searching alot on the A/F subject as I was looking for a range of good starting points to try and aim for, N/A and on the 150-175 shot I will be running. From what I found most seem to get the most power N/A at @ 12.5-12.8, and most power adder peeps (10-12lbs of boost or up to around a 150 shot) seemed to see the best safest results at @ 11.5-11.8. On the choppy-ness of the a/f, what causes the spikes, and on the dyno graphs how/why do they get the smoother graph? Is it the way EFI works and how the dyno shops "clean" up the numbers? I would like to see how the innovate LM1 and LC1 would look in that comparo...talk about a good hands on in use comarison on the diff. types of W/B avail.
Greg I've not done any 2nd gear wot dlogs in a long time due to wheel spin issues and you just don't get as accurate results as you do in 3rd. I would say if I dug through some of my old logs and found some 2nd gear runs, you would not have seen quite as much difference between them. I do think Chad's wb would still show smoother results. Another thing I was thinking about after posting this Maybe Chad has a laptop that takes data from the Tweecer at a faster rate thus giving more data events per second than mine Any thoughts on that The dyno software has built in filtering I do know that for a fact. I once saw a Dyno Jet guy zoom in on the ratio after I questioned him about a pull and you could see some spikes but they were not all that great. As for the spikes in these logs, remember that you are working with an analog signal and the magnitude of the spikes are not all that great anyway. Since I've seen a different wb display result here .......... I think I'll just stick with my old dog ... spikes & all Its not too hard to see I had my fuel table set for 12.5 to 1 Grady
