Sal,

Not at all. Your posts are most informative and a benefit to the entire community. Please feel free to add content whenever appropriate.

Thx,

T...

PS: This goes for the entire P-car community.

Trog - I tried to use the timing method today to adjust the idle. It seemed to work real good until I did a long downhill no throttle with a stop at the end of it. For some reason the car just about died. I had to hold it at about 1500rpm just to keep it going. A couple of blocks later and it was back idling OK again. I finally wound up taking the idle adjustment back out of it. I may try again sometime but not when away from homebase as I was today. When it did work it was great. The timing adjust appeared to compensate for the wide band fluctuation and provided a rock solid idle. I am not sure what was going on with loss of idle after the long coast.
Also curious if you got a chance to look at the combination of startup and warmup and MAT enrichments.
I went with straight pipes today and regardless of the dyno results I think it runs better. Side benefit of no tail gaters

I don't have any problems with the start-up enrichments, however like you, the engine idles approx 200RPM below setpoint until warmed up.

It's much too cold up here these days to make any baseline adjustments. I'll have to wait until things warm up a bit before I can contribute any useful data.

Damn Global Cooling!

T...

The timing in the stock Motronic at idle (cold or warm) is set to 3 degrees ATDC (-3). In my setup I use 0 while cold and 5 BTDC +5 while warm. But playing with timing for idle control sounds interesting and should help some.

Sorry, I thought the car wouldn't stat running after first started without holding the throttle. If it runs just slow then you must be in pretty good shape. Will catch up with you in the spring.

Scarceller, I saw the factory timing in the workshop manual and you are right on. I have also read that if you don't have some positive timing at idle the fuel burns late and can really light up a set of headers. Some to the point of glowing. Appearantly the cure for that is to advance the idle timing.

Trog,
I have tried just about every combination of settings I can think of and still I am either richer than crap low and OK high or I am OK low and lean up high. I can radically modify the VE table but shouldn't need 50+% adjustment.
Next and only other thing I can think of is to hook up the vacuum to the fuel regulator. The vacuum should reduce fuel pressure at idle and increase it under load. This is exactly what I need to happen but I haven't tried it yet. Perhaps the injectors are a bit too big but I am going to be hitting 85% at peak so I don't think smaller would help. I will let you know what I find.

dfink,

The purpose of the vacuum line on the fuel regulator is often completely misunderstood. I'll try to explain:

The idea is to always have the same pressure difference between the fuel pressure (inlet/top of injector) and the Manifold pressure (injector nozzle) in the stock cars 3.0bar. Keep in mind that manifold pressure varies as engine speed and load changes. So if you did not regulate fuel pressure based on manifold pressure then at idle (hi-vacuum) the injector would over inject fuel because the hi-vacuum will in essence pull extra fuel from the nozzle. Then at high load/RPM MAP starts to approach normal air pressure and the injectors don't deliver as much fuel as under hi-vacuum.

In the end the vacuum line connected to the regulator is simply so fuel pressure is always maintained as related to MAP and not normal air. The injectors are not injecting into free air they are injecting into a vacuum chamber. The idea is to always achieve a pressure difference of 3.0bar as compared to MAP

Hope this makes sense.

I have my regulator vacuum line connected, however it's not really necessary as fuel can be compensated in the VE table.

I share the same observations as DFink. I remove approximately -20% fuel at idle, and add approx +18% at WOT to meet my AFR targets. Seems to be a consistent characteristic of our 3.2 pumps.

I was hopeing that the lowering of fuel pressure at idle would lean things out and I would not require as much adjustment to the VE table. If you already have your connected and are getting the same results I am then I am now less hopefull. It should however have some effect as I know adjusting fuel pressure effects the A/F mixture quite a bit. It won't take much to try it. A foot of 1/8" vacuum line and a Tee.
It seems like we should be able to find a setting of the UAP and POT along with the blend that would work. It seems like if I start getting close to what I want then I start getting a horrible lean jerking. It doesn't show lean on the wide band but it acts like it is running out of fuel. If the V/E table went above 50% I could probably get it to work also. The amount of fuel required seems to go up dramatically the last 10-15%
I have a really good dyno tested setup for WOT so those numbers are the ones I try to get set in the fuel table. In my case it is about 12.8ms I then try to get the idle set at around 4ms. This I can do and it will idle and it will go WOT but everything in between goes super rich like 10:1. If I try to bring it back to lean side using the blend I can do it but trying to hold a steady state above 3000rpm causes the lean surgeing/jerking condition.
I can get it set so for the most part the lower end is in the 11:1 to 12:1 range but that seems like a terrible waste of fuel.
For those who don't know the system the blend feature blends the signal from the TPS with the signal from the MAP effectively fooling the system into thinking the manifold pressure is lower. For example with no blend the manifold pressure indicated in the V/E table is 55kpa with the addition of blend that signal can be made to indicate 40 or 45 kpa. This in essence leans the system as the fuel table at that pressure is a lower number. With the car going rich the use of blend should correct the issue. No success so far.

OK I think I got it figured out finally. Didn't have to hook up the vacuum to the regulator it was all in the settings. I started to play around abit offline to see what settings effected what. I was able to see what happened to the actual fuel table and then set it to do what I wanted. The trick is to set the UAP (TOG) to a fairly large number used 18 then set the POT (IOT) also to a fairly large number to bring the entire thing back down into range. I used 5.2 this put the fuel table WOT at 12.8 which is what I needed. The result of this is that it changes the slope of the table so it is leaner under idle and cruise but still has the volume needed for WOT. I also used about 20% blend right across to 4000rpm and 10% blend to 8000rpm. This in effect lowers what the fuel table sees for a MAP reading and also stablizes the MAP reading. Without the blend the MAP reading is around 60 at idle with the blend I brought this down to 45. The other effect of this is that without blend any change in the load makes a hugh change in the MAP reading. Just slight acceleration indicated as nearly full load. With the blend the reading is more stable and you do slight acceleration with the MAP sensor going to 90kpa. This also keeps things from going instantly rich every time you touch the throttle.

So in summary what you need to do is find you maximum pulse width. Probably on a dyno. This will be the pulse width to target regardless of other settings. You then need to find the pulse width that creates good conditions for idle. Then set the POT (IOT) and UAP (TOG) to hit those numbers at WOT and 45kpa. Then I found where the system cruises and set the EGO setting to 14.5:1 since the system is linear that area also required an adjustment to the V/E table. No adjustment would be needed if the entire table stayed at one EGO setting.

Anyhow it can be done or least gotten close. Now I understand more the function of the two setting and how you effect the rate of change or the slope of the fuel curve. If seems like you would want to set the one reading to 12.8 and the other 0 but this changes the curve to one where everything low is rich. By raising the UAP and then subtracting out the POT you change the slope. So I feel alot better about the system now. No lean surging and it runs good all the way to 7200.

Good luck when you can get some dyno time. Hopefully I remember what I did and can explain it to you. Sometimes I think a rookie can explain to a rookie better than an expert to a rookie. If you want it PM me and I will give you my number. It may be easier to explain that way.

dfink,
I am not familiar with your system, however I found with the sequencial injection that the injection timing (i.e. degrees BTDC when the injector closes), has a significant effect at idle speed. Do you have adjustments for this injection timing, if so, what settings are being used?
Paul

I don't believe the electromotive system has the ability to change where in the cycle the injector fires. I will check however. I don't believe it is even discussed as to where in the cycle the injector is set to open.

I read that, in sequential injection, fuel is injected just prior to intake valve opening and must be fully injected sometime before the intake valve opens. Reason for this is that fuel atomizes best in the manifold with little to no air flow.

Anyone else know if this is true?

All

OK, I know this is old as the last post is over 3 years old but....

I just read the 253 posts and my head is spinning.

I'm thinking going this way and would like to hear from Trog, Paul et al about there experience over the last few years.

Hindsight being 20/20, anything different you would have done different?

Don't hold back, you could save me a bundle :D

Cheers

JJ

JJ
To answer your last question first, I would do nothing different if approaching this project again from the start.
The upside is a very responsive steetable engine, 287FWHP with rev limiter set at 7200.
The throttle bodies did foul the A/Con condenser and compressor, and rear wiper motor which were all removed. Have since redone the complete AC system with 964 compressor and generic condensor mounted well up in the rear wing. I note your location and expect in the colder climate you would need to warmup for 1-3 minutes prior to holding good idle. For the engine management just using throttle position and engine rpm for the main fuel and ignition mapping, with MAP, Air Temp, and engine (head) temp compensations/trimming. I have the M600 optioned with data logging, dual wide band 02, and mini display which I would also recommend. Not sure of which engine management system you are looking at however can assist if you go the M600 route.
Trust this helps with your decision making. Any specific questions ??
Cheers, Paul

Hey Paul

Great to hear. I recalled reading your post about the AC and wiper intefering.

Won't have that problem as the AC was not installed when I got the car and there was no wiper for the 83 Cab :) The engine damper (Cab only) may give me some problem.

Definitely got questions but want to digest what I have been reading.

I know that Trog got is kit from Clewett Eng, did you go with them as well?

I did send C.E. an e-mail earlier today asking for some details. Not sure how you guys got your info back in 2009 as I find it hard to figure stuff out in 2012 :) PMO website is short on details.

If you can take a look at at the C.E. kit that I'm looking at and see if its all in but as usual, I expect there is more require as it mentioned: Note, 3.2 liter and smaller engines will need a crank trigger adapter.

I'm sure that you will notice a slight price increase since you got yours :D

Cheerio

JJ

I am in the middle of my project installing 40mm ITB's using the latest MS2 box and (for now) using my Electromotive HPV-1 on my twin plug 3.2 SS motor. Just laid out the locations for the MS2 box and the Relay plate (from DIYAutotune) and have the ITB's and injectors installed. I will use the wiring harness from DIY also, makes it much neater with all wires labeled..

JJ
Sourced parts from individual suppliers. ITB, M600, Coils, Ignition module(s), AT, MPA, ET sensors, all sourced here in Australia. Planning the conversion is 50% of the fun. Started with a 12 tooth crank gear (DIY), CE crank sensor bracket, and a DIY cam position sensor, however did at one stage question the signal from the cam sensor (located at pully end, the DIY job). Did later install a 60,-2 teeth C.E. crank pully which is best way to go. Use this without a cam sensor for some time as the M600 can also do multi-squirt injection, and wasted spark. Later installed CE cam sensor FW end and then set M600 back to sequencial injection. Reason for this sensor changing was an occasional miss when HOT and under load - finally located a fauty ignition connector which caused this grief. - hence was never a sensor issue.
As far a cost goes I am sure there are more economical alternatives. Then if we were driven by "Bang for the Buck" we would not necessariy be playing with P cars.
Paul

Don't remember dreaming about a Mustang back in 1964/65 :D:):D

Thanks Rick

Not much new to report since I've completed the ITB and suspension upgrades. The engine starts and runs fine when air temperatures are above 60degF. However below 50DegF, it takes a few moments of cranking to get her fired-up. Then you need to feather the throttle to keep revs up before she'll idle. To deal with the cold start/idle issue, I backdated my auto-heat and installed a hand throttle.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1345087869.jpg


The only other change was the installation of a backdated air filter. The air filter includes an oil tank bung which allowed me to '86' the oil collection tank. Plus it included a port for the fuel tank vapour recirculation.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1345087933.jpg


That's about it. The car starts fine, runs great, and has never left me down.