xt2005bonbon Posted February 5, 2018 Author Share Posted February 5, 2018 Yeah. But it was not that super cold. Intake temp like 32-33 F. Not that bad really. I mean, yeah, I keep hearing winter gas is not that good either. But man, 18 mpg. I am essentially driving a gas guzzler now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
covertrussian Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Freezing temps are what I consider too cold for good gas mileage. With wind chill water would freeze, this means your transmission fluids are struggling to keep thin at this point too. Plus added air resistance, and if tires weren't pumped up reduced tire pressure, equaling to rolling resistance. If you had rain or snow, those hurt gas mileage too, since they increase drag and wheels will free spin loosing energy. Back when I was more stock, I would get 24mpg when it was at freezing temps, going 70mph. I can see it being 20ish at best going 80mph. 05 LGT 16G 14psi 290whp/30mpg (SOLD) 12 OBP Stock 130whp/27mpg@87 Oct 00 G20t GT28r 10psi 250whp/36mpg 22 Ascent STOCK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 5, 2018 Author Share Posted February 5, 2018 fwiw, tires are a bit larger than stock (225/60/17-geolandar at/s). Tire pressure was good though. I understand all these limitations that you have mentioned. But it should still not result in 18 mpg IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
covertrussian Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 225/60/17 are almost 1" taller then 225/55/17 (stock), that's +3.4%, did you adjust the odometer mileage by that much before doing the mpg calculations? Basically when your odometer shows you traveled 100 miles you actually traveled 103.4miles When doing MPG calcs those extra 4 miles makes a big difference . 05 LGT 16G 14psi 290whp/30mpg (SOLD) 12 OBP Stock 130whp/27mpg@87 Oct 00 G20t GT28r 10psi 250whp/36mpg 22 Ascent STOCK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 5, 2018 Author Share Posted February 5, 2018 No I did not . And I was just reading off the mpg gauge from the car. No actual precise computation of recording how many gallons, etc.... Yeah, shame on me. Just checked tacomaworld tire calc and it looks when you think you're going 80 mph, you're actually going ~83 mph. oops. How do you adjust the speedo btw? In any case, already ordered a blackstone sample kit. We shall see. At least, she does not knock under high load and usually achieves boost target now (since I have adjusted the WGDC tables). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
covertrussian Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 No I did not . Most people don't , this is why I stopped trusting peoples gas mileage claims. There are too many variables that most folks don't account for. This really sucks because when trying to google for MPG related data, it becomes impossible to find anything meaningful. This is why I started doing testing myself And I was just reading off the mpg gauge from the car. No actual precise computation of recording how many gallons, etc.... Yeah, shame on me. Another tisk tisk. Gauge uses the MAF data for calculations, so it will never be as accurate as the real thing. But with that said, over a 1k miles, I've seen them be not too far off, but over 100-300miles it can be as much as 5mpg off. Just checked tacomaworld tire calc and it looks when you think you're going 80 mph, you're actually going ~83 mph. oops. How do you adjust the speedo btw? You can't unfortunately. I wish there was a ECU setting. Also Odometer and speedometer are based on the same readings either. On my car 225/45/17 tires would have the speedometer be perfect, but odometer was off a by a little. For this reason I use GPS, and do all the math in my spreadsheet. In any case, already ordered a blackstone sample kit. We shall see. At least, she does not knock under high load and usually achieves boost target now (since I have adjusted the WGDC tables). I need to do the same, the kit is still sitting on my shelf 05 LGT 16G 14psi 290whp/30mpg (SOLD) 12 OBP Stock 130whp/27mpg@87 Oct 00 G20t GT28r 10psi 250whp/36mpg 22 Ascent STOCK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 5, 2018 Author Share Posted February 5, 2018 In general though, I usually know my car is getting pretty good gas mileage by observing the gas gauge and seeing that I roughly do 100 mile per quarter tank (emphasis on 'roughly'). When I begin to see 60 miles or something per quarter tank, then I already know I am getting crappy gas mileage. And that's what I was seeing this past Saturday and I don't like it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
covertrussian Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Yup I do the same, Mine usually will do 120m and be at quarter tank. That's about 4.0gal which is about 29mpg. It's a good way to see it in real time, but hills do make it move around. 05 LGT 16G 14psi 290whp/30mpg (SOLD) 12 OBP Stock 130whp/27mpg@87 Oct 00 G20t GT28r 10psi 250whp/36mpg 22 Ascent STOCK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 20, 2018 Author Share Posted February 20, 2018 covertrussian, one question... I started to notice yesterday that in part throttle (~17%), medium load, I noticed steady AFR of 15.2-16. I also noticed no correction applied. So that means I am in open-loop mode right? Next question, should it run lean in that situation? I would guess no. If it should not, and since it is running open-loop, does that mean this issue can be fixed in the tune? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
covertrussian Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Correct your in open loop mode and that is very lean, your map is probably at 14.7 fuel map value but it's running leaner which also means your MAF scales are off. You can log the status of open/closed loop by logging the field called "CL/OL Fueling* (status)". If it's at "8" it's closed loop, open loop is "10", finally cold start open loop is "7" Also, Throttle position doesn't matter, ECU uses "Mass Airflow (g/s)", stock calls for open loop above 80 g/s. You can reduce it by modifying an experimental "AF #1 Learning Max Threshold". 05 LGT 16G 14psi 290whp/30mpg (SOLD) 12 OBP Stock 130whp/27mpg@87 Oct 00 G20t GT28r 10psi 250whp/36mpg 22 Ascent STOCK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 20, 2018 Author Share Posted February 20, 2018 Thanks for the feeback. Regarding the CL/OL switching, seeing the fuel correct go from X% to 0% would imply a switch from close to open loop no? In other words, wouldn't it be sufficient to log this parameter to see if you switch between CL/OL? So, in order to fix this issue, which table(s) would you 'play' with? side note: now, I am wondering if this is contributing to these low load knocks I've been plagued with for so long. Although each time I logged this lean condition, I was not able to catch a knock event at the same time.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
covertrussian Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Fuel map is the one your going to mainly mess with. Figure out what your average mass airflow vs engine load/rpm is. Once you do, look at the fuel map value, if it's 14.7 then richen it up. Your low load knock is most likely from running too much timing down low, fix that before you go on any other wild goose chases. 05 LGT 16G 14psi 290whp/30mpg (SOLD) 12 OBP Stock 130whp/27mpg@87 Oct 00 G20t GT28r 10psi 250whp/36mpg 22 Ascent STOCK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 20, 2018 Author Share Posted February 20, 2018 Thanks. Yeah, I need to address that timing issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solidxsnake Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 Regarding the CL/OL switching, seeing the fuel correct go from X% to 0% would imply a switch from close to open loop no? In other words, wouldn't it be sufficient to log this parameter to see if you switch between CL/OL? Practically yes, technically no. Theoretically it's possible that you have a load range that has a "perfectly" dialed in LTFT, so you might be in closed loop but still have 0% STFT. Very unlikely that you'd see a your STFT pegged at 0% besides when in closed-loop, but it's technically possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 21, 2018 Author Share Posted February 21, 2018 ^Yeah I thought about that. Although from my logging experience, if it was still in closed loop, you'd still see the AFR swing a little around the target value. I am realizing this now, but looks like in open loop, the AFR does not swing IIRC my observations. Correct me if I am wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
covertrussian Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 This is why I have multiple gauge profiles on RomRaider . Dyno logs have less stuff then casual driving ones, and highway driving have their own set. I get 0% LTFT all the time, so it's not unusual, a better one to use is 0% correction (STFT), that is always moving during open loop. But with that said, I just looked at one of my logs and even though CL/OL status was 10 (open loop), longer term fuel trim was still applying. This is even with D learning disabled. 05 LGT 16G 14psi 290whp/30mpg (SOLD) 12 OBP Stock 130whp/27mpg@87 Oct 00 G20t GT28r 10psi 250whp/36mpg 22 Ascent STOCK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 21, 2018 Author Share Posted February 21, 2018 Hang on, I was referring to the STFT parameter, not the LTFT. In my case (and albeit the limited logging I've done), I kept seeing the STFT being stuck at zero during open loop. I did not see it moving at all. So you do then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 21, 2018 Author Share Posted February 21, 2018 covert, you're not using the btssm yet? If not, you really should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
covertrussian Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 Hang on, I was referring to the STFT parameter, not the LTFT. In my case (and albeit the limited logging I've done), I kept seeing the STFT being stuck at zero during open loop. I did not see it moving at all. So you do then? I think it should be good enough to use, but keep in mind it is possible to have 0% correction too. covert, you're not using the btssm yet? If not, you really should. Nah, I use a laptop, I do too many logs and reflashes throughout the week (during mod testing) to bother with inferior screen sizes 05 LGT 16G 14psi 290whp/30mpg (SOLD) 12 OBP Stock 130whp/27mpg@87 Oct 00 G20t GT28r 10psi 250whp/36mpg 22 Ascent STOCK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 21, 2018 Author Share Posted February 21, 2018 Come on man, you can make good use of a 7" screen tablet. This was an old layout I had before. And just like romraider, you can hit the defrost button to log. You can see LV on the fly man. The only downside is you can't upload a ROM to your ECU. Other than that, I bet you would love it. http://legacygt.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=213955&d=1438707135 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perscitus Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 The beauty of btssm is you hardly ever have to look at the screen while logging if you so choose, just log away... no bulky laptop or tablet, no risk of running out of battery while logging a 5 hour highway drive or 2 minutes worth of WOT pulls. Or enable auto logging on WOT and Btssm will self start and stop the logs for you, as many as you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 21, 2018 Author Share Posted February 21, 2018 Yeah man. I am telling you, you won't regret it. Here is my latest layout fwiw.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
covertrussian Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 Yeah that's really nice, I would love that for just daily driving since my scangauge doesn't have nearly as much info. Might be a project I do later, but I do like my sun glass cubby for sunglasses... 05 LGT 16G 14psi 290whp/30mpg (SOLD) 12 OBP Stock 130whp/27mpg@87 Oct 00 G20t GT28r 10psi 250whp/36mpg 22 Ascent STOCK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 21, 2018 Author Share Posted February 21, 2018 I should add that I do have a tablet set up in the 05 but the 06 has not. So the above layout is actually used on my phone (nexus 4). It is a pretty small screen, considering today phone standards . Nonetheless, I see everything just fine. I am using a magnet holder like this one placed on the cd slot. http://i.imgur.com/pyeHlYo.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xt2005bonbon Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 After careful observations and 'live logging', I am now convinced that long term fuel trim D is turned off. The LTFT is always at 0 (been like that for a very long time) and now carefully saw that the STFT gets stuck at 0 as soon as I pass 32 or 35 or 40 g/s depending on the load. I did see that open loop is set when this happens. I believe I can check that in the tune right? In any case, why would you want to turn that cell off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.