Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 25 2017, 04:54 PM

I have been trying to get my conversion done in time for Okteenerfest. I have run up against a brick wall and just cant seem to figure out what i am doing wrong.

If anyone can help me by looking at my tune files or providing insight it will be very much appreciated.

I can get th car to idle but nothing beyond that. Any use of the throttle is less than impressive and almost useless. Meaning it bogs down and does not accelerate at all.

I have no clue what i am missing.

2056 with new low impeadance injectors. Bosch Wideband O2 sensor.

Really need some suggestions. Not sure if i can post the tune files here. But will try.

Posted by: Craigers17 Aug 25 2017, 05:29 PM

Hey Mike,

I'm just a newbie here, so I'm kinda talking out of my arse...but I'm interested on the most novice level about microsquirt as well, only because about 10-15years ago I owned a 74' model that had stock efi, and it plagued me for awhile.

That being said, I was doing some research on the interwebs and came across a video linked to thedubshop.net. I'm sure they are probably well known here, but I don't know, nor can I speak of personal experience with them.

However, they seem to be very knowledgeable about the whole topic. Just say'n, ...if you're in a jam, they might be a good resource....for what it's worth.

-Craig

Posted by: db9146 Aug 26 2017, 05:37 AM

Mike,
Might want to try the bird board as well. I believe there might be more folks who have gone the 'squirt route there.

You might also email the guys at DIY Autotune to see if they can help or point you in a direction for some professional help.

Dee

Posted by: Mark Henry Aug 26 2017, 08:02 AM

Can you post your build details, or if you already have a thread on this a linky.
Plus list all your values, some one may spot an error.

The issue you are posting could be a simple program input error, I once chased something similar for a whole day only to realize I entered the wrong fuel cut value in one spot.

Posted by: r_towle Aug 26 2017, 08:21 AM

It's too rich

Posted by: jd74914 Aug 26 2017, 10:26 AM

Even some screen shots of the fuel and timing tables would be helpful to start off with; they're pretty easy to sanity check. Where did you get the flow rate information for your injectors?

If you want to send me your map I can take a look-I'm noof a big MS guy but I have played around with some systems. My email is my username here @gmail.com

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 26 2017, 04:32 PM

Not sure what's happening but only running on 2 cylinders. 3/4 is dead! Will have to check some connections.

Posted by: Montreal914 Aug 27 2017, 01:33 AM

Don't give up!!!

I too am looking into this in the near future and your thread has been very inspiring.

I hope you get your engine running beyond idling and I know people here will help you get there.

Good luck, and keep the faith.

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 27 2017, 02:02 PM

Ok so made progress. Had some values wrong made some changes. It run but like crap. Will contact DIY and see if someone would like to take a shot at it.

Actually drove it.

Posted by: Mark Henry Aug 27 2017, 05:08 PM

You said you have a bosch wide band. Are you using it through MS instead of a meter?
Where do you have the sensor mounted? If it's on the muffler tip the sensor may not be getting hot enough and not reading correctly.

Without values and details I can't be of help.

Posted by: ConeDodger Aug 27 2017, 05:48 PM

McMark is pretty good with Microsquirt.

Posted by: wndsrfr Aug 27 2017, 07:14 PM

I think that first you need to be firing on all 4 cylinders and know that you're getting fuel injected on all 4.
Once that's done, your map should at least get some response if you're getting a good manifold pressure signal, so look carefully at that using a vacuum guage hooked in with a "T" connector somewhere that will show the manifold pressure. If you're on ITB's the manifold pressure signal will be very choppy & hard for the ECU to follow well. For that reason I switched my SDS injection system to throttle position only. I'm going to try to attach my SDS map--it's an excel spreadsheet. SDS has a dead nuts simple approach to the map for fuel pulse duration: Multiply the TP "value" in column B by the RPM fuel "Value" in column E to get the injector duration pulse each time it fires.
Hope this will help a bit...

 SDS_Remap_TP_Sensing_8.xls ( 32.5k ) Number of downloads: 118

Posted by: jpnovak Aug 27 2017, 09:13 PM

you mention the car idles. Does it idle smoothly? If so, I would expect that you are firing 4 cylinders.

Is your WBO2 reading in TunerStudio (or Megatune?) If so, what is the AFR reading? Did you setup TS to read the WBO2 correctly?

If you PASS the first two steps above the next question is: Have you started to tune the car? Do you understand tuning the car - meaning recognizing Lean vs Rich? EFI is exactly the same as adjusting the mixture with a screwdriver or changing jets in a carb with the exception of using keystrokes and instantaneous feedback.

If the car is lean, add more fuel. If its rich, take fuel away. TunerStudio will even do this for you if your target AFR table is good.

The car will absolutely run like crap if you have not tuned the car.

Posted by: falcor75 Aug 27 2017, 10:40 PM

1. Pull the plugs to make SURE you get spark on all cylinders.
2. Pull the injectors to mare SURE you get fuel on all cylinders.
3. Once you have fuel and spark post screenshots of all your settings and tables in the microsquirt.

Posted by: Mark Henry Aug 28 2017, 07:50 AM

This why I keep asking for some info on your system, ITB may never have good enough vac signal and running TPS only solves 90% of low vac issues.

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 28 2017, 08:42 AM

The specifics

Tuner Studios MSv3.0.28 –
Firmware MS2 /Extra3.4.2 release 2016421

Porsche 914
4-cyl 2056 CC displacement
High impedance injectors Flow at 3-BAR 134 CC
Bosch TPS
MAP GM 3 Bar
GM Open element IAT
AC Delco 213-928 GM Multi-Purpose Temperature Sensor
36 in 1 Crank wheel VR sensor
VW Passat IAC Bosch 0280140512

Current Tune  Blizzard_2017_08_28_08.06.07.msq ( 118.86k ) Number of downloads: 101

[attachmentid=617
927]


Attached thumbnail(s)

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 28 2017, 08:53 AM

The one thing I noticed is that my MAP seem high even at idle. Only going down to the 40's? Wonder if my MAP calibration is incorrect. Using straight GM 3-bar from DIY.

It does look like I did not have the Barometer Sensor set to the same as the MAP

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 28 2017, 10:05 AM

I resolved the cylinders. Ground wire came lose. Seems to be running on all cylinders.

I think I do have the understanding on how to tune but I think I must have something incorrect because the efforts to tune do not produce the expected results.

I think I had an issue with the MAP setting and the injector sizes.

Posted by: Chris H. Aug 28 2017, 11:01 AM

I feel your pain. I have an EG33 so can't help too much but the one thing I overlooked was the condition of the plugs. As Rich mentioned, you are, or at least were, running rich at some point. It's just part of the dialing in process.

Here's what my plugs looked like when I pulled them:



And then I heated them with an ordinary canister torch:

Just like new and there was an immediate improvement in the performance.



Wish I could tell you things are going well, but due to the challenges with the EG33 VR sensors I went back to the stock ECU for now.

Posted by: Mark Henry Aug 28 2017, 11:14 AM

You're running to lean for an aircooled engine, I'd be aiming for 13.5:1 max, 12.5 is OK. The heads actually get some cooling from the cool fuel charge.
I can run 14:1 because I have nickies, but after that I start seeing a rise in head temps.

I do agree the 134CC injectors are to small. I didn't look at charts for very long, but do you know what your injector duty cycle is? You should never run more than 80%.
Also many injectors are designed to run at a certain duty cycle and do not perform well when they are out of their OE range.

For example 914 L-jet 1.8 injector is somewhere in the mid 250cc range and they do not work well at all with aftermarket systems, where as 2.0 d-jet injectors are huge but perform well at almost any duty cycle.

Posted by: Mark Henry Aug 28 2017, 11:25 AM

Just an FYI, the couple of L-jet systems I've tested including an L-jet on a 914 2.0 all ran about 13.5:1 AFR

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 28 2017, 11:55 AM

the 134 was at 50%

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 29 2017, 06:28 AM

OK so I have gone back through all of the advice given. While I thought I had it resolved, I a still not getting one of the injector banks to fire.

Definitely only running on 2-cylinders.

Seems like the INJ 2 bank Pin 10 is not putting out a ground signal.

I have verified that the injectors are mechanically operational- The fire when given 12 V and a ground and I have spark at each plug.

I have verified the wiring is correct and connections are in place from the injection to the AMP Seal Block.

Switch out the wiring from side to side and the problem follows INJ 2 Pin 10 as moving INJ 1 from side to side results in operational injectors and firing.

I have no concept in how my wiring can be faulty and I don't think there is a setting other than turning on sequential fire that would cause one of the injector banks not to fire at the same time.

I have to think this is yet again a hardware problem?

Posted by: edwin Aug 29 2017, 07:04 AM

I'd have a crack at putting the correct injector flow rate in the software.
Pretty sure you'll find static flow is the value used.
Also you don't have a barometric sensor connected so get rid of those values at turn the option off.
Also worth Turning off cold start corrections off for your initial tune.
I can't see what you're doing for lambda sensor. Wired to the ecu?
After that it should be slightly more manageable

Posted by: Mark Henry Aug 29 2017, 07:14 AM

So INJ 2 bank Pin 10 is not putting out a ground signal you have to go through all your wiring with an ohm meter and check for continuity. I'm not sure on the ecu check, sorry.
Who built the MS?

The injectors should be fine, but I only run 30-35lbs pressure.

Posted by: jd74914 Aug 29 2017, 07:19 AM

Static value is almost always used.

Is there a "key-on" barometric pressure sensor option (using the MAP sensor)?


Unfortunately, it appears that way based on my read of your description.

You checked to make sure the non-firing injectors have 12V at their connectors? And that the ground side of the injector connector has continuity all of the way to the MS connector? I'm reading the above like you did that, but just want to verify.

Do you by chance have an oscilloscope? Or can you use another output rather than the one on Pin 10?

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 29 2017, 07:39 AM

No oscilloscope. I have checked all of the connections and wires. Comes down to all of the injectors will fire if 2 injectors are attached to INJ 1 wire. No injector will fire when attached to the INJ 2 ground.

Because these are high impedance injectors I don't think the one operational channel can drive both banks.

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 29 2017, 08:13 AM

Wow. Maybe I am a little sensitive over this now that I have purchased 2 ECUs. Just talked to DIY and I think they said it had to be operator error not hardware. While that hit me a bit wrong, if it is just me and it can be fixed easily then I am all good.

Going to go home and do another data log and see what it shows.

Posted by: jd74914 Aug 29 2017, 08:43 AM

It does sound like a hardware issue since you've checked both wires end-to-end. As an aside, I've never been happy with the robustness of MS hardware (Microsquirt in particular). It doesn't self-protect well and doesn't seen to have the greatest quality-control either.

Does TunerStudio allow you to manually turn on an output? That way you could make absolutely sure the pin is not grounding with a plain multimeter.

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 29 2017, 08:52 AM

Limited ability to configure outputs. Maybe someone with more skill than I have in electronics could work it out but. I configured a control for my external oil cooler fan but that is about the limit of my ability.

All I know is that the first unit had a defective resistor in the injector triggering circuit. This one seems to have an issue in that same circuit. Seems like a consistent issue in this circuit. Could it be my wiring? Sure but the circuit for the injectors is just so simple that it is hard to mess up 2 wires consisting of power and ground.

But I will go pull the log and see what they say.

Posted by: jd74914 Aug 29 2017, 09:07 AM

If you do into Tools>Injector Test Mode you should be able to force your injectors on continuously (set number of repeats to something high, pulse width to max of 65ms, and off time to 0ms). I'd unplug the connectors at that point and just look at the INJ2 pin. If it doesn't ground and the INJ1 pin does, you definitely have a hardware issue. That should take every other component out of the loop.

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 29 2017, 09:17 AM

That is a good Test idea! Will post the results.

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 29 2017, 01:07 PM

OK took a chance and reloaded the firmware to ECU. Problem solved. Now i just have to get it timed and driavable!

Thanks for the support.

Posted by: jd74914 Aug 29 2017, 01:57 PM

Awesome! Having to reload firmware is a little ridiculous, but I'm, glad you got that fixed.

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 29 2017, 03:29 PM

So not quite drivable yet. But certainly running. Any insight on tuning tips would be appreciated. Now i am going super lean or rich on acel and get in backfires?

Posted by: jd74914 Aug 29 2017, 04:08 PM

You'll want to look at your O2 sensor to guide your tuning. What is it saying while you're accelerating?

What are your accel enrichment settings?

Posted by: Montreal914 Aug 29 2017, 08:01 PM

Is the O2 sensor/gauge looped back into the MS for live correction?

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 30 2017, 08:43 AM

Was going back through the set up guidance and it recommended setting up the VE table with the accel enrichment off. Looks like I will need to revise the VE table and then set the accel enrichment.

Posted by: Mark Henry Aug 30 2017, 11:16 AM

I didn't see or missed it , ITB's Or single TB?

Backfiring can be cured by adding a TPS (on decel) fuel cut.

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 30 2017, 11:47 AM

Single TB.

Currently not cutting fuel on decel.

Looking at the graphs it seems like everything should be working but it just isn't.

Posted by: mightyohm Aug 30 2017, 11:55 AM

I haven't read the whole thread, but I've been running Megasquirt for many years and I never needed a fuel cut on decel. If you're seriously backfiring you most likely have an intake/exhaust leak or the mixture is grossly off. My car burbles and pops slightly on deceleration but it's not objectionable and i've attributed it to some small exhaust leaks near the head.

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 30 2017, 12:11 PM

It is far from being set up to run well! Had a recent issue with a firmware problem so I am just in the beginning stages of tuning while running on 4-cylinders. Likely a bit soon to attribute issues to leaks.

Planning on working back through everything this afternoon.

Posted by: mightyohm Aug 30 2017, 12:15 PM

I guess my $0.02 would be - don't worry about stuff like fuel cuts until you get the base map sorted out. Those features just add complexity and aren't strictly necessary.

Posted by: McMark Aug 30 2017, 12:34 PM

Somewhere in the menus you can pull up the 'Realtime Display' which shows all of the readings from the sensors. Actually, realtime display pulls up graphs, and then there's a button to see all the actual numeric values. Post a picture of that, with the key on, but not running. I've recently realized how vital understanding the 'non-running' readings of sensors is. For example, your MAP sensor should be reading around 100kpa while not-running (at sea level). It's pretty easy, once you know, to look at the gauges before you start the car and see if that looks right. Also, when the engine is cold, the CHT and Intake Air Temp sensors should read about the same. If they don't, one of them is configured wrong.


Also, have you used a timing light to confirm the timing displayed on the laptop matches what you see in real life?

Oh, and finally, I think it's prudent to turn off all closed-loop interaction while tuning. If you're trying to tune the VE table, and the AFR table is fiddling with things 'behind your back' then you're going to have a tough time because you'll make a change in the VE table, and then the AFR controls will put it back where it was (essentially). Tune the VE table open loop, then once it's running well turn on closed loop. This will make it run worse, until you tweak the AFR table so it runs back where it was. At the end of that process you have a tuned VE table and a tuned AFR table and everything is happy.

Posted by: Mblizzard Aug 30 2017, 12:38 PM

I think I got caught by the closed loop problem on my first attempt. Will see if I can find that display.

Posted by: mightyohm Aug 30 2017, 12:44 PM

The closed loop authority is typically pretty low, like 10 or 15%, so it will push things around but usually not in a way that prevents tuning. Some people like to disable it, though. I've tuned both ways - sometimes the closed loop correction helps because it sort of steers things in the right direction and your initial tune can be pretty rough but the car will still be drivable (assuming the AFR targets are reasonable).

Posted by: McMark Aug 30 2017, 12:44 PM

Had to look it up...

It's under Basic/Load Settings. Then click 'All Output Channels' at the bottom.

Posted by: JamesM Sep 1 2017, 03:08 AM

I told myself I wasn't going to get involved in another Megasquirt troubleshooting sessions on the board, the amount of crazy uneducated bat:stromberg: advice i have seen around here over the years has really turned me off to discussing it.

That being said I have been having to much fun with it again lately so here we go...

First things first, dont make changes based on suggestions from anyone that isnt looking at 100% of your configuration, it will most likely mess you up more than you already are. This is a very complex system and its a lot more involved than turning a screw to lean it out, in reality there about about 1000 adjustable values here that interact with each other. There should be ZERO guesswork here as every variable is defined and should be set appropriately.

ok done with the rant and on to business:


1. First order of business, is the MSQ file you posted still current or have you fixed some things there? I see a few fundamental problems with the basic settings.

2. As Mark Henry stated earlier we really need full build details. The one detail I am most concerned with at the moment is are you controlling fuel and ignition or just fuel? If you are control spark you need to fix your advance table based on known advance curves for a type 4 you are way over advanced (assuming the physical timing is set correctly).

3. Your req_Fuel value needs to be set CORRECTLY. Yes technically you can set this to just about anything and then tweak your map around until the car runs but doing so will then render the values in your VE table meaningless. (seriously people tweaking the req_Fuel value around to "fix" a problem may be my #1 megasquirt pet peve) req_fuel is a constant that is set based on your injector setup NOT A TUNING VALUE. Specifically the number is a constant that represents a fuel pulse width at 100% VE based on your engine displacement and injector flow rate. Set this correctly and the numbers in your VE table will actually represent the volumetric efficiency for your engine at the given RPM/load bins. This then makes it a lot easier to roughly predict what those values should be. SCIENCE!!! NEAT! Given you had your injectors flow benched you are ahead of the game in that you know exactly what they flow (270cc/min@43psi) so the only question left is what fuel pressure are you running them at? The current req_fuel value you have set of 17.3 would only be correct if you were running at 24psi which i suspect is not the case. If you are running stock 914 fuel pressure 29psi those injectors calculate out at flowing ~220cc/min so your req fuel value would be 15.7 This is a calculated value, there is only one right answer so we need to know what your fuel pressure actually is. Lowering this value is going to lean out everything across the board so IF you have trouble starting after this change you will need to add fuel back by increasing values in the VE table.

Fix these things first and get it idling and then ill go over tuning fundamentals/workflow


looking at your VE and advance tables its easy to see why it is running the way you say it is

Posted by: Mark Henry Sep 1 2017, 06:49 AM

Ahhhh! You have to tune in Open Loop! Always!
Closed loop is something you could try after tuning in open loop. Closed loop may always run too lean for our cars that like things a little rich side.

On the injectors 270cc is fine if they do that at 30-35 PSI. I totally hate increasing pressure to increase flow, to me it's a terrible way to compensate for incorrect injector sizing. I run at 35 psi.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 1 2017, 07:29 AM

Thanks for the help> It is a huge learning curve!

I am running right at 49lbs of fuel pressure which should put me right in the range of the rated injector flow. But what I wondered is if the max flow rate should be used or the 50% duty cycle? I changed to the 50% and as you said a number of adjustments to the VE table were required. If I should use the max flow it is an easy fix for the VE table if you look at the math!

Posted by: McMark Sep 1 2017, 08:37 AM

Max flow. The idea is to know what the max those injectors are capable of. Everything in the software calculations is scaling down. So if you put in a lower number (50% duty cycle) then the scaling gets done twice, once by you and once by the software.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 1 2017, 08:40 AM

That seems to make sense but it is not well documented in the setup information I have. It is likely the one of those things that should be apparent but I missed it somehow.

Posted by: JamesM Sep 1 2017, 10:29 AM

Injector static flow rate is the value you are looking for.

What is the reason for running the pressure so high? Given you know the exact flow rate at 43.5 PSI and 270cc/min should support up to ~160hp at an 80% duty cycle. I would recommend setting the fuel pressure there (43.5 PSI) unless you are expecting more than 150-160 hp out of your 2056. Also 3 bar is where most injectors are designed to run, go to high or low from there and you can have unexpected fuel delivery problems. So...

Set fuel pressure to 43.5
Injector size=270cc/min
Req_fuel=12.8

If for some reason you cant adjust the pressure and you have to run it at 49psi than injector size=295cc/min and req_fuel=11.7, but i would adjust the fuel pressure down if at all possible.

I wouldn't tweak your VE table yet unless its required to get the car started after the change. It still needs to be tuned anyways.

Let us know when its idling after the adjustments...

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 1 2017, 10:34 AM

Sorry typo. I am right at 40 PSI. 9 is too close to the 0!

Posted by: JamesM Sep 1 2017, 10:41 AM

Not always, it depends on how you are tuning. If you are tweaking things manually than closed loop will probably make things difficult you. If you are tuning your VE table via log analysis though having closed loop on while you are collecting your data will actually give the analyzer more data points to work with and speed up the process.

Doing things manually is a royal PITA given the number of data points we are working with. The autotune feature available in the paid version of Tunerstudio is worth WAY more than what they charge for it as is the log analyzer in MegaLogViewer. You will turn weeks of tuning into hours and get things a hell of a lot more accurate in the end. again SCIENCE!! If you are only going to pay for one get the registered version of Tunerstudio for the autotune feature. I like having both because i nerd out on data.

Posted by: JamesM Sep 1 2017, 10:47 AM

At 40PSI the calculated flow rate would be 259cc/min so req_fuel=13.3. Flow rate calculations are not 100% exact though. If you are obsessive like me and want to be exact run at 43.5 given you have the bench testing at that pressure.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 1 2017, 10:47 AM

Yes I agree. I have both full versions. Like you said there is just too much data too manage for the new person. While you can grasp the interrelation of the varies data points and the impacts your changes are suppose to have. I just find it frustrating when because of your own lack of knowledge you don't get the expected change. the end it is your fault because you had a setting incorrect but I guess that is just part of it all!

Hope I don't have weeks required to complete. Have to drive this to Okteenerfest!

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 1 2017, 11:11 AM

I think the resolution is capable of adjusting to that. Will revise.

Posted by: mightyohm Sep 1 2017, 12:37 PM

As long as you set the AFR targets correctly I don't see why this would be the case.

I agree that tuning open loop is usually a better approach (particularly if the AFR targets aren't configured correctly) but I've done it both ways. The key is to understand what is happening, you can usually see the influence of the closed loop control and decide if it's helping or hurting the tune.

Posted by: McMark Sep 1 2017, 12:48 PM

I can see the logic of both approaches: focusing on the VE table first vs. the AFR table first.

If you're tuning the VE table, it seems to me, you should be open-loop. You then tune via whatever feedback you have available to you (WBO2, dyno, etc) to bring the VE table to 'perfection'. Then you can enable closed-loop, after populating the AFR table with the values you see while running your final tune.

--OR--

If you're tuning via the AFR table, you run closed-loop from the start and then tune via whatever feedback you have available to you (WBO2, dyno, etc) to bring the AFR table to 'perfection'. Then populate the VE table with the values you see while running your final tune.

But I feel like, from the other responses, that I might be missing something from the picture. James? Jeff? Can you correct or add to my understanding?

Posted by: JamesM Sep 1 2017, 02:31 PM

You set your AFR targets before using autotune or the log analyzer to adjust the VE table. The AFR targets are what tuning the VE table is attempting to achieve. With closed loop + AFR targets enabled extra data points are generated as the close loop functionality is varying the pulse width to try and hit the target. This generates data for multiple pulse widths under the same target bin. The amount of closed loop correction applied is being recorded in the log along with the resulting O2%. The analyzer/autotune then uses this data to correct your VE table to the most accurate result possible.

Look at it like this:
Say hypothetically you are running with closed loop off, cruising under steady load steady RPM (lets say 65 kpa 3500 rpm on your VE map) this would result in megasquirt looking up the value for that VE bin (call it 85%) and then calculating the injector pulse width for those operating conditions (lets say its a 12ms squirt) lets also say that this bin on the VE table is currently tuned too rich so this 12ms squirt occurring at 65kpa 3500rpm produces a burn of 11:1 AFR. You could drive like that for an hour but you would only wind up with a single data point for that bin.

That data point being:
"A 12ms squirt at 65kp 3500 RPM gives you 11:1 AFR"
You can drive forever like that and it will be the only datapoint the analyzer has to work with. The only conclusion the analyzer can make is "needs to be leaner" but there is no data to say by how much.

Now lets set proper AFR targets and turn closed loop on:
Car still holding at 65kpa 3500rpm Megasquirt does the lookup and produces a 12ms injector pulse that results in an 11:1 burn. That is data point #1 BUT now the closed loop algorithm looks at that output and determines the AFR target is not being hit (lets say the target is 13.5 for cruise) Depending on how you have your closed loop set up after a few misses its going to tweak the pulse width slightly so now we have a data point #2 of 65KP 3500RPM 85%VE with a 3% correction applied produces an 11.8ms pules that results in an 11.2:1 burn. Still not hitting the target, closed loop tweaks again and we get yet another data point in the log. After a short while of running like this we will have one of two results. Either A. Closed loop operation will have resulted in a data point that hits on exactly what we are looking for or B. If the VE bin is further out of tune than the closed loop settings allow for correction we will collect data points on all the run conditions up to that correction limit, but even then the slope of that correction data allows the analyzer to predict what the value should be. the analyzer then kicks you back a new generated table based on the data.

Autotune basically does the same thing just with a slower correction rate than closed loop algorithms are usually set to.

With a single data point you just have to keep guessing at how much to adjust which is fine if you don't mind spending weeks manually dialing in your map. I find data collection and automated processing a way more enjoyable way to do it, not to mention faster and more accurate.


If you change your AFR targets after tuning your VE table you should go back and re-tune your VE table to hit those targets otherwise you are constantly depending on closed loop operation to hit them which is slower and not as accurate as a properly tuned VE table. It puts you at risk of being outside your closed loop limits and should your O2 sensor crap out you will be running out of tune. Basically the goal is to get your VE table to a point that the closed loop algorithm never has to do anything. You know your tune is dialed in when you can run a datalog through the analyzer and have it make minimal to no changes based on the data provided.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 3 2017, 05:55 AM

Thanks to some very sound advice and guidance above and beyond my wildest expectations. I got to drive the car! Still have a few bugs to work out but overall proforem very well. I think there is more to fix and tune but i can say that even in this less than perfect state this systems performs better than the stock system.

Got to recheck for vac leaks, get the idle control valve set, and revise the AFR and VE tables to fill in a few gaps.

Seems to be wandering just a bit on the AFR at times and i have a few values in the current table that just don't work. Going to try and import a table James provided. Thank you sir!

Posted by: BeatNavy Sep 3 2017, 06:50 AM

Congratulations, Mike! Just in time for Okteenerfest. I know it's been a long haul, so I'm glad you're almost there. I'm following behind you at some point on the Microsquirt path, but I'm having someone else do most of the hard work. Still, I followed this with great interest. Enjoy!

Posted by: LowBridge Sep 3 2017, 06:54 AM

very cool... and congrats on the milestone!

Posted by: jimkelly Sep 3 2017, 07:26 AM

congratulations ARE in order

Posted by: 76-914 Sep 3 2017, 08:40 AM

And thx to James for posting again. I always enjoyed reading your posts James. Even if it doesn't apply to what I'm running. I'm an info freak.

Posted by: Montreal914 Sep 3 2017, 09:06 AM

Congrats!

Enjoy the ride

Posted by: JamesM Sep 3 2017, 09:52 PM

Just glad I could help get another 914 successfully squirted. There is so much to learn with the system and steep learning curve to boot that many get frustrated some to the point of throwing in the towel. I hate to see that happen because if you can make it through the install its always worth it in the end!

Posted by: JamesM Sep 3 2017, 10:32 PM

The VE table will still need a lot of work especially in the upper range. The change I made to the RPM bins should make that a little easier. I didnt touch the tune, just the scale.

The idle wandering you you may be able to work out just by spending more time on that area, if not a trick I like to do to control idle better is to bracket the RPM bins around your target idle speed. Say you want to set your idle to 950 RPM you can set one of the RPM columns to 800 and the next one at 1200, then set the VE values in both columns the same. What this does is ensure there is a constant VE value for the entire range the car idles in. Otherwise you can experience sort of a runwaway condition at idle. The area between two VE bins is interpolated so if that interpolation creates a slope your idle can be somewhat unpredictable. Bracketing the RPM range with the same values ensures there is no slope for the idle to climb up.

Now you get to the fun part, the never ending quest for a perfect VE table!

Given your timing control is mechanical you will probably find you will be unable to get 100% consistant results with the VE table. Timing affects fuel needs and there will always be some variance as to when the advance is coming on. Just as long as your "close" is landing somewhere between 12.5-13.5 AFR in the mid rpm range you should be good. Of course I know you want to go to full ignition control somewhere down the line as that is where the extra power is hiding!

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 6 2017, 08:12 PM

James

Incorporated your changes and I have a car that seems to run quite well. An amazing difference! Need to back out the timing a few degres but ran great on a 10 mile drive tonight.

Can't wait to add ignition control!

Posted by: ndfrigi Sep 6 2017, 10:55 PM

Hi Mike, congratulation for making your megasquirt run well after a long patience!
Sorry if I have to hijack your thread, I've been wanting to ask your help or members help on this thread since it is related but I just waited till your issue is fix before asking some help.
Is there a way you can help us make a 71 1.7 megasquirt run after engine rebuilt?Actually it was running before the engine rebuild and after installing back the engine and the megasquirt II system, we are able to run it on idle but hesitation when we tried to rev it. We thought the megasquirt need some tuning since the engine has been rebuilt. Well, we (Bob-new owner) called Diyautotune and they suggested Bob to buy the updated software, so he did bought it and after installing the software to his laptop and hooked it to the car, a new project was requested and now the old project or old program was deleted. Now totally car won't run. Customer support from diyautotune is not helping at all. Just a little history of the car. I bought the car running 3 years ago except with broken rear suspension console. and after fixing the suspension, Bob bought it from me and he drove it for a few months until it needed engine rebuild. So basically we have no idea how the megasquirt system installed. The good thing only is that I acquired the car with running megasquirt.

Posted by: ndfrigi Sep 6 2017, 11:00 PM

Posted by: Jeff Bowlsby Sep 7 2017, 08:25 AM

"...i can say that even in this less than perfect state this systems performs better than the stock system"

How so? Specifically.

Posted by: JamesM Sep 7 2017, 05:48 PM

uh oh, here we go...

Posted by: Jeff Bowlsby Sep 7 2017, 06:24 PM

Please do not misunderstand my question, I am an inquisitive person and only seek accurate information, not to start a heated debate. The question is purely rational and not subjective. When a bold claim like that is made it requires justification otherwise the myth that D-Jet is somehow problematic/flawed/inefficient/etc. continues without justification. I have always run D-Jet cars and find them to have no issues and terrific. No doubt other FI systems have their benefits. We have street cars here, not high performance, highly sensitive machines requiring the minutia to be exactly perfect.

From my perspective, any quality made, appropriate to the engine, properly adjusted FI system is as good as another in terms of how the engine performs and functions. With that understanding no FI system will perform significantly better/worse/differently than another, will not be more responsive/give more power/better mileage etc. The best FI system just feeds the engine what it needs and as long as it does that well, whats the difference?

Show us the justification of the above claim or qualify/recant the broad generalization. Its a fair question.

Posted by: timothy_nd28 Sep 7 2017, 07:55 PM

2 quick benefits over the stock Djet setup would be the ability of having sequential vs batch injection. This would help for a smoother idle, perhaps a lower stable idle. The other benefit is readily available and cheap replacement parts.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 8 2017, 08:18 AM

Would be happy to help however I can!

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 8 2017, 09:36 AM

Very valid.

First, I think you read too much into my statement. I never claimed better 0 to 60 times, more power, or a higher top speed. My performance reference is to the fuel system not the car.

The D-Jet is neither perfect or seriously flawed. But it is limited in what it can control and the changes it can make. When it comes to keeping an engine within the most desirable operational parameters, modern systems are more flexible, capable of monitoring and controlling more parameters, and have a more realistic capacity to perform better at operating the fuel system over all conditions than the D-Jet even on a stock engine. Additionally, the improvements in modern sensors, the accuracy of the sensors, their durability, and the ability of the ECU to make decisions based on more data results in a very real step up in the performance level of the modern fuel system over the D-Jet.

First as we all know, the stock system lacks sufficient feedback to accurately determine the impact of changes the ECU made had on the engine. If the parameters called for a specific condition the D-Jet blindly supplies fuel for that condition regardless of how it impacts the engine. Regardless of loving or hating the stock system adding an O2 sensor that provides actual feedback to the ECU allowing it to determine the impacts of changes made is a step up in performance of the fuel system.

Next, being able to accurately adjust the various ECU parameters to meet your specific engine requirements directly results in better performance. You very accurately acknowledged it is essential for any fuel control system to be properly adjusted to the engine. I have 96mm pistons, big valve heads, performance exhaust, matched injectors, and electronic ignition. Each of these required adjustment to the D-jet system to account for the change. My ability to adjust the old system to account for these changes was limited and very difficult to accomplish. Adjusting a MPS to account for a engine modification requires a Zen like level of commitment.

I removed a functioning D-Jet system from this car. It is in a box and I will keep it. It worked and performed well. But it was clear based on AFR readings, that there were times and conditions because of my settings and my engine modifications, where it was documented that the fuel system was not performing well. Under certain conditions it was extremely rich (in the 10's) and other times it would be way too lean. Regardless of adjustments made to the stock system it was very difficult for me to reach a state where I had reasonably consistency across the range of engine conditions. I simply had to settle for a level of adjustment that worked reasonably well. It is my opinion that settling did not allow me to take full advantage of my modifications.

With the stock system I struggled to control AFR, cylinder head temperatures, timing, start-up, and other issues. While it has been a bit of a pain, with the new system I can adjust it so well that I can have all of my parameters in the ranges I want under the conditions that I want to specify.

For those few reasons above I think my bold statement about the performance of the fuel system is supportable. I am sure there are some numbers out there from Dyno testing and such that may be able to support higher HP or faster 0 to 60 times but that was never part of my statement.

Posted by: poorsche914 Sep 8 2017, 10:14 AM

Will be looking at your system closely. Would like to put something similar on my Raby 2056 in place of the carbs.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 8 2017, 10:39 AM

I think that adding FI and ignition control would really make your engine more drivable.

I have mine set up so that it is linked by Bluetooth to a tablet. Using MS Droid I have real-time display of parameters and I can change parameters relatively easily and have multiple tunes available.

Posted by: JamesM Sep 8 2017, 12:25 PM

I totally understand as I am very data driven person myself. Much like the carbs vs d-jet discussions the Megasquirt vs anything discussions have a tendency to devolve hence my response and my reluctance to even post on the subject anymore.

That being said, and not having been the one to have made the statement here I can only comment on what I know about. I do know that the particular motor in question was not stock so I am going to assume the rest of the statement should have been "performs better than the stock system on my motor."

To be clear, I love a well running d-jet system on a bone stock motor. I have both a d-jet 1.7 and a d-jet 2.0 that amaze me every time i turn the key, they start on the first compression stroke and I am in awe that these 45 year old parts still perform so well.

My appreciation of Megasquirt has to do with it being a technical advancement that allows optimization and precision not possible with d-jet. Added bonus is that is is also tune-able to any modification you make to the motor.



I do not believe this is an accurate assumption. If it were why are all Porsches today not running D-jet? Technological improvements have been made that result in real world benefits. At the most basic level, putting aside the massive feature set of Megasquirt and the documented shortcomings of D-jet wiring connectors and just comparing the two systems from a fueling standpoint there are still advantages to Megasquirt. Specifically I am referring to the accuracy of supplying fuel based on an analog curve vs a digital programmable fuel map. Yes under some conditions (specifically the points in the curve the d-jet system has been tuned to) the fueling of the two systems will be identical however outside of those very specific points the curve approximating fuel needs is just that, an approximation. It may be close, but a digital map will be closer if not dead on. In addition, the needs of an engine are not always on a perfect curve. The engine in my autocross car for example once the fuel map was completely dialed in for whatever reason has a noticeable dip in fuel needs at WOT around 3200-3600 rpm so looking at it on paper the fuel curve at WOT is not a curve but looks more like a 2 humped camel. A d-jet setup on this motor could be tuned to produce a perfect mixture at couple specific points but because of the shape of the fuel requirements it would always hit a rich spot around 3200 RPM at WOT unless it was tuned to be dead on at 3200 RPM in which case it would be lean everywhere else. Would it be noticed from the drivers seat? Who knows, but it can be seen in the data.

Add to that O2 closed loop operation and you just increase the real world accuracy of the system even more.

And that is just fueling. Megasquirt has a complete engine management feature set and the advantages that the accuracy of a digital system provides are multiplied as soon as you add ignition control which is really where i feel the most gains are. You can visibly see the difference with a timing light between a car running a stock distributor and one running a 36-1 tooth wheel with wasted spark. You can also again tune the ignition table in ways that are just not possible with analog advance weights and vacuum canisters.

I can go more in-depth but the bottom line is always accuracy improves performance and efficiency and Megasquirt can be tuned to a higher level of accuracy across all running conditions than d-jet, even on a stock motor. Nothing "wrong" with d-jet, its just the nature of the two systems. Points that can be made to the advantages of d-jet over carbs are similar to the ones that can be made about Megasquirt over d-jet. Its further refinement and less compromises.

Posted by: Jeff Bowlsby Sep 8 2017, 03:30 PM

Thanks for the detailed follow-up James. We basically agree on everything important. MS and others can be excellent FI solutions for those willing to pay the price.

100% disagree with the comment on the D-Jet terminals. Lets forget this myth it has no substance. Greenwood promotes a beyond-extremist perspective if that is your source, he has provided nothing to back up his claims. Perhaps on paper, in a lab setting under forensic evaluation they are not the most optimal engineering solution and 100% agree that L-Jet style hardware is a significant technical improvement towards connectivity, but that does not make the D-Jet terminals fatally flawed. No 914s or other D-Jet cars have burned to the ground because of this terminal. How many D-Jet cars still have their original harnesses using those 45 year old terminals? Every 914 I have ever owned has its original harness and several of those cars I drove daily for many years with never a related fault. VWs, MBs, Volvo's - a significant number of cars used D-Jet around the world and continue to use it and its hardware to this day without issue.

AS you mention, our D-Jets on stock engines are perfectly suitable solutions for what they are, I would argue that they were not designed to provide the level of precision that newer digital based FI systems are capable of, nor do our stock engines demand that level of precision. So the higher precisoin is more of a novelty only, where it is not essential to the needs of the engine. Because they can be so sophisticated to set-up, custom fit and calibrate, it is disheartening to see some that attempt the conversion not be successful or not successful without extreme dedication and sacrifice - the effort and cost needed can be a significant price to pay. The conversions can be and are done, but at what cost in time and materials? The most expensive part of the D-Jet is the MPS and rebuilts are available for $300. and its a bolt in solution. If folks want to go to the trouble of an FI conversion, or need to because of engine mods, they just need to be aware of the full impacts of that decision - either way they have my full support as long as they are fully informed.

Posted by: StratPlayer Sep 8 2017, 04:34 PM

Great read guys, for I am one with a Djet and original harness.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 12 2017, 09:41 AM

Well all is running with just a few minor issues. Most of them self inflicted wounds!

Still working with the idle adjustments and I am seeing some higher CHT temps than I want. Playing with the timing a bit to see if I can get them down. May just wind up adding some more fuel in to cool things off more at cruising speeds.

The one thing I was wondering is because I am not controlling timing yet should I be using the tooth wheel setting? It pulls some adjustment for timing based on rpm from a table which I have set up to mimic the factory timing.

Not sure it makes much difference but I have been struggling with the timing for the CHT temps and not met with much success. Running at above 350 most of the time and it heats up rapidly on hill climbs. In fact I reduces it to about 23 degrees and the temps were worse. So I was wondering if the timing of the fuel injection could be part of this?

Hoping for the best on the trip and because I have the ECU set up with Bluetooth connection and I am running MSDROID on a tablet I should be able to make fuel corrections as need on the trip to Okteenerfest.

Posted by: jpnovak Sep 12 2017, 11:36 AM

Your post is contradictory. In one line you are changing timing to help CHT. In the next section you are fuel-only and not controlling timing.

If you are running timing through the distributor then changes to the timing curve will not make any difference to your tune. They are just parameters that go nowhere and have no function.

If you want to run with a more lean AFR (lean burn) you generally have to advance the timing to match. This is usually done on low throttle cruise bins. However, if you are not controlling timing then you are at the mercy of the timing generated by your dizzy curve.

Glad that the car is running well. Continue to tune. During the trip you can change the target AFR, adjust the fuel trim and find the balance of power, fuel mileage and CHT.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 12 2017, 11:49 AM

I am not controlling time with the Microsquirt. I definitely could be wrong but I understood that the when using the tooth wheel set up you can select use table for timing. I don't know if this table impacts the firing of the injectors. I think it would not be related as you suggest but just wanted to confirm I was not missing something.

Posted by: jd74914 Sep 12 2017, 12:18 PM

There should be a fuel injection timing table which controls either the start or end of the injection cycle. What is yours set at?

In my experience, injection timing doesn't really have a huge effect on overall engine performance unless it is wayyyyy off and all you're doing is pooling in the manifold. It can subtly change throttle response, making transients a bit better, and also has a slight effect on torque, but I've only seen that on an engine dyno after many hours of tuning. Your AFR can also be a little weird if its way off and you're sending gas right out the exhaust port as IV/EV timing overlaps. Again, this is pretty subtle, nothing like the changes even a few degrees of ignition timing might make.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 12 2017, 12:34 PM

This is what I have for my timing settings.



This is base don information from McMark.



So I am assuming the ECU knows when TDC occurs and fires the injector based on that.

Is there another setting for the injector timing?

Posted by: McMark Sep 12 2017, 12:46 PM

Injector timing is fixed. There is a setting for it, but I'm not advanced enough to know how big of an impact it can have. My intuition says that it's not very relevant at low levels of tuning. Much like sequential injection doesn't seem to have a large impact on rough tuned engines.

Mike, is your distributors mechanical advanced locked out? You have two options with the distributor/ignition.
1. Lock the MicroSquirt ignition (top left of your image, change the Fixed Advance setting from Use Table to Fixed Timing).
2. Lock the distributor (glue the weights, or otherwise stop the mechanical advance) and use the MicroSquirt timing table to control advance.

If you're distributor isn't locked and your setting are like the image you posted, you have two systems fiddling with timing. The results will be unpredictable.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 12 2017, 01:07 PM

Not sure I see the potential for the systems to compete. The ECU has no control over actual timing. It is only firing the injectors based on the signal coming from the tooth wheel.

Posted by: McMark Sep 12 2017, 05:17 PM

Ahhh, that's right. Now I remember how your ignition is set up. Yeah, there's no overlap.

Look under Basic Settings -> Engine and Sequential Settings.

Sequential Injection setting is probably set to Untimed. You can set it to Semi-sequential to specify the crank angle. I would search for a good reason to do it before switching. I doubt it's going to magically solve any problems.

Posted by: jpnovak Sep 15 2017, 10:30 AM

OK. Clear now. Your original post about timing was referring to injector timing relative to crank angle. This will have almost no effect on CHT unless you are overheating at idle or very low rpm. ONce you above about 1500rpm the injectors are spraying fast enough (and in batch mode) that you will see almost no difference.

If you were running sequential or some variant then you would see a greater effect where the fuel can puddle on the topside of the intake valve if the timing was VERY wrong.

high CHT could be running lean or wrong IGNITION timing. Have you verified your ignition advance curve with a timing light? Is the timing too advanced?

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 17 2017, 11:04 AM

Well I got a few hundred miles on the car at Okteenerfest. With a few minor adjustments here and there I was able to keep my head temps in reasonable ranges and enjoyed a pretty good power range. Admidittly it took a few atttemps to get dialed in but using MSdroid on my tablet made the MicroSquirt changes so easy but using a old school timing light to make slight changes in timing was more difficult.

Extremely happy with the performance and the ease of adjustment. Ran pretty much flawlessly the whole weekend and performed well enough in all areas of the power band to all me to keep up with some pretty good cars. Not any faster but certainly more consistent performance across a much wider area.

I think once I switch the timing control it will be even better.

Again thanks to everyone for you help. you will likely see a similar thread when i start converting the timing.

Posted by: Mark Henry Sep 17 2017, 04:55 PM

My experience would say you're trying to achieve too lean of AFR especially on WOT or load. I can do 14:1 with my car because it has nickies, but every iron cylinder car I've tested/tuned 13.5:1 is the big load (hill) max, trying to lean it out further has always resulted in skyrocketing head temps. this often is combined with little or no recovery on the downside of the hill.
Frankly once you get beyond a certain head temp heat soak sets in and it will never recover.

You have to totally ignore the results for water cooled cars, they have way more control over head temps and can do the lean burn trick. You have to remember that the aircooled engine is based on a 1930's design. Some say aircooled, some say air/oil cooled, really it's air/oil and fuel charge cooled.
You have to run a bit rich, you have to run at minimum 3K RPM because leaning out and lugging an aircooled will kill the engine PDQ.

I get into arguments about aircooled AFR all the time, least I used too, guys basically saying I'm an idiot and "what does he know".
Then in short order I'll hear thru the grapevine the same person who wouldn't listen to me has dropped a valve seat, etc.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 17 2017, 06:38 PM

Well to add to your wise insight I had a discussion with a man I respect imesenly. Lewis Broyles and he pointed out that it did not matter what your past experience told you or what any gauge said. The air cooled engine needs more fuel to run cool. I added that fuel and have been enjoying the benefits the whole Okteenerfest weekend. Still have a few rough points to refine but what a blast the car was to drive this weekend.

Ran with a few big dogs. Admittedly a few steps behind but still in the mix. Certainly a driver with more skill than i have could have done more. But damn that was fun! Never had such predictable performance with the D-jet. Could be just due to my lack of understanding with the D-jet but stil it was beyond epic!

Posted by: Eric_Shea Sep 18 2017, 11:36 AM

We're lucky to have James in our back yard.

We have one amazing stock d-jet system in Jim's car but, I'm biting my nails every time he turns the key. These systems are old and having a perfect, running system these days is like finding a needle in a haystack. So is find parts for them.

We also have one amazing custom 2270 MicroSquirt system in Scott's car. It is absolutely "jaw dropping" (there's a technical phrase you can write a white paper on) in how it performs. Imagine how a brand new Type 4 motor would perform today with modern FI from a 2017 Macan as an "example" (but totally open sourced). To watch James sit in the passengers seat and fine tune this motor while you're doing 3rd gear pulls from 1,000 rpm will bring a tear to any 914 owners eye.

Cam? Any cam you want.
AFR? Any AFR you want at any RPM or altitude.
Advance? You guessed it.

Congrats Mike! Sounds like you're well on your way to having a killer motor.

Posted by: McMark Sep 19 2017, 11:57 AM

Just went through configuring a MicroSquirt brain running MS2E firmware and the trigger offset (Trigger #1 Angle) settings are calculated differently between the two firmwares.

MicroSquirt 3.83 firmware would end up being around 290° as mentioned above.

but...
Mike is running the MS2E firmware and the angle for that is around 60°.


Attached image(s)

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 20 2017, 02:02 PM

Was just looking through a couple of options for coils and saw this using a VW coil.



Seems to be too simple? Would fire in essentially 2 banks?

Any thoughts? The coil is only $18!

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 20 2017, 03:50 PM

Been looking through the information and i still have no idea how firing order and such is set?

Will be using the EFI Quadspark and Tower 4 coil. But just have not grasped the setup and how to specify firing order.

Once I get the hardware in I will start an ignition thread.

Posted by: McMark Sep 20 2017, 04:01 PM

Ignition is simple.

The coil you pictured (and most like it) have two ignitors built in, which controlled by the blue wires in the above picture. The ECU triggers each wire separately, every 180degrees. The spark plug outlet/wire connections are paired. So the coil pictured above the top two connections fire simultaneously (pair A), and the bottom two fire simultaneously (pair B). This means that each cylinder fires twice per cycle, this is not like the stock setup.

The ECU is hardcoded to trigger IGNOUT 1 as cylinder #1.
So cylinders #1 and #3 get connected to the coil controlled by IGNOUT 1, and cylinders #2 and #4 connect to the coil controlled by IGNOUT 2.

The firing order is set by your spark plug connections.

This is Wasted Spark. If it's still confusing, research Wasted Spark because I bet that will clarify things.

But there's not software setting for firing order. You just have to hook it up right, which really is just like a standard distributor. You can screw up your firing order on a stock engine just by swapping two wires. Same thing with the coil you pictured. You can screw it up (or make it right) just by moving the spark plug wires. NOTE: Some coils come with cylinder numbers embossed/scribed into the body of the coil, THIS MAY NOT BE CORRECT FOR YOUR ENGINE. Those numbers are to guide/help people installing that coil into the car it was designed for. You're not doing that, so those numbers (if they exist) aren't for you. Sand them off or just ignore them.

tl;dr -- Firing order is set simply by hooking the spark plug wires to the correct spots, and that's all.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 21 2017, 03:40 PM

Ok so I have a better understanding.

As I said I have the EFI Quadspark and Tower 4 coil coming and it shows a configuration like what is shown below.



I think the SPK C and D requires a cam position sensor to use.

But I should be able to use just SPK A and B to fire each side of the coil

But because the firing order on this is 1, 4, 3, 2 I am not sure how to configure the wires?

Looks like I would have to fire 1&3 together. 1 would be at firing position and 3 would be the wasted spark on the exhaust, and next 2&4 together?

Posted by: JamesM Sep 21 2017, 11:43 PM

I recommend this coil, same one we just used on the 2270 build. Super easy with the built in igniters. Only thing to be aware of is the firing order difference between the inline 4 VW motors this comes off of and and type 4 firing order. You will need to swap the cylinder 3 and 4 plug wires from how they are labeled on the coil in order to get the banking correct. Wasted spark on a 4 cylinder only needs two spark outputs. No need for the quad spark or external igniters if you are using a logic level coil.


As far as your head temp situation, given you are running a stock cam with a large displacement engine and a stock distributor for timing control, I would expect your head temps to be over 350 most of the time and probably pushing 400 on the freeway and hill climbs. Also retarding the timing may actually be making the temperature situation worse. Best situation you could probably hope for with your current setup is to set the distributor timing to spec or maybe even advanced beyond that a degree or two and make sure you are not running leaner than 13.5:1 anywhere in the map. You could try to richen it up a bit in the areas you are running hot (possibly all the way to 12.5:1) but without programmable timing control that is about your only option at the moment.

Also, I would bet money that you have some holes in your cooling tin that are missing their proper plugs. If you see any opening in your tin at all there is something that is supposed to be sealing it. Not going to make a huge difference but every little bit helps. Most common ones I find to be missing are the seal around the oil pressure switch, the seal around the head temp sensor opening, and the ones that always seem to be missing, the ~1/4in holes for the spark plug wire clips. If you dont have all the proper hardware for your heat exchangers you should plug those lower holes in the fan housing too. Even with everything in proper order though 350+ with that displacement, cam, and distributor shouldn't shock you.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 22 2017, 06:38 AM

There are a number of cooling tin issues. First it was modified for AC so there are some leaks! But sound advice.

Been able to run in the 12.5 range and have seen some dramatic drops in temp. On highway at 70 - mpg 340 and never above 385 on hill climbs.

Should start putting in the new coil next weekend!

But I was thinking that my O2 sensor could be in the wrong place. It is currently located at the end of the exhaust pipe after the muffler. I am wondering if this is potentially giving me bad readings?

Posted by: JamesM Sep 22 2017, 06:26 PM

Those temps are looking good for your current setup.

Having the O2 sensor after the muffler in the tailpipe is not the ideal location. Depending on your exhaust there is a chance it could be reading slightly leaner than it should at lower RPMs. If anything it may be adding some delay to the sensor response. I like to put mine as near as you can to the collector, as close as possible to the heads but after all 4 pipes are tied together. I wouldn't delay any other progress on moving that sensor though. Its been working this far, consider moving it as a future improvement.

You are going to love the wasted spark once you dial it in!

Posted by: Montreal914 Sep 23 2017, 08:23 AM

I like the simplicity of the cost effective option shown on post #98 (VW coil). Do we know if this coil will accept the regular 914 ignition cables or it will require 99-01 Golf/Jetta ones? I recently bought a nice set of Magnecor cables and would like to keep it if I were to do a MS upgrade.

I am also running a 2056 (DJet) and getting these type of head temp mentioned.

I know the usual route for MS upgrade is induction, then ignition but could one begin with ignition while keeping the D-Jet for induction, then upgrade to full control?

Like your MS build thread, I have been enjoying this one as much and looking forward to your ignition one. Great achievement!

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 23 2017, 01:14 PM

My understanding is it will work with stock wires. I will verify when it gets here and post.

With the 2056 and D-jet you have to add more fuel than you think. I know there are all of these "ideal" values. But you have to control the head temps. Timing is a good place to start but don't be afraid to run richer than you think is necessary. You can always back it out but too lean = hot running engine regardless of what the number on the AFR is.

I started with fuel only first because i thought it would be easy enough to trigger off coil. Bottom line is that approach is not the best and if you are going to add a tigger wheel I highly recommend McMarks set up. Absolutely flawless on the install and operation.

I found the coil on Amazon for $18. I also have the DIY Auto Tune high power coil coining as a back up. But I am going to try the low cost approach first. Simple install and low cost is very appealing.

I have learned a lot during this process and had the input and assistance of some really great people. I hope this does help some others that are heading down this road.

As i have said, i have my D-jet and will keep it intact. But for me at least, the D-jet is just very difficult to adjust for any engine modification. After running hard at Okteenerfest and many drives after I know for a fact that the engine feels like it is running stronger and while I have no way to measure that, not having any problems with the system and having it just work under all conditions is enough to justify the conversion even if the perceived performance increase is just in my mind.

I will work with McMark and some other vendors to come up with a price list for the conversion so that people can see the actual costs. I got a little beyond my orginal intent to do this for less than $1,000. But I and confident that both fuel and timing can be done for this price or less.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 25 2017, 05:37 PM

A few preliminary things done. Coil and test wiring ready. Stock plug wires won't work with this coil. Will have to buy some VW ones and adapt.

Posted by: Montreal914 Sep 25 2017, 09:13 PM

A lot of the cables offered for the 99-01 VW 2.0 have metal sleeve at the spark plug. I did see some blue ones with rubber sleeves where it might be possible to slide over the rubber washer to seal the shroud.

I saw on ebay some pigtail to connect to the coil. This is an example, I'm sure there are cheaper ones.

Posted by: McMark Sep 26 2017, 07:56 AM

I don't understand what the QuadSpark unit is doing for you. The MicroSquirt can directly drive a coil with built in igniter. So why add the QS unit? Am I missing something?

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 26 2017, 08:30 AM

The other coil from DIY is a high energy unit with out igniters. So the Quadspark is needed with it. I am using the $18 coil with built in igniters to test everything first and will switch to the high energy coil at some point.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 26 2017, 08:34 AM

I order a couple sets of cheap ones and will hopefully modify those to work. The DIY Autotune coil that I will switch to after proving everything out should work with the stock wires.

Depending on how this coil works I may add the pigtail if I run it long.

Posted by: McMark Sep 26 2017, 08:45 AM

Ignition power is only relevant if the spark plug is failing to ignite the mixture. If the 'cheap' coil doesn't give you any performance issues, then increasing the spark power won't add anything.

The job of the coil, wires, and spark plugs is simply to ignite the air-fuel mixture. Starting a campfire with a match isn't better or worse than using a jet-flame lighter. The in some cases the lighter is 'better', but it doesn't increase the 'performance' of the campfire. Now that I think about it, that's a great analogy. If the match is blowing out (and this CAN happen to a spark plug) then you need the jet-flame lighter to overcome the issue. But if there is no issue, the lighter doesn't add anything and it's potential is wasted.

In case you're still looking at a low-budget build, or want to avoid possible complexity/issues from more components.

Posted by: Vacca Rabite Sep 26 2017, 10:57 AM

I could very well be wrong on this, but that's somewhat contrary to what I've always been told.

I thought that more power through the coil allowed the use of a larger plug gap. Larger plug gap gives a larger flame front at the point of ignition, and also gives faster ignition to the air fuel mix, which gives the fuel more time to burn, which allows more of the fuel to burn, which is your efficiency increase. Same theory as using twin plugs (which are even more efficient as they start 2 flame fronts, instead of just one bigger one.)

To use your example, using a match will get your campfire lit, but I bring a MAPP torch becasue it lights the fire a hell of a lot faster, and is more tolerant of damp wood, wind, rain and other things that will slow down ignition.

Zach

Posted by: McMark Sep 26 2017, 12:19 PM

Absolutely true.
It gives a larger spark length, but not necessarily a larger flame front. Flame propagates much like a balloon or bubble, with the spark at the center. Increasing the size of the origin of the flame kernel won't make the kernel bigger. Instead I would say it gives more opportunity for ignition in turbulent conditions.
I'm pretty confident that's wrong. I'm pretty sure flame propagation speed is fixed based on things like RPM, compression, overlap, swirl. I don't know of anything you can do to the ignition system that will increase the flame propagation speed (aside from twin plugs, which isn't even increasing flame speed either, it's just starting two fires at the same time and letting them expand toward each other).
Not the same theory. Two flame fronts is WAY different than one.

Maybe a better example is if you had a 1 acre field of dry grass. (no wind, or other outside forces) If you were to ignite the field in two places, 2 or 3 or 4 or 10 feet apart, the field would burn at roughly the same rate. But if you ignite the field from opposite sides, then you can clearly see that the total burn time would be far less.

My understanding is that there are two common issues that ignition systems encounter:
1. Low RPM instability: At low rpm the air-fuel mixture is moving fairly slowly. There is less swirl in the combustion chamber, there is less efficiency at low RPM so you're not getting reliable exhaust expulsion nor intake suction. The fuel has more time to fall out of suspension and form droplets.
2. High Compression instability: At high compression ratios it's harder for the spark to jump the gap because of the density of the air (maybe you could say there's more air molecules that the spark has to push past). Also, on turbo applications (maybe high compression motors as well) there is a possibility for the higher charge swirl (turbulence) to literally blow out the spark like a candle.

Low RPM instability can cause misfires if the spark event happens at an inopportune time, when the swirl effect has just happened to pull the fuel particles out of reach of the spark. Especially at low RPM the air-fuel mixture is NOT homogeneous. There are areas of greater and lesser AFR. If the spark plug fires when there's no fuel around, it misfires (no ignition). Adding length to the spark would mildly improve the chances of avoiding that situation. Multiple sparks on one plug greatly increase the chances of avoiding that situation by trying multiple times, one of which is likely to catch. Twin plug will also greatly increase the chances for ignition. Simply increasing spark voltage will do nothing to increase the chances of ignition. Remember there is no such things as a 'hotter' spark.

High compression instability is clearly a case for increasing spark voltage. If the spark plugs are failing to fire because of charge density, increasing voltage will absolutely increase the reliability of the spark jumping the gap. If the spark is being blown out, a higher voltage will add stability to the arc in those turbulent conditions.

The KEY to all I'm saying is that if a basic coil is igniting reliably, increasing anything in the ignition setup won't do anything (aside from multiple spark).



Okay, the campfire example isn't perfect. But "damp wood, wind, rain and other things" would be examples of factors that make igniting unreliable and would therefore be example of when my assertion recommends upgrading ignition components.

Posted by: McMark Sep 26 2017, 12:26 PM

Actually, more thoughts on this if you needed more convincing that the flame propagation speed is fixed. Consider that the entire reason that we have to increase spark timing (advance) as RPM increases is because we need to ignite the mixture earlier to give enough time for complete combustion to happen.

If we could increase the flame speed by increasing the voltage from the coil, we would have engines with fixed distributor timing, and variable coil voltage. Because controlling coil voltage is a HELL OF A LOT EASIER than designing a centrifugal advance distributor.

Posted by: Keyser Sose Sep 26 2017, 12:29 PM

Use the analogy of a bucket of gasoline. It doesn't matter if you throw a small match into it or a large match, once there's ignition it's ignited. Or maybe better if you poke a small needle or a big nail into a balloon, the bang's going to be exactly the same. Only time you'll have an advantage from a lager spark is in extremes like very high RPM's, or extreme swirl from forced induction, those kinds of things.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 26 2017, 01:04 PM

While all of this is true, the one true benefit of a high engery coil is that it actually does have the ability to overcome resistance that is inherent to the system. As the engine and electrical system gets hot the resistance the flow of electricity increases. Higher energy coils do limit the degregation of the spark due to resistance.

Posted by: McMark Sep 26 2017, 01:34 PM

I have objections, but I suspect I'm annoying at this point so I'll bow out.

You're certainly not going to hurt anything by throwing more voltage at it.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 26 2017, 03:25 PM

You have no idea just how much information you provide to others in these discussions. No need to bow out.

You are spot on most of the time and discussion is what moves the understanding of those of us that don't do this every day forward. Thank you for that.

High engery coil turn the 914 into a 10 second car? Certainly not. But it has its application as long as your expectations are in line with reality.

Posted by: McMark Sep 27 2017, 07:54 AM

Okay, I wrote a few different replies and deleted them all. I'm going to step out of the theoretical and just talk about your setup.

The VW coil you got 'temporarily' will give you everything you need.
The QuadSpark setup will allow you to run a larger spark plug gap, and that will improve your idle, but everything off idle will stay the same.

Posted by: mb123 Sep 27 2017, 06:50 PM

I jumped to the end on my phone. Are you still trying to use the 3 bar map? If you are not boost, you should really only use the stock 1 bar. I use a 3 bar on my lsx because i will be boost. Show me your map values for thst 3 bar. If that is not right everything will be off.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 27 2017, 07:44 PM

Yes still using the 3 Bar but with a linear calibration of 1.1 kPa at 0 volts and 315.5 kPa at 5 volts it should read the normally aspirated range?

Posted by: mb123 Sep 27 2017, 09:00 PM

Ill take a look am on my tuning laptop

Posted by: jd74914 Sep 27 2017, 09:08 PM

It will read the ambient pressure range, but with less than optimal resolution. Might not be a big deal since you're not tuning to the nth degree, but I personally would change it out.

Posted by: McMark Sep 28 2017, 06:26 AM

Yup, it's a matter of resolution.

If any MAP sensor give you say 100 'steps' or readings, then a 3bar MAP sensor will give you 33 steps for NA and 66 steps you don't ever use.
A 1bar MAP will let you use the whole 100 steps for NA.

It's more righter more of the times.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 28 2017, 07:48 AM

Good point.

Ordered.

Anyone need a 3-bar?

Posted by: mb123 Sep 28 2017, 03:04 PM

the 3bar gives less resolution, and you probably did not need it. you still need the right scale and offset for any map sensor. e.g. these are the GM settings for hp tuners....

GM 1 bar map sensor Linear and offsets for HPtuners software
MAP Sensor Linear: 94.43
MAP Sensor Offset: 10.34

GM 2 bar map sensor Linear and offsets for HPtuners software
MAP Sensor Linear: 207.66
MAP Sensor Offset: 9

GM 2.5 bar map sensor Linear and offsets for HPtuners software
MAP Sensor Linear: 244.68 kPa
MAP Sensor Offset: 10.21 kPa

GM 3 bar map sensor Linear and offsets for HPtuners software
MAP Sensor Linear: 329.41
MAP Sensor Offset: -6.35

GM 3.3 bar map sensor Linear and offsets for HPtuners software
MAP Sensor Linear: 333.33
MAP Sensor Offset: 33.33

So you should be able to get it to fire and take the pedal without the finer resolution.

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 28 2017, 04:31 PM

I always thought the MAP readings were a bit "vague" at times. Ran well and responded well to changes in tune but having better resolution in the engine operating range has to be better.

Tuner Stuidiods has slightly different values built in.

Posted by: mb123 Sep 28 2017, 10:25 PM

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 29 2017, 06:49 AM

OK should be a good weekend. Going to change over to the 1 BAR MAP and to controlling the timing with the ECU!

I am going to simple way first.

However I was just wondering if I am missing something in Tuner Studios regarding IGNOUT2.

As indicated in the setting below there is a place to select IGN 1 but there is nothing about 2.



Does the ECU just "know" when to fire the other bank ore is there a setting I have enable?

Posted by: Mblizzard Sep 29 2017, 06:56 AM

Quick question McMarK. I am assuming this photo is at TDC?

Posted by: JamesM Sep 29 2017, 05:02 PM

I think once you run it you will realize you don't need anything more than the simple way. Its already so much more than what the stock system was and the less hardware and wiring to mess with the better.

Other than the settings for your trigger wheel (which you need to confirm with Mark given its his wheel) your output settings look good for that coil. With "number of coils" set to "wasted spark" IGNOUT 2 is enabled automatically. I don't believe the secondary output channel is customizable in software. Yes the ECU knows which bank to fire as long as you have the missing tooth angle set correctly so it knows where TDC for cylinder 1 is.

Be sure you check the tooth angle setting with a timing light once it is going. When running fuel only angle doesn't matter only engine speed, so it could be set completely wrong but working fine until you try and fire a spark with it.

Posted by: Mblizzard Oct 1 2017, 11:18 AM

Well this cant be good. Did a temporary wrire in of the coil and plugs for testing.

F$%king started first time! Smooth great idle and all seems good. I must rip it out and break something so it will be harder! I am confused when I am not banging my head on the wall. Pretty amazed at the ease of the conversion.

Will have to get a dizzy block off from some where McMark?

Checked time with light and it seemed close. Will have to mount up everything and put the actual coil wire connector on when it comes in.

Anyone got an existing mounting bracket for the tower coil?

Idle is too high now as I think my existing throttle body was designed to have negative advance at idle. Anyone know a solution other than plugging the small hole in the throttle plate.

I guess i can plug in negative advance into the ignition table at idle speeds? Throughly checked for vacuum leaks and have none and was able to idle great using the negative advance settings on the 123 dizzy.

Posted by: Mblizzard Oct 1 2017, 01:05 PM

Crap I like this! Plugged in -10 advance at the idle MAP and speed and instant 950 RPM!

Did not turn a single bolt on a dizzy or get out the timing light. Just used my button finger.

Not sure if that is the right way to address the problem but it works.

If you ever consider doing this the Bluetooth is a must. I think the Bluetooth unit was like $60 and I am using a $100 android tablet most of the time to make changes with MSDroid. Very nice. This set up has saved me far more time than the $160 it cost.

Posted by: Matty900 Oct 1 2017, 07:28 PM

Nice work Mike I'm watching your thread very closely as I intend to do the microsquirt soon. Have to save some pennies up first. So maybe February? So that means you're going to come out and get it dialed in for me right?

Posted by: Mblizzard Oct 1 2017, 08:35 PM

Love Oregon so that is possible. Yes I think this can be done fairl cheaply and I kind of got away from that but the reality is that other than the ECU so many of the parts are vet cheap. I got the coil for $18 and just got a 1 bar map for $20. I will work on getting a parts list and cost together.

Posted by: JamesM Oct 1 2017, 10:05 PM

You are idling at 10 deg after TDC? If so something aint right.

Before you do anything else tuning wise you need sanity check your trigger wheel settings with a timing light. Temporarily enable fixed advance from the wheel decoder page and set it to whatever your timing mark on the fan is at, or if you have an adjustable timing light you can mark TDC on the fan and set the fixed timing to whatever you have your timing light adjusted to. If its off you need to adjust your missing tooth angle to correct it. It should be more than close, with the setup you have it should be dead on, rock solid like nothing you have ever seen on a 914. Be absolutely sure you know what the markings on your fan are at, verify against the flywheel TDC mark.

Once you are absolutely sure the timing displayed in Megasquirt matches what you are actually getting you want to adjust your timing at idle to obtain the maximum manifold vacuum and then retard it a few degrees from there. This will give you the strongest idle and best off idle throttle response. Your idle is probably going be somewhere in the 8-15 deg BTDC range setting it like this. If you cant get the idle speed down with the timing set in this manner then you have other issues that need to be addressed. Dont adjust your timing to bring down your idle. You don't want to be idling 10 deg ATDC this will cause your exhaust (and most likely heads) to run hot as well as give you a weaker idle and sub par off idle response.

Timing is the most critical thing to get correct. In addition to possibly damaging your engine if you get it wrong, getting it correct and dialed in is where you are going to see the performance gains.

If your throttle body is stock and unmodified check you Aux Air regulator, and PCV. whenever i see an idle that cant be adjusted down on a car with a stock intake setup its usually one of those two things is broken/stuck open. You should have no problem adjusting idle speed properly with 8-15 deg advance if everything is working correctly.

Also, remember you will need to re-tune your fuel map once your timing table is set. Changes to the timing impact the engines efficiency/fuel needs.

Posted by: JamesM Oct 1 2017, 10:53 PM

Almost forgot

http://thedubshop.goodsie.com/hex-distributor-plug

They have a vented plug with an AN fitting as well if you wanted to go that route for extra case venting.

thedubshop has pretty much everything you would need when it comes to Megasquirting VWs/914s. Best to not browse around on that site to much otherwise you start getting ideas...

Posted by: McMark Oct 2 2017, 06:42 AM

You've already passed the need, but yes, my picture is a TDC (roughly).

I think I still have your address. I'll send you a block off plug.

with James, confirm the timing by enabling FIXED TIMING. That's CRITICAL. Do nothing else, until the laptop/computer and what you see with the timing light matches.

Also, as James mentioned, you may have air leaks in your intake system if the idle stays high once the timing is correct. You should be around 12degrees BTDC by the way. If your idle remains high, start checking for leaks.

Vacuum based injection (MAP-systems or D-Jet) doesn't have a problem with air leaks. Air leaks change the manifold vacuum and the FI compensates for the extra air because of that change in vacuum. Newer FI will run lean if there are air leaks. Not MAP/D-Jet, they just use the air and you notice a high-idle issue.

This is applicable to anyone running D-Jet or MAP-based FI: If you can't kill the engine by closing the idle bypass screw on the throttle body, then you have air leaks.

Posted by: Mblizzard Oct 2 2017, 08:26 AM

Have to get the coil plug harness in as it is just a temp setup for testing the electrical part. Did brief check admittedly not extensive of the timing and it seemed to be very close. Changed table at idle to 0 advance and saw only the TDC marking. Will follow your check process.

No AAR or PCV. Running case vent and head vents to oil catch can and then to breather. Fairly sure I have no vacuum leaks. I can cover the throttle body and it dies instantly. I have sprayed, checked, and listened countless times and can not find any leaks. That does not change what you stated and I do need to verify the timing further and recheck for leaks.

Will do that and report back.

Posted by: Mblizzard Oct 2 2017, 08:28 AM

Love the Dub Shop but because McMark / Original Customs did my engine and supplied many of the FI conversions components seems to be necessary to use his.

Posted by: JamesM Oct 2 2017, 10:58 AM

I get it, good to stick with the people helping you out. I didn't know mark was producing these.

Really curious to see what you find out regarding the high idle.

Posted by: Mblizzard Oct 4 2017, 07:59 AM

OK So I followed James direction.

Enabled fixed advance from the wheel decoder page. Set to 0 which should give me TDC on the timing light. This was off so I adjusted the Tooth angle for #1 BTDC from 60 to 72 and it showed the correct timing mark dead in the slot!

Enabled Use Timing table and at idle it seem to indicate the right value of 9 to 10 degrees. On bumping up the RPMs the marks advanced in the correct direction toward the 27 degree mark but fell just short of the mark. The table was set to 27.

Revising the table to 30 brought the impeller wheel 27 degree mark into perfect alignment. A bit confused by that so I will recheck it tonight and try to get a video.

Based on each tooth on the trigger wheel being 10 degrees I was a bit perplexed by the 72 value getting the TDC lined up so that is likely where I am off as on the total advance. Just did not have the time to go back and recheck last night.

If anyone needs a wire connector for this VW coil I have 3 extra!

Posted by: McMark Oct 4 2017, 10:50 AM

Try doing this with it set to 12 degrees now that you're closer. The engine probably won't idle very well at 0. Check for 12 degrees fixed on the computer, and tweak the offset angle till you see 12 on the timing light.

OH! And make sure your timing light is compatible with wasted spark!!

Posted by: Mblizzard Oct 4 2017, 12:03 PM

OK I picked 0 because it had a exact measurable point on the impeller. There is no 12 degree mark. I have the simple timing light that works with wasted spark. No way to set the offset.

I guess I could back in to it from the 27 mark as well as another check.

Posted by: Mueller Oct 4 2017, 12:43 PM

Pelican has a nice write up with a template for the timing on the impeller.

http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarticles/914_timing/914_timing.htm

http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarticles/914_timing/914_timing.pdf

Posted by: McMark Oct 4 2017, 12:58 PM

That'd work. Just adjust your timing table until EVERYTHING above 3000 rpm is 27° and then use your timing light to check the timing like a stock 914. Rev up past 3000 and see if the mark is there. Adjust as necessary.

Posted by: Mblizzard Oct 5 2017, 03:00 PM

Got a very undeserved but much appreciated gift from a true master. Thanks to Orginal Customs and McMark for a work of art.

Posted by: timothy_nd28 Oct 5 2017, 03:39 PM

I wonder if they make one that has a cam sensor?

Posted by: JamesM Oct 5 2017, 10:07 PM

I dont know if Mark does, but yes they do exist.

http://thedubshop.goodsie.com/mini-cam-sync

I have always felt like going full sequential on a Type 4 may be overkill but that is a configuration that I have not tired myself so i cant say for sure. I can say batch fire setups run so damn good i dont know if I would be able to notice a difference.

Posted by: gothspeed Dec 24 2017, 02:52 PM

I heard Mark sells a Microsquirt Kit .... I have searched the forum for info on this and this is one of a handful of threads that mentions this. Does anyone have a link to Mark's MS kit?

Posted by: Mblizzard Dec 24 2017, 03:24 PM

I think it is by request. PM him and he will hook you up!

Posted by: gothspeed Dec 24 2017, 08:54 PM

Thank you for the response.

Posted by: rudedude Oct 11 2018, 05:18 PM

I have read this thread and your other and am wondering how the microsquirt system is working for you? I am ready to make the plunge and was hoping to hear positive results from you or any others that have done so after reading this. Thanks.

Posted by: Mblizzard Oct 11 2018, 06:02 PM

Well it is a love hate relationship. But for the most part the hate was self inflicted. The guys at DIY Autotune are awesome and you need to use every source you can find to learn. The important thing to remember is that there is a steep learning curve and you will make mistakes. But holy crap when it is working right there is nothing like it.

There is a huge amount of information in the people on the world. Reach out when you are stuck.

Posted by: VaccaRabite Oct 11 2018, 06:36 PM

So much THIS.

Learning how to deal with modern injection is really hard at first. But once you get it, you get it. Tune the car on a dyno and the ability to just start it and drive is more or less amazing. My car has never behaved so nicely...

Zach