Tuning
Topic for MegaSquirt kit tuning issues.
By CZDAlfa on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 - 07:20 am:
Well, I'll start this off. I just recently completed the MS conversion on my 87 Milano with a stock 2.5. I am running without the AFM, using a true TPS, and no cat. convertor but basically stock, otherwise. I have it running on Peter's 3.0 Map form his MS page, which I greatly appreciate. I have set the req. fuel at 14 and 3 to 4 steps either side it stumbles. I am running the Flyback board and 25 PWM Current Limit. I have been unable to load any of the logging software to my laptop for some reason but am using Megatune. The car runs very rich at idle and seems to continue that pattern on up the RPM range, although it is rather hard to tell without logging software. Am I going the right way in adjusting the VE table by scaling it down? I have messed with it some but I am a car guy not much of a computer guy and somewhat unsure of myself in this type of tuning. Although, it is somewhat the same as turning air screws on a carb it is more in depth. More or less, I am curious if everything sounds OK so far and any tips on which way to go.
Thanks, Chuck.
By Peter Webb on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 09:43 am:
Sounds like tach spikes to me. We've all had that problem. That's exactly the way mine behaved when I was getting them.
In MegaTune, click file then logging. Select full and put in a file name. If you download MSLVV it will show the spikes with huge red lines on the RPM graph. If you can get a full log from MT, email it to me and I'll look at it for you.
Email address attached to my name on the post header.
I just diagnosed tach spikes for someone else recently using the same method.
-Peter
By Steve R on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 06:06 am:
Chuck, I note you mention not using the logging software, but if you are using Megatune there's a very easy and quick way to spot tach spikes.
The rpm dial gauge has a "tell tale" the shows highest value from when the screen was started.
Drive around a bit using sensible rpm & note where the tell tale sits, if it's pegged at 8000rpm (and you haven't been there), you definately have tach spikes. If you happen to be watching the rpm dial, you'll see it happen. It's common that you'll find the problem plagues only a single or few rpm points (mine was about 1600rpm only).
The mods for curing it are well documented in MS manuals and straighforward (Ed cap, Dave cap, resistor in-line etc).
Hope this helps
By Steve R on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 06:13 am:
Note to Peter,
You were soooooo right that tuning is the most time consuming bit of building Megasquirt, it's also the most fun !
My GTV runs beautifully now, thanks for all your help and pointers along the way
As an aside my "petrolhead" friends all think this hardware/software combo is the coolest car gadget they've seen.
By Peter Webb on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 06:48 pm:
Steve, good call on the tell-tale. If he's running MT he has datalogging. Maybe he can't get MSLVV to run on his machine.
Just in case it's not spikes (though I'm pretty sure it is), a datalog would be very helpful in diagnosing the problem.
The open-source aspect of MS is one of it's greatest strengths. I get the same reaction from gear-heads on the MS as Linux gets from bit-heads. Sadly, I'm both
Looks like we have a whole lot more MS's running here in the last few months. Great news.
Don't forget to post your success story on the MSEFI forum. I asked Lance for an Alfa section there. Let's fill it up with running cars!
-Peter
By CZDAlfa on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 07:45 pm:
Thanks for all the tips!! I am going to look at the tach spikes issue tomorrow. I never thought about it causing my problem! I love how MS works, the car seems to start better, idle better, and rev better even in this state of tune. I'll get there I may need more help but Steve is correct tuning it is the fun part although, I really enjoyed building it!! When I get more info I will post it.
Thanks!!
By Peter Webb on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 08:03 am:
A few more thoughts on Chuck's tuning project...
Req_Fuel should be set and correct first. Use the req_fuel calculator to get a good number. 14 sounds reasonable. Remember, it's adjustable in 10ths so a 2-3 ms change will be pretty drastic. Changing from 14 to 13.5 would be more accurate to fine-tune it. The VE table should be fine. You just need to get req_fuel to a good value.
This is in the MegaManual, but I'll repeat here:
Req_Fuel is the total fuel required in milliseconds at 100% volumetric efficiency at 100% load (100Kpa) at redline. The VE table is a percentage of that number based on load and speed. Actually, it's a percentage of volumetric efficiency but easier to think of it that way. By changing the VE table, you may end up with a scewed table because req_fuel is off and therefore inputting a bogus VE number to offset it.
Req_Fuel needs to be correct first. Then the VE table should be adjusted to suit. The req_fuel number in my table isn't going to be correct for you because I'm running big injectors. The VE table should be pretty close, although I am running big cams, headers and a ported head.
Once req_fuel is correct, you can do fine-tuning on the VE table based on crossover points of the NB02. Set EGO correction on, using 25% limit and 5% step rate and 12 cycles. Run a full datalog and watch the crossover points. You can use MSLVV for this, or input it into MSTweak. s
After that is all correct, you can apply your enrichments. The toughest part is warm-up. You only get 1 or 2 shots at it per day. Using the warm-up wizard helps and turning EGO correction CLT down to 40degF.
Accel enrichments are seat of the pants. Be careful here as the "if a little bit is good, more must be better" theory doesn't work. If you over-enrich the accel, you'll get stumbles and sluggish acceleration.
After that's all done, the cold enrichments are a little tougher. I forgo these for the most part because I'm not accelerating my car hard before it's warmed up. The V6's don't like that. I set cold accel ms to 0 and cold accel multiple to 125%. I have decel fuel cut to 110% because I get bucking otherwise. That's probably due to the cams and large throttle area on my custom intake. Since you don't have a cat, you won't hurt anything. Unburned fuel on decel will kill a cat pretty fast.
Priming pulse and cranking pulse is a seat of the pants thing. And you'll have to mess with that as the weather starts to get cooler. I did my initial starting and tuning in -6degF weather so I had it right pretty much first time. I had to turn the warm cranking down a little this summer.
HTH on the tuning strategy. Sounds like you're already happy with the way it runs over the L-Jet. Once you get it totally dialed in, you'll be even happier.
-Peter
By CZDAlfa on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 09:05 pm:
Just a note here, using Steve's tip for the tach spikes showed them at almost exaclty the same point he mentioned. I made the mods he mentioned in his build article on the home page. Will see how it runs tomorrow. I'll also try those smaller increments with the req fuel. Thanks again for all the help.
Chuck
By Steve R on Saturday, October 09, 2004 - 04:07 am:
Chuck, let me know how that works out for you, if you still find problems I've some additional suggestions.
There is also a way of tuning around this by tweaking the VE table so that the effect of a transient rpm spike is effectively ignored. If you like I can send you a .msq file that will show what I mean easier than an explaination... need to know your email address though...!
By CZDAlfa on Saturday, October 09, 2004 - 02:49 pm:
It worked out just great! No more tach spikes and a much cleaner idle. Still have lots of tuning left but getting closer. Steve, I would like to see the .msq file that you mention on your build up page. My e-mail is (czd3my at juno dot com.)
Thanks!
By Steve R on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 03:18 pm:
Cool, glad it worked. The file and explanation is in your inbox, I'll be interested to hear your opinion of my sometimes sideways "logic" !
By Peter Webb on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 08:25 am:
Great news in getting the tach spikes resolved. Maybe Steve or I could add that to his installation document.
It seems that all the Bosch ignition systems suffer from this so it's a requirement not an option to get it resolved during installation.
FWIW, the 528 installations that use an identical L-Jet+ignition system to ours have this problem too.
What did you guys end up with for an R10 value? I've seen different values work. I think I'm running a 1Mohm in there and the tach signal is clean with just the Wing Diode installed. Putting the Wing inline alone helped a little but didn't solve the problem until I increased R10.
I talked to another guy who installed in a Verde that didn't have the problem but R10 was getting VERY hot during running. The MegaManual suggests increasing it in that case too.
Anyway, glad it turned out to be a known issue rather than chasing a new one for weeks. Be sure to add yourself to the success stories!
-Peter
P.S. I'd like to get a collection of MSQ and Datalogs from running Alfas. If anyone with a running car would like to email me their final tuning file with datalog I'd appreciate it. I'll use them to help future installations. TYIA.
By Steve R on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 03:10 am:
Chuck, I had a delivery failure from the mail and .msq file I sent you. I will try again, but thought I'd put the message here too.
Glad the mods seemed to do the trick for the tach spikes. Mine still indicates an occasional tach spike at around 1600 rpm, but the following VE table entry trick completely removes any symptoms when driving...
I run with exactly the same VE for both 1800 rpm and 6700 rpm for MAP readings 33, 43, 54 & 65. Simple as that really & here's why :
I figured that the low MAP areas around max rpm are never used, other than very transiently if I happen to change gear that point, so the actual entry in the high rpm/medium MAP area is irrelevant to the car's general running. However, when the tach spike happens the MS thinks my car is operating at 18100rpm for one ignition cycle, and therefore extrapolates the VE table entry from the nearest point - which is the highest rpm line. Now I noticed that a tach spike only really affected drivability when cruising or gentle acceleration when the car bucks or bogs very noticably.
So by having the same VE entry at the highest rpm point as the cruise and light throttle MAP entries around the problem rpm, the symptoms completely vanish ! If I'm accelerating through 1600 rpm (with a high MAP reading) then either the engine is only at that rpm for a very short period of time and unlikely to catch a spike, or if one does happen, then the little bit of extra fuel at full throttle for one ignition cycle just doesn't make itself felt inside the car.
Data logging and the tell tale on megatune rpm gauge indicate I still get the occasional tach spike, but when driving you just can't tell at all. So if you still get the occasional tach spike give this a try, a really nice simple and free solution.
By Steve R on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 03:16 am:
Peter, Chuck
When I get home this evening I'll email a copy of my .msq file to you both.
Another one for your collection Peter !
(PS I'm researching the MSnS option now with a view to adding full spark advance control tables too & it appears simpler than I first feared... so watch this space - Although I really need to save some cash for a set of Greg G's big injectors first)
By Peter Webb on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 09:10 am:
Steve,
I've just started the EDIS conversion for my 3.0. I'll post pictures and stories too.
What route are you going for spark?
-Peter
By Steve R on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 09:35 am:
I'm currently looking at both EDIS (using donor scrap yard ford Mondeo v6) and also MSnS (keeping the stock ignition stuff close to intact, but locking the distributor down)
My preferance would be EDIS as it's superior in most ways - spark "power", minimal jitter/scatter & should be more reliable, but the stock based system should be simpler to execute and aesthetically look nearer stock.
Re EDIS I could probably make and mount a sensor bracket but the main issue I can see is fiting a 36-1 wheel to the v6, without custom machine work ? Would be interested to hear your thoughts on this?
One more thing I'm looking for is the standard advance curve for the GTV6? I can't find documentaton for it thus far, so will probably resort to setting it carefully at idle then measuring it at a couple of rpm points with both full and zero vacuum applied to the distributor.
That would give 5 reference points to extrapolate around and shouldn't be too bad a starting point as I believe mechanical centrifugal advance-weight distributors simply move to their max advance at a set rpm and stay there unless the vacuum advance is triggered too. I know the factory idle advance, and I'll know figures for say Xrpm and Yrpm both with and without vacuum advance added.
I imagine we are all running more base ignition advance that the factory suggests as a simple tweak already!
By Peter Webb on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:55 pm:
I run 25degBTDC static and goes to 45degBTDC at full advance at 3500RPM. It's dangerous I know and I make sure I use the appropriate fuel. It's been higher with no noticable ping or knock however it ran like crap and all the power went away. I'm going to use a dyno for finding the advance curve. As luck would have it, I'll be doing an EDIS setup for a racing buddy of mine who will have a rolling dyno in his shop to tune his car so I might be able to get some time there for my car while I do his.
I agree on the virtues of EDIS. Aside from the installation, it's a much easier system.
You'll have to use a 164 oil pump drive with the nut on the top to lock down the distributor drive once you take it out. The slotted drive pin will ride up if you don't and that gear supplies drive to the oil pump from the belt pulley.
The wheel fitment shouldn't be too tough. Electromotive have various 36-1 wheels but considerably more expensive than an Escort/Mondeo.
-Peter
By Peter Webb on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 05:33 pm:
I think we'd better add a spark section now.
I like how this is growing
By Steve R on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - 02:22 am:
That's an awful lot of advance Peter, I've read somewhere that racers on pump fuel won't go beyond 33 max advance WOT for the v6's.
45 sounds more like an LPG advance limit, what are you running, rocket fuel ?!
By Peter Webb on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - 08:07 am:
Pay no attention to that still in the back of the garage
Well, I'll start this off. I just recently completed the MS conversion on my 87 Milano with a stock 2.5. I am running without the AFM, using a true TPS, and no cat. convertor but basically stock, otherwise. I have it running on Peter's 3.0 Map form his MS page, which I greatly appreciate. I have set the req. fuel at 14 and 3 to 4 steps either side it stumbles. I am running the Flyback board and 25 PWM Current Limit. I have been unable to load any of the logging software to my laptop for some reason but am using Megatune. The car runs very rich at idle and seems to continue that pattern on up the RPM range, although it is rather hard to tell without logging software. Am I going the right way in adjusting the VE table by scaling it down? I have messed with it some but I am a car guy not much of a computer guy and somewhat unsure of myself in this type of tuning. Although, it is somewhat the same as turning air screws on a carb it is more in depth. More or less, I am curious if everything sounds OK so far and any tips on which way to go.
Thanks, Chuck.
By Peter Webb on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 - 09:43 am:
Sounds like tach spikes to me. We've all had that problem. That's exactly the way mine behaved when I was getting them.
In MegaTune, click file then logging. Select full and put in a file name. If you download MSLVV it will show the spikes with huge red lines on the RPM graph. If you can get a full log from MT, email it to me and I'll look at it for you.
Email address attached to my name on the post header.
I just diagnosed tach spikes for someone else recently using the same method.
-Peter
By Steve R on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 06:06 am:
Chuck, I note you mention not using the logging software, but if you are using Megatune there's a very easy and quick way to spot tach spikes.
The rpm dial gauge has a "tell tale" the shows highest value from when the screen was started.
Drive around a bit using sensible rpm & note where the tell tale sits, if it's pegged at 8000rpm (and you haven't been there), you definately have tach spikes. If you happen to be watching the rpm dial, you'll see it happen. It's common that you'll find the problem plagues only a single or few rpm points (mine was about 1600rpm only).
The mods for curing it are well documented in MS manuals and straighforward (Ed cap, Dave cap, resistor in-line etc).
Hope this helps
By Steve R on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 06:13 am:
Note to Peter,
You were soooooo right that tuning is the most time consuming bit of building Megasquirt, it's also the most fun !
My GTV runs beautifully now, thanks for all your help and pointers along the way
As an aside my "petrolhead" friends all think this hardware/software combo is the coolest car gadget they've seen.
By Peter Webb on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 06:48 pm:
Steve, good call on the tell-tale. If he's running MT he has datalogging. Maybe he can't get MSLVV to run on his machine.
Just in case it's not spikes (though I'm pretty sure it is), a datalog would be very helpful in diagnosing the problem.
The open-source aspect of MS is one of it's greatest strengths. I get the same reaction from gear-heads on the MS as Linux gets from bit-heads. Sadly, I'm both
Looks like we have a whole lot more MS's running here in the last few months. Great news.
Don't forget to post your success story on the MSEFI forum. I asked Lance for an Alfa section there. Let's fill it up with running cars!
-Peter
By CZDAlfa on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 07:45 pm:
Thanks for all the tips!! I am going to look at the tach spikes issue tomorrow. I never thought about it causing my problem! I love how MS works, the car seems to start better, idle better, and rev better even in this state of tune. I'll get there I may need more help but Steve is correct tuning it is the fun part although, I really enjoyed building it!! When I get more info I will post it.
Thanks!!
By Peter Webb on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 08:03 am:
A few more thoughts on Chuck's tuning project...
Req_Fuel should be set and correct first. Use the req_fuel calculator to get a good number. 14 sounds reasonable. Remember, it's adjustable in 10ths so a 2-3 ms change will be pretty drastic. Changing from 14 to 13.5 would be more accurate to fine-tune it. The VE table should be fine. You just need to get req_fuel to a good value.
This is in the MegaManual, but I'll repeat here:
Req_Fuel is the total fuel required in milliseconds at 100% volumetric efficiency at 100% load (100Kpa) at redline. The VE table is a percentage of that number based on load and speed. Actually, it's a percentage of volumetric efficiency but easier to think of it that way. By changing the VE table, you may end up with a scewed table because req_fuel is off and therefore inputting a bogus VE number to offset it.
Req_Fuel needs to be correct first. Then the VE table should be adjusted to suit. The req_fuel number in my table isn't going to be correct for you because I'm running big injectors. The VE table should be pretty close, although I am running big cams, headers and a ported head.
Once req_fuel is correct, you can do fine-tuning on the VE table based on crossover points of the NB02. Set EGO correction on, using 25% limit and 5% step rate and 12 cycles. Run a full datalog and watch the crossover points. You can use MSLVV for this, or input it into MSTweak. s
After that is all correct, you can apply your enrichments. The toughest part is warm-up. You only get 1 or 2 shots at it per day. Using the warm-up wizard helps and turning EGO correction CLT down to 40degF.
Accel enrichments are seat of the pants. Be careful here as the "if a little bit is good, more must be better" theory doesn't work. If you over-enrich the accel, you'll get stumbles and sluggish acceleration.
After that's all done, the cold enrichments are a little tougher. I forgo these for the most part because I'm not accelerating my car hard before it's warmed up. The V6's don't like that. I set cold accel ms to 0 and cold accel multiple to 125%. I have decel fuel cut to 110% because I get bucking otherwise. That's probably due to the cams and large throttle area on my custom intake. Since you don't have a cat, you won't hurt anything. Unburned fuel on decel will kill a cat pretty fast.
Priming pulse and cranking pulse is a seat of the pants thing. And you'll have to mess with that as the weather starts to get cooler. I did my initial starting and tuning in -6degF weather so I had it right pretty much first time. I had to turn the warm cranking down a little this summer.
HTH on the tuning strategy. Sounds like you're already happy with the way it runs over the L-Jet. Once you get it totally dialed in, you'll be even happier.
-Peter
By CZDAlfa on Friday, October 08, 2004 - 09:05 pm:
Just a note here, using Steve's tip for the tach spikes showed them at almost exaclty the same point he mentioned. I made the mods he mentioned in his build article on the home page. Will see how it runs tomorrow. I'll also try those smaller increments with the req fuel. Thanks again for all the help.
Chuck
By Steve R on Saturday, October 09, 2004 - 04:07 am:
Chuck, let me know how that works out for you, if you still find problems I've some additional suggestions.
There is also a way of tuning around this by tweaking the VE table so that the effect of a transient rpm spike is effectively ignored. If you like I can send you a .msq file that will show what I mean easier than an explaination... need to know your email address though...!
By CZDAlfa on Saturday, October 09, 2004 - 02:49 pm:
It worked out just great! No more tach spikes and a much cleaner idle. Still have lots of tuning left but getting closer. Steve, I would like to see the .msq file that you mention on your build up page. My e-mail is (czd3my at juno dot com.)
Thanks!
By Steve R on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 03:18 pm:
Cool, glad it worked. The file and explanation is in your inbox, I'll be interested to hear your opinion of my sometimes sideways "logic" !
By Peter Webb on Monday, October 11, 2004 - 08:25 am:
Great news in getting the tach spikes resolved. Maybe Steve or I could add that to his installation document.
It seems that all the Bosch ignition systems suffer from this so it's a requirement not an option to get it resolved during installation.
FWIW, the 528 installations that use an identical L-Jet+ignition system to ours have this problem too.
What did you guys end up with for an R10 value? I've seen different values work. I think I'm running a 1Mohm in there and the tach signal is clean with just the Wing Diode installed. Putting the Wing inline alone helped a little but didn't solve the problem until I increased R10.
I talked to another guy who installed in a Verde that didn't have the problem but R10 was getting VERY hot during running. The MegaManual suggests increasing it in that case too.
Anyway, glad it turned out to be a known issue rather than chasing a new one for weeks. Be sure to add yourself to the success stories!
-Peter
P.S. I'd like to get a collection of MSQ and Datalogs from running Alfas. If anyone with a running car would like to email me their final tuning file with datalog I'd appreciate it. I'll use them to help future installations. TYIA.
By Steve R on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 03:10 am:
Chuck, I had a delivery failure from the mail and .msq file I sent you. I will try again, but thought I'd put the message here too.
Glad the mods seemed to do the trick for the tach spikes. Mine still indicates an occasional tach spike at around 1600 rpm, but the following VE table entry trick completely removes any symptoms when driving...
I run with exactly the same VE for both 1800 rpm and 6700 rpm for MAP readings 33, 43, 54 & 65. Simple as that really & here's why :
I figured that the low MAP areas around max rpm are never used, other than very transiently if I happen to change gear that point, so the actual entry in the high rpm/medium MAP area is irrelevant to the car's general running. However, when the tach spike happens the MS thinks my car is operating at 18100rpm for one ignition cycle, and therefore extrapolates the VE table entry from the nearest point - which is the highest rpm line. Now I noticed that a tach spike only really affected drivability when cruising or gentle acceleration when the car bucks or bogs very noticably.
So by having the same VE entry at the highest rpm point as the cruise and light throttle MAP entries around the problem rpm, the symptoms completely vanish ! If I'm accelerating through 1600 rpm (with a high MAP reading) then either the engine is only at that rpm for a very short period of time and unlikely to catch a spike, or if one does happen, then the little bit of extra fuel at full throttle for one ignition cycle just doesn't make itself felt inside the car.
Data logging and the tell tale on megatune rpm gauge indicate I still get the occasional tach spike, but when driving you just can't tell at all. So if you still get the occasional tach spike give this a try, a really nice simple and free solution.
By Steve R on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 03:16 am:
Peter, Chuck
When I get home this evening I'll email a copy of my .msq file to you both.
Another one for your collection Peter !
(PS I'm researching the MSnS option now with a view to adding full spark advance control tables too & it appears simpler than I first feared... so watch this space - Although I really need to save some cash for a set of Greg G's big injectors first)
By Peter Webb on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 09:10 am:
Steve,
I've just started the EDIS conversion for my 3.0. I'll post pictures and stories too.
What route are you going for spark?
-Peter
By Steve R on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 09:35 am:
I'm currently looking at both EDIS (using donor scrap yard ford Mondeo v6) and also MSnS (keeping the stock ignition stuff close to intact, but locking the distributor down)
My preferance would be EDIS as it's superior in most ways - spark "power", minimal jitter/scatter & should be more reliable, but the stock based system should be simpler to execute and aesthetically look nearer stock.
Re EDIS I could probably make and mount a sensor bracket but the main issue I can see is fiting a 36-1 wheel to the v6, without custom machine work ? Would be interested to hear your thoughts on this?
One more thing I'm looking for is the standard advance curve for the GTV6? I can't find documentaton for it thus far, so will probably resort to setting it carefully at idle then measuring it at a couple of rpm points with both full and zero vacuum applied to the distributor.
That would give 5 reference points to extrapolate around and shouldn't be too bad a starting point as I believe mechanical centrifugal advance-weight distributors simply move to their max advance at a set rpm and stay there unless the vacuum advance is triggered too. I know the factory idle advance, and I'll know figures for say Xrpm and Yrpm both with and without vacuum advance added.
I imagine we are all running more base ignition advance that the factory suggests as a simple tweak already!
By Peter Webb on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 01:55 pm:
I run 25degBTDC static and goes to 45degBTDC at full advance at 3500RPM. It's dangerous I know and I make sure I use the appropriate fuel. It's been higher with no noticable ping or knock however it ran like crap and all the power went away. I'm going to use a dyno for finding the advance curve. As luck would have it, I'll be doing an EDIS setup for a racing buddy of mine who will have a rolling dyno in his shop to tune his car so I might be able to get some time there for my car while I do his.
I agree on the virtues of EDIS. Aside from the installation, it's a much easier system.
You'll have to use a 164 oil pump drive with the nut on the top to lock down the distributor drive once you take it out. The slotted drive pin will ride up if you don't and that gear supplies drive to the oil pump from the belt pulley.
The wheel fitment shouldn't be too tough. Electromotive have various 36-1 wheels but considerably more expensive than an Escort/Mondeo.
-Peter
By Peter Webb on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 05:33 pm:
I think we'd better add a spark section now.
I like how this is growing
By Steve R on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - 02:22 am:
That's an awful lot of advance Peter, I've read somewhere that racers on pump fuel won't go beyond 33 max advance WOT for the v6's.
45 sounds more like an LPG advance limit, what are you running, rocket fuel ?!
By Peter Webb on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - 08:07 am:
Pay no attention to that still in the back of the garage
Peter,
Thanks for the link to the new site. I was afraid the GTV6 site was lost forever.
I've just completed my 85 GTV6 3.0L conversion and MS installation. I had some problems with tuning issues and thanks to Peter's assistance (or should that be persistence) the car is now running beautifully.
With Peter's help, I have overcome, poor idle, running rich, stalling, etc. Don't get me wrong, the problems weren't the fault of MS but rather my own shortcomings in understanding the whole tuning process. In Peter's own words, "where else can you get you car tuned on a Sunday afternoon by someone 6,000 miles away?"
David S
Thanks for the link to the new site. I was afraid the GTV6 site was lost forever.
I've just completed my 85 GTV6 3.0L conversion and MS installation. I had some problems with tuning issues and thanks to Peter's assistance (or should that be persistence) the car is now running beautifully.
With Peter's help, I have overcome, poor idle, running rich, stalling, etc. Don't get me wrong, the problems weren't the fault of MS but rather my own shortcomings in understanding the whole tuning process. In Peter's own words, "where else can you get you car tuned on a Sunday afternoon by someone 6,000 miles away?"
David S