Rv8 - configuring distributorless wasted spark

[Pupp]

Two coil packs = 4 ign drivers, all firing pairs of plugs each (1+6, 8+5, 4+7, and 3+2 in that order), but at what intervals?

[Pupp]

Gotta be 90 degrees between each pair, right?

[Pupp]

Or is it 180 degrees over two revolutions?

[thenick]

90 between each pair isn't it? Mine fires at 0, 90, 180 and 270

[Pupp]

thenick said:

90 between each pair isn't it? Mine fires at 0, 90, 180 and 270

Well, you've clicked on what I've been looking at... I thought 90 too and that's what the ECU is set to. But, looking at a couple of maps on the pc away from the ECU, the config is coming back as 0, 180, 0, 180 and I've just confused myself by looking at this (the dizzy schematic) and trying to equate the same pairs with the engine cycle on a v8.

It's alright, been a tough day!

http://www.mez.co.uk/TuningTheRoverV8-pt11.html

Edited by Pupp on Wednesday 9th April 21:57

[Pupp]

thenick said:

Ah yeah you can only see the ECU settings when you're plugged into the ECU. Those settings aren't part of the maps so they will be the same whatever map you load... The 0 180 0 180 must be the default setting it goes to when not connected.

I'm sure that's right (and I'm sure it's also 90 degs), I'm just looking for reassurance! lol

[thenick]

Hmm not sure, I know it will revert to default if you try to look at the ECU settings when not plugged in to it. Mine reads 180 0 180 0 when not plugged in but it is set to and runs on 0 90 180 270

[thenick]

woops sorry, thought that post hadn't gone through! So pressed delete and re-wrote it... long night! Still having trouble with it I see, have you eliminated the timing?

I scared myself when playing with the coil packs the other night - After disconnecting them and moving everything in to its new position, I fired it up to bleed the power steering and found the car running rough and backfiring much like when I first set it up. Turned out to be two HT leads I hadn't quite clicked on all the way! Phew!

[Pupp]

thenick said:

woops sorry, thought that post hadn't gone through! So pressed delete and re-wrote it... long night! Still having trouble with it I see, have you eliminated the timing?

I scared myself when playing with the coil packs the other night - After disconnecting them and moving everything in to its new position, I fired it up to bleed the power steering and found the car running rough and backfiring much like when I first set it up. Turned out to be two HT leads I hadn't quite clicked on all the way! Phew!

I'm confident of TW aligment to within a degree or two, but think I might have had the crank sensor polarity reversed. Have swapped that but by the time I did the battery was suffering and the plugs were fouled. It's massively overfuelling so I'm going to take the inj settings right back and incrementally increase...

Better be worth it!

[thenick]

Yeah I'm sure you can take at least 7ms injector time off most of my map and still have a reasonable AFR. You'll probably need to bump up the advance a little bit though. Hope you get it going without too much trouble! I'm sure it'll be worth it in the end!

[chrispitman]

My two pence worth - It must be at 0 90 180 270 as its wasted spark and its 4 stroke, thats why its paired up and the wasted part goes to a cylinder without a air fuel mix like the exhaust stroke. For two revolutions of the engine all 8 plugs fire, so 0 90 180 270 0 90 180 270. Maybe wrong thou.

[The AJP Griff]

will one coil pack will fire twice per engine revolution(ignition and exhaust),and thus 180o apart?You just have two leads from one coil pack going to 2 cylinders.

[Johno]

thenick said:

Yeah I'm sure you can take at least 7ms injector time off most of my map and still have a reasonable AFR. You'll probably need to bump up the advance a little bit though. Hope you get it going without too much trouble! I'm sure it'll be worth it in the end!

Hasn't your car been mapped by Dave then ?

[Johno]

If as we've been discussing via email the R45V8 map supplied it is set up for standard injectors, and should not be massively overfuelling.

I think yours is an air issue . . . Sent an email over with a couple of other ideas.

[thenick]

Johno said:

thenick said:

Yeah I'm sure you can take at least 7ms injector time off most of my map and still have a reasonable AFR. You'll probably need to bump up the advance a little bit though. Hope you get it going without too much trouble! I'm sure it'll be worth it in the end!

Hasn't your car been mapped by Dave then ?

Yeah it has been mapped by Dave, but he mapped it for maximum power with absolutely no regard for emissions or economy! Hence it uses a lot of fuel (around 12/13 AFR most of the time). I have written a second map where it runs adaptive mode and pegs to the AFR target map and runs just fine on cruise, though there is a noticeable difference in power so I only use it for cruising or around town.

[Johno]

Are you using an LC-1 to give you that AFR reading ?

If so good luck ! I got talked in to using one, and having it on the road with Dave proved the rumours of how poor they are being true . .

I hope yours is a good one, as mine is ste. I'm going to have another go at calibrating it, but just don't see the point.

My LC-1 was at 1.0 to 1.5 out consistently, and I wouldn't trust my engine to the adaptive mapping mode being run by an LC-1 as it is currently, the damage doesn't bare thinking about.

I also don't believe Dave would map your car for the a 12-13 afr throughout the range, as that doesn't give the greatest power or response from an engine . . . Seems strange to me.

[hiltonig]

whats the alternative to the LC1 if they are not that accurate ????

just about to chuck my trigger wheel out of the window !!!!

[thenick]

Johno said:

Are you using an LC-1 to give you that AFR reading ?

If so good luck ! I got talked in to using one, and having it on the road with Dave proved the rumours of how poor they are being true . .

I hope yours is a good one, as mine is ste. I'm going to have another go at calibrating it, but just don't see the point.

My LC-1 was at 1.0 to 1.5 out consistently, and I wouldn't trust my engine to the adaptive mapping mode being run by an LC-1 as it is currently, the damage doesn't bare thinking about.

I also don't believe Dave would map your car for the a 12-13 afr throughout the range, as that doesn't give the greatest power or response from an engine . . . Seems strange to me.

Yeah I have the LC-1, not had any problems with is so far though. It's very accurate, and when tested against TVR Powers rig, it came out bang on after being calibrated. I think the biggest problem they suffer with is earth noise. I've wired mine directly to the ECU earth which goes straight into the fusebox though so haven't had a problem with it.

The 12/13 AFR does seem a little much (12ish near idle, 13's futher up), but after chatting to the RR guy at Power, he seemed to think it was a very good map - though was a full bore one and a bit excessive for everyday use, hence the adaptive map as well. It does run fine at 14ish AFR, but it doesn't feel as responsive and there seems to be a little less power.

[Johno]

hiltonig said:

whats the alternative to the LC1 if they are not that accurate ????

just about to chuck my trigger wheel out of the window !!!!

It just seems the results form LC-1's are not consistent and the calibration of them is required regularly and conducted well. I need to do mine again, Emerald see very few that give an accurate reading.

With all these things it seems to come down to how much you pays . . . they just get more expensive after the LC-1 . .

[rev-erend]

I bought an alternative to the LC1 called Zeitronix from the USA.

Also bought the optional display screen - so should be able to see Emerald vs Zeitronix displays of AFR to see how well it stays calibrated.