TPS vs. MAP fuel mapping

[MattR]

Hi, I've been fortunate enough to have another G4+ user share his tune with me but I'm unsure as to whether the TPS fuel map will be the best option. For background, we are both using the BMW M54B30; however his engine has a set of ITBs from an S50B30 and has intake Vanos enabled - I'm using a intake manifold & throttle body from an M50B25 and have locked both cams at 0º advance. 

 

Would a TPS map be appropriate in my application? And if not, how do I go about converting the map for MAP?

[nilsp]

Normally with ITB`s, TPS is best suited, as the vacuum isnt very stabile with ITB`s.

Doing this myself to bmw 4 cyl engine with ITB, and have understood this is the way to go.

[Woody]

You are right MattR , just change the load axis from tps to map on the fuel map  press control and x it will open up the axis and load /speed site box , also go into Fuel Main tab and make sure the Equation load source is set to Load= Map and you should be good to go

HTH cheers Keith

[whittlebeast]

Here is a video I did on that subject.

 

Also see

and

https://youtu.be/MJ1V0A9uKLE

 

 

[MattR]

3 hours ago, Woody said:

You are right MattR , just change the load axis from tps to map on the fuel map  press control and x it will open up the axis and load /speed site box , also go into Fuel Main tab and make sure the Equation load source is set to Load= Map and you should be good to go

HTH cheers Keith

Thanks Keith. Will this convert the table values as well? Sorry for the noob question 

[Adamw]

If this is not an ITB engine and has a reasonably stable manifold vacuum then you will get a better tune switching your fuel table axis over to MAP or MGP.  Note the existing fuel table numbers wont be much good to you after that as it will take a completely different shape.

[Woody]

On 8/23/2018 at 2:04 AM, MattR said:

Thanks Keith. Will this convert the table values as well? Sorry for the noob question 

Sorry mate  , just re read your original post and  as Adam has said your engine is on a normal manifold and throttle body so MAP /MGP would be the best option 

 

Cheers Keith

[mapper]

I don't agree. 

I get better results with tps vs rpm and 4d mgp vs rpm. For sure on turbo and single throttle engine. 

[Brad Burnett]

1 hour ago, mapper said:

I don't agree. 

I get better results with tps vs rpm and 4d mgp vs rpm. For sure on turbo and single throttle engine. 

Have you done this with modelled multi fuel setups?  My beams motor with itbs is already set up with tps v rpm modelled multifuel set up and will be adding a turbo soon.  With that being said, does 1 4d table for mgp v rpm work for the 2 blended fuel tables?

[mapper]

20 hours ago, Brad Burnett said:

Have you done this with modelled multi fuel setups?  My beams motor with itbs is already set up with tps v rpm modelled multifuel set up and will be adding a turbo soon.  With that being said, does 1 4d table for mgp v rpm work for the 2 blended fuel tables?

That's a good point. Yes I have done it in multifuel. And yes it can be a bit of a compromiss with the 4D table, because on ethanol the engine is usually more efficient at higher boost, because egt is lower = backpressure lower = lower pressure Ration = more efficient. 

However, you can use the 5D table to correct that. 

[Brad Burnett]

So the 4d table for the mgp vs rpm and then use the 5d for a correction for the ethanol?

[mapper]

8 hours ago, Brad Burnett said:

So the 4d table for the mgp vs rpm and then use the 5d for a correction for the ethanol?

The fuel Modell does the main correction for ethanol. You can use the 5d table to correct if on higher boost settings the efficiency on ethanol differs a bit from pump fuel. If 5D is needed, values are usually below 3%.