cappo_nz

Thanks for the update, any idea on timeframe? Is there a beta release/testing program that end users can join?

cappo oct 23.pclx Tune attached - not possible to capture a log as the fault is between key cycles.

Hi team After installing the latest G4X/G5 PCLink & associated firmware update, my virtual fuel tank level was reset to 0L. Assuming this was normal from the update resetting some variables I filled the car and reset the virtual tank to full. After the next key on event, I noticed that the virtual fuel tank was again reset to zero, where previously it would maintain its fuel level. I have checked my Add Fuel Input and Reset Accumulated input, both working as expected (and anyway neither of these set the tank to zero..). Appears to me that there is a fault in the latest firmware causing this as this is clearly not desirable behaviour. Any input or feedback as to fixing this? It makes it fairly difficult to rely on the car, being that it has a 30L tank and no in-tank sender connected - VFT value is displayed on an MXS Strada dash.

Have you looked at the options when adding a new page in Race Studio 3? There are a lot there, and then from there you can select elements of the display and change what parameters are displayed for each visual element.

The idle base position table *can* be configured as a 3D table - add MAP or MGP to your Y axis and setup from there.

In PCLink under the Logging menu, open Setup Logging and check that First Crank Prime is in the list of logged parameters.

It looks like your Boost Table Ratio Table needs setting up properly. At the moment it will always take a 50% blend from target boost table 1 & 2 because you have no other values in the table. Perhaps something like this will be better? This should make a linear blend between table 1 (0% ratio) and table 2 (100% ratio) when your multi-fuel blend table swings from 0 to 100%. That assumes that your multi-fuel blend table is set correctly for ethanol content. With this set up right I don't think you need to have Ethanol as an axis on boost target table 2, as that table is only blended in as your multi-fuel value goes up. You can set that back to another value, similar to boost target table 1.

Is there any plan to introduce minimum lockouts for the CLL? I would like it to not run in overrun conditions, for example, which would be best achieved by having a minimum TPS or minimum MAP value for CLL operation. Having a function to auto-set the LTFT axes to match the primary fuel table would be awesome too, and make correcting the primary table from the LTFT table much easier. G4X AtomX V1.

No problem, I eventually want to add ethrottle waaay down the track so I'll have to ditch the Atom anyway at that point.

Is it possible to have my earlier AtomX upgraded to V3 spec to handle knock control etc? Or are the versions too far different to do this?

With the advanced controls it is possible to set up a fairly smooth rev limiter, either through a speed based limiter or an RPM one. Bringing it up close to the 25MPH number and holding it there smoothly will take some testing and setup but it is possible. Re the Ethrottle limiter, you can create up to 3 different tables for the Ethrottle mapping so you could feasibly have a Dry/Wet/Pit throttle mapping and they can all be switched independently of each other. You can also change the axis on the tables to suit, i.e speed etc. This might do what you're after.

I started off doing it in the Ignition ECT trim table but to be fair, I should really move it to a 4D/5D table since I'm not actually using the ECT parameter anymore. Good to know that'll solve that.

Okay yep thats in line with what I've been trying - is there a way to defeat the trim limit of -30 degrees? I suppose I'll survive with the 10ATDC that I've been seeing anyway, as my IACV is close to maxxed out by then just keeping the thing at 1100rpm.

Recently added a catalytic converter to my road car and looking to implement some kind of post-start cat heating. I've got a map made that has a 30s timer from engine start (triggered by IGN1) and given that as an axis on an ignition trim table, with TPS as the other axis (to disable any ignition trim if TPS >1). Is there a general consensus on the ideal ignition timing to generate heat in the exhaust? I've been playing with taking out more and more, and it holds idle well with closed loop idle control making up for it. Is there such thing as taking out too much timing for cat heating?

If the PDM software is anything like the AIM dash software, you should be able to configure your own CAN receiving profile for it and also create a matching CAN output stream in PCLink to get the parameters to match up. Same thing from the PDM to the Link, getting the data into the Link is fairly easy if you can configure and know how it comes out of the PDM. It is simply a case of knowing where the bytes are and what the CAN ID is, then creating a CAN stream in PCLink with the right parameters expected in the right places. I'm doing a similar thing with some CAN buttons (on my own arduino based keypad though) being passed through a Link G4X out to a Link MXS dash, and passing some extra sensors from the dash back to the Link.