Adamw

I havent played with many turbo cars to speak from experience but I have heard a few very experienced tuners say on a reasonably powerful turbo car, using DBW for slip control doesnt work well. I suspect because you have to close the throttle a long way to get a relatively small torque reduction it becomes a big lazy control loop. I know some that have incorporated popping open the BOV (usually with CO2) to get a quick torque reduction.

Integrale8V, One suggestion is to try your trigger 2 on rising edge since its falling edge clashes with the gap on trigger 1. Also, I know you have already stated that you tried playing with arming voltages, but im curious if you tried something like the screen shot below; The reason I ask is I think with the way you have the arming voltage set up now @ 0.2V, that little hump that you have in the middle of the "gap" looks like it is high enough to potentially arm and cause a false tooth. Maybe a long shot, but worth trying just to eliminate that. Expanding on Simon's comments, why is the cranking speed so variable on this engine - is it highly modified or perhaps bad battery/starter/wiring? This engine I am not familiar with but some similar jetskis I have played with crank much higher - like 300RPM. I have found 36-2 is usually quite immune to cranking issues so I would have thought it should work ok with the right settings.

John, The link does have the capability to set "custom TDC's". I have never used this function so I dont know for sure if it will like us commanding 2 cylinders to fire at the same time, but screenshot below is how I think it should be set up. Scott might be nice enough to run that setup on his sim to confirm it behaves as expected, otherwise you can just try it and see. Set engine as 2 stroke, 2cyl, injection mode to sequential, ignition mode to direct spark, rest of config as below; If the above method doesnt work there are a couple of other ways you could do it. One is setting it up as a single cylinder as you have suggested above and driving both coils and both injectors from the Cyl #1 drivers. Another way you could do it is set it up as a 4cyl, 2 strokke, coil & injector for cyl #1 goes to ECU #1 drivers, coil & injector for cylinder #2 goes to ECU #4 drivers. Drivers 2&3 dont get connected.

There was a hint dropped on the forum by the Link techs a couple of days ago that suggested a new external Ethrottle controller was in the works. Maybe this was what they were proposing to you?

Yes gauge art make a Link compatible vga adapter.

I reckon you have a faulty injector or 3. EGT #4 goes colder in most of the areas that is showing lean. #5 & 6 are not as bad but also suspect. The pic below I think gives the biggest clue. In this screenshot, RPM, MAP, and pulsewidths are constant, nearly flat lines, yet look at the lambda, it pegs from full rich to full lean twice in a matter of seconds. There are a few scenarios that could explain this but I think most likely those lean humps are where an injector(s) doesnt open. Although I agree with Dobson that your injectors are working outside there linear range, you still have funny things going on even at higher pulsewidths so I feel there is more to it than just "too big" injectors. Edit: I just had another thought... Maybe try swapping injectors 1,2,3 over with 4,5,6, then if egt's 1,2,3 run cold I think that would confirm an injector issue. If the problem remains on the same cylinders then you could have a bad connection somewhere.

I was just going to say upload your map too... You definitely have something very odd going on. Some of it looks like it might be caused by a hole in your fuel map because commanded PW is very short near the misfires but there are also a few other confusing clues. I have a couple of questions too; What is your lambda device? - it seems to "bottom out" around 0.72. which is a very odd rich limit. How much confidence do you have that the logged lambda values are realistic? In your other log the IAT is reading 5°C at 300KPa MAP which seems optimistic. Obviously this is not part of the problem, but is there an explanation for this? Ice intercooler? What injectors do you have?

John, thanks for confirming. I'm fairly certain in this case my suggestion from last night will work for you; Set engine type to 2 stroke, set injection mode to sequential. You will then have fully programmable injector timing (every 360deg), you wont need to mess with trigger offset and/or shifting the trigger wheel and you wont need the cam sensor. The only thing you will need to be careful of is don't use fuel cut for any engine limiters as you could possibly get a situation where it cuts one injection event (which would be half your fuel so you could get a lean cycle), if you use ignition cut instead it should be fine.

I havent thought this through in great detail and dont fully understand what John is trying to achieve - but I think John might be able to get what he wants (sequential timed injection, but 2 squirts per cycle, no cam sensor), by setting engine type to "2 stroke" or even rotary? I also have some experience with injector timing which I will share later when I have a bit more time...

Scott, I thought that was the case but what tripped me up here is if I open the G4+ Storm black base map all the ethrottle settings are visible and all the relevant inputs outputs appear to be assigned like there is a controller. Are they only there for an external controller? Do you guys even make an external controller anymore?

Ok, there are big differences between the G4 storm and the new black G4+ storm. Here are some I remember; Old has 34pin connector, new has 2 x 34pin connectors, so a lot more inputs/ouputs.Old has 4inj and 4 ignition drivers, new has 8 of each (and any unused can be used as aux outs).Old has 3 or 4 analog inputs, new has 8.Old has 2 digital inputs, new has 8.Old was quite limited with 12 table allocations, new has 20.New has DBW built in.New has Knock control built in.New has configurable CAN and can take CAN inputs.New has Modelled fuel equation (i'm pretty sure old G4 didn't).New has much better logging.New has much more flexibility with virtual aux's etc.New will still see new features added, software improvements and bug fixes, etc.

Yes, the Atom has CAN - it is on the main connector. No, Innovate reliability hasnt improved. The difference between open and closed loop is closed loop uses "feedback" and open loop doesnt. In the case of boost control the feedback would be a MAP or boost pressure sensor, so basically in closed loop when the controller see's no boost it keeps the wastegate shut, once boost increases to near the set point the the controller uses the solenoid to adjust the wastegate and control boost to the setpoint. With open loop there is no pressure sensor feedback - the controller just pulses the solenoid at a pre-programed duty cycle regardless of what the boost is doing. Both strategies can work well when set up/tuned correctly and will control boost fine and give similar "spool up" speed. Closed loop will generally give a more consistent boost level especially in situations where environment is variable - altitude, temperature, etc but can also take more tuning time to get it right.

Post number 3 confuses me but all the other OP's posts here refer to the G4 and not G4+. The OP would get a better answer if he could confirm which ECU models he is trying to compare. Old G4 with new G4+? Old G4 with Old G4+? Old G4+ with new G4+?

Also your wire looks too big and the crimp doesn't look right. These superseal connectors are pretty fussy and need a round crimp (rather than a "B" crimp) on the insulation ears otherwise they wont go in.

Note the SCG-1 is only an open loop controller - the atom can already do open loop control so no advantage using the SCG-1. Also my experience with innovate widebands is not good - I would strongly urge you to look at other options. After you have replaced the sensor many times you will wish you went for a better brand... A CAN based wideband would be good for you as it wont use any of your precious analog inputs. Link do a CAN wideband controller and the AEM X-series work well too. A digital input is an input that can only sense "on or off" or pulsed type signals - not a variable (analog) voltage. Most modern cars you can splice into the VSS (speedo pick up on gear box) for vehicle speed. - it wont effect your existing speedo. Yes, TPS would be the next priority. If you use a CAN wideband it will leave you another spare. No extra sensor required, it is standard practice to use the normal ECT sensor.

Try this: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9h3aF9QxB3Cek1Lc1lyZVFzaDQ Note most of the info is in the G4 software help file, and sometimes a little more up to date..

You cant easily measure the ignition output from the ecu unless you have a scope since its only a very short "pulse". The ecu has an ignition test function so if it were me I would use that to eliminate as much of the other hardware as I could before suspecting the ecu. It would be very unlikely to be something wrong with the ecu. The steps you have taken already with swapping coils etc is a good start, the next test I would do is swap the ignition output wires 1 & 6 at the ecu connector (B57 & B52) then do the ignition test again and see if the fault now moves to 1 or stays at 6. If #1 then no longer sparks it indicates an ecu problem, if the fault stays with #6 then you have a hardware/wiring issue.

Hi Felix, I agree, it could be useful for some applications although I have never found an engine that needed it (and yes I have done a few rotaries). For most users with a 1:1 FRP, the diff fuel press will be relatively constant, and normally by the time secondaries come in to play the battery voltage is pretty constant too. So I'm curious why do you expect yours isnt? The few cases I can think of would be mechanical fuel pump where you get poor pressure at low RPM or a rising rate regulator.

Hi Mike, Are you getting a screen like below with the odd units "%FF" showing? If so I suspect this might just be a display bug and it will probably still work ok if you just pretend these are duty cycle.

The G4+ atom doesnt have a builtin MAP sensor. It seems you might be looking at a manual for the old G4 model which did.

Yes its +volts on one side and - on the other. The idea is you want to get as close as you can without overlap. Although if you do overlap it will just look like it does now showing gear "zero" in the middle of the change. if you have roughly 0.5v steps then try say 0.2 or 0.22v.

I have only had a quick look but dont see any obvious problems in your settings. For some reason your log is a bit odd with some channels appear to be logged very slow and out of sync so it isnt as helpful as it could be, but again I dont see too much wrong. Have you checked coils actually have 12v during cranking? Also what sort of engine? You have injection mode set to single point group which is not common so I wonder if this is a mistake or you do actually have just a single injector?

I think I mentioned in one of your other posts a while ago that you need to increase the "volt tolerance" setting under gear detection until you get a crisp step between gears. Yours is at 0.1v now, try bumping it up 0.1v at a time until you get the best result. The few cars I have done have normally been around 0.3v from memory. You can test this "driving" in the garage with the wheels jacked up.

It doesn't sound like a trigger problem. Can you post your .pcl so we can have a look over the settings. Also a pc log of cranking might be helpful. Is the sensor a 1gt101?

Yes the G4 had 4 or 5d fuel and ignition tables. in the download section of Links website you wil find the G4 software, if u download and install that it will have a storm base map in it's directory.