Davidv

Okay thanks Adam.

Ahhh, it's now working on Fallling edge setting. I took 360 deg out of trigger 2, so it's now set to -160 instead of 200 degrees. Then it fired up and I could set the VVTI trigger offset correctly without it jumping around. So it looks like it should be okay now.

Hi, I've been reading through some old posts about errors getting 2GR triggers to work with a G4+ I am using a G4+ Xtreme on latest firmware version. Trigger 2 is set to the LHS bank intake. I've added 1k pullup resistor to trigger 2, and 2.2k resistors to the other 3. The motor started up nearly first pop which was great. However, it seems like it must only be running in wasted spark mode / batch injection currently. I saw in an older post that the trigger decoding only works when set to falling edge for trigger 2. However on my setup, trigger 2 only works and the engine only fires up, if I have the motor set to rising edge trigger 2. Some of the posts about trigger decoding and which bank to put trigger 2 on were a few years old, so I'm not sure if anything's been changed in the meantime. When I trigger 2 set to rising edge, and put into cam test mode. I get the following numbers. I couldnt seem to get any of the DI based triggers to display and sensible values yet. Just looking for some guidance on whether I'm heading down the right path or not - Do I just need to set trigger 2 to falling edge, then try find an offset value that lets the motor start? When I have the trigger set to rising edge, it seems like I can adjust the value through 720 degree range, and then the Inlet LH position value jumps around a bit. But the motor still runs on any setting (as I suspect its in batch fire mode and ignoring the trigger) However I've not yet found any offset for falling edge mode that will let the motor crank up. I'd have thought it just ignores the trigger like it does for rising edge mode. Note - This engine is a 4GR, a smaller version of the 2GR but its triggers are the same. I've attached tune file and trigger scope. Thanks. 4GR setup.pclr 4gr trigger scope.llg

Ahh bummer. Okay thanks.

Hi, Just seeking some clarity on this. If I wire up one throttle to an Xtreme as per normal to the regular ethrottle pins. Can I then wire a 2nd up using the expansion module, and it'll control both happily? As the notes look to indicate that the expansion module is for setups that dont have ECU e-throtle capability. I assume it all just works off the same target throttle angle table and so on. Thanks

I took this out recently to the Pukekohe track, as I wanted to have a go before it closes. Just a few days prior I setup the e-throttle rev match function. AND HOLY HELL THIS IS GOOD! In this whole video I didnt do a single rev match, ECU was taking care of it. So I could just concentrate on the brakes. Not only is it good for reducing lap times, but also reducing mechanical wear from synchros and clutch getting a hard time. The motor was getting quite hot (108deg max) so I need to sort the cooling a bit better. But on the whole it performed well beyond expectations.

Hi, sorry for late reply. I've found there are 3 variations of the throttles. Early ones have a cable pulley on the throttles (avoid, unless you want to run a cable) Middle ones have no cable, and single e-throttle motor. Then the late ones have two e-throttle motors that run a pair each of the cylinders. Because they use it for weird bike engine wizard magic traction control stuff. The Middle ones are the ones to get, not sure on which years. But there's nothing canbus about it, all analog signal TPS and a regular + and - ethrottle connection.

I've made a few changes lately. Firstly I converted to an e-throttle ITB setup from a BMW S1000RR. This, by some luck had a port spacing almost exactly identical and right size for a 1NZ motor. It also means I've got cruise control connected up, which works awesomely. I'm now running some slightly shorter runners that have given some gains in the 6000-9000rpm region at expense of some midrange. Good for drags. I also went to a 13" wheel setup, so a 205/70/13 M&H dot rated bias ply tyre for the front. Then some skinny alloys with 155s on the back. Car weight is now around 790kg. So I went to the drags again, and it ran great! I ran a 13.49 @ 99.5 mph. Had a 2.09 60ft so that could still probably improve a bit. But on the whole, was real happy with it. I was using a new shift light setup that I wasnt quite used to, so ended up buzzing the limiter a little more than ideal. I'm looking forward to getting out there again and experimenting some more with tyre pressures and launch rpm to find what's good. On the whole though, the car's been great. Here's a video of the 13.4 run: Also, because this is a weird/unusual engine and car combo. Especially for drags. Some gentlemen from the Moving Our World youtube channel came along to film a night of racing. So they put together this really cool video, which is a nice keepsake for a successful night with a new PB. Some interesting slow motion footage of the run where I was launching at 7500rpm with only 7psi in the fronts. Still heaps of wheel spin, but it's amazing how a proper drag tyre will just keep propelling you forward anyway.

A friend loaned me some drag slicks to try. So last night at the drags. Suuuper busy, but it was really awesome to see a big crowd at the drags, lots of spectators too. Was a cool atmosphere. So first run, set the hoosiers to around 20psi which is very high, but wanted to start out conservative. Ran a 14.092 @ 100.21 mph with a 2.33 60ft. Super happy with that! I was convinced at this point that I'd get a 13 tonight. Second run we dropped the pressures a bit, launch wasnt so good and I ran a 14.1 with a higher 60ft. At this point I figured I'd probably cursed myself saying I'll get a 13. Looking at the logs of both runs, the motor was bogging a bit when I was trying to roll into the throttle and clutch. So third run, set a launch limiter at 5500rpm. Full throttle sitting on line, dump the clutch. And crap. No wheel hop no big spinning, just felt like stretching out and releasing a rubber band. It felt so much faster than my first run, I crossed the line realizing it must be a 13. Absolutely stoked beyond belief Get my time slip and was blown away 13.83 @ 99.6 mph with a 2.1 60ft Here's the video for it

Hi, sorry for the slow reply. I cant remember the wiring exactly, but it wasnt too hard to trace the wire colours back to the plugs on the motor to tell which ones were sensor ground or whatever. The factory engine/loom splices the grounds for the cam and crank sensor together to one wire. Sorry I dont really have any other pics. It's just a plug cut out from a factory ECU, then wires soldered onto the pins and heat shrink over the top. Then at the other end, just crimping on the terminals that plug into the link ECU. Since the last update, I got a torsen LSD installed. Ported the head, built an airbox setup, and tested some trumpet lengths. Also printed a new adapter that flips the throttles the other way up, so it just looks a bit tidier. Then took it to the drags, ran a 14.7 @ 95.5 mph with a 2.5 60 foot Then took it to the dyno, managed to pick up another 6 horsepower by running it leaner and some other minor tweaks. So 141 wheel horsepower @ 7700rpm, pretty happy with that! Still has the factory exhaust which is awful, and I think the high exhaust pressure has been causing my wideband to read incorrectly. As my indicated 12.8:1 AFR on my canbus wideband was in reality around 11:1 at the tail pipe with the dyno's wideband. So it picked up power as soon as we started leaning it out. So I'm looking forward to heading back to the drags again shortly.

So things escalated a bit... It turns out that the Toyota Prius C / Aqua uses a modified 1NZFE motor (1NZFXE) to suit hybrid application. So this means it has 13.4:1 compression, ceramic coated pistons, electric waterpump, lighter crank shaft, and a few other goodies that also make sense for things other than a 75hp atkinson cycle motor. So I bought some JUN 264 deg cams, stiffer valve springs, fitted ITB, fitted an alternator (normally no belt driven accessories and then paired it with a close ratio Vitz RS gearbox. The difference is outstanding! Currently no VVTI working and it's still a completely standard Echo exhaust which is far from optimal. I havent been to any events but it's done a 5.8 second 0-100kph with the open diff. It's using 66% duty cycle with 310cc 2ZZGE injectors at 55psi. Being able to rev it higher, and the close ratio box with a 4.3 final drive has made a massive massive difference. The noise it makes now is hilarious, none of the performance or sound at all matches the general aura of the car. LSD is on the to-do list!

Hi, My other car has been off the road for ages, and life has been in the way. So I thought it might be fun to just wire up my ECU into the Echo so I could have a play around with some tuning stuff again. It's a 1300cc economy engine so not going to set the world on fire. But a bit of fun. I need/want to revert it all to factory though, so I bought a spare ECU from wreckers and cut the plugs out to make a patch loom. This car has VVTI on the intake side, which means I could do my usual sweep through the vvti angles and see which delivers the most airflow into the engine. Results were unexpected: (Colour scale is cam angle, blue is 0 degrees advance) The engine pretty much hated having any cam advance at all over say 3000rpm. As opposed to my other engine where it likes lots of advance right to say 6500rpm then tapers off. I also noticed that the mass air flow rate just absolutely flatlines when you got to around 4000rpm. I didnt have a map sensor connected, but my suspicions were that it relates to the absolutely tiny throttle body, and the super long skinny runner on the intake manifold. There didnt look to be a particularly easy way to fit a bigger throttle body, as the whole manifold is plastic and there's not much scope for boring it out. So looking in the parts bin, I had some silvertop 4AGE throttles in the garage. I have a 3D printer that could bang together a usable prototype so after a few adjustments ended up with this. Then printed some trumpets to available clearance. Everything fit up surprisingly easily, the most expensive part of the swap (of parts I didnt already have) was just buying a radiator hose so I could move the filler cap a little further over. Results - were amazing! Instead of flatlining at 4000rpm, it just kept going up. I'd keep revving it a bit higher to help mitigate the crummy gearing from 1st to 2nd, but it starts getting valve bounce at around 7200rpm. Also, now since the pressure differential from intake side to exhaust side has lessened (less intake vacuum at WOT) the engine now likes having more cam advance to make use of some scavenging. Virtual dyno showing really good gains, and the difference in the fuel map backed this up too. I took this car to the drags last year for a laugh, and when standard it ran a 17.6 @ 77mph with a 2.5 sec 60foot. So I wanted to try beat this as best I could, so setup a basic launch control using just rpm limiter with vehicle speed as a load axis I figure I can tweak the 0kph limit up or down to set how much initial wheelspin it has, and then tweak the decay rate to calm down any excessive wheelspin as it gains speed. Some testing was looking promising but I also havent really been in the mood to deal with a blown up clutch so I didnt spend too much time on it. The printed manifold got some reinforcing just in case. Come to drag day. I think this launch control method would have worked well if I was doing a burnout to scuff the tyres. But since I was clutch concious I was just rolling through. So the tyres would get wet to a varying degree and also the rubber debris you pick up varies from run to run. So I found it was a bit inconsistent. None the less, managed to improve the PB significantly to 16.4 @ 83mph. With a slower 60ft at 2.6 seconds So possibly even quicker however I only completed a minimal amount of runs for sake of clutch preservation. (I've owned this car since 30,000km, it's now on 195,000km with original clutch) It's actually been heaps of fun, and it's a completely different car to drive with the better intake. I've got a gearbox ready to fit with better final drive ratio and gearing from the RS model, and a torsen LSD to fit in it. I'll also chuck the 1500cc motor in at some point, I'd imagine it would dip into the 15 second bracket pretty easy with that combo. And it's great because all of the parts are hilariously cheap. If I could wring 100hp per litre out of the 1500cc setup it would be pretty hilarious to drive, as it's only around 800kg. Still not the same power to weight ratio as my other car, however, would be a heap of fun to do some autocross/hillclimbs/small track stuff with.

Hi, I've recently been setting up an Alpha N based engine with modelled fuel. With Alpha N the shape of the tables are a bit abstract, as at low rpm a small amount of throttle opening can deliver nearly the entire air requirement of the engine. So to mitigate this I had the idea of using Air per Cyl Estimated as a load axis on my ignition table, so that as conditions change and the VE calculation/fuel changes, the ignition timing would match it. So I can let the wideband trim the fuel to be correct, and then the ignition timing will just follow suit instead of needing its own set of compensation tables. In PClink it will let me select it as an axis option, and when you go for a drive you can see the box move around to show that the current value is travelling around on both axes. But the actual ignition value stays pinned at the top row. I realize you've moved on to G4X and this is a fairly abstract request but if it's an easy fix it would be nice if it works. Example attached with tune file and a log. 2NZ air per cyl estimated not working.pclr not working 2.llg

Forget about the CanID you really need to think about Frame ID instead. Your frame ID takes up one of the bytes in the message. So in this example below, it is Frame number 13 . When this can frame is received by your teensy, you need to look a that first byte to tell you which frame it is. If the number is 13, then you know that your values in the frame are Inj timing, Ign Angle, and Inlet / LH target. So you can update those values.

Do you have the other half of it connected to 12v? I've done the same where I removed the factory stopper switch and put another brake switch in. But the problem was that I really needed the switch to activate on/off closer to the engagement/bite point of the clutch, rather than right at the end of travel. So it didnt work so great for launch control etc. So I'm going to redo it with an adjustable mount somehow.

So you've physically wired your tacho to the aux output that you're wanting to use as a tacho? Once you've done that, download PClink for G4+ and plug into your ECU. You'll see a list down the left hand side, listing the aux outputs and what they currently do. If you click on one you'll be able to reassign it in the box that pops up.

What's been interesting is that a lot of weight removal so far has come from things I guess I have always considered to be a "fixed" weight. Like, a different alternator and bracket are 4kg lighter. I've never even considered looking at an alternator in this manner before. A lot of people fuss over having XYZ engine because it's 20kg lighter than ABC engine. But then you see people make the benefit null and void by using 10mm thick steel for engine mounts and stuff like that haha. I think a carbon fibre bonnet will make a lot of sense, but the front guards are paper thin and dont weigh much. Doors definitely have a bit of weight. Interestingly the Coupe version of this car weighs more than the sedan, because of the gigantic slab of glass in the rear hatch. So getting rid of that would be good, but, like you say not all of these things are a good compromise for a road driven car. I'll be pretty happy to get a fair bunch of weight out of the heavy end of the car. I might make moulds of all of the panels though, just because it's impossible to get replacements and the existing pool of parts slowly rusts away more with each passing day haha.

In other news, I've ended up moving house a few times and various other annoying life things have meant not much time for car stuff. But I've switched over to a dual VVTI motor now. While doing so, I realized how stupidly far forward my engine sits, so I scope creeped this incredibly basic minor upgrade into a full blown overhaul haha. I decided I want to try get the car down to mid/low 900kg without sacraficing its road manners or legality or comfort etc etc. Which is so far looking like it'll be easier than expected. New engine mounts I've made are 6kg lighter than before. A 4-1 manifold is 10kg lighter than my 4-2-1. But both will be able to fit. Hoping to come up with a lighter intake situation. Moving to a lithium battery and getting rid of battery location in the boot. Saves about 15kg and should help crank the motor over a bit better. And makes my boot a bit more usable again. Then moving to a dual master pedal box, downsizing rear brakes and a few things like this too. Just lots of little things that add up. I'm Consolidating all of the 3/4 empty fuse boxes around the place, into a single Bussmann fuse/relay box in the center console. And the new engine has ended up about 100mm further back which is crazy. Some small chops to firewall but my engine bay has taken a hammering over the years so time for a repaint anyway. So I'm trying to make things a bit tidier this time around rather than just "functional" haha. But there are some remarkable improvements in coolant routing and so on which come from moving to an engine that's actually designed to be in an FR layout. Who knew

I've been doing some work on making a crude engine simulator, so if I'm using something else that I want to test that has Canbus I can just hook them up to each other and expect similarish results that my engine would give. So it needs an airflow model. So far I'm just using these simple factors to determine how much airflow the engine could potentially be consuming RPM How much air per cyl at 100% VE How max VE tapers each side of max torque RPM based friction losses Potential horsepower based on mass flow Then I've modelled a throttle body too, which has an exponentially increasing/decreasing flow rate based on angle. So if the angle allows you to flow more air than what the engine is trying to consume, MAP stays at 101kpa and the engine can reach its full throttle VE value. But if the throttle is closed further than this, then it shows the number as dictated by throttle angle but also generates a map sensor value. Which then generates a pumping losses number based on MAP and RPM. So the idea here is that it can simulate the situation where the engine is still able to flow 100% of its potential power even at lower throttle, if the engines airflow demand is low enough. Even if he airflow number is fixed the actual power number changes a little through the RPM sweep due to differing losses. So to add more features I basically add more things which potentially take away from max power if they are non optimal. So I still need to make an AFR model, so that you'll make less power as you go further away from peak power AFR. Then make an ignition model which has an ideal ignition number (in milliseconds to 15 ATDC so it generates a fairly sane number across the rpm range) But then has variables to account for different amount of ignition needed when you run richer or leaner, or less engine load. Then from there, I'll make a road load simulator where the car is requiring a varying load as it travels along ups and downs. So the simulation of cruise control is a bit more accurate as in real life the test conditions go out of bounds a lot if the road gradient changes too much across the course of a single test. So obviously this wont be a 100% accurate simulation of my engine or any other engine. But it will react to changes in hopefully a similar way a real engine does, and be capable of being tuned like a real engine does. The eventual idea is that I'll be able to test and troubleshoot my cruise control ignition trim system using this instead of needing to drive the car every time I need to test something. So this virtual motor will have an ideal ignition table which I currently dont even know what it is. But it will be my other devices job to run iterative tests to figure that out. This will be able to whizz through 1000s of iterations much faster than how it can process in real time when you're waiting for fuel samples to generate and conditions to stabilize. Which should help for troubleshooting and bug finding/fixing to no end. So hopefully when I get my car running again it'll be fairly stable. What will also be good is if a G4X ECU is in the budget at some point, I'll be able to drastically cut down the number of calculations etc I'm having my dash do and send back to the ECU. As the math channel feature will allow the majority of things to be done all onboard which is exciting.

Remember that injector timing only really makes a difference when the injector is open for a very small amount of time. Such as idle or cruising. Because once you're up to say 70% or higher duty cycle, your injector is firing for so long that it makes little difference. I've found that around 400deg is good but on cold starts bringing closer to 250deg (from memory ) meant I could reduce cold start enrichments.

I've wired one up fine, 82mm though. Just using the Altezza e-throttle settings for now, havent fine tuned. But first things I would check, are if you move the throttle plate by hand, does the TPS signal move? When it does the calibration, does the throttle plate move on its own, or not? I'd say the situations you need to look for, are TPS signals not working or maybe the polarity of the motor control wires are back to front.

I remember there was a thread a while back about a particular video card driver that causes these symptoms. I went from a slow old laptop that worked fine, to a flash new one that ran like a dog. But there was a fix for it by changing the video card driver. Are you definitely using the latest PClink version? As I think they also applied a fix for this inside PClink but cant remember.

I've been thinking about this lately, essentially you're trying to build maximum horsepower to your cars/wheels traction curve. So you dont necessarily want more boost in 3rd gear at the same speed as second, you want the same amount of horsepower at that given speed. So I thought controlling the wastegate based on speed vs injector duty cycle would be a decent simulation of horsepower level. If you dont have enough boost in gear X to get to 30% DC on the injectors at 55kph. Here, have some more haha. (and vice versa)

I havent had a look in your logs files, but just a thought - your knock sensor is just a microphone, so anything else that happens around same frequency as knock will get picked up like knock. I drove myself mad trying to solve a similar issue, with knock only at certain load and rpm combinations... gave up - months later I found that the springs were rattly and loose in the clutch plate. So if the clutch was loaded up one way or the other it was fine, if it was "coasting" it would rattle and show as knock! Do you think there's possibly anything else going on in the motor/gearbox/etc etc that could cause something to happen at that rpm?

So the % of zone means, how close it needs to be to the center of a cell to count the value example - if half way between one cell at the next, ignored.