Tuning Table Size VE and Advance POLL inside

[fredio54]

Hi, If you have any experience with standalones, or, if you don't but you have some opinion, I'd like to hear it. I'm at the point of deciding on table sizes for the main functions VE (fuel) and Advance (ignintion).

Above is a poll, please if you vote, also post a reason with your vote.

There is some background info on it here :

DIYEFI.org Forum - View topic - Tuning Table Size VE and Advance POLL inside

Fred.

 

[rms]

At least 20 load or TPS sites. You need quite a few if mapping from TPS.

23 rpm sites is more than enough. Once over 3000/4000 rpm 1000 or more rpm gaps are ok.

 

[fredio54]

At least 20 load or TPS sites. You need quite a few if mapping from TPS.

Could you please justify that (I'm not disagreeing, just looking for reasoning). Bare in mind the sites are relocatable.

23 rpm sites is more than enough. Once over 3000/4000 rpm 1000 or more rpm gaps are ok.

Again, can you justify that? And for which engine(s) does that apply, not a Busa engine for example Also consider that we'll be tuning from zero rpm with this table and as such the bottom rpm bin will be at zero rpm. You'll need 2 - 4 including the zero one below idle to tune startup and cranking/idling etc.

What about the situation where you have a cammed up 15000rpm boosted bike engine on itbs? Surely the range of VE will be large from 1500 to 15000 with a large ramp rate in the 7 - 12k region when the cams come in. (al hypothetical figures).

Thanks for your input!

Fred.

 

[Arnout]

I prefer 1x1, easiest ofcourse. 1 value fine for everything. That would be awesome!

 

[fredio54]

I prefer 1x1, easiest ofcourse. 1 value fine for everything. That would be awesome!

LOL

Funnily enough, that is going to be an option for setup etc. VE = number. Period.

Fred.