The legnth of pipe and long distance the boost travels has an intercooling like effect.
junk yard turbo?
- Thread starter do92fj80
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Just started following the build, WOW looks great! Nice clean install. I look forward to reading more. Boost coming in around 1700 rpm is great.
It seems to be full boost at 2500 to 2600 RPM, I'm not running it very hard. You do hear the turbo more since it is at the back with such a short and large exhaust(4") after the turbo. It sure runs good
Getting on the freeway has never been this good! I'll take more pic's soon. Everything looks better underneath painted black. I can use some ideas on the intercooler pipe. My wideband was reading 9.8:1 on extended steady boost at 30% throttle
. Most of the time I see low 10s under boost though. I will definitely be doing some kind of fuel control later. -Andy
Getting on the freeway has never been this good! I'll take more pic's soon. Everything looks better underneath painted black. I can use some ideas on the intercooler pipe. My wideband was reading 9.8:1 on extended steady boost at 30% throttle. Most of the time I see low 10s under boost though. I will definitely be doing some kind of fuel control later. -Andy
NaterGator
On Gilligan's Island
Holy crap! Turbocruiser is getting 13s and you are getting 9.8 running the boost under load? You keep running lean like that and y'er gonna blow that motor.My wideband was reading 9.8:1 on extended steady boost at 30% throttle
Other way around my man, he is running way richer than me. I think that I have finally figured something out ... assuming that the injectors are good and assuming that the stock ECM (no add ons) is in place, WOT is always going to give the same amount of fuel more or less which is A LOT. How rich one runs then essentially depends on how one "balances" the mixture with more air and/or more boost (assuming stock ECM, no piggy back product, etc).
So intuitively a turbo system that makes WOT run richer (ie the remote system which I think is totally cool as long as it can be protected) is giving the engine less air and/or less boost, and a system that makes WOT run leaner is giving more air and/or more boost. To further this thought, the AVO turbos which will run lean without the extra injectors are adding alot more air with the same boost as/then the Safari system, and the remote turbo as it is setup for this finicky break in period, has probably less air and less boost than the Safari system but still plenty o punch to force the rig into WOT open loop operation mode aka RICH! What I would like to see is the remote turbo get setup with same boost as Safari and AVO ( 7.5 to 8.5 psi) and see what those A/F readings are then!!!
I am more and more convinced that the trick to WOT ratios that are around 13.3 steady (that's the trick) is adding more air and more boost until you ultimately balance those big injectors of ours into the right ratios. Overly simplistic approach but assuming we have the stock ECM w/o any piggy back product, I don't see any other way other than to accept that really rich running state. I also think that the stock MAF is part of the overall problem in the sense that it simply stops measuring things at about 2/3 to 3/4 the potential of the vehicle in force inducted form. The modded MAF immediately took my WOT start point to 13.3 vs. about 12.6 for the stock MAF. Additionally the modded MAF took my WOT finish point (the point that it richens and richens up to) to 10.8 from 10.0 or lower for the stock MAF. Now part of that might be the better airflow of the thing but part of it might also be the better dataflow of the thing. Either case, if we can collect data past the point that the stock MAF measured, we are sure to dial that WOT ratio in much more readily assuming that the ECM continues to "look" at all that additional data. In sum, I think that the airflow and dataflow characteristics of the modded MAF allow us to go back to that overly simplistic square one and start slowly ratcheting up the boost till we all hit that sweet spot at WOT. JMHO.
I don't know Shawn, one way to find out is to turn up the boost and see if that fixes it. But I have to beleive that the extra air will trigger extra fuel.
Seems to me that running rich at WOT is a *good* thing and I cannot think of a reason to change that. Kinda defines what WOT is all about doesn't it?
What am I missing?
-B-
What am I missing?
-B-
It seems to be full boost at 2500 to 2600 RPM, I'm not running it very hard. You do hear the turbo more since it is at the back with such a short and large exhaust(4") after the turbo. It sure runs good
How much boost you making? What is wastegate breaking pressure? You could disconnect the wastegate feedback so there is no restriction on boost and carefully observe what happens to booste-watch it climb while observing a/f ratio. if max boost is realized at only 2500rpms it makes one wonder if turbo is too small or perhaps you need to let her have more boost.
you have the wideband so push it.
Then head to the dyno. start a fund to get the dyno done. Every one interested donate $10. count me in.
Sir your build begs the question: If this works well why buy a 1fzfe? the 3fe is so much easier to work on, and the truck is a much cheaper buy. if 250hp and 300ft/lb is this easy.....
how do you get the oil back to the motor? do you pump it back with a pump?
Last edited:
B yes you want to run rich at WOT but there's big difference between 10.0 rich and 13.3 rich. The sweet spot is what we are all striving for here; anything richer than say thirteen is actually dousing and drowning the engine in fuel, increasing emissions, and reducing power. Christo can selectively set his ratios on his 100 series and he says that the rig really comes alive when its a little less rich. I think the extra power perceived via the "butt-dyno" with the Modded MAF is due to reducing the restriction in the MAF and also due to increasing the range and resolution of the MAF. The difference between the stock MAF at 12.6 which is when it initially goes into its open loop, and the modded MAF at 13.3 is pretty impressive. If we can completely prevent the creep towards richer and richer A/F ratios we will really get to the performance potential of the 1FZFE. What I'm wondering, and is probably more appropriately another thread alltogether is why the rig initially sets WOT at a more ideal mixture and then allows the constant creep towards richer? Any thoughts on that anyone?
I wonder if it could be due to a mismatch in the "curve" of the MAF versus the ECU's expectation. In other words, the ECU is interpreting that more air is flowing than really is. By "curve", I'm suggesting that maybe at low flows, the MAF gives exactly what the ECU "expects", at moderate flows it is close, but at high flows there's a material variance. In closed loop, the O2 sensors would moderate this, but at WOT/Open, the O2 sensors are ignored.
This may be a scenario that a dyno could help with. I would think that on your rig, it would be difficult hold a steady-state at WOT (constant speed, throttle position, load). Would the AFM drift richer in this circumstance?
Of course, with my NA beast, I could do this test any time -- just merging onto the freeway. Care to "lend" me your wideband?
On a related thought, could the endpoint be related to "max" fuel ability of the FPR/pump/injectors?
This has been on my mind for some time. If that is the case then the answer would lie within the ECM, which I have a spare of.
This has been on my mind for some time. If that is the case then the answer would lie within the ECM, which I have a spare of.
Okay guys group chant: "Crack It, Crack It, Crack It" !
Okay guys group chant: "Crack It, Crack It, Crack It" !
Actually the first step is to confirm this is the case.
All you buddy,
record these present readings at WOT
LTFT%
AFR (wideband)
air flow in LBS
then dial up the boost a little and record the same values.
Comparing those two sets of values will give a clear indication of what is going on in open loop.
I'd start a new thread tomorrow after you have done this.
Last edited:
I'm the rookie here. In my mind, the different speed/rpm/load values would obfuscate the results.
I don't have WBO2, but I can hold most of the variables constant by going up a consistent, steep grade at altitude.
In Turbocruiser's case, though, he'd probably need to be towing 15,000 lbs up the same grade!
The only way *I* can think of to isolate down to 1 variable (boost) would be to buy some dyno time.
I don't have WBO2, but I can hold most of the variables constant by going up a consistent, steep grade at altitude.
In Turbocruiser's case, though, he'd probably need to be towing 15,000 lbs up the same grade!
The only way *I* can think of to isolate down to 1 variable (boost) would be to buy some dyno time.
I'm the rookie here. In my mind, the different speed/rpm/load values would obfuscate the results.
I don't have WBO2, but I can hold most of the variables constant by going up a consistent, steep grade at altitude.
In Turbocruiser's case, though, he'd probably need to be towing 15,000 lbs up the same grade!
The only way *I* can think of to isolate down to 1 variable (boost) would be to buy some dyno time.
I calibrated my MAF by only monitoring LTFT%. That was all that was needed.
Those three readings should remove all doubt of how the ECM operates in Open loop.
Another though...
Shawn if possible, try hooking up the stock MAF and rehooking up the stock FPR. Then put a mech fuel guage on the rail. Run the guage OUTSIDE the engine bay onto the hood. I hope Christo is willing to help. I would really suggest that all of the rail connections be perfect. My bet is that the rail pressure is above 43 psi while you are in boost, this is due to the stock FPR design. I also think this is why you were seeing the truck become more rich as boost rose in the further up in the rpm range. If possible I will try this on my truck this weekend.
With the the new housing the stock FPR is capped off and positive pressure can not act like an air spring in the FPR raising the fuel rail pressure. IMO this is why you are seeing less rich during boost with the new housing.
In terms of MAF sensor design, the sensors both work on the same principal. I would be really surprised that the output curve's slope are really different between the two sensors. But, best way to find out is to log data.
Just putting this out, but anyone have any thoughts that the engine was cammed for torque in the low rpm range (low rpm is it's most effecient point for fuel combustion) and that the engine is just really poor at combusting fuel at higher rpm? It may look rich on the wideband but the engine just isn't setup to combust the given fuel effeciently so out it goes to the exhaust? Just thinking out loud.
Still love the new housing running perfect after 4000+ miles. BTW I agree with Beowulf rich is good.
If it is this (10.8) rich maybe lower octane fuel could be used?
Shawn if possible, try hooking up the stock MAF and rehooking up the stock FPR. Then put a mech fuel guage on the rail. Run the guage OUTSIDE the engine bay onto the hood. I hope Christo is willing to help. I would really suggest that all of the rail connections be perfect. My bet is that the rail pressure is above 43 psi while you are in boost, this is due to the stock FPR design. I also think this is why you were seeing the truck become more rich as boost rose in the further up in the rpm range. If possible I will try this on my truck this weekend.
With the the new housing the stock FPR is capped off and positive pressure can not act like an air spring in the FPR raising the fuel rail pressure. IMO this is why you are seeing less rich during boost with the new housing.
In terms of MAF sensor design, the sensors both work on the same principal. I would be really surprised that the output curve's slope are really different between the two sensors. But, best way to find out is to log data.
Just putting this out, but anyone have any thoughts that the engine was cammed for torque in the low rpm range (low rpm is it's most effecient point for fuel combustion) and that the engine is just really poor at combusting fuel at higher rpm? It may look rich on the wideband but the engine just isn't setup to combust the given fuel effeciently so out it goes to the exhaust? Just thinking out loud.
Still love the new housing running perfect after 4000+ miles. BTW I agree with Beowulf rich is good.
If it is this (10.8) rich maybe lower octane fuel could be used?
semlin
curmudgeon
the 93/94s have the same motor and a rep for running lean at high rpms with a supercharger so I would say this is a fuel management decision by toyota in the obd2 ecu design. you have to consider the worst case scenario they are metering fuel for which is not just wot on a straight away with forced induction. the truck is built to tow and carry large loads and operate in hot climates. it also has engine temp management issues that would have been apparent by the time the 96-97 ecu was designed. All very good reasons to err on rich instead of lean in open loop. they weren't thinking track performance or optimum mileage. they were thinking about somebody dragging the truck up a 6 degree slope at a steady 4000 rpm while loaded to the axles and towing a 10,000 lb trailer in 110 degree weather.
I think the 93/94s run lean because the VAF under boost hits it's max metering ability and then the injector duty cycle remains static and more air at this point begins to gradually produce a lean condition. A perfect situation for a RR FPR solution.
I beleive I've worked out why we're seeing a rich condition and why Toyota programmed it to do that. The explanation is heavily weighted on the theory side but based on my known knowledge of other similar systems.
I beleive I've worked out why we're seeing a rich condition and why Toyota programmed it to do that. The explanation is heavily weighted on the theory side but based on my known knowledge of other similar systems.
