Did some data logging last night!

[01SS05RL]

Tried out my LS1M datalogger/scanner(www.LS1M.com) on the RL last night. It works!! It scans and logs all computer controlled sensors, reads an clears service engine codes, even has a 0-60 timer that reads off your vehicle speed sensor so is very accurate! I didn't bother trying that yet as it was raining last night.
I did log two 5 minute drives with many WOT blasts, one completely stock, and 1 with the boost bypass "mod" done. Like was said here B4, it did NOTHING.
I logged the following engine parameters:
ECT-engine coolant temp
IAT-intake air temp
IGN-igntion timing(spark advance or retard)
LFT- long term fuel trims(amount of adjustment the computer is making to keep the car running@14.7 A/F ratio)
MPH-Guess
O2- O2 sensor voltage(this tellls you if your running rich or lean@WOT)
B-BOOST
RPM- engine speed
TPS-throttle position sensor(tells how far the throttle is open in % or voltage) This is the only thing that doesn't work right due to being programmed for th voltage readings for the LS1 in my Camaro. 88.2% was the WOT reading.
Need to look at the data more later, but it looks like my WOT A/F readings look great!(895-905). The IAT's stay nice an cool(while moving).Like I said, the boost was basically identical(10.1 PSI@3500rpm- 11 PSI@4500- 12.02@6000) those varied slightly from run to run, most times the boost would top out @11.88PSI.
Will do more with it later, just figured I'd pass on that it works on our cars. I was exited! This could mean that a MAFT(mass air flow translator) would work too, giving you limited control of your A/F ratio. Hmmmm MAFT+smaller pulley=???? Either zoom or boom I guess, something to think about tho.

Sorry to ramble!

[ZR2_S10]

If you want to see if the boost bypass mod works, try doing the same runs again, and log MAP sensor on the intake manifold.

The boost it looks at is a calculation, as opposed to a direct reading off the map sensor.


These are the things i like to watch:

TPS volts
MAF Freq and g/s
MAP kpa
RPM
Spark Advance
Knock Retard
vehicle speed
long term fuel trims
bank one, sensor 1 o2

Also, you may want to reconsider the Maft. I have seen it go whacky and blow up grand nationals, grand prix's, and camaro's.

[redline14]

Hurry and do the 0-60 time!!

[01SS05RL]

Yeah, I was thinking I may need to monitor the map sensor instead, will try that! As far as the MAFT going whacky, I've never heard of that before, and I have had one in my Camaro for 6 months now with no probs. I was just kinda trying to think of ideas to mod these things. I'm prob. not brave enough to try something like that till someone who knows more about these things than me tries it.

Will try the 0-60 test soon! I have the parts to make a cold/ram air setup, so will get some times, then do the intake and see if there is any noticable gain from it.

[Sp00ner]

Originally Posted by 01SS05RL

Yeah, I was thinking I may need to monitor the map sensor instead, will try that! As far as the MAFT going whacky, I've never heard of that before, and I have had one in my Camaro for 6 months now with no probs. I was just kinda trying to think of ideas to mod these things. I'm prob. not brave enough to try something like that till someone who knows more about these things than me tries it.

Will try the 0-60 test soon! I have the parts to make a cold/ram air setup, so will get some times, then do the intake and see if there is any noticable gain from it.

What were you thinking for a ram air set up? I've been trying to look at this myself but it's been crappy out!

[MotorMouth]

Originally Posted by 01SS05RL

but it looks like my WOT A/F readings look great!(895-905)

I would not call those numbers great. The low .900 to high .890 mv range is starting to cut into the relm of pre ignition. I would say that is a bit lean personally, that would also explain some of the other issues here of people having codes set for lean conditions.

Dose the ECM provide or your scan tool have the ability to read KR (knock retard)? I would be curious to see how much (if any) timing the motor was pulling under a peak boost load.

[01SS05RL]

Originally Posted by Sp00ner

What were you thinking for a ram air set up? I've been trying to look at this myself but it's been crappy out!

Gonna attach a 3" hose to the back of the driver side foglight blockoff plate (the fake mesh where there should be a foglight).Cut a hole in the plate, cover the hole w/ some black plastic mesh.Run the hose to the center of a Spectre air fiilter(they make adapters for both ends of the hose,sold at Autozone). Cut a 3" hole in the bottom of airbox for the hose to go through,into the filter. Leave the box, lose the lid.
With it setup like that, air should be forced(fed) to the center hole in the filter, but if you get into deep water, it will pull air from the sides(airbox) so it can't(I hope) hydrolock. Poke holes through the side of a straw, and try to drink through it, you can't cause it will pull air from the holes.
I think it will work and look great! I will try to do it soon and see if what makes sense in my head will actually work Will take pics if you want.

[01SS05RL]

Originally Posted by MotorMouth

I would not call those numbers great. The low .900 to high .890 mv range is starting to cut into the relm of pre ignition. I would say that is a bit lean personally, that would also explain some of the other issues here of people having codes set for lean conditions.

Dose the ECM provide or your scan tool have the ability to read KR (knock retard)? I would be curious to see how much (if any) timing the motor was pulling under a peak boost load.

I have always understood .880-.910 to be ideal for about a 12.5-12.7:1 which is great for WOT. I got my 02's on my Camaro around .910 w/ a MAFT and put it on a dyno w/wideband 02 and I was @12.2:1 adjusted MAFT 2%lean and got 12.8:1 which the tuner/dyno operator said was perfect. Now, I'm talking about optimizing for performance.
Yes, I can(and will)monitor spark retard. I did not last time, but did log timing advance, so will try to see if it looks like they backed off at all. Log's are on comp. at home

[MotorMouth]

Is your SS still n.a.? Naturaly aspirated motors tend to run a bit leaner at WOT than forced induction motors.

I may be wrong as well though. After I posted this I rembered I was working on old knowladge from tuning my Typhoon. With the improved cooling and much improved combustion chaimber design on the JSL (in comparision to design it's self, obviously they are different motors) these numbers might be ok, but I am not sure.

I have allways worked under the pre-tense that .900 was the lowest you wanted to go on an fi motor.

I am very interested in the KR. If you could log this, MAP voltage, injector pulse width and timing advance it would be greatly appreciated.

I looked at the web site you provided and think I'm going to make an investment in that scan tool set up. Thanks for posting the link!

[01SS05RL]

Originally Posted by MotorMouth

Is your SS still n.a.? Naturaly aspirated motors tend to run a bit leaner at WOT than forced induction motors.

I may be wrong as well though. After I posted this I rembered I was working on old knowladge from tuning my Typhoon. With the improved cooling and much improved combustion chaimber design on the JSL (in comparision to design it's self, obviously they are different motors) these numbers might be ok, but I am not sure.

I have allways worked under the pre-tense that .900 was the lowest you wanted to go on an fi motor.

I am very interested in the KR. If you could log this, MAP voltage, injector pulse width and timing advance it would be greatly appreciated.

I looked at the web site you provided and think I'm going to make an investment in that scan tool set up. Thanks for posting the link!

My SS is still N/A and the RL is my first dealings w/FI so you may be correct. I willl log those parameters and see what I get. Also interested in logging injector duty cycle as I've seen ppl saying that our injectors are almost maxxed out now.
Good to hear your interest in the scan tool, I love it! I was thinking of emailing Mark(the guy that makes and sells them) and seeing if he would make a program for our cars that had the correct TPS readings. I figure if there is enough interest he would do it.