The Rwd 2Az-Fe Thread.

[LittleRedSpirit]

Interesting story with the vvti. I had followed the manual and set up ve and vvti what was supposed to be correctly, but Adaptronic wrote back and said they replicated the error in the vvti output on the test bench and have declared it a bug.

 

It must be something to with the VE tuning as the car had better control of the vvti before and now it doesn't have any.

 

It was stuck at 4 degrees and wouldn't change to meet targets after changing to VE tuning. It did work before though with the same PID, base position and duty cycle settings and just using its target angles graph vs rpm for target input. I don't really get what's going on, and they come back with a few "fixes" but nothing that has actually worked. The best I've been able to do is adjust the constant 4 deg advance down to zero as a base position by adjusting the vvti 1 reference position which should help as it didn't ever in reality go lower than 3 or 4 degrees in the logs I had made. What's happening is the targets are never changing, so the new tuning mode is not referencing the fuel map that is now used for vvti angles.

 

The one thing I did change that was a great boon was the injector dead times. I found someone's test data for Toyota injectors like mine and entered that. Made such a difference. Car starts on the third period of the crank every time where before it would crank and half run then conk a couple of times. Seems getting those injectors set up perfect really helps. I would have had way early injection the way it was before, so would have had pooling fuel to ignite in the inlet hence the half running. Also explains why my prior fooling with injector timing adjustments was a big waste of time that produced poor and nonsensical results.

 

Today I will probably reload my last working vvti map, which would be my last ms tune before conversion to VE. Ill add the correct injector dead time table data, then the adjustment to the base position on cam 1, and then I want to know how it drives with vvti working closer to spec albeit with no load compensation. I bet the dead time correction yields power up higher in rpm and start ability and smoothness at idle. Before it would have a little stumble at idle once in a while.

 

I hope they find their software bugs soon because I was enjoying VE and have a lot of time and research invested in the switch. They have told me to start increasing PID values and try to make the controller move, but I think this doesn't make sense as the PID values were correct as far as the vvti worked with them before. I honestly think there's a bad bit of code governing the system that is somehow relevant in the software once VE is used with a fuel map based target table.

 

One nice thing, its not me, the guys have agreed there's a bug so I'm just happy I have learned enough about the ecu to now know when I'm not the one causing the problem.

 

Edited March 13, 2016 by LittleRedSpirit

[kickn5k]

 

Fair bonkers 2AZ in here for ya.

Edited March 13, 2016 by kickn5k

[LittleRedSpirit]

thats retarded :thumbsup:

[kickn5k]

thats retarded :thumbsup:

 

F'ing impressive! Just goes to show, how over engineered the 2AZ actually is.

400fwhp N/A just shouldn't happen, i'd love to see that cylinder head.

 

Gotta suck you have to go back to MS tuning for a little while though, VE tuning seems 10 fold quicker to get sorted.

[LittleRedSpirit]

Adaptronic have gotten back to me and confirmed its no PID issue, as I expected, its a firmware issue that locks out vvti control. Only if you have an unusual non arbitrary tune resolution like I do, which is at 250 rpm resolution up to 3000 and 500 rpm res. thereafter. So basically they say it will work if I reset the fuel map used to control vvti to arbitrary spacings. I'm going to test this and Ill see how it goes. I want all the torque I can find. I'm getting a bit over chasing these settings and once I have the vvti all configured and fully under control I will probably go find rob Novak and invest in some quality dyno time.

[LittleRedSpirit]

Just weighed it at the dump, 1060kg with me, a 10kg removalist blanket and the laptop inside.

 

Once you deduct the mass of loose items its about 960kg. More or less the same as my 20v ae71.

[ke70dave]

That is awesome.

 

Time to make some carbon fibre things to replace heavy things so you can be lighter!

[LittleRedSpirit]

The shell already has no rear beaver lower section, absolutely no metal under the rear bar, and a glass hatch. The bonnet isn't a weight saver it wont be much if any lighter than stock thanks to all the sealant and the 1.6 alloy cap.

 

I'm happy with that. Ill keep searching for torque for now and then maybe once I put carpet, sound deadening and some trim back in that's where it will stay. About 20kgs more. I like how it handles with a full tank too. The diff and gearbox are the big extra weight areas, but both nice and low under the floor.

 

Did a big long tuning log drive up to past northlakes on the highway yesterday and it was really fun. Got a lot of changes made to the maps and should save a tonne of fuel. After changing to ve things are always rich as ʞ©$ɟ, I was on track to getting 300ks to a tank but ive taken back lots of the rich areas now I'm happy with the vvti curve.

 

Ill do a bit more tidying up then Ill go get Robert Novak to tune it properly. Robs known for tuning cars and finding all the torque.

[kickn5k]

 

Fair bonkers 2AZ in here for ya.

 

Had a chat to the owner today. With the bits and pieces I've seen, no expense was spared when built in 2008. Pistons are ultra, ultra light. Looking to get it closer to an 8sec pass.

[LittleRedSpirit]

Finally got it hammering pretty well all the way through the rev range. When it came back from the dyno it had a hella mid range torque hole and a good little peak after to still make 107kw atw. It was running the same vvti angles as the timing map was ignition so that meant at full throttle I was advancing the cam to 33 degrees as timing was too, which would have been less than ideal since at these load points you would want vvti off for the best VE/torque/peak hp performance.

 

I did a few different revisions of the vvti mapping after finally getting vvti control properly established. I was able to get it going pretty darn well yesterday. It wanted a fair bit of advance up to 4000 revs then a quick taper off. This seems to be the best way to control it I've found and short of dyno time its probably about the best I can do. Still working on mixtures on the lower load and rpm points for cruising. Might have to get it a little more precise then try closed loop fuel and see how that goes.

[LittleRedSpirit]

Finally tried out the new welder today, its great, I'm very impressed by its performance. I made an inch tube 2mm wall bar to hold the battery box in properly. Its got two big area 1.6 folded plates that hold on to the box, and a 5mm plates either end. Was a good little trial run. The job really would have needed .8 wire but I was able to find settings to get .6 welding it beautifully. It was made with under 20 dollars worth of steel from Bunnings so not a big investment. I think its substantial enough to attach harnesses to as well some day.

 

[greenmac80]

nice!! well done. great little units for sure.

[LittleRedSpirit]

Did a lot of testing and adjustments over the last few weeks. Getting it running a bit better now. I got the economy improving since I found some vvti programming that works nicely and makes it pull hard all the way through the range. Taken a couple of drives up the Bruce highway to log highway cruising. Seems pretty darn fun, I feel a bit less need to change the gearing now as its got a longer stronger pull to the engine. I still would like 3.7 or 3.58 gears though in the long run.

 

I'm thinking about another trip to the drags soon to test the adjustments. Between sticky tyres, lighter wheels, better vvti mapping, softer and taller rear springs and shocks, and a cleaner near complete re-tune it should be on the up and up Should get below 15 in it I think.

 

I did another oil change its only been 2500ks but I think without the heat exchanger it reduces oil life and it comes out spent enough at that mileage. I'm using Penrite synthetic hpr5.

Edited April 25, 2016 by LittleRedSpirit

[ke70dave]

What sort of litres/100km you reckon you are getting fuel economy wise?

[LittleRedSpirit]

Its pretty poor because the ve made it very rich everywhere. I haven't done that many ks to really see, and Ive done a lot of experiments and tuning so its been all over the place. I need to do a test and see I guess.