Ford Mustang Forums banner

61 - 80 of 87 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Discussion Starter #62
@snakebite90 , did you ever get the car running with the corrected injector battery voltage offsets and the dipstick correctly seated?
Yes I did, but still no change which lead me to believe I have a vacuum leak.

I found other injector data over at EFIDynotuning. I’m thinking of giving it a shot see what it does. I used the data for the M-9593-A302 injectors but Decipha has different data listed for the 93-95 cobra injectors. It’s definitely different, check it out.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Yes I did, but still no change which lead me to believe I have a vacuum leak.

I found other injector data over at EFIDynotuning. I’m thinking of giving it a shot see what it does. I used the data for the M-9593-A302 injectors but Decipha has different data listed for the 93-95 cobra injectors. It’s definitely different, check it out.
That's wrong if you have the blue top Ford 24# injectors which are M-9593-A302. Stick with the injector data I gave you. You have a problem elsewhere.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Discussion Starter #64
That's wrong if you have the blue top Ford 24# injectors which are M-9593-A302. Stick with the injector data I gave you. You have a problem elsewhere.
John, the ones I have are ford blue top. However they have a different part number (F1TE-D5A). Would those be that same as the M-9593-A302?
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,800 Posts
John, the ones I have are ford blue top. However they have a different part number (F1TE-D5A). Would those be that same as the M-9593-A302?
Don't quote me on this but I was told the part number on the injector is for the injector itself (F1TE-D5A) and the part number John posted is Ford's Manufacturer part number (M-9593-A302) which is for the kit consisting of 8 injectors. To answer your question, they are the same.

BTW,
Use the injector data John gave you and enter it as shown.

Good luck
Michael Plummer
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Discussion Starter #66 (Edited)
Quick update.
I removed all vacuum lines and plugged the ports, basically isolated the engine. This time i did find a leak with the smoke tester, the intake must not have had enough pressure with the other hoses connected, such as the PCV. It was a plug under the top intake that was dry rotted and cracked. After fixing I did another smoke test and no more leaks!
I then checked the PI corrections and it made no difference, still showing roughly 22% correction on both banks (sweeping on the right side). I got on YouTube and rewatched the video Michael and John made about the PI correction/Injector slope and when I follow that procedure i show about 4% correction but if I follow the write up procedures I get the 22%. I must be doing something wrong. I’ll just have to keep messing with it.

On a side note, the car runs and drives just fine. A lot better than it did the old computer and tune. On decel when coming to a stop sometimes the rpms will drop too low and I will have to tap the throttle but I noticed that is not happening as often anymore.
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,800 Posts
A couple of questions.
1. New or old Pro-M EFI software?
2. What was your injector low slope rate when you got a PI correction of 4% and 22%?

Don't do this "I’ll just have to keep messing with it". Seeing that John Janek has been invested in the troubleshooting, he'll jump back in here in a few and figure this out (he's better at this than I am").

Good luck
Michael Plummer
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
I haven't re-read this whole thread and I can't remember if it was mentioned for sure, but post 1 mentions the supplemental harness so I'm gonna say we are dealing with Insight here.

@snakebite90 , the video you're referencing Micheal and I made several years ago now - long before Insight and adaptive fuel were available. Back then you could fire an engine up and look at the corrections to guide you moving the low slope. That is still very much a valid method, but you do need to disable adaptive fuel and then clear the adaptive fuel tables before you do it. If you don't, the the adaptive fuel will take over and drive corrections to 0 without you doing anything, so the correction factors won't be helpful.

That said, I am confused about the "writeup" resulting in 22% corrections while you were able to get down to 4% using the method from the video. What writeup are you talking about? And like Micheal asked, where did you end up with low slope? (I'm wondering if you followed the old video to a T and therefore didn't disable adaptive fuel. If you didn't do that, corrections will plummet as the processor learns, and things will look better than they really are.)

22% on each bank really sounds like PCV to me. I know you described the PCV setup as a hose post maf going to the oil filler neck and then PCV valve hose going under the intake manifold, but I don't believe you answered the part about breather caps. If you did, my apologies. Do you have one on the filler neck or anywhere else? In my experience, unmetered air through a PCV system results in between 20 and 25% correcting at idle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,738 Posts
when i was chasing a lean condition on b1, it was the stupid breather cap all along. but my correction was about 10-13%. probably has something to do with what kind of vacuum the engine is pulling. drove me crazy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
when i was chasing a lean condition on b1, it was the stupid breather cap all along. but my correction was about 10-13%. probably has something to do with what kind of vacuum the engine is pulling. drove me crazy.
That is true. More vacuum will result in a larger correction as it's more unmetered air.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Discussion Starter #73 (Edited)
@Michael Plummer.
-New software, withsupplemental harness

-26.22 on low slope, but like John said the 4% was before resetting adaptive fuel, 22% after resetting.
- I meant keep messing with it as in trying to find a problem, I didn’t not mess with any of the injector data. I would of thought that after finding and repairing that vacuum leak I would have seen some improvement, but there was nothing.

@John Janek, -The “write up” is the one you find in the help section, where the installation, first start up and all that information is. You are correct, the 4% is before I disable and reset the adaptive fuel, once I do that it goes to 22%. When I watched your guys video i saw you guys didn’t do any of that, you guys opened the PI correction and started adjusting the low slope. I didn’t know that the wasn’t required with the old software. Makes sense
-No breathers at all, just PVC to intake and filler neck port to intake port after the MAF

@kjb302ho -only problem is that both banks nearly mirror each other, I would say less that 2% different between banks. I would agree that it’s a vacuum leak as it’s affecting both banks equally. I’m going to do the same thing as when I did the smoke test and completely remove and plug all vacuum lines and ports including PVC and see what the corrections are then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
If you were to bypass the PCV system momentarily, you might be able to cross a number of possible leak areas off the list quickly: front and rear main seals, front and rear intake manifold-to-block gasket/seals, oil pan gasket, valve cover gaskets, oil cap, dipstick tube-to-block, distributor gasket... basically any seals for the crankcase itself. Just pull the PCV valve hose off the bottom of the intake and pull the other hose off the filler neck. Cap the bottom of the intake manifold. Plug the hose that comes off the inlet tube. (You still want the crankcase to be able to breathe, but you don't want to pull a vac on it nor do you want to introduce a new leak.) Only issue with doing this is you will reduce the amount of air you're sucking in for idle speed as you're no longer drawing air through the PCV system. However, Closed Loop ISC should correct for it fine just idling in the driveway. If your fuel corrections drop substantially with no PCV system in play, then your leak is in the crankcase somewhere like the areas I mentioned above. If the corrections don't change, then you can cross those items off. Start looking at other places like all the injector O rings, brake booster, the throttle blade pivot points (these all leak a little... it would need to be a substantial leak)...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Discussion Starter #75
If you were to bypass the PCV system momentarily, you might be able to cross a number of possible leak areas off the list quickly: front and rear main seals, front and rear intake manifold-to-block gasket/seals, oil pan gasket, valve cover gaskets, oil cap, dipstick tube-to-block, distributor gasket... basically any seals for the crankcase itself. Just pull the PCV valve hose off the bottom of the intake and pull the other hose off the filler neck. Cap the bottom of the intake manifold. Plug the hose that comes off the inlet tube. (You still want the crankcase to be able to breathe, but you don't want to pull a vac on it nor do you want to introduce a new leak.) Only issue with doing this is you will reduce the amount of air you're sucking in for idle speed as you're no longer drawing air through the PCV system. However, Closed Loop ISC should correct for it fine just idling in the driveway. If your fuel corrections drop substantially with no PCV system in play, then your leak is in the crankcase somewhere like the areas I mentioned above. If the corrections don't change, then you can cross those items off. Start looking at other places like all the injector O rings, brake booster, the throttle blade pivot points (these all leak a little... it would need to be a substantial leak)...
I had time to mess with the car today. I pulled the PCV and the hose on the intake tube and plugged them both, it made no difference in PI corrections. Then I removed and plugged the hose that goes to the vacuum tree with the PCV still disconnected and still no changes in the PI. I then grabbed my torch and ran it across the lower intake, upper intake, throttle body, basically everywhere around the engine and still saw no change. Just to confirm that the torch would actually show a difference in the correction I put it in front of the intake air filter and sure enough the PI correction dropped to about 10%. Other than that everything else I tried showed no change. Could it be possible that the bottom of the intake gasket is leaking and sucking air out of the lifter valley? and if it is possible what would the chances of that happening? I don’t think I’ve ever heard of that happening. I also have a set of 60lbs injectors I can swap out for the 24lbs just to eliminate those as a possible problem. Any other suggestions? Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Possible, yes. I think it's unlikely though. You'd likely be sucking in and burning oil too if that were happening.
Without actually having the car in front of me, this is tough. Exhaust leaks can cause false lean readings. Lemme ask this... does the car run better when the fuel correcting is taking place? In other words, does it run better in closed loop when adding 22% fuel compared to running in open loop when there is no correcting at all? (The wideband gauges themselves will read lean in open loop with no correcting.) If the engine doesn't run better in closed loop, or if it in fact runs better in open loop, you likely have a false lean reading.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Discussion Starter #77
Possible, yes. I think it's unlikely though. You'd likely be sucking in and burning oil too if that were happening.
Without actually having the car in front of me, this is tough. Exhaust leaks can cause false lean readings. Lemme ask this... does the car run better when the fuel correcting is taking place? In other words, does it run better in closed loop when adding 22% fuel compared to running in open loop when there is no correcting at all? (The wideband gauges themselves will read lean in open loop with no correcting.) If the engine doesn't run better in closed loop, or if it in fact runs better in open loop, you likely have a false lean reading.
John, I never switch the car to open loop. The “write up”/ instructions to setting fuel doesn’t say to switch to open loop. This is the procedure I follow based on instructions.

-Get engine to operating temp and switch to working page.
-In the “CALIBRATION” area select Fuel> adaptive> scalars and switch fuel_adapt_enabale to DISABLED and click enter then write.
-On top of screen click on TOOLS > reset adaptive then select reset fuel adaptive and click ok
-In the “VARIABLES” area select Fuel> closed loop> and open bank1 and bank2 PI Corrections.
-In “CALIBRATION” area select Fuel> Injector> low slope and adjust.

To answer your question, I’ve never driven the car in open loop or with the fuel_adapt Disabled, it’s always been just idling in the driveway. When I switch from enable to disable the idling of the car doesn’t change (and I don’t believe the widebands readings change either but I’m not sure on that, I’d have to double check). The cars stays steady idling at 900rpm. However, when I reset the fuel adaptive in the TOOLS section then the car does have a little stumble and surges for a couple of seconds but then it goes back to a steady idle. the PI correction gauges go to 0 and then quickly work their way back to 22%. I will try again today and see what the widebands read.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Sorry. What I'm talking about wouldn't have been in a writeup anywhere. Based on your above comment about the stumble, I'm gonna guess that it's not a false lean reading, but this is the procedure I'm talking about.
  • Disable adaptive fuel (if it's not already)
  • Clear adaptive fuel (do this just to be safe anyway)
  • Under Fuel > Closed Loop > Configuration -- set Closed Loop Fuel Control to Disabled
    • This will let the engine run in open loop which means straight off the MAF with no correcting no matter what the widebands detect.
I expect you'll see the gauges jump up to something like 17.9 if it would normally be adding 22% more fuel. If that's a correct reading, the engine will not run well. (Again, based on you're comment on the stumble, I think it's gonna run poorly.)

Forgive me if we covered this already... fuel pressure is 39-40 with the vac line off the regulator? Are you running the pro m delta p fuel pressure sensor?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,738 Posts
if you have a fuel pressure sensor, you must turn on "enable". this is located where you adjust the low slope.

if its enabled, and you are not running the fuel pressure sensor, it will cause you problems. it must be disabled if you're not running the fuel pressure sensor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
482 Posts
Discussion Starter #80 (Edited)
Sorry. What I'm talking about wouldn't have been in a writeup anywhere. Based on your above comment about the stumble, I'm gonna guess that it's not a false lean reading, but this is the procedure I'm talking about.
  • Disable adaptive fuel (if it's not already)
  • Clear adaptive fuel (do this just to be safe anyway)
  • Under Fuel > Closed Loop > Configuration -- set Closed Loop Fuel Control to Disabled
    • This will let the engine run in open loop which means straight off the MAF with no correcting no matter what the widebands detect.
I expect you'll see the gauges jump up to something like 17.9 if it would normally be adding 22% more fuel. If that's a correct reading, the engine will not run well. (Again, based on you're comment on the stumble, I think it's gonna run poorly.)

Forgive me if we covered this already... fuel pressure is 39-40 with the vac line off the regulator? Are you running the pro m delta p fuel pressure sensor?
Fuel pressure set at 39.5, not delta fuel pressure.
I just ran the test following your procedures and you are correct again, as soon as switched to open loop the widebands jumped to about 20 AFR and the car runs like crap, didn’t die but does run like crap.
Once I switch back to closed look and enable fuel adaptive it starts to run good again and corrections come back down. I accelerated the car and noticed the corrections come down, for example at 1500rpm= 18% and 2500rpm=15% correction.

Forgot to mention that after I switched to open loop the check engine light came on. O2 sensor signal stuck lean bank 1 and 2
 
61 - 80 of 87 Posts
Top