2013 MazdaSpeed 3 P0171

Maybe I misunderstood what you wrote, but if you parked after your trip and fucked off for a bit then yeah, that's not the right way to do the test. You need to have the engine nice and hot from after a trip, and when you park after that you immediately do the test.

Don't forget to blip the throttle so it starts off higher, and make sure the RPM is going up when you kill the engine or it will tank the pressure below 400 (idle).
 
I'll re test after I get a revision from Will I really don't want to drive the car any more than I have to with the way it's running.

Honestly the only reason I did it was I saw that P0089 code which is now gone. From reading more about that code though it seems it's more related to the in tank pressure regulator.

I did not blip the throttle as I shut it off I just shut it down at idle with pressure in the mid 400s. So I'll make sure to do that when I retest.

I do have a fuel pressure gauge but I'll need to build an adapter to put it in line with my 3/8 PTFE line which I do plan on doing. Just to be sure I don't have an issue with the fuel pressure supplying the HPFP.

I also want to do that test with the guage between the Ethanol sensor and the HPFP. In theory there shouldn't be a restriction there as the factory line is 5/16 and my new line is 3/8 but I suppose I'm a bit paranoid.
 
HPFP will operate properly with minimal pressure. It just needs to be "fed," it doesn't really amplify the ITFP pressure. I'm reasonably sure you could gravity feed the HPFP with a 2 liter bottle full of gas and it would make normal pressure at idle.

Higher flow rates would be a problem though.
 
So Enki if I'm understanding you correctly, if I have a low pressure side fuel volume/pressure issue it's going to become very evident in my data logs and the way the car behaves at higher boost/load?
 
Correct. If it's not fed enough, pressure will drop off in line with the delta between injection and feed. Basically, higher loads will drop pressure more at a given RPM / HPFP cycle rate. A good example of this is a stock turbo car on E mix with stock HPFP internals will see pressure dip in the mid range then climb back up towards redline, as airflow falls off compared to the amount of fuel the HPFP can move.
 
So I did the FPRV test the right way last night and it climbed to 1813 the first time and then I could see the drop off and then watched it again and same thing at 1816 this time. Thanks Enki!

So tuner sent me a new map and said everything looks off mechanically but the data is consistent so no reason not to continue at this point. Told me to get logs on the new map and we would go from there. Looking at the logs from the new map LTFT are improved to around 7 and they were at 25 before. STFT are still kind of all over and it hard to tell so I'll just wait to hear back and see what he thinks.

P0171 is gone now and is not even stored as a intermittent or developing DTC.

P0089 has returned though and it looks like it will be confirmed according to FORSCAN. From the little bit I've read it seems like it's the in tank fuel pressure regulator not doing what it supposed to. I'll have to rig up an adapter to check actual pressure on the line feeding the HPFP to confirm.
 
Well LTFTs are back in spec, car drives just fine.

The lean condition was resolved with tuning but now we have run into another issue. Tuner isn't happy with my BATs and the temperature Delta he is seeing on my WOT logs even in 75 degree weather.

Looks like I'm going FMIC, there will be a lightly used CPE TMIC for sale soon!
 
Enki, it's a BNR S3. No corn yet the plan was to finish up the 93 tune and then go E30.

I talked to Will on the phone today. He's just not comfortable long term for the health of the motor with my BATs in the 160s and higher on this intercooler. We are not having an issue with KR it's just BATs.

Last logs I sent him it was about 75 degrees out and I was on the highway cruising easy for about 5 miles or so before logging. Logs start at about 100 degrees and by the time I'm at 7 K we are at 163 degrees.

Plan is to move to a Cobb FMIC he has tuned on those and seen very good results. Told me he's done 500 whp on one. Also I can keep my stock crash bar which was a big reason I didn't go FMIC in the first place.
 
Must be pushing that S3 pretty hard then, especially at 7k. A FMIC might bring the temps down a bit but it's still going to be higher than normal, especially at 7k on such a small turbo.
 
Some assumptions:
1. At 7k, your VE is 100% (It's probably lower, but still)
2. You're at 3000 ft elevation (I'm lazy and didn't change this, but lowering it will make things worse)
3. You're hitting 20 psi @ 7k
4. It has the GTX2867 Gen 2 compressor wheel, and matching housing

This is where it is on the map (Purple star); similar to the K04 at 6k RPM:
GTX2867R-G2-Comp-Map-Kg-Sec-scaled.jpg

So yeah, don't be surprised if the FMIC doesn't help as much as you expect, the boost drops several PSI, or both. It's definitely shooting fire.
 
Enki, from looking at logs yes we are hitting 20.8 psi at 7 k. Also I'm in Chicago which sits at about 600 feet. So basically I would need a more efficient turbo because as you said its a flamethrower at that point.

I guess where I am struggling is from what I read I would be able to max out stock fueling or close on E30 with an S3. I guess I'll just have to be happy with wherever we land at this point.

Seems like it's not the most efficient way to do it or I made some assumptions about some things.

As far as coolant temps with a FMIC I do have a KoyoRad waiting to be installed. I did plan on making sure everything was properly ducted and sealed up to force as much air through the the IC and Rad as possible.
 
Yea your just almost off the map on the efficiency a fmic probably isn't going to cut the bats that much
 
Updated with the new info. Also, the last map I posted I was actually using my 2.0 displacement, so at my altitude you'd be *way* off the map. Lol.
GTX2867R-G2-Comp-Map-Kg-Sec-scaled.jpg

You should be able to make 400 with this setup, but probably not on pump gas.
 
Enki, thanks for the data.

Honestly I have no intention on ever running the car on 93 again once this tune is complete. I also understand what you and EB are pointing out with turbo charger efficiency.

The IC core can only do so much to drop the charge temp. So in theory I would think my initial charge temp from the FMIC would start lower than what a TMIC would? So if my temp delta stays roughly the same I would in theory see lower peak BATs?

I fully understand there is a lot of science here and what seems to make sense from a logical standpoint does not always hold true.

I know this has been gone over a million times but does anyone have any links to actual data or can anyone point me as to where I can read more about this?
 
do you have all of the stock underhood ducting installed?

can you post a graph of the BATs vs RPM from one of your pulls?

if you are looking to lower BATs you need at least a TR8 sized intercooler and work to seal off the front end and force the air through. you will need to cut the crashbar to install that size intercooler.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top