Hi, got the car mapped yesterday very happy with the results haven't had time to drive it on road yet due to the rain (going out this
morning)
The car made 175bhp@wheels and 148ft-lb torque@wheels
If you factor about 15% on top of those for a estimated Flywheel power so that is just over 200bhp & 170ft-lb Torque, tbh I'm only
interested in the power@wheels and how it drives
I have the fuel pressure set@45psi so the power is just on the limit of the injectors@80%, I plan to go back and alter the cam position to see if
there is further bhp to be extracted, but for the moment I'm just going to enjoy it
Old graph with estimated Flywheel power, you can clearly see after 4700rpm it stopped making anymore power
New RR Graph with power measured@the wheels the tiny dip@5000rpm is the inlet cam just coming on (the plans is alter the static cam timing to try take
this out)
I'm also planning to increase the exhaust manifold port size up to 2.5" diameter and have the exhaust port flowed to match, this should
hopefully allow the engine to carry on making power right past 7000rpm
But for the moment i'm just going to enjoy as it is, anyone who has this engine and has the setup so it an on/off to control the inlet camshaft,
i would strongly recommend changing it to fixed cam timing.
The Car is so much more enjoyable to drive & usable
The mapper has done a good job there Matt, the O2 line looks spot on.
However, you've lost a lot of torque in the mid range, which shows the benefit of the VVT system, with the loss of torque on the top end overlap
showing the downside of a simple 'switch'. But, again at your peak power your only up 5bhp, more torque yes but I think this is better
lower down.
This exercise tells me, as I thought, the next step was a new gearbox with ratios suited to the engine.
It was already a BEC beater on top end so I wouldn't be tempted to push the revs up any higher without any (expensive) engine mods.
quote:Originally posted by coozer
The mapper has done a good job there Matt, the O2 line looks spot on.
However, you've lost a lot of torque in the mid range, which shows the benefit of the VVT system, with the loss of torque on the top end overlap
showing the downside of a simple 'switch'. But, again at your peak power your only up 5bhp, more torque yes but I think this is better
lower down.
This exercise tells me, as I thought, the next step was a new gearbox with ratios suited to the engine.
It was already a BEC beater on top end so I wouldn't be tempted to push the revs up any higher without any (expensive) engine mods.
The loss of torque in the midrange i don't find noticeable, I didn't like the way it was on/off before it felt like driving a diesel with
the narrow power band it had, it is a lot more driver friendly now as its not always trying to break traction in the lower gears
My graph is power@wheels I believe yours was calculated@flywheel? You need to add around 15%+ to my figures to get an estimated Flywheel power of the
engine now
There is still some further changes to be made mainly the exhaust primary's as they aren't big enough
I'm probably going to fit a MX5 gearbox from the mk3 2.0 model with a 5 speed
The difference is night and day in the way it drives you can hang on to gears alot longer which is what is needed where I live lol!
Your last sentence is the most true, about where you like to live.
I wnet from a screamer to running the vvc and really enjoy the torque that it releases.
I picked up a spare engine the other day, so I'm going to port that and think about a 285 piper regrind, the cam is quoted as not suitable for
vvc, a quick email provided the answer. They can't garantee the piston to valve clearances so always play it safe. I'll do the head work
first then post the results.
...and obviously the answer was in the programmation of Variable Cams Timing !!!
...so I Wikied it !
Here is a very simple synthesis :
BMW's VANOS :
quote:VANOS operates on the intake camshaft in accordance with engine speed and accelerator pedal position. At the lower end of the engine-speed
scale, the intake valves are opened later, which improves idling quality and smoothness. At moderate engine speeds, the intake valves open much
earlier, which boosts torque and permits exhaust gas re-circulation inside the combustion chambers, reducing fuel consumption and exhaust emissions.
Finally, at high engine speeds, intake valve opening is once again delayed, so that full power can be developed. VANOS significantly enhances emission
management, increases output and torque, and offers better idling quality and fuel economy.
Track-day-guys are in search of high-end power and without an Engine Managing System that can handle the solenoid, you're basically in the same
situation as me, looking for the best timing but as a compromise.
Anyway, for those who have an Emerald K6, there is a VVT output but not really documented
I wonder if the IACV output couldn't be used, as is or with a voltage inverter, to control the ST170 valve Solenoid ?
Manu, any updates on your build? (PM or blog update? :-))
VVT control (or VANOS for that matter) is not as simple as just running a PWM signal. It needs feedback from the cam sensor to close the loop.
Just a question for the crowd here. As I seem to read that the ST engine itself is a desirable unit and people are willing to spend some amount to get
the timing fixed, would you guys consider a little controller to set the cam timing based on revs only. This would give the performance (not the
emissions) benefits from the VVT system.
The delete kit price is about GBP 100, correct? What would be a reasonable price for a controller instead?
You need an ECU that can do camshaft position timing to fully use the PWM valve
not just PWM on its own, this is where the ECU's and mapping time gets expensive
I've done 500miles+ in mine now and i can say that for the cost and ease of fitment the Delete VCT is the way forward for ST170 engine owners on
a budget.
I personally love the way the engine pulls up the topend of the RPM, the engine really does like to be up above 5500rpm
i still have the limiter set at 7250rpm and the motor is stock.
There will always be owners who prefer the VCT on/off function, but for me & where i live its exactly how i want it
it never fails to put a smile on my face blasting down a B-road with the engine on song without having to grab the gearstick every 5 secs because it
out of the powerband
quote:Originally posted by MarcV
Manu, any updates on your build? (PM or blog update? :-))
VVT control (or VANOS for that matter) is not as simple as just running a PWM signal. It needs feedback from the cam sensor to close the loop.
Just a question for the crowd here. As I seem to read that the ST engine itself is a desirable unit and people are willing to spend some amount to get
the timing fixed, would you guys consider a little controller to set the cam timing based on revs only. This would give the performance (not the
emissions) benefits from the VVT system.
The delete kit price is about GBP 100, correct? What would be a reasonable price for a controller instead?
it would need to be RPM and TPS to even get anywhere close, and the mapping time would also increase as you would ideally want multiply fuel/ignition
fields to benefit from the above
the Delete VCT kit is a low cost, easy option for fitting a ST170 engine and having up to 180bhp+ from a stock motor
the cost involved to get the Blacktop Zetec this level to me it's just not worth it.
i would be interested in some uprated camshaft for the ST170 that don't use the VCT (like the blacktop) but i don't think they are
interchangeable between the cylinder heads, unless someone knows different
quote:Originally posted by MarcV
Manu, any updates on your build? (PM or blog update? :-))
Hey Marc. No Blog so far as I'm not building anything, just using/tuning the Zetec 1.8 FI Westfield I purchased second hand in UK last Year.
quote:Originally posted by MarcV
As I seem to read that the ST engine itself is a desirable unit and people are willing to spend some amount to get the timing fixed, would you guys
consider a little controller to set the cam timing based on revs only. This would give the performance (not the emissions) benefits from the VVT
system.
That's exactly what I was thinking about, to get the best out of both options with a simple RPM input (and maybe the TPS) !!
I'm pretty sure Emerald guys could instantly provide an output like this, according to a single matrix RPM/TPS map.
Aha, clear. Seemed to recall you were in the market for / building a GKD...
I think you should not base it on TPS as this indeed requires more mapping effort. If it were to gradually change camshaft position over the rev
range, it would give the benefits of the system (low overlap at low rev, higher overlap at higher revs) and still be just as easy to map. So for
every rpm a fixed camshaft position.
Surely it won't do the extra overlap for internal EGR or drag torque reduction and all that, but you don't have this with fixed timing nor
would you be interested in it.
quote:Originally posted by MarcV
Aha, clear. Seemed to recall you were in the market for / building a GKD...
I think you should not base it on TPS as this indeed requires more mapping effort. If it were to gradually change camshaft position over the rev
range, it would give the benefits of the system (low overlap at low rev, higher overlap at higher revs) and still be just as easy to map. So for
every rpm a fixed camshaft position.
Surely it won't do the extra overlap for internal EGR or drag torque reduction and all that, but you don't have this with fixed timing nor
would you be interested in it.
you will require an ECU that can do Camshaft position and PWM this is where the cost is & mapping, you couldn't just use a PWM controller as
the solenoid is pulsed not opened a certain amount vs RPM.
If cost wasn't an issue i would fit DTA pro60 ECU and map my car this way, but it would cost nearly £2000 to do so and all it will do is move
the power around not necessary increase the peak power produced.
but if someone can build a controller that will do the above cheaply that can be used on a more entry leave ECU, i'd be very interested in the
results
quote:Originally posted by MarcV
Aha, clear. Seemed to recall you were in the market for / building a GKD...
I was and I even purchased a cheap E36-328i that ended up being my daily, coz' it's reliable and convertible...
But I wasn't very impressed with the GKD chassis design and options. On top of that, registration in France for new built is impossible if you
don't use an up-to-date low-emissions engine or try a pre-1993 carbed UK-registered car, not to mention the time and money needed for a built.
That's why last spring I bought this Westfield with loads of engine and chassis options, to enjoy driving instead of building... done 6000
miles between may and october !
To get back to the subject, I wonder if the TPS input wouldn't make sense to tune a dynamic timing because obviously a low RPM high TPS should
output a slightly different value than a standard low RPM, wouldn't it ?
quote:
Hello,
I was wondering if the K6 would be able to manage the VCT solenoid from ST170 Ford engine, for example.
Could any of the output be programmed according to RPM and TPS to map the Cam Timing ?
Thanks
Emmanuel
and here is their response :
quote:
Hi,
We have done a lot of these engines and control the cam via a PWM output table, as you say, rpm against TPS. The engine seems to only need the cam
retarding at idle and very light throttle.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but It seems to me like this will be just full on / off, no specific position. I'm looking into the Ford
specifics, but the system I am familiar with (VANOS) will not work without closed loop control.
I have an Emerald K6 and asked before buying it. For cam control you need a close loop control. So you need to use the phase sensor then use other pmw
output to the solenoid. After that get it mapped. Emerald were not interested as they said on engines they had ran it made little difference.
Delete kit is about £30. And if you wanted you can just use a standard zetec pulley instead of a vernier one. I got a pair of pulleys new for £120.
Far cheaper then the DTA ecu, then hours of mapping.
As for cams. I think the blacktop inlet cam could fit. But it will require a new spacer bearing for the number one bearing. I don't have a head
and cam to check, yet.
quote:Originally posted by MarcV
Correct me if I'm wrong, but It seems to me like this will be just full on / off, no specific position. I'm looking into the Ford
specifics, but the system I am familiar with (VANOS) will not work without closed loop control.
I think it's an analog output that you may amplify to your need and program as shown on screenshots below.
I've asked Dave for more information and he might post answers here as I sent him the link to the topic.
Here is the table Dave is talking about :
There are two other outputs available.
Don't know how they work though
