CTSV ID1050x issues

[supraslow92]

Hello all,

just installed a set of ID1050x injectors in my 10 CTSV, only other mods are airraid intake, upper pulley, 160 therm, and tsp headers. I entered in the settings available from ID's website, and the car is running pig rich. Pulling 40% fuel. I've never half scaled anything, but attempted to by following DSteck's guide, it got the car to idle with okay trims, but would spit and sputter if i tried to get do any part throttle/boost. I tried to find every table that needed it and scale it properly. Stoich, injector pressure, maf, ve, knock cylinder, etc. If anyone could take a look at my two posted maps, and help me figure out what i'm doing wrong. Thanks!

1050x no scaling.hplJamisonWatkins-ctsv-1050x-boltons-Rev1.hptJamisonWatkins-ctsv-1050xhalfscaled-boltons-Rev3.hpt

[freddog23]

have u tried without scaling

[Maxspeed96ct]

which ecu does the ctsv have? on the e38 g8 with 1050x all I had to scale was double the AFR and half the IFR numbers.

you sure you have to scale all those other ones?

[mowton]

The CTSV has the E67 PCM which limits out at 127 lb/hr. The 1050's are rated at 117 lb/hr (4 bar/58 psi) and will cap out at 128.587 at the 488 kPa delta pressure axis value. This is really as low as you have to go as you will never exerience vacuum levels lower than that. So you could squeeze them in without doing any scaling. If you are a die hard for accurracy, then the Double/Half strategy works.

I would make sure that the previous injectors were tuned properly or they weren't scaled which would off your MAF/VE models.

I'll take a look at the file a bit later for you if there are no answers by then

Ed M

[supraslow92]

have u tried without scaling

yes, it was pulling 40% fuel at idle and cruise. Log and file is attached.

[supraslow92]

The CTSV has the E67 PCM which limits out at 127 lb/hr. The 1050's are rated at 117 lb/hr (4 bar/58 psi) and will cap out at 128.587 at the 488 kPa delta pressure axis value. This is really as low as you have to go as you will never exerience vacuum levels lower than that. SO you could squeeze the in without doing any scaling. If you are a die hard for accurracy, then the Double/Half strategy works.

I would make sure that the previous injectors were tuned properly or they weren't scaled which would through off your MAF/VE models.

I'll take a look at the file a bit later for you if there are no answers by then

Ed M

I didn't compare it to a stock file yet, but everything appeared to be stock. I previously had an 11 V with I'd 850s and didn't have any issues like this. If you could take a look I'd really appreciate it!

[mowton]

Double check your IFR data...it doesn't match the ID data.......

Ed M

[supraslow92]

Double checked data, it was off slightly as i used the pasted the data from the slightly different x axis table. however inputting the correct data didn't make much of a difference. still pulling 40% fuel, tried basic double stoich, .5 injector flow rate, and same exact thing. Attached are logs from both.

1050x no scaling.hpl

1050x-halfIFRdoublestoich.hpl

JamisonWatkins-ctsv-1050x-boltons-Rev2.hpt

JamisonWatkins-ctsv-1050x-boltons-Rev2-halfscaled.hpt

[mowton]

Post the file and log just before you changed the injectors...which to confirm, is the only change you made...correct?

Ed M

[supraslow92]

Post the file and log just before you changed the injectors...which to confirm, is the only change you made...correct?

Ed M

I don't have any logs from before I put the Injectors in. The car was bone stock, the Id1050x were installed as well as an air raid intake and Texas Speed longtubes.

[liqidvenom]

Were you able to get your tune sorted out? I have a similar setup and was curious.

[mowton]

Not sure if you got this straightened out, but if not. I would just insert the 1050x data without scaling in the original tune and tune the maf accordingly. Also make sure the MAF is installed in the right direction.

Ed M

[liqidvenom]

Not sure if you got this straightened out, but if not. I would just insert the 1050x data without scaling in the original tune and tune the maf accordingly. Also make sure the MAF is installed in the right direction.

Ed M

HI Ed,
Would it be ok if i run my tune with the stock data by you to make sure I did it correctly?

[mowton]

HI Ed,
Would it be ok if i run my tune with the stock data by you to make sure I did it correctly?

Sure post it up...I am heading out, but will check back in later....

Ed M

[liqidvenom]

2013_ctsv_manual_base_file_lady_in_red_ECU_1050x_injectors_scaled_E85_enabled_052618_pass_1.hpl2013_ctsv_manual_base_file_lady_in_red_ECU_1050x_injectors_scaled_E85_Enabled_031118.hpt

Here is a log of a drive around town and my calibration as well. If you see anything that stands out as wrong let me know.

Thanks in advance.

[ddtech]

I tune roughly 3-6 CTSV a week, and do not have to double stoich on these for the 1050x's.
Follow the posted PNP data off of ID's site and it works perfectly fine.
I even run FID1100s in my personal veh, i haven't doubled stoich.

[mowton]

I tune roughly 3-6 CTSV a week, and do not have to double stoich on these for the 1050x's.
Follow the posted PNP data off of ID's site and it works perfectly fine.
I even run FID1100s in my personal veh, i haven't doubled stoich.

We established that in thread #4 and that is how his tune has been represented. He needs to tune the MAF and all should be good.

Ed M

[mowton]

2013_ctsv_manual_base_file_lady_in_red_ECU_1050x_injectors_scaled_E85_enabled_052618_pass_1.hpl2013_ctsv_manual_base_file_lady_in_red_ECU_1050x_injectors_scaled_E85_Enabled_031118.hpt

Here is a log of a drive around town and my calibration as well. If you see anything that stands out as wrong let me know.

Thanks in advance.

Looks OK, tune the MAF and you will be OK.

Ed M

[liqidvenom]

Thanks for looking at it ED. I have been doing some drives today making changes for the VE and then after the MAF. Are you saying that i should just do the MAF and be ok? I dont mind taking a swing at both.

[mowton]

Thanks for looking at it ED. I have been doing some drives today making changes for the VE and then after the MAF. Are you saying that i should just do the MAF and be ok? I dont mind taking a swing at both.

I'm sorry, continue the way you were going. Finish the VE, then do the MAF. I normally start with the MAF as it is easiest and will show any other "build" issues. But also have seen on several cars, the VE being so far off that it applies its "background" filtering/take over when the MAF verification fails. And that is yet another reason I always advice logging Dynamic Airflow (PCM's final answer) as this will show you a marked difference between the 2 airmodels during these scenario's.

Ed M