New beginner's Tuning Guide (DVD) from Calibrated Success

[waterbug1999]

What books you guys recommend?

[98 tigershark]

Everyone in this discussion knows that we are talking about WBO2 sensors as which one is the best as tested. The truth is that in the same test they all can be off for different reasons which is mainly electrostatic charges by the exhaust gases. Why some say NKG is the best because they do understand this as with their spark plugs and other parts. The WBO2 sensor works off of a very small voltage except for heating to around 600 degree.
The real truth of which sensor is the best is impossible to determine for this reason, explanation and tests required to make a determination have really never been done. Why?
The flow of gases in automotive exhaust systems creates a static charge. While this is not a problem if the charge dissipates as it forms, it can become a serious problem if the electrostatic potential builds to the point were it interferes with sensors. Several trends in automobile exhaust systems have heightened the potential for charge buildup.
This change increased the volume of gases or exhaust through the exhaust
pipes, increasing charge accumulation. Charge accumulation may increase in the exhaust system as fuel pressure is boosted to aid fuel injection. In addition, some oxygenates blended into fuels can increase static charge as they flow through the exhaust system Test for Electrostatic Charge to determine the best WBO2 sensor should includes test methods for measuring the electrostatic characteristics of materials, components, and assemblies to ensure they will not cause electrostatic charges.
Uneven dispersion can make also make conductivity spotty and render a part nonconductive. Exhaust and sensor designers should use uniform wall thicknesses and generous fillets and corner radii to keep material flowing freely and to prevent a filler or fiber from concentrating in parts and on sensor geometries.
The tester must evaluate components to ensure to classify the electrostatic-dissipation characteristics of materials.
The ESD Association classifies material having a resistance below 104 Ohms as conductive, between 104 and 1011 Ohms as static-dissipative, and above 1011 as insulating. Unfilled plastics are usually insulators. Although these classifications were developed primarily for static-safe packaging materials, they are also referenced throughout the static-control industry.
Volume resistivity (in Ohm-cm) is the measured resistance times the area of the measuring
electrode Resistance and static-dissipation measurements should be performed using surface contacting electrodes that simulate real-world surface contact. Standard test probes- pinpoint probes that come with digital multimeters or alligator clips—should not be used. The former lack sufficient contact area, while the latter make random point surface contact and could also punch through the surface and contact the conductive parts. Silver-paint electrodes should also be avoided. They can give false low resistance
readings because the paint makes total surface contact and can penetrate the surface layer to make contact with the conductive additive, neither of which occurs under normal conditions.

In other words unless you use a new exhaust system each and every test and equally discharging every sensor and system every time, you can not be certain as described above as NKG has not done the testing nor has the other manufactures. It is therefore impossible to form an intelligent conclusion as Electrostatic discharge is not the same on any vehicle anyway.
If you understand this then you understand the importance of good grounding procedures for all parts of your EFI system including the sensors and eliminating static electric interference charges if possible. It is impossible to eliminate all the static charge for a WBO2 sensor and therefore no way to tell which is better unless these and other intense factory testing is done.
Regards,
98 tigershark

[98 tigershark]

eficalibrator has a book out and so does Jeff Hartman " How to tune and modify Engine management systems. The second is a good book and has some important tuning understandings but it does fall a little short as to what I have heard about Gregs Book (eficalibtator) so check them both out.
Good Luck,
98 tigershark

What books you guys recommend?

[Aloicious]

What books you guys recommend?

like 98TS mentioned, Greg's book is excellent, I've got it and its a great reference. this is it here:
http://www.amazon.com/Engine-Managem.../dp/1932494421
just remember that its not a step by step how to tune or anything, its more of something that helps you understand how the PCM works with the engine sensors so you can do the tuning. if you read some of the reviews of the book the ones that are all upset are the ones who want a step by step book made for HPT (at least thats how they all sound, they mention that it isn't specific to HPT. I say good. who needs a HPT book anyways.) so if you want a book that helps you understand how the engine works with the PCM then its a great buy. but if you're looking for some step by step guide. I don't think you'll find it outside the free tutorials on here like autove, etc.

I'm sure his new DVD is also very good, but at the moment, the price is prohibitively high for me. I will most likely get it sometime though.

[waterbug1999]

I was looking at the exact same spot.. I have a 25 gift card from amazon, might as well use it.

[RWTD]

36ers from FAST... I re-did the calcualtions according to the spread sheet.

Ive been playing around with the B5934, B5935 and B5936 as of yesterday for the cold start surge, it did help so I am going to keep adjusting it and see if it will eliminate it.. I see the B5935 and B5936 set too high so its just bouncing the timing from way low to way high until it smoothes out (after 8 to 10 secs).

Unfortunately, the "infamous" injector spreadsheet only helps you in ratioing the IFR table. Everything else is "unknown", and I can assure you that "playing" with those parameters isn't going to cut it, as that data can ONLY be generated on a variable based flow bench. Greg has specifically asked FAST for specific information in the past, so that he can utilize such to build proper injector calibration data in GM units, but they aren't listening.

FWIW, Greg took Ford Racing's injector calibration data and backcaculated everything from Ford units to GM units. His training DVD has ALL the calibration data for the following injectors:

Part Number  Flow    Body Imped  Len Conn    Cal Data
M-9593-C302  19 #/hr EV1  11-18  L   Jet/Min Link
M-9593-LU24  24 #/hr EV6  11-18  L   USCAR   Link
M-9593-A302  24 #/hr EV6  11-18  L   Jet/Min Link
M-9593-AA302 24 #/hr EV6  11-18  L   Jet/Min Link
M-9593-B302  30 #/hr EV6  11-18  L   Jet/Min Link
M-9593-BB302 30 #/hr EV6  11-18  L   Jet/Min Link
M-9593-MU32  32 #/hr EV14 11-12  M   USCAR   Link
M-9593-LU34  34 #/hr EV6  11-12  L   USCAR   Link
M-9593-M39   39 #/hr EV6  11-18  L   USCAR   Link
M-9593-F302  42 #/hr EV1  11-18  L   Jet/Min Link
M-9593-G302  47 #/hr EV14 11-18  M   USCAR   Link
M-9593-LU60  60 #/hr EV6  11-12  L   USCAR   Link
M-9593-LU80  80 #/hr EV6  11-12  L   USCAR   Link

Keys:
Flow = Flow Rate in lb/hr of injector at 39.15 psi
Body = Body style of injector
Imped = Ohms value
Len = Length of injector (L = long, M = Medium)
Conn = Connector style of injector (Jetronic is the old rectangle style conn, and USCAR is the new smaller square conn)
Cal Data: Links you to the actual Ford Racing injector calibration data you will use to input into your tuning software (note, this data is for Ford vehicles, and will not work if you attempt to use with other non-Ford vehicles)

Notes:
M-9593-A302 and M-9593-B302 are the old "blue tops" and "red tops", respectively, that are not produced any longer.
M-9593-LU60 and M-9593-LU80 are the Siemens (Continental) injector that Ford Racing offers. The LU80 is the original equipment used on the FR500CJ Mustang.
M-9593-F302 is the original equipment on the '99-'04 SVT Lightning.
M-9593-G302 is the original equipment on the '07-'10 GT500.
M-9593-M39 is the original equipment on the '03-'04 SVT Cobra.
M-9593-MU32 is the original equipment on the '05-'06 Ford GT40 (they had 16 total), and is the same injector Whipple uses in their '05-'09 Mustang GT supercharger kits (fuel pressure at WOT is raised to increase their output substantially).
M-9593-LU24 is the original equipment on the '03-'04 Mach 1.

[RWTD]

98 tigershark, that article you referenced from here...

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...charge-in.html

...talks about nothing in regards to widebands and exhaust systems. It's merely a "safety" article in regards to using plastics inside of the fuel delivery system. All manufacturers conform to ESD testing standards for their fueling systems. Regardless, the ESD (electrostatic discharge) issue that the manufacturers resolve is during the flow of fuel from the tank to the injector. After that, it's in the cylinder, and all you get is combustion.

Edit: Wait I minute, I just figured it out! Someone made up some crap! They literally took that real article I linked above and raped it like newbs do to their tunes! Everyone, look at what was stated, and then look at what the real article said:

A quote from from the hacked up article posted above:

The flow of gases in automotive exhaust systems creates a static charge. While this is not a problem if the charge dissipates as it forms, it can become a serious problem if the electrostatic potential builds to the point were it interferes with sensors. Several trends in automobile exhaust systems have heightened the potential for charge buildup.
This change increased the volume of gases or exhaust through the exhaust
pipes, increasing charge accumulation. Charge accumulation may increase in the exhaust system as fuel pressure is boosted to aid fuel injection. In addition, some oxygenates blended into fuels can increase static charge as they flow through the exhaust system

Quote from the "real" article, titled "Seeking neutral: controlling charge in auto fuel systems.":

The flow of fuel in automotive fuel systems creates a static charge. While this is not a problem if the charge dissipates as it forms, it can become a serious problem if the electrostatic potential builds to the point where arcing occurs. Repeated arcing can pierce a hole through a plastic fuel-system component, which will cause fuel or vapors to escape. During refueling, even a single electrostatic discharge can cause a thermal event.

Several trends in automobile fuel systems have heightened the potential for charge buildup. One is the growing use of plastics, which has generally been a boon to the industry. As insulators, however, plastics heighten electrostatic issues. Another is the shift to fuel injection, which prompted designers to move the fuel pump from near the engine to the fuel tank. This change increased the volume of fuel through the fuel lines, increasing charge accumulation. Charge accumulation may increase in the future as fuel pressure is boosted to aid fuel injection. In addition, some oxygenates blended into fuels can increase static charge as they flow through the system.

Not only just that part, but they took the ENTIRE real article and deleted and added to it in multiple other areas with blatant bullshit! This is about as bad as plagiarism gets, and all for the sake of someone, whomever it was, attempting to make themselves look brilliant.

Here's more:

Quote from from the hacked up article:

Test for Electrostatic Charge to determine the best WBO2 sensor should includes test methods for measuring the electrostatic characteristics of materials, components, and assemblies to ensure they will not cause electrostatic charges.

Quote from the "real" article:

All plastic elements that carry fuel--filler necks, fuel modules, filter, lines, fuel rails, onboard vapor recovery refueling systems and more (Table 1)--receive close scrutiny regarding electrostatic charge. The industry's fuel-system ESD standard, Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) J1645, "Fuel System--Electrostatic Charge," includes test methods for measuring the electrostatic characteristics of materials, components, and assemblies to ensure they will not cause electrostatic hazards in vehicles

And again:

Quote from from the hacked up article:

Uneven dispersion can make also make conductivity spotty and render a part nonconductive. Exhaust and sensor designers should use uniform wall thicknesses and generous fillets and corner radii to keep material flowing freely and to prevent a filler or fiber from concentrating in parts and on sensor geometries.

Quote from the "real" article:

Uneven dispersion can make conductivity spotty and render a part nonconductive. Designers use uniform wall thicknesses and generous fillets and corner radii to keep material flowing freely and to prevent a filler or fiber from concentrating in part geometries such as comers.

Yet more:

Quote from from the hacked up article:

The tester must evaluate components to ensure to classify the electrostatic-dissipation characteristics of materials.
The ESD Association classifies material having a resistance below 104 Ohms as conductive, between 104 and 1011 Ohms as static-dissipative, and above 1011 as insulating. Unfilled plastics are usually insulators. Although these classifications were developed primarily for static-safe packaging materials, they are also referenced throughout the static-control industry.

Quote from the "real" article:

Resistance is used to classify the electrostatic-dissipation characteristics of materials. The ESD Association classifies material having a resistance below 104 Ohms as conductive, between 104 and 1011 Ohms as static-dissipative, and above 1011 as insulating. Unfilled plastics are usually insulators. Although these classifications were developed primarily for static-safe packaging materials, they are also referenced throughout the static-control industry.

And finally:

Volume resistivity (in Ohm-cm) is the measured resistance times the area of the measuring
electrode Resistance and static-dissipation measurements should be performed using surface contacting electrodes that simulate real-world surface contact. Standard test probes- pinpoint probes that come with digital multimeters or alligator clips—should not be used. The former lack sufficient contact area, while the latter make random point surface contact and could also punch through the surface and contact the conductive parts. Silver-paint electrodes should also be avoided. They can give false low resistance
readings because the paint makes total surface contact and can penetrate the surface layer to make contact with the conductive additive, neither of which occurs under normal conditions.

Quote from the "real" article:

Conductive polymers are defined by their volume resistivity, as opposed to surface resistivity, because current flows through them and not just along the surface. Volume resistivity (in Ohm-cm) is the measured resistance times the area of the measuring electrode or material surface, whichever is smaller, divided by sample thickness. The resistance of loaded thermoplastics is nonlinear and is a function of the test voltage applied.

Resistance and static-dissipation measurements should be performed using surface-contacting electrodes that simulate real-world surface contact. Standard test probes--pinpoint probes that come with digital multimeters or alligator clips should not be used. The former lack sufficient contact area, while the latter make random point surface contact and could also punch through the surface and contact the conductive filler or fiber. Silver-paint electrodes should also be avoided. They can give false low-resistance readings because the paint makes total surface contact and can penetrate the surface layer to make contact with the conductive additive, neither of which occurs under normal conditions.

What's going on here? 98 tigershark, please explain yourself!

[XLRVIII]

James has an incredible knack for sniffing out BS.
RWTD FTW!

[XLRVIII]

I was looking at the exact same spot.. I have a 25 gift card from amazon, might as well use it.

you will like gregs book.
I bought it a couple of years ago, and it's still on top of my "reading stack".

I've read it cover to cover many times and it's still a "good read".

one of my favorite quotes comes out early on in the book
Suck,Crush, Bang, Blow.. which sounds alot like many internet message boards....but it's good stuff!

hats off to Greg, as I've said many times in various places.

[KenB]

WOW is all I have to say.