Mazda 6 Forums banner

81 - 100 of 148 Posts

·
Registered
2016 Mazda 6 Touring AT
Joined
·
283 Posts
Discussion Starter · #81 ·
Amazing job with the videos and the sound clip. Just gotta love that supercharger whine. Are you getting the full tune from VT or a local shop?
VT-Racing includes the tuning as part of the package, BUT it seems because I was previously tuned by OVTune that is causing some issues (even the stock tune I flashed back to is encrypted, and they always tune based on tweaking what's already there rather than just pushing a completely new tune. I'm going to see if I can get the dealership to flash it back to completely stock tune, unencrypted, and then try again with the VT-Racing tuner).
 

·
Registered
2016 Mazda 6 Touring AT
Joined
·
283 Posts
Discussion Starter · #82 · (Edited)
OK appointment scheduled to drop car off at dealership Thursday night for them to complete on Friday, then hopefully Friday evening I can work with VTRacing tuner, (out of Japan) and get the first real tune applied!

Surprisingly they didn't really think it was that strange that I want my ECM re flashed...
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,895 Posts
This is all so awesome. Great job Dan! It's not much but it's the best I've got with the new forum - You've earned yourself your own little spot in the 3rd gen 1 stop shop :)

242695
 

·
Registered
2016 Mazda 6 Touring AT
Joined
·
283 Posts
Discussion Starter · #86 ·
Continues to run/drive great, just starts every time... still hunting a tiny leak of coolant from the intercooler hose.

Got it back from the dealer, freshly re-flashed with the latest OE tune (revision D now, which was rev A before...) feels oog.

Still not tuned, but did some data logging, to test safety in current state, while pushing the supercharged setup hard
🙂

https://youtu.be/eVkH8tilCnM

This is a side by side screenshot showing the mass air flow in G/s. On the right is my car fully tuned on 95 octane fuel, on the left supercharged on stock OE tune. N/A max air flow is 150G/s, SC max air flow is 200G/s
That exactly matches my calculations that this is increasing the effective size/power of this motor by 33%
The timing right now is VERY safe, so there's a lot of power left to extract with the tune.
I wanted to get a 0-60 or 0-100km pull but it's been rainy/wet roads, so it just spins at any speed in first gear if I floor it
🙂


Also no Knock Retard of any kind, no risk at this point, only problem is that it's not at full power yet...

Fuel pulse width went from a max of 4ms to 5.2ms, again about 30% increase, which means the ECU is properly adjusting for the increased air flow, and the AFRs look similar to pre SC, so that seams reasonable

242716
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
Continues to run/drive great, just starts every time... still hunting a tiny leak of coolant from the intercooler hose.

Got it back from the dealer, freshly re-flashed with the latest OE tune (revision D now, which was rev A before...) feels oog.

Still not tuned, but did some data logging, to test safety in current state, while pushing the supercharged setup hard
🙂

https://youtu.be/eVkH8tilCnM

This is a side by side screenshot showing the mass air flow in G/s. On the right is my car fully tuned on 95 octane fuel, on the left supercharged on stock OE tune. N/A max air flow is 150G/s, SC max air flow is 200G/s
That exactly matches my calculations that this is increasing the effective size/power of this motor by 33%
The timing right now is VERY safe, so there's a lot of power left to extract with the tune.
I wanted to get a 0-60 or 0-100km pull but it's been rainy/wet roads, so it just spins at any speed in first gear if I floor it
🙂


Also no Knock Retard of any kind, no risk at this point, only problem is that it's not at full power yet...

Fuel pulse width went from a max of 4ms to 5.2ms, again about 30% increase, which means the ECU is properly adjusting for the increased air flow, and the AFRs look similar to pre SC, so that seams reasonable

View attachment 242716
Hey, how did your intake valves look when you had you mani off?
Mine were gummed up when I bought it at 70,000kms.
I don't know the driving history as I bought it from a dealer.
Thanks for the posts on the build.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,375 Posts
Dan, when you mention that the max pulse width of the injectors increased, do you suggest that the injectors only open once per cycle...or is it just that the trace you cite looks at only the MAIN injector-open "event"; one that typically varies with air-flow?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,521 Posts
Dan, when you mention that the max pulse width of the injectors increased, do you suggest that the injectors only open once per cycle...or is it just that the trace you cite looks at only the MAIN injector-open "event"; one that typically varies with air-flow?
Pulse width, or injector duty cycle refers to how long they stay open each time they fire. So they are pushing "1.2ms more fuel" each time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,375 Posts
I know... but as I understand it, many DGI cars have multiple injection events in a given "cycle"... and I was enquiring about whether of any of other events changed duration.
 

·
Registered
2016 Mazda 6 Touring AT
Joined
·
283 Posts
Discussion Starter · #92 ·
I know... but as I understand it, many DGI cars have multiple injection events in a given "cycle"... and I was enquiring about whether of any of other events changed duration.
In the MazdaEdit logs it doesn't differentiate between number of injection events, but lists length in ms of pulse width (which happens to be 30% more than pre supercharger)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cdn17Sport6MT

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,375 Posts
In the MazdaEdit logs it doesn't differentiate between number of injection events, but lists length in ms of pulse width (which happens to be 30% more than pre supercharger)
I would bet, then, that the "main event" for fueling the car, is the one with the increased pulse (hence more fuel injected); and that it is the only one that is revised with the higher air-flow due to the SC. I suspect any other injection events are for trying to wash some fuel-air over the intake valves, say, on the start of the compression stroke (and delayed closure of the intake valves)... and likely they are not modified.

??
 

·
Registered
2016 Mazda 6 Touring AT
Joined
·
283 Posts
Discussion Starter · #94 ·
Hey, how did your intake valves look when you had you mani off?
Mine were gummed up when I bought it at 70,000kms.
I don't know the driving history as I bought it from a dealer.
Thanks for the posts on the build.
Not as good as I'd like, should have gotten some footage but there was a lot I was trying to just complete. There was a tiny bit of accumulation at the base of the valve stem like a tiny bulb, other than that is was mostly just coated black. In an ideal world I would have cleaned it, though I'm skeptical if it was enought to be noticeable and hoping that with the super they will get hotter and burn off carbon better. BUT I was shocked how much oil kept coming out of the intake manifold after removal! So I feel very good about putting a proper catch can with brass mesh filter and baffeling to really try to cut down on that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Continues to run/drive great, just starts every time... still hunting a tiny leak of coolant from the intercooler hose.

Got it back from the dealer, freshly re-flashed with the latest OE tune (revision D now, which was rev A before...) feels oog.

Still not tuned, but did some data logging, to test safety in current state, while pushing the supercharged setup hard
🙂

https://youtu.be/eVkH8tilCnM

This is a side by side screenshot showing the mass air flow in G/s. On the right is my car fully tuned on 95 octane fuel, on the left supercharged on stock OE tune. N/A max air flow is 150G/s, SC max air flow is 200G/s
That exactly matches my calculations that this is increasing the effective size/power of this motor by 33%
The timing right now is VERY safe, so there's a lot of power left to extract with the tune.
I wanted to get a 0-60 or 0-100km pull but it's been rainy/wet roads, so it just spins at any speed in first gear if I floor it
🙂


Also no Knock Retard of any kind, no risk at this point, only problem is that it's not at full power yet...

Fuel pulse width went from a max of 4ms to 5.2ms, again about 30% increase, which means the ECU is properly adjusting for the increased air flow, and the AFRs look similar to pre SC, so that seams reasonable

View attachment 242716

Check out this guys findings. Our skyactiv-g engines are so advanced! As long as our sensors are working, our cars will make accurate corrections. Most likely all you'll need to do for tuning is decrease the target AFR. I've been playing around with Mazda Edit thanks to Rafael & feel pretty competent on it, as of now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts

Check out this guys findings. Our skyactiv-g engines are so advanced! As long as our sensors are working our car will make accurate corrections. Most likely all you'll need to do for tuning is decrease the target AFR I've been playing around with Mazda Edit thanks to Rafael & feel pretty competent on it as of now.
Nice......I have felt the benefit of running 91 octane for a while now. It's nice to see it substantiated in a way.
 

·
Registered
2016 Mazda 6 Touring AT
Joined
·
283 Posts
Discussion Starter · #97 ·

Check out this guys findings. Our skyactiv-g engines are so advanced! As long as our sensors are working, our cars will make accurate corrections. Most likely all you'll need to do for tuning is decrease the target AFR. I've been playing around with Mazda Edit thanks to Rafael & feel pretty competent on it, as of now.
If you are messing with the AFR, did you have to buy a more expensive license for MazdaEdit (I thought the license we use when getting tuned doesn't allow you to edit the maps). Also a lot of the power gain comes from timing, AFAIK.

While I am the first to acknowledge that our ECUs are very good at adapting, there are also some VERY questionable assertions/numbers presented in that article that do not align with my experience.

1) they assert that stock 2.5L is 150-155WHP, but doesn't seem correct, I've seen multiple stock dyno's that all put it at 170-174WHP (this matches Mazda's claim of only 8% drivetrain loss for the FWD Skyactivs)
2) They assert that the stock ECU is putting out as much power as tuned, BUT there is no way, as the tuning is advancing timing to make more power. Before I installed the supercharger I flashed back to stock tune and drove like that for a week or two, and it felt SLOW compared to what I was used to. Obviously I didn't spend the money to dyno it, but the difference is glaring.
3) they claim only 191WHP with the header, but I've seen a couple guys dyno at 196-199whp with just cat-back exhaust + intake + tune (without changing the header). I know that different dyno's will give different numbers, but there's a lot of numbers/details in that article that don't match reality...
I'm not saying they're necessarily trying to be deceptive, BUT it certainly does not match with my real world experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Trollz3457

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
If you are messing with the AFR, did you have to buy a more expensive license for MazdaEdit (I thought the license we use when getting tuned doesn't allow you to edit the maps). Also a lot of the power gain comes from timing, AFAIK.

While I am the first to acknowledge that our ECUs are very good at adapting, there are also some VERY questionable assertions/numbers presented in that article that do not align with my experience.

1) they assert that stock 2.5L is 150-155WHP, but doesn't seem correct, I've seen multiple stock dyno's that all put it at 170-174WHP (this matches Mazda's claim of only 8% drivetrain loss for the FWD Skyactivs)
2) They assert that the stock ECU is putting out as much power as tuned, BUT there is no way, as the tuning is advancing timing to make more power. Before I installed the supercharger I flashed back to stock tune and drove like that for a week or two, and it felt SLOW compared to what I was used to. Obviously I didn't spend the money to dyno it, but the difference is glaring.
3) they claim only 191WHP with the header, but I've seen a couple guys dyno at 196-199whp with just cat-back exhaust + intake + tune (without changing the header). I know that different dyno's will give different numbers, but there's a lot of numbers/details in that article that don't match reality...
I'm not saying they're necessarily trying to be deceptive, BUT it certainly does not match with my real world experience.
I guess I should have clarified my point. If we aren't talking about how high or low the dyno read just the chance in horsepower with bolt-ons without a tune is impressive to be honest. BTW that OV tune was by Matt not Rafael the new OVT tunes are much better.
I have the MazdaEdit Personal. I would love to tune some of the forum members cars but in order for that to happen I would need people to do a group buy so I can purchase the Pro Mazda Edit.

I agree with you, I definitely gained way more HP over stock. The stock tune the AFR tries to stay at 14.8:1 at WOT for efficiency whereas I have mine tuned at 12.5:1 at WOT
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Ok ok crap. I’m jumping on board now. Now I gotta know. The 6 does need a little more pep in the step


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
Ok ok crap. I’m jumping on board now. Now I gotta know. The 6 does need a little more pep in the step


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
It can take up to 50 miles for the timing to adjust ---- so it might not be instantaneous.
I prefer 91 to 87. I went back to 87 over the winter and noticed a difference.
 
81 - 100 of 148 Posts
Top