Opinion the Map Bravo Mjet 150 hp DPF

[tidus1985]

I forgot, I had several problems with the clutches of these engine, only on the 159, the problem is the weight of the car, many' that give problems from the original slippage and breakage of the pusher disk, on good you should not have big problems, not even from mapped drive, I figured so, and anyway, the clutch should be the same, but the change I don't know, it seems to me to be different on the fiat

[panterargento]

look, you are good and most important thing you do, then you place the map as I made it, spiegadoti the why:

Maps pedal and torque limiter - partonomappa pedal from 3000 rpm to facilitate the response of the pedal already at 300 rpm for a best shot, torque limiter is also a 5% under not to give too much of a difference to the delivery and make it more linear, then I'll explain to you that with this clutch and flywheel risks less

Map times, touched on the basis of requests rail map rail, and a little rpima with a minor increase of more to make more homogeneous the map without being too intrusive to the netherlands, I also changed the maps of the limiters up to 82mm3 not to just below 80, and then not read the map relative to the 80mm3

maps advances - a maximum of 1.2 degrees to be sure not to smoke too much even if the increases are low, given that you have dpf, of course, the egr off as thou hast done, thou

map turbo, as I said I increased a little all over the world to improve the combustion and thereby delay the cleaning of the dpf is increased in a targeted way to high to not be under the 1350 and burn better, make less smoke, better combustion and more extension

maps rail increased to half load and 1500 rpm for injections shorter and smoke less, to give a hand to the dpf.


I hope I can be useful!

In the map you posted, you have deliberately left ori the other maps the pedal and labda?
I want to say...? just cos? that must be you?
I think that the maps pedal I should do as the first, and the maps lambda I should do the same as the map I posted?

[tidus1985]

then, the maps pedal are used to buttons sport and quant0altro, many for safety, make all of them, I after several tests I noticed that the map that is used, and the standard one, then moddo only that, the maps lambda I purposely left stock because we have changed the times of injection and then already to send more fuel without changing the maps lambda, should be touched only if modifichio break point of time, tax time up to 100 mm3, and informs the map, in that case the limit really, then given that you also have the dpf more reason to leave them gold with this type of change

[panterargento]

Perfect now ? all pi? clearly, the map I tried it and I have to say that v? a bomb, just the way I like progressive.
The only drawback ? that if you thrust the pedal around 2000 rpm and with high gears 5? or 6? I feel a vibration, then after the 2300 disappear.
Then I put ori the times up to 1500 bar, and the vibration ? gone.
It is not a vibration of the flywheel, but pi? the engine...
What do you say?

[tidus1985]

if it vibrates ? the flywheel will not dampen the vibrations of the engine, I would have removed the torque limiters up to 2500 rpm but it goes well as you did pero you lose some time to a low to medium

[panterargento]

I tried it with torque limiters, but vibrates anyway...maybe it's not time take them off up to 1500 bar, maybe have them attenuo a bit up to that threshold and see how it behaves.
Terr? up-to-date.

[tidus1985]

ok then, do so, I have seen the map of the rail, put ori the time from 1300 bar down and you will see that you will not have problems because up to 2000 rpm and does not exceed 1300 bar

[tidus1985]

maybe 1300-bar to 600 bar by an increase of 4-5% maximum

[panterargento]

I have already made? a trial to mitigate up to 1400 bar, an increase of 5% (vibration). this pi? light), 1400-why? it should be 2300 rpm (based on the conversion below) and up to these revs the problem ? still present.

Bar/RPM

50/700
120/800
121/900
200/900
250/1000
300/1100
400/1300
600/1400
800/1500
1000/1700
1200/1900
1300/2100
1400/2300
1500/2500
1600/2800
1800/3000
1801/3400
1802/3700
1803/4100
1804/4500

Then I did this:
-times inj brought gold from 1400 bar to 600 bar and lowered the increase from 12% to 10% at 1500 bar (vibration solved)
-torque limiter and increased by 10% up to 2750 rpm (the map with the pedal on the unit to these rounds requires more? torque with respect to the limiter), this is to compensate for part of the decline of the power given by the mod on the timing inj before 2500 rpm
-map rail lowered the increase from 6% to 3% from 1500 rpm to 2250 rpm since that range does not c'? pi? so much demand for diesel
-advances carried ori under 2500 rpm (I think that is not used more? anticipate up to l?)
-turbo left cos? com'? (I only made a mod by 1E1992 to 1E19B0 with increase of 120 points ? the maximum value of the increment from the map corresponding to those rpm according to the break point, I have seen other people do, and still in the driver with DPF I was as a limiter of the same, not? if all goes well and if it will be useful)

Now I don't know if I have thought it well, however you place the map with these fixes, and if you can give me an opinion on all of this.

[tidus1985]

then, it is fine, the map to the turbo that you have touched not ? a limiter but a map is a generic which is used in particular operating conditions when ? active a bit, now I can't remember what c'? following on damos, advances ok you have done well, rail, say, goes according to the school, know that by decreasing the rail does not decrease the power but decide only whether to extend or acciorciare injection times, that is fine so anyway your mod ? lightweight, but with the rail 6% instead of 3% make a favor to the dpf, and anyway a good map should be fine, you always do that with dpf rail turbo should be raised a hair, in order to better burn and last for less time the inj