Hi Cail, Now I got some track data! But I have some new questions.: 1. The tracks are overwritten every day - despite these with *common* in the name - they are appended.Correct? What does *filtered* in the track name mean - the others I think I can interpret but: 2. where are all the other sensors ...

I mean the files creation date. They are old and nothing that I have intentionally created. Looks like files that are part of te installation respectively an example. BUT!_ I have just checked again - I was looking in the wrong directory all time long - it was on the external memory of the phone ...

I wanted to write: atl least nothing new - so there are two sets of track files from last year.
With the user.track file it did not work - now I renamed it to default.track and will try again tomorrow.
But the content you posted earlier in the thread is ok?

Hi, So after two rides I just checked and there is no tack data in the /track folder - at least nothing - don't know if these files have been created by former runs from me... However, could it be the problem that two files: default.track (where everthing is commented out - like a tutorial) and the ...

Hi,

of course you are perfectly right - i will get some data logged - but again, I will need the speed values as well so I have added it to the sensors list in the exampel you have given.

Regards,
Sascha

Ok, sorry - of course I mean the instantaneous fuel consumption l/100km - it's just the instantaneous velocity that makes the l/h to l/100km - and even if there is a limited 5second integration time for the l/100km - surely a bit higher than that what you have programmed to obtain the l/h (by ...

Hi, From time to time I observe strange combinations (in my setup at one screen) between the liters/100km and liters per hour dispite all other sensors seem to deliver plausible signals - e.g. l/h shows 5,0 and l/100km is 7,0 while running (almost) constantly with 50km/h (and proper updating speed ...

max throttle I apply is about 80% - just before the enrichment becomes active. But now after some more cycles I think I have measured a positive effect - puh. Initially it was I think a somehow unlucky coincident of several negative aspects (colder ambient temperatures, headwind and some additional ...

Thanks Cail - thats what I thought. But I am desperately looking for the reason why my new forged aluminium rims ( the ominous "magnesium" wheels from the 3L lupo) with michelin energy tires do not save any fuel (far from it!) - so I hoped that maybe at least my 1.7% correction due to the higher ...

Hi,

In which direction does the speed correction factor influence the speedometer signal?
Does 1.1 mean my real velocity is 10 Percent higher than the signal or the other way round?
Sorry - I could just try it with an extreme value but mayby somebody can answer?

Best regards,
Sascha

Does it make sence to see consumption dependency based on current estimated power performance? Yes, of cause! This would tell you if you really drive efficienty. Because every MPG calculation tells you more or less "drive in the highest gear at optimum speed - lets assume it would be 60mph". For ...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_CnTRDVaXo-4/TRMcGgqGHxI/AAAAAAAAANI/NdIf5vaebD8/s640/untitled.JPG [taken froseminarpaper.com] thats the only thing what I have found regarding a quantitative comparison of VE for different rpms - it seems as there is really a variation of 15-20% along the engine speed ...

VE is not RPM dependent, so that would be physically incorrect assumption (although possible). Are you sure? I thought that would be one of the fundamental problems in designing the intakes, valves and valve timing to get good VE over a broad rpm range ... even above 100% (even witout supercharging ...

Hi Cail, Thanks for quick response - i have tried to set VE down and of course the consumption goes down. At the moment I drive the engine as much as possible at low rpm (1200-2200) and very high loads (<90%) and there setting VE to 75% might be OK for my small (I think 2 valve) engine but with the ...

Hi, you said that initially Hobdrive showed you 1.3 l/h as idle consumption - and you calibrated it with the volume efficiency down to 0.7? Dis you set it then to 54% instead of the 92 (default). Cail, is that the right way? My lupo 1.0 has also a 1.3l/h idle consumption but somehow I accepted ...

There is of course some discretion intervals for both of these. Normally, the status is read every 3 secs for Fuel Engine Conditions, and every 4 secs for lambda. So in cases when your engine behaves faster that this, you'll see no "influence". The parameters are not configurable for now, but I can ...

I have observed similar strange things. The problem is that at the moment he does not recognize short coast load periods (p.e. turn right at an intersection without stopping or breaking) He gets confused so that he can´t consider the subsequent acceleration phase properly (almost kick-down - to ...

Hi Cail, How do the options: a) Trim Fuel E. on engine conditions b) Trim Fuel E. by Lambda value below vehicle setting actually work? One of both sets the instantanous co nsuption (l/h) to zero when lambda goes up (to 2 - deceleration fuel cutoff) so far so good. But sometimes that just doesnt work ...

Hi, ne update - now, with 50% ethanol LFT is about 20% and I get a "low fuel effeciency warning" . But that is not yet an error code message? The warning say something with LTFT higer than 11.0. Is that a hobdrive value or is it just a warning generated from the ECU? Even I expected this to happen ...

I presume the values are positive? Meaning 10% less fuel in reality comes into the engine? I was pretty sure that LTFT +10% means more than predetermined by the characteristics. :roll: Now I am confused? Or was that a question? In theory, after a period of driving, your engine should correct LTFT ...