Subject	^This is what I meant....
Posted by	The Hawk on January 03, 2017 at 9:07 AM
	This message has been viewed 280 times.
In Reply To	Yes, but even the 646HP looks lean for ethanol. (n/m) posted by MixManMash on January 03, 2017 at 08:17 AM
Message	If he is tuning the cars this way, what do his "daily" maps look like? I don't want to be on the ragged edge.......
Follow Ups	Finally tuned, dyno results - ZaXxon 14:33:05 12/31/16 Isn't that lean for running on E85? (n/m) - MixManMash 16:52:37 12/31/16 Or was the lambda to AFR calibration on the dyno sensors set - MixManMash 21:14:53 12/31/16 yup.. (n/m) - Stanky 17:20:54 01/01/17 ^This concerns me..... - The Hawk 11:21:31 01/02/17 they ran out of pump - JaffaUK 06:05:42 01/03/17 Yes, but even the 646HP looks lean for ethanol. (n/m) - MixManMash 08:17:09 01/03/17 ^This is what I meant.... - The Hawk 09:07:06 01/03/17 I wouldn't call 12.2 ragged edge on ethanol - JaffaUK 11:20:21 01/03/17 12.6 when you look further to the left. 13.6 on the previous (n/m) - puchy 11:42:51 01/03/17 Fuel concentration? - The Hawk 10:57:16 01/01/17 Dane, and I think e64, and around 26psi (n/m) - ZaXxon 15:23:49 01/01/17 Clip - ZaXxon 06:44:42 01/03/17 BTW, mad props to all of the innovators and TT.NET family - ZaXxon 08:55:25 01/03/17
Post a Followup	You cannot reply to this message because you are not logged in.