[JMcLellan]

Please review attached 3rd and 4th gear pulls included. Running on Map 3 with 3 gallons of E85. Car has ******* ********. If things look clean here I will try Map 4 next. Let me know how things look. Thanks!

[JMcLellan]

Attaching some Map 4 logs for review as well if anyone wants to take a look. Payam reviewed these and said both were looking good.

[Cannon @ BMS]

No BEF?

[JMcLellan]

Originally Posted by Cannon @ BMS

No BEF?

Do you mean back end flash? Nope. This is straight JB4 Map 4

[fuzzywuzzy987]

Your trims are pretty pegged on map 4. Map 3 looks better IMO. I would try map 3 without E85 and see how it compares. It may be able to make boost with the same timing and even lower trims.

"This signal can be quite variable but as long as it does not spend too much time pegged at 50 (maximum value) then all is well. If pinned at 50 for long parts of a run typically AFR will behind to lean out and tuning adjustments must be made to get fuel trims back within range."

[JMcLellan]

Originally Posted by fuzzywuzzy987

Your trims are pretty pegged on map 4. Map 3 looks better IMO. I would try map 3 without E85 and see how it compares. It may be able to make boost with the same timing and even lower trims.

"This signal can be quite variable but as long as it does not spend too much time pegged at 50 (maximum value) then all is well. If pinned at 50 for long parts of a run typically AFR will behind to lean out and tuning adjustments must be made to get fuel trims back within range."

Thanks for the feedback. I take this to mean that running Map 4 isn't necessarily unsafe per my logs, it's just that I might not be realizing the potential gains from that Map because the car is compensating to ensure its not running too lean?

I will give Map 3 a try without E85. Honestly, it is a pain to run to two different gas stations to fill up and I'd rather just run 93 octane and see what Map is best for that.