Can someone explain why we are not using the req fuel calculator and just estimating the required fuel for our injectors? I have always just accepted it but now it makes me wonder why we are questioning the built in formulas.
I am using the value that was calculated if it makes you feel any better . It really doesn't make that big of a difference though, because if you set a req_fuel value to high, you set your VE values a bit lower, if you set your req_fuel value low, you set your VE a bit higher. I think the point is to get your VE values (not including boost) to be under or around 100% at peak. I know using the built in value for req_fuel, without including boosted areas, my VE maxes at around 70% (going from memory). If I changed my req_fuel down a bit, I could get that right up to the 100% mark and simply scale my VE table (it has built in functionality to do this). I don't really know why people don't use the default value, but once my wideband gets here and I can better tune this thing, I'll let you know if I find out any reasons to change said value .
The reason why everyone is using a non-standard REQ_FUEL value is because that's what MRSLICK had in the MSQ files that he posted.
I use MegaTune calculated REQ_FUEL values in all my installations. This way, when you install a different set of injectors, all you have to due is adjust your REQ_FUEL and enrichment settings. If you use a non-standard REQ_FUEL value, then you have to guess.
Well, at least me and dougie2 are using the req_fuel that Megatune calculates . This way, when I replace my injectors, I can use the built in functionality to scale the VE table accordingly, otherwise you'd have to figure out how much to scale it by with either a bit more math, or a bit more manual tuning .
You guys are talkin about what MrSlick said to put in? Now you have me wondering if this is part of my probs. He had/has mine set at 11.0 and Im only running 4G 450cc's.
Use the fuel calc located in MT. IT works fine. I have been retuning mine and it is working out fine. I also updated code so i cant be sure but i get a much better idle as well. I can idle smoothly at 15.5 AFR.
Start over. Any info you are following from Slick was not 100% accurate.
you numbers are wrong i can tell you that! my 550's are 6.4 and 450's should be 7.4
Originally posted by Star Turbo Talon Use the fuel calc located in MT. IT works fine. I have been retuning mine and it is working out fine. I also updated code so i cant be sure but i get a much better idle as well. I can idle smoothly at 15.5 AFR. Start over. Any info you are following from Slick was not 100% accurate. you numbers are wrong i can tell you that! my 550's are 6.4 and 450's should be 7.4 Terry
Well then something is up, cuz I try to change to 7.4 and the car will not run at all. I even tried staring at 11.0 and tried to drop it by .5 increments and couldnt get below 10.5.
Now I dont know what I did, the car wants to run lean from 14.0 when I give it throttle in nuetral. WTF
. It really doesn't make that big of a difference though, because if you set a req_fuel value to high, you set your VE values a bit lower, if you set your req_fuel value low, you set your VE a bit higher. I think the point is to get your VE values (not including boost) to be under or around 100% at peak. I know using the built in value for req_fuel, without including boosted areas, my VE maxes at around 70% (going from memory). If I changed my req_fuel down a bit, I could get that right up to the 100% mark and simply scale my VE table (it has built in functionality to do this). I don't really know why people don't use the default value, but once my wideband gets here and I can better tune this thing, I'll let you know if I find out any reasons to change said value 
