Densecharger, X-pipe, 3" catback, Amazon Chip = Check Engine Light

[46stang]

mjchip: that's what i would suggest as well! put the stock air box back in there and drive it!
Did you turn the maf sensor to a different spot then stock? this will effect A/F ratios! if the stock box keeps the light out i would then put the densecharger back on and try to keep maf orientation as close to stock as possible! I've seen it alot where people will rotate the maf so it looks nicer! not saying you did that, just a thought. good luck!
Leon

 

[JP DEMOLET]

It's probably one of the chip settings.

There have been no check engine lights in the "non-chip" applications. The bends in front of the meter won't adversly affect the meter as will be seen when the 5.0 Mag shootout results are released. I've had no problems with over 1000 of the 100mm systems in service, in the down position, with following the factory suit with how the meter is oriented.

It drove us crazy when comboing with aftermarket meters for these same reasons and why I don't combo.

Not to say that you can't have a chip with the system, just have the chip burnt last.

I prescribe the system as working "best with the factory meters and factory programming".

Pull the chip and reset the computer.

If the meter were being adversly affected by the Densecharger the check engine lights would be coming on on the stock applications also, which not being the case, narrows the variables.

 

[Cobra'03]

I do not recall that admonition in any of the text on the website. I just ordered a DC, so if I have a MIL problem I see having two options:
1) Return the DC
2) Submit to an unplanned, inconvenient, re-burn for $$?

So are you saying it is likely that the MIL light will come on with an aftermarket chip, and if so, do I have the option of returning the DC if I do not choose to do #2?

 

[SONICMAN]

New Info!

I scanned the computer this morning with the Scan tool. I found that I had two codes again. P0172 and P0175, too rich and too lean banks 1 and bank 2. I checked the Freeze data when the light came on. The computer stores all relevant data when it lights up the check engine light.

Rpm = 1643
Throttle postion = 24%
Load = 23 %
Long term Fuel trim bank 1 = -25%
Long term Fuel trim bank 2 = -25%
Coolant temp = 183 F
MAF = ~3 lbs/min.
Closed loop fuel operation

This means that the fuel curve was so rich at light throttle cruising at 1643 rpm that the long term fuel trim had leaned out the mixture by 25%. Something is causing the system to run extremely rich.

I pulled the diablo chip out and reset the computer. The long term fuel trim at idle is now at -17% after 6 miles of driving. At ~1600 rpms the long term fuel trim is at -8.8% after 6 miles of driving. I believe with extended driving I am going to get to the -25% again at ~1600 rpm. I will drive some more tonight and see. If it does it without the chip than the chip is not the problem. I am also reading MAF = .60 to .72 lbs/min while idling with the a/c off. mjchip checked his settings at idle and his MAF = ~.50 lbs/min at idle. I believe I am getting exagerrated MAF readings with the Densecharger at idle, as can be seen with the -17% long term fuel trim at idle. I am not going to pass judgement yet, because I really like the Densecharger. The intake air temp never gets high with it and the faster you go you get back to ambient air temp with it. That part is really nice.

More to come...................................

Brian

 

[boostm3]

>>This means that the fuel curve was so rich at light throttle cruising at 1643 rpm that the long term fuel trim had leaned out the mixture by 25%. Something is causing the system to run extremely rich. <<

Im sure youre aware, but if youre not, at WOT, this LTFT value is also in use. It is applied to your WOT Open Loop static tables. ITs taking whatever values are in that table intended by the tuner, and leaning them out by 25%, which of course, could be a big problem for you.

Keep us up to date, and good luck

 

[SONICMAN]

50 miles since the reset.

50 miles have elapsed since the diablo chip removal and the computer reset and no light. I still have the Densecharger in place in the lower postion. It is still leaning out the long term fuel trim but not to the -25%. It seems that with the torque available down low with the diablo chip and the densechargers slightly exagerated air flow signal I am getting a too rich condition for some reason. It is okay without the diablo chip but the low end torque is gone.. With the diablo chip it couldn't hold traction at any rpm in first gear (even with traction control on). Now it doesn't spin rolling on in first gear at all. It pulls hard up top but I miss the low end of the chip. I am still seeing .60 to .68 lbs/min of airflow at idle and it fluctuates alot. It is pulling out about -11% long term trim at idle now after 50 miles.


More to come.........................

Brian

 

[JP DEMOLET]

Have you moved the K&N to the "up" position yet?

Move it up, reset the computer, and still leave the chip out and see what happens next. Run it through 6-8 drive cycles before trying anything else next.

You will still have a significant torque addition over stock with the DC.

 

[mjchip]

Originally posted by JP DEMOLET
Have you moved the K&N to the "up" position yet?

Move it up, reset the computer, and still leave the chip out and see what happens next. Run it through 6-8 drive cycles before trying anything else next.

You will still have a significant torque addition over stock with the DC.

Hi John,

As I told Brian, the following is causing his problem:

A mismatch between the MAF transfer function that is programmed in the PCM (or chip) and the actual transfer function of the meter.

This is most likely being caused by one or both of the following:

1. Densecharger design/installation significantly altering the actual MAF sensor output
2. Transfer function inside PCM being altered by the chip

I seriously doubt if the tuners are altering the MAF transfer function via the chip; there is simply no reason to do so. However, if they are using the curve for the 01+ Lightning MAF, it will be off as the 03 Cobra MAF has a *different* flow vs. voltage curve. So, since Rick from Amazon Racing burnt the chip for Brian and you designed the Densecharger, the two of you should get together to figure out how the two products are interrelating to cause the DTCs.

As someone else mentioned up above, even if the combination does not throw a DTC, it would affect the WOT air/fuel ratio through the OLFM variable. For example, if the DC/CHIP combination caused the LTFTs to go to -15% across the load range, 15% additional fuel would be taken out at WOT and the car would run leaner. This would make more power but may end up being unsafe as it would be 15% leaner than what was programmed in the chip. If the Densecharger for the 03 Cobra is causing this, and I suspect that it is the main culprit, then that would explain why your product is making so much more power on the dyno than the other CAI kits. The big gains might be from the mixture leaning at WOT and not just due to the better flow characteristics/cooler intake air temperatures. Anyway, this is all speculation on my part BUT you folks should really try to figure it out.

On a side note, for me this wouldn't be a problem because I could recurve the meter easily and "on the fly" with the MAFterburner. The same thing could be done by altering the transfer function inside the chip, it would just take a lot longer to do it.

If either of you need any input from me, feel free to PM or email me at: [email protected]

Best,

MJ

 

[JP DEMOLET]

The mafterburner would be the way to go.

I've got a lot of guys with the Pro-M 87s and the full DC using the mafterburner with great results.

I wish I could post the dyno graph of the 5.0 shootout session.

The gains aren't at just the top end, they start around 2300 and remain consistent all the way up.

You guys understand the computer programming much more than I do.
What about the customers with this same chip running the UPR tube? My system will flow more air but the filter position and c orresponding length in front of the meter would be about the same with moving the K&N "up".

 

[mjchip]

Originally posted by JP DEMOLET
The mafterburner would be the way to go.

I've got a lot of guys with the Pro-M 87s and the full DC using the mafterburner with great results.

I was running the 100mm DC with the MAFterburner on my Bullitt with great results also.

The gains aren't at just the top end, they start around 2800 and remain consistent all the way up.

Actually, this is more indicative of a global mixture change rather than just improved air flow (especially when running on a dyno as you don't get the full extent of the cooler air benefit).

You guys understand the computer programming much more than I do.
What about the customers with this same chip running the UPR tube?

Honestly, it looks like the UPR product has more *straight* length in front of the MAF meter (before the 90 transition) and a less discontinous fit between the CAI flange and the MAF flange. Any discontinuities near the MAF element cause turbulent flow and the 90 bend causes a flow gradient due to the acceleration of airflow near the outside (long) curve and deceleration of airflow near the inside (short) curve. In short, there are two conditions that must be met in order for the Hitachi-style MAFs can function properly. They are:

1. laminar flow (no turbulence in the area of the sampling element)

2. zero flow gradient across the meter bore

If you depart from either or both of these conditions, you will get erroneous output from the MAF.

My system will flow more air but the filter position and c orresponding length in front of the meter would be about the same with moving the K&N "up".

True, but this additional length is *after* the 90 degree bend so it helps little with this problem.

Best,

MJ

 

[SONICMAN]

Just a thought!

Assuming it takes "x" amount of air per minute to idle the vehicle. Assuming mjchip is pulling the air through the factory MAF sensor without the protuding gasket. He has a larger hole to bring the air through than I do with the protruding gasket. Given the fact that:

Q=V*A

Q= volumetric flow rate, V= velocity or air , A= cross sectional flow area

As area goes down the velocity must go up, to keep the same (actual flow rate).

If Q is constant to idle both vehicles and my Area to bring the air through is smaller because of the smaller hole in the gasket. Then my velocity of air would have to be higher through the MAF. This could explain why I have an indicated higher air flow at idle than mjchip.

He had ~.50 lbs/min at idle
I had ~ .62 to .70 lbs/min at idle.

This could explain the phenomena that I am having. After 65 miles of driving the long term fuel trim is about -12 % at idle.

What do you think Mark C?

Brian

 

[mjchip]

Re: Just a thought!

Originally posted by SONICMAN
Assuming it takes "x" amount of air per minute to idle the vehicle. Assuming mjchip is pulling the air through the factory MAF sensor without the protuding gasket. He has a larger hole to bring the air through than I do with the protruding gasket. Given the fact that:

Q=V*A

Q= volumetric flow rate, V= velocity or air , A= cross sectional flow area

As area goes down the velocity must go up, to keep the same (actual flow rate).

If Q is constant to idle both vehicles and my Area to bring the air through is smaller because of the smaller hole in the gasket. Then my velocity of air would have to be higher through the MAF. This could explain why I have an indicated higher air flow at idle than mjchip.

He had ~.50 lbs/min at idle
I had ~ .62 to .70 lbs/min at idle.

This could explain the phenomena that I am having. After 65 miles of driving the long term fuel trim is about -12 % at idle.

What do you think Mark C?

Brian

Hey Brian,

I think that it's a distinct possibility.

MJ

 

[JP DEMOLET]

Just open up the gasket!

Or remove it altogether and use the permatex.

You guys have to realize that I test these units to function properly on the stock meters and applications.

You have to pick a baseline system that produces the most increases after testing different diameters, filters, lengths, etc..

My system further offers the tunability, which changes performance being able to offer a change in length and number of bends prior to the meter.

If the DC doesn't work correctly with the chip settings then go to the Mafterburner.

The system will work correctly with future mods, it just depends on which ones you choose.


All the "given" system variables aren't being tested to finalize what configuration works best with these given mods. Test with a bigger filter "down". Move the current filter "up". I sell the 9" K&Ns @ $55., delivered which is a $75. retail priced filter. This is a cheap increase in CFM flow. You can also slightly increase CFM flow in the "up" position with a 7" long filter.

The available changes already built into my system will obviously affect future mod compatability.

At least my system has these available changes....Standard!

 

[SONICMAN]

Just brain storming.

I am going to try the DC in the upper position today (hopefully). I will see how that affects the LTFT at idle and the lbs/min rate at idle. Lastly I will try with the gasket trimmed or taken out completely. I think the smaller hole in the gasket maybe the culprit. It makes sense to me. The velocity has to be higher with a smaller area to flow thru. This will cool the thermistor more and therefore send a higher voltage to the ECU.

Assuming the open area of the MAF is 95 mm on the stock MAF with stock MAF unobstructed and
Assuming the gasket opening with the DC is 87 mm.

There should be a ~19.2% higher velocity of air flowing through the smaller hole.

mjchip MAF reading at idle = ~.50 lbs/min
My MAF reading at idle = ~.64 lbs/min

.50 * 1.192% = .596 lbs/min

It almost adds up to the real world results I am seeing.

Brian

 

[mjchip]

Re: Just brain storming.

Originally posted by SONICMAN
I am going to try the DC in the upper position today (hopefully). I will see how that affects the LTFT at idle and the lbs/min rate at idle. Lastly I will try with the gasket trimmed or taken out completely. I think the smaller hole in the gasket maybe the culprit. It makes sense to me. The velocity has to be higher with a smaller area to flow thru. This will cool the thermistor more and therefore send a higher voltage to the ECU.

Assuming the open area of the MAF is 95 mm on the stock MAF with stock MAF unobstructed and
Assuming the gasket opening with the DC is 87 mm.

There should be a ~19.2% higher velocity of air flowing through the smaller hole.

mjchip MAF reading at idle = ~.50 lbs/min
My MAF reading at idle = ~.64 lbs/min

.50 * 1.192% = .596 lbs/min

It almost adds up to the real world results I am seeing.

Brian

I suspect that the problem lies both in the 1st 90-degree bend closest to the MAF body AND in the rotation of the MAF relative to the position that it is in the stock vehicle (the orientation used when the intake tract was flowed and the transfer function determined.

JP should be able to figure this out pretty easily by doing the following:

1. Hook up an OBD-II scanner to the car.

2. Monitor STFT bank1, STFT bank2, LTFT bank1, and LTFT bank2 as well as MAF Rate (lb/min) and Fuel System 1 (tells you if the vehicle is in open loop or closed loop) with the car idling.

3. Try this with the MAF meter in the position that it is now on the '03 Densecharger (electronics nearest bulkhead) and record the data (make sure that the PCM is running in closed-loop)

4. Modify the DC so that he can rotate the MAF (he has done this in the past for other customers).

5. Rotate the electronics to the position where both the LTFTs and STFTs are closest to zero. The LTFTs are the time integrated values of the STFTs so it takes a while for them to change. The STFTs change almost immediately. This will most likely be the orientation where the least amount of transfer function error is introduced and IMO how he should configure the product.

Well, best of luck to all.

MJ

P.S. JP, if I can do anything for you, feel free to give me a call. I'll PM you my number.

 

[Jerryk]

Gasket: from the email I sent to JP regarding the install of my DC and some suggested install direction updates: "view the assembled MAM/L Pipe and ensure the rubber gasket provided does not protrude into the pipe. If it does, you can mark it by assembling the MAM and Pipe and tightening it which will imprint the outline of the MAM and pipe. Then disassemble it and trim the rubber gasket with a sharp razor blade. Reassembly with the gasket and some black RTV to ensure a good seal. "


I am not sure I read exactly what you did with that gasket but if you just assemble it as delivered the gasket WILL protrude into the tube. This is a very bad thing since as you know its right in front of the MAM and will MAJORLY disrupt the airflow. Is there ANY material protruding? I went so far as to even clean all the RTV that "squeezed" into the tube after tightening the MAM. Did this by covering a screwdriver w/ a rag and carefully wiping the inside diameter.

--> Just reread your post: you are pretty much saying the gasket DOES protrude into the pipe which DOES disrupt airflow RIGHT in front of the electronics.. very bad. Trim the gasket so nothing protrudes and all your problems go away.

My pullied/chipped car runs perfectly w/ the DC. Even w/o the chip it runs perfectly just leaner and w/ a lot less torque as you already indicated. Mine is mounted in the "down" position but I don't know if that matters.

Jerry

 

[08snake]

Originally posted by SONICMAN
I have had the Dynomax 3" catback and Amazon Custom Chip for 4 weeks. The other day I added a Densecharger system. Drove the car for 1 day until the x-pipe came in. I installed the X-pipe and the check engine light came on after 6 miles. The code was read and is reading "TOO RICH in bank 1 and bank 2" The Muffler shop and the Ford dealer both checked for exhaust leaks. No leaks. The Ford Tech said that the O2 sensors are fine and switching properly. The Ford Tech blamed the chip for running too rich. How could that be the case if I had run the chip for 3 weeks with no light.

Note: Before I installed the Denscharger I had a K&N with no silencer and no light.

Does anyone had the same setup as I do? Have you had the same problem and solved it? The individual manufactures (Densecharger and Amazon) have never heard of this problem before. I have the same tune as Jim Vaccaro before he did the pully swap. Any suggestions?
Thanks
Brian

FWIW, I was on the phone with Rick this AM, we talked about your issue and that I had the same tune. Our only difference is I have an Off-road H-pipe and UPR CAI, no light, or any issues for that matter.

 

[SONICMAN]

If I move my filter up to the upper postion, I will basically have the UPR setup. I will probably give that a try tonight (hopefully) and see how that affects things. What do you use to seal the MAF adapter flange? I would like to have some more MAF readings from other people with 90 degree bend intakes and Long Term Fuel trims as well. Hopefully you won't get a light, I wish I were that lucky.

Brian

 

[08snake]

Brian,
I didn't use any type of seal. I bolted Flange to Flange. This was a topic of a thread here in this forum. Turned out alot of people bolted it up this way.

 

[Jerryk]

Brian, use the process I described to imprint the rubber gasket provided. Trim it so there is NOTHING protruding into the pipe. Use the black RTV lightly on both sides and assemble it. The DC is a good product, just make sure its installed correctly. I'm not trying to flame you but don't get all big science about it, just install it correctly and enjoy. Logic says with so many people running around with this thing on and causing no problems at all something is hosed in how it is installed, or your MAM itself is hosed or something along those lines.. Enjoy. BTW, this was a great thread from a technical troubleshooting perspective! Lots of good computer insight..