If you have a 5AT look here
https://g35driver.com/forums/5524645-post48.html
* I dont know how to attached xls spreadsheet so I had to change to pdf file - the column headers are cutoff, but you can still tell what is what... if someone knows how to attach Excel let me know and I'll re-post so you can widen each column (not really necessary for this though).
Since the cells are short the names are cut off... I figured naming would be more confusing since they bleed into one another... its pretty easy to count columns from left to right...
If you can tell me how to post xls file you can re-size the columns and use the data to make all the fancy graphs and charts you want.
* I dont know how to attached xls spreadsheet so I had to change to pdf file - the column headers are cutoff, but you can still tell what is what... if someone knows how to attach Excel let me know and I'll re-post so you can widen each column (not really necessary for this though).
If you can tell me how to post xls file you can re-size the columns and use the data to make all the fancy graphs and charts you want.
I can't believe this is still being debated when it's so obvious that per the FSM, the ECM cuts fuel on deceleration and when you hit the rev limiter. It can't get any more clear than that. ALL fuel injected cars use sort of fuel cut programming on deceleration. That's a fact. Even carbed cars did this to a degree except that vacuum would pull a small amount of fuel from the bowl. Only in off throttle situations when the rpms drop to 1,800 does the ECM allow for fuel injection. Additionally, the fuel pump is always on when the car is in the "on" position. That means fuel is at the injector. Only when the ECM provides current to the injector will it open. It's not like the ECM is turning the fuel pump on and off.
Evidence of fuel cut is clearly shown in dynos where the operator let's off the gas and coasts, but continues to record the dyno run. You'll see that the second he let's off the throttle and coasts in gear, the numbers drop like an anvil. If there was still fuel being provided, power would continue to be shown on the dyno plot. It's really not that hard to understand.
Evidence of fuel cut is clearly shown in dynos where the operator let's off the gas and coasts, but continues to record the dyno run. You'll see that the second he let's off the throttle and coasts in gear, the numbers drop like an anvil. If there was still fuel being provided, power would continue to be shown on the dyno plot. It's really not that hard to understand.
Last edited by DaveB; Dec 9, 2010 at 04:28 PM.
this whole "Debate" seems similar to the discussion of losing cruise control with shorter final drive (3.7 and shorter)... I interpret the reference "lose" as meaning it doesnt work any longer (and when it's a blanket statement, I interpret it as meaning everyone) - we have learned that not everyone loses cc and even ones that do often dont lose it all together, but at a lower mph.
Not unlike "sway bars" really being "anti-sway bars" or "throttle response" typically having nothing to do with the actual throttle responding. Or "could care less" really meaning "couldn't care less"...
May seem like "semantics" to some - and these examples all may be obvious to many, but if you are using the literal meaning there is discrepancy.
So if "fuel cut" isn't the same as "no fuel"... that would explain the Cipher data logs... if "fuel shutoff" has parameters that have not been defined here, then there is still a level of uncertainty as to that terminology.
One thing is for certain - the literal application isn't as straight forward as some may want to believe.
Not unlike "sway bars" really being "anti-sway bars" or "throttle response" typically having nothing to do with the actual throttle responding. Or "could care less" really meaning "couldn't care less"...
May seem like "semantics" to some - and these examples all may be obvious to many, but if you are using the literal meaning there is discrepancy.
So if "fuel cut" isn't the same as "no fuel"... that would explain the Cipher data logs... if "fuel shutoff" has parameters that have not been defined here, then there is still a level of uncertainty as to that terminology.
One thing is for certain - the literal application isn't as straight forward as some may want to believe.
I can't believe this is still being debated when it's so obvious that per the FSM, the ECM cuts fuel on deceleration and when you hit the rev limiter. It can't get any more clear than that. ALL fuel injected cars use sort of fuel cut programming on deceleration. That's a fact. Even carbed cars did this to a degree except that vacuum would pull a small amount of fuel from the bowl. Only in off throttle situations when the rpms drop to 1,800 does the ECM allow for fuel injection. Additionally, the fuel pump is always on when the car is in the "on" position. That means fuel is at the injector. Only when the ECM provides current to the injector will it open. It's not like the ECM is turning the fuel pump on and off.
Evidence of fuel cut is clearly shown in dynos where the operator let's off the gas and coasts, but continues to record the dyno run. You'll see that the second he let's off the throttle and coasts in gear, the numbers drop like an anvil. If there was still fuel being provided, power would continue to be shown on the dyno plot. It's really not that hard to understand.
Evidence of fuel cut is clearly shown in dynos where the operator let's off the gas and coasts, but continues to record the dyno run. You'll see that the second he let's off the throttle and coasts in gear, the numbers drop like an anvil. If there was still fuel being provided, power would continue to be shown on the dyno plot. It's really not that hard to understand.
Not really anything to argue about (but that's what it turned into).
So if "fuel cut" isn't the same as "no fuel"... that would explain the Cipher data logs... if "fuel shutoff" has parameters that have not been defined here, then there is still a level of uncertainty as to that terminology.
One thing is for certain - the literal application isn't as straight forward as some may want to believe.
One thing is for certain - the literal application isn't as straight forward as some may want to believe.
I don't how in the world the term "shut-off" could turn into a battle of semantic wit. When I tell my 2 y/o daughter to shut-off the water, she knows to turn the faucet handle to the point that the water flow stops completely.
I can do more data logging (although I have three others already that show the same thing)... but I'd rather wait for Jeff and Ashly's logs first. Continuing to reference the (brief) FSM blurb is getting old. I still haven't seen a clarification to the specific questions about how the FSM states "fuel cut" and "fuel shutoff"... I fully understand that you (and others) want to view it as it means no fuel when off throttle... I'm saying it doesn't work that way in actual application (and the FSM doesn't define the conditions to know whether or not what I have referenced is normal).
