6L80 TM removal?

[SRT10KLLR]

I noticed that on the new 6L80's you can only select to have TM on/off. On my 4L60(Silverado) you could remove any percentage you want. Is it something that will be getting updated soon.

My brother has a new 2010 Camaro and with the TM on off it shifts too hard at the track and spins into 2nd and 3rd. What can I do to soften it up a bit?

[SRT10KLLR]

Here is what they wrote on another forum. Can anyone confirm this.

"I do not use EFI live but with HP tuners torque management is adjustable.
It works on a combination of tables (Shift torque factor, Shift torque factor adder, Adder modifier & Cold multiplier).
The formula for it is ((Shift torque factor adder * Adder modifier) + Shift torque factor) * Cold modifier."

Is EFI Live working on a solution for this?

[GMPX]

We have been wanting to expand on the 6 speed TCM tables for sometime now, it's just one of those really hard computers to work with, well, I should say, to figure out what the heck is going on.
Reality is we probably won't get to the T43 again until early 2010. But I can assure you it has not been forgotten about.

Cheers,
Ross

[PatrickfromMd]

We have been wanting to expand on the 6 speed TCM tables for sometime now, it's just one of those really hard computers to work with, well, I should say, to figure out what the heck is going on.
Reality is we probably won't get to the T43 again until early 2010. But I can assure you it has not been forgotten about.

Cheers,
Ross

Any more updates on this? I have a 2010 and with TM off I really dont like how it jerks you slowing to a stop as it downshifts. I was told this was due to TM

[MN C5]

FWIW You can work around it a bit by limiting the amount of timing being pulled.

[Chuck CoW]

Any more updates on this? I have a 2010 and with TM off I really dont like how it jerks you slowing to a stop as it downshifts. I was told this was due to TM

Nope.... Nothing to do with Torque Management.

The shift schedule is controlled by a few things.... Throttle angle, MPH, and a few other things....

Depending on the rate of decel and the corresponding throttle angle (how far your foot is into the throttle) you can get that side effect.

While TM is involved, I would prefer to modify your shift schedule to lessen "jerk" you're seeing.

Call me.
Chuck CoW

[PatrickfromMd]

Nope.... Nothing to do with Torque Management.

The shift schedule is controlled by a few things.... Throttle angle, MPH, and a few other things....

Depending on the rate of decel and the corresponding throttle angle (how far your foot is into the throttle) you can get that side effect.

While TM is involved, I would prefer to modify your shift schedule to lessen "jerk" you're seeing.

Call me.
Chuck CoW

Thanks for the advise Chuck.
It was most noticeable with my foot off the throttle slowing from say 35 to a stop light
I hope to finally get around to re-installing EFI live on my new Windows 7 machine so once I’m up and going again, I will get with you.
(I hear there are some new videos in the works, can’t wait to see.)

Patrick

[Patrick G]

FWIW You can work around it a bit by limiting the amount of timing being pulled.This is very good advice.

I have TM fully engaged, but I modify the minimum final timing spark table (B5157) to reduce the timing reduction at higher rpm and loads. This way, I have smooth TM upshifts and downshifts at light throttle, and screech-bang shifts at WOT. It's the absolute best of both worlds.

[The Alchemist]

thats a clever approach :doh2:
will try that,
Thanks!


I have TM fully engaged, but I modify the minimum final timing spark table (B5157) to reduce the timing reduction at higher rpm and loads. This way, I have smooth TM upshifts and downshifts at light throttle, and screech-bang shifts at WOT. It's the absolute best of both worlds.[/QUOTE]

[Chuck CoW]

Thanks for the advise Chuck.
It was most noticeable with my foot off the throttle slowing from say 35 to a stop light
I hope to finally get around to re-installing EFI live on my new Windows 7 machine so once I’m up and going again, I will get with you.
(I hear there are some new videos in the works, can’t wait to see.)

Patrick

Call me... I've modified my A6 corvette cals recently....I have some ideas for you.

Chuck CoW

[Chuck CoW]

We have been wanting to expand on the 6 speed TCM tables for sometime now, it's just one of those really hard computers to work with, well, I should say, to figure out what the heck is going on.
Reality is we probably won't get to the T43 again until early 2010. But I can assure you it has not been forgotten about.

Cheers,
Ross

I could help you out by......sending you several PMs and e-mails on the subject if you like....SEVERAL times a day....:angel_innocent:

If you need some incentive.....:hihi:

Chuck CoW

[PatrickfromMd]

Call me... I've modified my A6 corvette cals recently....I have some ideas for you.

Chuck CoW

Chuck, your mods did the trick. :cheers: I loaded the modified tune and she is good to go. It downshifts and rev matches as it slows to a light. With my SLP longtubes and exhaust it has a nice growl as I’m slowing to a stop with no jerking at all. (subtly gets people’s attention as well.)

[PatrickfromMd]

Call me... I've modified my A6 corvette cals recently....I have some ideas for you.

Chuck CoW
Chuck,

More good news, the track opened and I made an appearance with the modified tunes last night. I can’t really explain it, but it was running hard and consistent. In fact I bested my best ever 13.08 with a 12.748. :cucumber: At the end of last season I was running an average of 13.3, but last night every one of my 8 runs was in the 12s (averaging about 12.8)
The trans is shifting firmly but not harsh. Periodic dead spots before the shift also seem to be a thing of the past. Great work! :rockon:

[slowhawk]

We have been wanting to expand on the 6 speed TCM tables for sometime now, it's just one of those really hard computers to work with, well, I should say, to figure out what the heck is going on.
Reality is we probably won't get to the T43 again until early 2010. But I can assure you it has not been forgotten about.

Cheers,
Ross

I'm bringing this back up because it would be greatly appreciated to have alot more table's. All these new cars have these newer tranny's and we need to tune them right. I've manipulated my own car to shift smooth but it took alot of time messing with table's we shouldn't have to mess with. My 2011 car doesn't even have an option to shut off TM.

Thanks
Don

BTW- The tranny worked good enough to run 12.5's at 111mph at 4014lbs. Mods are only a cold air and ARH headers with nitto's at 28psi.

[slowhawk]

Back up again.

Would really like some more love on the A6 tranny. Only company know that has better control is Trifector. HPT and EFI live are behind the ball. Got some 700+rwhp cars coming out and need tranny control.

[Rhino79]

PLEASE......bumpity

[Chuck CoW]

Dwindling number of tables as the cars get newer...

YES, I agree.... I would LOVE to see more for this transmission....

It's a wonderful machine and it's controls are complex....

We need more help.
Chuck CoW

[TBMSport]

I've notice that too ...less and less tables.

[Rhino79]

I remember when EFI was the most inclusive for the supported models, Now it seems that EFI is content to keep letting HP control the gas market. I know efi is head and shoulders above on the diesel, but what about us gas guys? The T43 tables have been on the back burner FOREVER, a guy can not even properly tune for a single disc converter on a t43 without pwm tables. Not to mention the lack of TQ MGT tables. I have spent almost over 8K bucks with EFI over the years between v1, v2, and over 70 licenses. That may not seem like much to most but for a personal tuner working on simply referrals, I have done well. I want to keep my biz with efilive, thats why I bought it instead of HP tuners. The software has gone up now, licenses are higher, and we are getting less tables. Is EFI content with minimal gas support, everything from gm now is e38 and t43 for the most part, why not be heavily supported on those modules?

Sorry to sound pissy, I do understand you can't just snap your fingers and have stuff done. A lot of the threads on this forum about t43 cals lacking tables are over a year old.

[minytrker]

I think alot of people who do a lot of gas tuning are in the same boat. It seems EFI has switched to the cummins market and those of us who tune mostly gas are just stuck in 2009. A couple years ago if EFI supported a controller you knew you had everything available to you to do a full tune. Now as the vehicles get newer it seems we are getting less and less to work with. It sucks having to own and use several different tuning software's just for a few tables.

[Rhino79]

I have defended and supported efilive in so many online pissing matches between efi and hp, it was always THE premier software to use with the best selection of cals for the controllers it supported. Now I am right at the point of buying hp just for t43 usage..lol. It just doesn't seem right but I guess it is what it is.

[TBMSport]

I thought I had an all in one set up, but I'm with you Rhino. Learning, let alone finding, the information to do simple mods is becoming ridiculously time consuming. Plus this new price hike is something I don't see as an easier sell. And don't get me started with the confusing updates for firmware and operating systems!! I'm bugged that some tables are mislabled for some 3 revisions now. I recently had a drag day and I'm the slowest truck there and only one with EFI Live. I ask all the tuners if they could look at my calibrations through EFILive and they just scratch their heads and tell me "wow...we just do this and that and we're done". Anyone try to check out a 2012 ECM tune from HoldenCrazy? EFILive can't even read a single thing. I'm looking at options like LS1Edit...but I don't think they support transmissions well. I'd hate to have to swallow my pride and join the bandwagon over at HPT...but..

[GMPX]

Dwindling number of tables as the cars get newer...
For T43 specifically? It's reduced yes, they get more complex over the years, remove things, add more. We aren't GM, I openly admit I don't understand how that thing works as if I was working for GM, and it sure doesn't help they keep making major code changes each model year.


I remember when EFI was the most inclusive for the supported models, Now it seems that EFI is content to keep letting HP control the gas market.
Really?, EFILive was (and still is) the only company to offer support for the 2010+ E78 and E39 ECM's. We also tried E83 support but there has been very little interest there, again, not an ECM that HPT supports.
I've seen the complaining by HPT customers about the Speed Density tuning situation with E38's and having to wait forever for them to release their 'custom OS' , for that very reason we have picked up a lot of their customers over the years who probably felt that same abandonment as you do whilst they worked on getting the Hemi stuff to market.


I know efi is head and shoulders above on the diesel, but what about us gas guys? The T43 tables have been on the back burner FOREVER
And probably will continue to be given lower priority as we chase new markets. Remember, the T43 is 5 years old now, it probably reached critical mass years ago with regards to sales potential. Meanwhile there is probably over 300,000 Cummins trucks looking for custom tuning. Remove the emotion, think business, what path would you take?


The software has gone up now, licenses are higher, and we are getting less tables.
Explanations behind our first ever price rise for licenses has been given. I am not removing tables from existing supported OS's, so less only applies to new.


Is EFI content with minimal gas support
For 2011+, I'm not sure how adding support for three new controllers that are replacing the 5 year old E38 & E67's is classed as 'minimal support'.
We have 2012 Camaro, Vette, Truck support for the E38 & E67 already too.


everything from gm now is e38 and t43 for the most part, why not be heavily supported on those modules?
No, the E38 & E67 are being phased out, first V8 platform was the 2011 2500HD that switched to the E78.


It seems EFI has switched to the cummins market and those of us who tune mostly gas are just stuck in 2009.
Too right we have, EFILive is a business not a backyard hobby, we saw an untapped opportunity as big as the Duramax market was (because that is a dead end now thanks to the LML) and went for it, no apologies from us there. We were probably pushed to do so by the Duramax tuners who themselves knew it would bring them lots of new business too.


A couple years ago if EFI supported a controller you knew you had everything available to you to do a full tune. Now as the vehicles get newer it seems we are getting less and less to work with. It sucks having to own and use several different tuning software's just for a few tables.
I know many shops who run both software packages, they like how certain things are done in one vs the other. I know out here in Australia at least, the HPT only shops are very envious the EFILive customers can do a solenoid flush on the T43 (that controller we ignore). It's a critical function they have chosen to omit.
I don't know what major things we've left out of other controllers since 2009?


Now I am right at the point of buying hp just for t43 usage..lol. It just doesn't seem right but I guess it is what it is.
I think that would be a wise business decision, like I said, many shops I know own both. Not always EFILive customers buying HPT either, it works the same on both sides of the fence.


Anyone try to check out a 2012 ECM tune from HoldenCrazy? EFILive can't even read a single thing.
2012 what?
In September we added support for 2012 E38 OS's 12647991 & 12649046, 2012 E67 OS 12635457.

Feel free to vent all you like, it won't change the business decisions we've made and we certainly don't regret any directions we have taken with our tuning software thus far.

Maybe we should invite some Diesel tuners into this thread and really stir things up :shock:

Cheers,
Ross

[TBMSport]

All that is well and good Ross..and I can understand what it's like to be in a position to defend your product. But as we are saying...we love your product. It is our love and appreciation for what EFILive has done over the years that fuels our frustration and hence voicing it. We'd like an all in one product. I dont' think you should be taking offense that we want that product to be EFILive.

Yes, I understand diesels are easier to tune and make a highly profitable market to break into. Kudos on making that executive decision to boost cash flow. But what about the people who support EFIlive? The simple truth is, yes, scan tool functions are nice and appreciated...but as I've said in emails and in other outlets as a vendor here in the US the end user wants one thing and one thing only...added performance to his car. He doesn't care about the oo's and ahh's that we do. However, it's increasingly embarrassing and frustrating to be unable to do the simplest of increased performance mods because of a lack of uniform reference information on the software. The forum is nice, but a lot of the information is so scattered that it's a journey just to compile the data.

Yes you are a business, but you're a supplier business with retailers that rely on your products. As such we expect things to be more in line with a full line professional product manufacturer in the line of an easily accessible and understandable reference material that is current and up to date. Further, from the perspective of a vendor, it's impacting our bottom line and business model to convince customers to buy EFILive products when all they want is just some extra horsepower or performance. Lastly, my concern is why doesn't EFILive advertise at a corporate level? Why is the burden upon the retailer to market the product?

[TBMSport]

12130
Unreadable 2012 TCM file

[joecar]

...

Yes you are a business, but you're a supplier business with retailers that rely on your products. As such we expect things to be more in line with a full line professional product manufacturer in the line of an easily accessible and understandable reference material that is current and up to date. Further, from the perspective of a vendor, it's impacting our bottom line and business model to convince customers to buy EFILive products when all they want is just some extra horsepower or performance. Lastly, my concern is why doesn't EFILive advertise at a corporate level? Why is the burden upon the retailer to market the product?:doh2::doh2::doh2::doh2:

Ok, there is a severe lack of understanding what the EFILive, HPTuners, LS1/LS2edit, Tunercat, etc, products are...

Do you understand that all the non-OEM tuning packages (and there are none that are OEM... the OEM doesn't want you touching anything and creating EPA headaches for the OEM) are a reverse engineering of the OEM's controller...?

Do you understand that to document and create the reference material that you stipulate will mean that FlashScan would require a team of engineers and writers, leading to a product that would be priced at something like $27,000 rather than $700...? [ Don't scoff, I have seen software packages costing $250,000 plus license fees of $2500/user/year (in other fields). ]

And how do you advertise a reverse engineered product at a corporate level...? Doing so makes it official that you've busted thru the OEM's encryption mechanism and are likely infringing their copyrights... it makes no sense to advertise at a corporate level.

Who will buy a tuning package...? Not everyone, and not even someone, but most likely tuning shops and gearheads who regularly swap their own cam.

Do you understand that tuning packages require the user to figure out how to tune (does the Snap-On truck driver teach you how to use Snap-On tools you just bought from him...?).

As for not having many tables for new controllers... it is a matter of how much time/effort the reverse engineering effort is.

$.02
:)

[Tordne]

12130
Unreadable 2012 TCM file

Sorry, that's my fault. I uploaded it to my website (completely outside of and nothing to do directly with EFILive) prematurely, before a calibration map is made.

[Rhino79]

And probably will continue to be given lower priority as we chase new markets. Remember, the T43 is 5 years old now, it probably reached critical mass years ago with regards to sales potential. Meanwhile there is probably over 300,000 Cummins trucks looking for custom tuning. Remove the emotion, think business, what path would you take?
As a service manager myself, this is like me saying to a customer.....I won't service the EFI mercury that you have that is 10 years old because the new Verado sc outboard has taken over. The t43 is still a current controller, you guys have some tuneability but not everything needed. It is used in trucks and cars both, is that not enough volumn to justify added t43 support?



For 2011+, I'm not sure how adding support for three new controllers that are replacing the 5 year old E38 & E67's is classed as 'minimal support'.
We have 2012 Camaro, Vette, Truck support for the E38 & E67 already too.
It is increased support, what I should have said is that with some improvements with the software and additional controllers, the bastard know as the t43 is still being ignored.


I know many shops who run both software packages, they like how certain things are done in one vs the other. I know out here in Australia at least, the HPT only shops are very envious the EFILive customers can do a solenoid flush on the T43 (that controller we ignore). It's a critical function they have chosen to omit. I don't know what major things we've left out of other controllers since 2009?
I had an 09 Silverado with the old crusty t42 that also had no wot lockup tables, I could not prevent wot converter lockup until you dug deeper and got me a cal file. I will say you have done this for me before and I appreciate that Ross. This is nothing personal at all and I love ALL other aspects of efilive outside of the poor t43 support.



Feel free to vent all you like, it won't change the business decisions we've made and we certainly don't regret any directions we have taken with our tuning software thus far.
And I don't regret using efilive as my only tuning solution, I am now frustrated because over and over the t43 has been pushed back and pushed back with no change in site.


Maybe we should invite some Diesel tuners into this thread and really stir things up :shock:
It isn't about diesel, it's about a 5 year old controller that you still can't properly tune. 5 years! No pwm and lack of tq mgt tables....the 2 things that you need to make this transmission and aftermarket single disc converters live.


I believe your reply to my post pretty much told me what I needed to know (perhaps what I already knew). I will continue to use efilive much as possible but it appears I will have to finally step outside of my all in one bubble and do business elsewhere as well.

Ryan

[slows10]

These guys were asking for these tables back when it was still new four years ago. It got pushed bac and pushed back over the years by efilive. Now for you to say it is outdated and not a wise buisness decision for you is a bit weak. You cant just push things back until it is starting to be outdated then say its to late, we have other things that are priority. I have read where your response has been that it will take 2 days to go thru a file by hand and that is time you cannot spend on it. My response would be if you spent 10 minutes a day over the last 4 years it would have been done a long time ago.Not bashing efilive at all, sorry if it seems like it.

[Tre-Cool]

i dont want to jump in on any of the bashing but last i checked the t43 is still being used in all the holden v8 auto's with no replacement transmission in sight.

i guess if you wanted to semi-appease people,workshops etc, if they have the know how perhaps having the ability to view the raw bin file from the trans and let them attack it on thier own.

[slows10]

I dont believe this is bashing at all. In a few years the cummins guys may be talking about the same thing about a table or two that are not supported. Then what? Is the response going to be we have newer things to support no time to look at an outdated ecm? Imo people need justification for a price increase, not saying efilive is not justified in raising prices. Total support for each ecm should be the norm. If some of the pro tuners say these tables are needed, they are needed.

[GAMEOVER]

Subscribed...

[TBMSport]

:doh2::doh2::doh2::doh2:

Ok, there is a severe lack of understanding what the EFILive, HPTuners, LS1/LS2edit, Tunercat, etc, products are...

Do you understand that all the non-OEM tuning packages (and there are none that are OEM... the OEM doesn't want you touching anything and creating EPA headaches for the OEM) are a reverse engineering of the OEM's controller...?

Do you understand that to document and create the reference material that you stipulate will mean that FlashScan would require a team of engineers and writers, leading to a product that would be priced at something like $27,000 rather than $700...? [ Don't scoff, I have seen software packages costing $250,000 plus license fees of $2500/user/year (in other fields). ]

And how do you advertise a reverse engineered product at a corporate level...? Doing so makes it official that you've busted thru the OEM's encryption mechanism and are likely infringing their copyrights... it makes no sense to advertise at a corporate level.

Who will buy a tuning package...? Not everyone, and not even someone, but most likely tuning shops and gearheads who regularly swap their own cam.

Do you understand that tuning packages require the user to figure out how to tune (does the Snap-On truck driver teach you how to use Snap-On tools you just bought from him...?).

As for not having many tables for new controllers... it is a matter of how much time/effort the reverse engineering effort is.

$.02
:)

Joe...you know I know love you :grin:and all that you do for us, so this isn't personal...but seriously. Do you honestly think the OEM is on to HPTuners bc they take full page color ads in our car magazines but NO one in GM has the slightest clue about EFILive? Really, now? It's quite obvious that they are familiar with aftermarket 'hackers'. It's why they have tracers, trackers, and/or parameter changes in newer model years. So that is not an excuse.

But more importantly, what you seem to be missing is two primary things. One. We have come to expect EFIlive to be on the cutting edge. It's how you guys promoted yourselves in the beginning...it's why we use and support you. Do I understand how difficult it is to crack GM Codes, yes, but obviously not to the technical level that you do. But guess what, without sound like a dick...when it comes down to it, I don't care. That's why I come to you. My customer's don't give a rats' backside what I had to go through to design and manufacture their grilles, valances or exhaust kits. But they do know that they pay a premium for my parts bc I have established a reputation for offering a superior part. Now I can start a long list of excuses as to why I can't follow up, but when it boils down to it, Iset tat expectation bar/standard high and either I flatly concede that I don't want to maintain it or step up to the challenges presented.

Two. The issue is not for EFILive to give the end user a plug and play 'performance' tune...the issue is for EFILive to give the end user a plug and play INTERFACE or easy to follow tutorial to make his own performance tune. I deal exclusively with E67's and T43's. These two modules seem to have the least level of support. Now clearly teh E38 is a dumbed down extension of E67's. Yes, I know not every table is used in every OS. Yes I know, that you guys may be able to access a table, but don't necessarily understand how the computer or GM methodology integrates that table during vehicle functions. Fine...I get it. But we all understand that tuning starts with VE tables...so why is it so daggum difficult to do an AUTO VE for E67's. Ok fine..that's an ECM function. But as Tre-Cool stated. The T43 has been out since '06. It's a basic fundamental TCM from ZF used in all GM 6 Speed gas autos. Why can't I log my torque converter lock up/slip functions? If you give us (avid supporters) the tools, we can at least support one another.

I don't think HPTuners people are from NASA. If they can do it and you guys can have accomplished the things you've done in the past, then I'm confident you can do this. Now if EFILive is plainly saying to use their software as a diagnostic tool and they have no intent to make a user friendly interface. Love it or lump it....then put that in a STICKY, tell us to just go to HPTuners and lock the thread.

[Blacky]

Joe...you know I know love you :grin:and all that you do for us, so this isn't personal...but seriously. Do you honestly think the OEM is on to HPTuners bc they take full page color ads in our car magazines but NO one in GM has the slightest clue about EFILive? Really, now? It's quite obvious that they are familiar with aftermarket 'hackers'. It's why they have tracers, trackers, and/or parameter changes in newer model years. So that is not an excuse.

I think maybe the term "advertise at a corporate level" does not mean the same thing to the same people.
To me (and probably Joe) that phrase means approaching GM to have EFILive recognized and integrated with GM's TIS and SPS - sort of like the Mongoose cable from Drewtech is integrated into the GM's SPS.
EFILive can't and won't do that. However, we do advertise at a "consumer level" in national magazines in the US.

Regads
Paul

[joecar]

TBMSport,

Have you read the following:
- scantool user manual,
- tunetool user manual,
- VVE tutorial,
- VVE guide;

if you read thru those you should be able to perform VE tuning for E38/E67 (the first two show how to use the tools, the last two show you how to tune).

[ScarabEpic22]

Jesse, you can Auto VVE the E38/67, Ive got a few logs that have good data but just arent long enough to justify spending the time on my VVE table. Its more involved than the LS1, but its also a much more complex system of how the VVE tables are setup.

Maybe this weekend I can actually set aside some time and get some good logs. Might have another 300mi roadtrip coming up, if I do Ill try to get a good log of it.

[minytrker]

I have defended and supported efilive in so many online pissing matches between efi and hp, it was always THE premier software to use with the best selection of cals for the controllers it supported. Now I am right at the point of buying hp just for t43 usage..lol. It just doesn't seem right but I guess it is what it is.

I was in the same boat, I sold HPT years ago but had to end up buying it again a couple years ago. It defiantly sucks when you spend a thousand plus on an EFI stream and then have to spend another hundred for a HPT license to change on thing. I know it goes both ways EFI has some tables HPT doesnt and vise verse BUT we are talking about a main table almost every who tunes gas vehicles needs for hundreds of thousands of vehicles I think its pretty important. 2006-2011 covers ALOT of vehicles and people will be tuning those for years and years.


All that is well and good Ross..and I can understand what it's like to be in a position to defend your product. But as we are saying...we love your product. It is our love and appreciation for what EFILive has done over the years that fuels our frustration and hence voicing it. We'd like an all in one product. I dont' think you should be taking offense that we want that product to be EFILive.



I didnt post anything to bash EFI if it was taken that way. There is no perfect tuning software, I like and dislike things about EFI and HPT but I still choose to use EFI over HPT daily and try to promote EFI. But its kinda a slap in the face when EFI tells you to go buy HPT and other people own both when you have literally thousands and thousands invested in EFI already. EFI is already is harder to sell to people because of the higher cost than HPT and its less "popular" but its now turning away potential customers because of the lack of one or two tables on a single controller. I understand why EFI is getting into cummins and and even support that even though I dont currently tune cummins BUT I get 50 to 1 calls about EFI for gas than cummins. I doubt there are more cummins than 2006-2011 GM that people tune with the T43. IMO it would be in EFI best intrest to spend the money and time to add atleast the same amount of support as the competition.

[Duke]

Newbie here. I'm one of those pesky customers that just buys a tune and only wants performance. So, can the EFI engine tune file be loaded on top of a HPT tune that has the tranny tuned right? :cucumber: I want some of that.

[joecar]

Newbie here. I'm one of those pesky customers that just buys a tune and only wants performance. So, can the EFI engine tune file be loaded on top of a HPT tune that has the tranny tuned right? :cucumber: I want some of that.Yes... but you don't think of it as being on "top"... you can read/edit/flash with either tool at any time.

[Rhino79]

Newbie here. I'm one of those pesky customers that just buys a tune and only wants performance. So, can the EFI engine tune file be loaded on top of a HPT tune that has the tranny tuned right? :cucumber: I want some of that.

Thanks for posting this over at Camaro5, one of the largest 5th gen forums that has a ton of t43 cars.

[GMPX]

Yes, I understand diesels are easier to tune and make a highly profitable market to break into.
My eye's were opened up to the Diesel performance market years ago, it's bigger than you might imagine and now that EFILive has established itself as the premiere tuning package for Diesels it must be nurtured.


Kudos on making that executive decision to boost cash flow. But what about the people who support EFIlive?
Support or use? What do you mean support?


However, it's increasingly embarrassing and frustrating to be unable to do the simplest of increased performance mods because of a lack of uniform reference information on the software. The forum is nice, but a lot of the information is so scattered that it's a journey just to compile the data.
Have you taken any of the courses that are on offer by numerous companies? We write software, not tune cars for a living.
Does Microsoft teach you how to program a computer?
Does Snap-On teach you how to rebuild an engine?
No, like us, they provide the tools to do so. I have forgotten so much myself on the controllers because I don't work on them each day like tuners do.


Unreadable 2012 TCM file
Sure, T43 again, you made it out like ALL 2012 models of anything weren't supported, that isn't the case. In fact the 2012 Camaro ECM was supported within days of it's release as we had a tune file sent in from someone who picked one up.


The t43 is still a current controller, you guys have some tuneability but not everything needed. It is used in trucks and cars both, is that not enough volumn to justify added t43 support?
There is ONE person at EFILive doing cal work, if I am working on new markets to ensure our future then the others stop, when we see sales trends as new things are released it becomes a sensible decision as to where we need to dedicate R&D.


I love ALL other aspects of efilive outside of the poor t43 support.
I don't know what we can do to fix it, if I had a direct line to GM asking them how it works then we'd be on track.


These guys were asking for these tables back when it was still new four years ago. It got pushed bac and pushed back over the years by efilive.
See my reply above.


i dont want to jump in on any of the bashing but last i checked the t43 is still being used in all the holden v8 auto's with no replacement transmission in sight.
Australia is a very small percentage of our sales market.


if they have the know how perhaps having the ability to view the raw bin file from the trans and let them attack it on thier own.
No need, they can make up any .cax file they want, there is people in the US doing this.


Imo people need justification for a price increase
Use the search function, it's been covered thoroughly.


I don't think HPTuners people are from NASA.
No, but they have four calibration engineers, makes a big difference to what can get done.


Now if EFILive is plainly saying to use their software as a diagnostic tool and they have no intent to make a user friendly interface.
What a bizarre statement, certainly not made by us.


I understand why EFI is getting into cummins and and even support that even though I dont currently tune cummins BUT I get 50 to 1 calls about EFI for gas than cummins. I doubt there are more cummins than 2006-2011 GM that people tune with the T43. IMO it would be in EFI best intrest to spend the money and time to add atleast the same amount of support as the competition.
If we were going to go broke focusing on the Diesel market we wouldn't do it, the decision to focus on Diesel came from sales feedback. I'm not saying that by us adding 1,000 tables to the T43 is flogging a dead horse, but it certainly would not result in any significant sales figures change. Oh, how about we introduce a year model fee to ensure the R&D for new models is justified. A one off fee for unlimited tuning on a 5 year + model run is very fair, maybe too fair.
T43 troubles aside, it was going to be a struggle this year for us with the GM gassers, we had a lot of interest at the trade shows when we announced we were starting on Cummins support, people said this will be bigger than anything you have done before. So for the last year we have very much concentrated on getting Cummins to market. So far it's paid off and will continue for years to come due to a different licensing model.

So where does that leave the T43, well, nothing will change much this year, I am away for 7 weeks as of next week. If we've dropped the ball on the T43 we are just going to have to wear that hat, I don't see how that makes the rest of the software unusable as is being made out in this thread.

Cheers,
Ross

[Rhino79]

So where does that leave the T43, well, nothing will change much this year, I am away for 7 weeks as of next week. If we've dropped the ball on the T43 we are just going to have to wear that hat, I don't see how that makes the rest of the software unusable as is being made out in this thread.

Cheers,
Ross

Ross, I really love the software. I honestly downloaded the beta demo for hp, its like nintendo vs xbox 360...lol EFI being the 360 of course. I honestly am not personally to the point where I need pwm support. I have gotten around the tq mgt issue by logging and altering the max timing drop between shifts until I got it where it feels right. I did come off pretty aggressive in this thread, I'll admit.

I'll say this, you personally have gone out of your way for me on 2-3 occasions to get me a .cal that was either not supported at the time or was missing something I needed. I would just like to know the t43 is not going to be forever what it is now. PWM is one of the biggest things that needs to be altered to support a good converter, thats the biggie to me.

I am not a diesel guy, and I can see where you have to follow trends to continue growth. I personally didn't know you were the only person writing cals. I admit I didn't know hp tuners had 4 calibrators. This makes more sense to me as to why some projects are more important than others. You can only do so much.

So i will apologize for stirring this up, you guys clearly have a great product, and I think it's success has our expectations high. I appreciate what you guys do, and as much money I have spent with efi, I have made a good amount as well.

Ryan
Now go crack that t43!...jk http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j188/dewmanshu/Internet%20Crap/other_mr_peanutHumps.gif

[slowhawk]

The problem some of us are at now is the thought of dumping EFI completely and going HPT because of this one minor issue of the lack of T-43 tuning.For the 11/12 I can not get a good tranny tune due to a few table's we have no control of. Atleast having a TQ management delete would help band aid the tunes a bit.Then some converter lock up pressure control would be nice for stall converters.

I just sent in a 2012 tranny file that is un recognized. Hopefully GM has a better base file in there.

Don

[Boost]

With all due respect & no sarcasm intended... a big LOL at EFILive having to defend their product and business decisions. Since 2006 I have bought and sold vehicles based on what EFILive supports, even made huge job and carreer choices by it. I am not going to question it since I DO NOT WRITE, DESIGN, HACK, OWN the software! Sorry guys. I am just a little dude who pays a minimal fee to do amazing things to hundreds of GM vehicles that impress my fellow master techs a great deal, and have had very good support and results, after I chose this product since I judged it as superior from the competition. My 2 cents. And if you were going to do ALL diesel, screw it I'm in!!! But it is great you so sooo much for gas!

[ScarabEpic22]

I understand why everyone's upset, and I also understand EFILive's position on the matter.

If everyone is so pissed about it, get a few guys together and start cracking the code. Stick it into a .cax file and use it in EFILive. A little more work than simply buying HPTuners, but I guess thats up to the majority.

[Tre-Cool]

while im not a hpt user, i can see them picking up efilive customers who now focus on e38 and t43 controllers due to their custom os ve table for the e38 and calibration updates for the newer auto's.

for me, it's not a big concern just a "would be nice to have the same settings sorta deal"

[GMPX]

while im not a hpt user, i can see them picking up efilive customers who now focus on e38 and t43 controllers due to their custom os ve table for the e38 and calibration updates for the newer auto's.
Quite the opposite on the ECM side of things, we have many customers switching from HPT to EFILive because of the need to wait for them to release custom OS's for the E38/E67. There is over 100 unique OS's between those two ECM's, with EFILive you can do VE tuning on every one of them, with HPT, maybe a handful and that's it. Even then their 'custom VE table' is all zero's, you start from scratch.

Anyway, back to the T43, whilst I've been over here in the US I've had a chance to spend some time with Jesse from Wait4me, he's created he's own cax files for T43 tuning that adds some important things. I hope to add what he has done if he's ok with that, probably January next year as I am not back from the US until mid December.

Cheers,
Ross

[Rhino79]

That is the best news I have heard yet! Thank you and thanks Jesse!

[slowhawk]

Good to hear. I sent a few file awhile ago that has alot of changes too for converter lockup ext.

I'll make sure to stop by and say hi at PRI next week.

[Boost]

http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?17766-2006-Mazda-Miata-VIN-into-an-06-GTO-e40-pcm

[TBMSport]

That is the best news I have heard yet! Thank you and thanks Jesse!

:iamwithstupid: Wahoo...can't wait

[GMPX]

Yeah, but it still doesn't make me an overnight trans expert :help2: , I think we all appreciate Jesse offering to help us out.

[TBMSport]

At the least, I just need to know what gear the trans is in, trans temp, and what the converter slip is while logging my other engine functions. I would like to know what "pattern" it is in, but trial and error I suppose will reveal that.

[ScarabEpic22]

At the least, I just need to know what gear the trans is in, trans temp, and what the converter slip is while logging my other engine functions. I would like to know what "pattern" it is in, but trial and error I suppose will reveal that.

Jesse, you can already log those parameters, I just double-checked in V8. You have to use BBL on your V2 though, the V7.5 Scan tool cannot log multiple controllers simultaneously. V8 will be able to, until then V2 BBL is the only way. You can still play the logs back in V7.5 though!

[TBMSport]

Jesse, you can already log those parameters, I just double-checked in V8. You have to use BBL on your V2 though, the V7.5 Scan tool cannot log multiple controllers simultaneously. V8 will be able to, until then V2 BBL is the only way. You can still play the logs back in V7.5 though!

You've logged a 6 speed T43?

[Tre-Cool]

yes, i log mine all the time. but you have to set it up through bbl.

i log both the e38 and t43 togethor.

12360

try this options file on your v2.

[ScarabEpic22]

You've logged a 6 speed T43?

Personally I havent, but all the PIDs are there. Have you tried it, or do some error out?


yes, i log mine all the time. but you have to set it up through bbl.

i log both the e38 and t43 togethor.

12360

try this options file on your v2.

BTW the TBSS and 07 5.3L TBs use E67/T42 combos from GM so with a 6L80E swap its a E67/T43 combo. Im pretty sure an E38/T43 combo wont log correctly for a TBSS with an E67/T43 combo.

[Tre-Cool]

did u mean e67/t43 combo wont log instead of e38/t43?

as i mentioned that's how i do all e38 + t43

[Dieselman]

did u mean e67/t43 combo wont log instead of e38/t43?

as i mentioned that's how i do all e38 + t43

I agree 100% you can log the E38 and T43 at the same time with BBL

[ScarabEpic22]

did u mean e67/t43 combo wont log instead of e38/t43?

as i mentioned that's how i do all e38 + t43

No, I ment that the TBSS doesnt use an E38 and uses an E67, so the Options.txt file you posted wont work for Jesse as it is for an E38/T43 combo, not an E67/T43 combo.


I agree 100% you can log the E38 and T43 at the same time with BBL

Yep, only way to log multiple controllers is via V2 BBL right now.

[Rhino79]

Any updates on this?

[TBMSport]

I've been busy with the ECM tune and of course life as a whole...so I haven't had time to read up on how to use this BBL feature to log ECM and TCM. But I'm now discouraged (again) that it may not work for E67/T43 combos

[GMPX]

But I'm now discouraged (again) that it may not work for E67/T43 combos
No, I think what Erik meant is what was posted was to suit an E38 & T43, that didn't meant it won't work, will never work with an E67 & T43.


I haven't had time to read up on how to use this BBL feature to log ECM and TCM
Ok.

FYI, the T43 progress I believe has stalled again. I am not sure what has happened to Jesse, I can't seem to be able to get hold of him. He may be overseas tuning again.

[Taz]

... I haven't had time to read up on how to use this BBL feature to log ECM and TCM. But I'm now discouraged (again) that it may not work for E67/T43 combos ...

Hello Jesse,

You really owe it to yourself to learn how to use the EFILive tuning package - both the software and BBx functions. It seems you have invested a great deal of time in engineering T43 conversions for the Trailblazer platform, but very little time with learning how to best use the EFILive software.

Attached below is a screen shot (PDF file) of my E67 & T43 BBL PID configuration - hopefully it helps get you started.


Regards,
Taz

[joecar]

The BBL stuff is very easy to configure using the V8 Scan&Tune software, as Taz has shown in his attachment.

[Rhino79]

FYI, the T43 progress I believe has stalled again. I am not sure what has happened to Jesse, I can't seem to be able to get hold of him. He may be overseas tuning again.

THanks for the update Ross, I have tried calling and pm'ing jesse on ls1tech with no response as well.

[wait4me]

Im here, Im currently working on them as we speak. Should be a 300 or so table add in for you guys. :) lots of limiters, torque calculations, timers, comms based stuff. Lots of goodies. ;) Sorry Ross, been a busy week! :) ps, did you guys send me more of those health bars? :)

[Rhino79]

Ty so much Jesse.

[GMPX]

ps, did you guys send me more of those health bars? :)
No, because I just discovered after reading the box that you are better off eating a Mars bar than one of them, no wonder they taste so good.

By the way everyone, there might be some interesting A6 development announcements soon (aside from Jesse's work), testing has been happening at a couple of shops here in Melbourne.

[TBMSport]

HELLLLLLLLLYEAH!!!:mrgreen:

[Rhino79]

Thank you guys for looking into it!

[Taz]

... By the way everyone, there might be some interesting A6 development announcements soon (aside from Jesse's work), testing has been happening at a couple of shops here in Melbourne ...

Nicely done gentlemen !! There are a lot of very intelligent and resourceful people who have worked out some very useful CAX files for the T43 - if this is that type of team approach, the eventual product should be awesome !

Thank you to everyone ... just getting into the A6 at this time ... I need all the help I can get.


Cheers,
Taz

[joecar]

+1 Thanks to all involved :cheers:

[wait4me]

No, because I just discovered after reading the box that you are better off eating a Mars bar than one of them, no wonder they taste so good.

By the way everyone, there might be some interesting A6 development announcements soon (aside from Jesse's work), testing has been happening at a couple of shops here in Melbourne.


LOL yeah i knew there had to be a catch! They are yummy.. lol

[GMPX]

Nicely done gentlemen !! There are a lot of very intelligent and resourceful people who have worked out some very useful CAX files for the T43 - if this is that type of team approach, the eventual product should be awesome
This was the very reason we allowed the .CAX file, we know there is people out there with the resources to expand beyond what we offer without waiting (or passing on to us) the info required. I wonder if those with these .CAX files have actually got anywhere with the T43's problems?

[Tre-Cool]

Well done to all involved, While i have been happy with my own t43 calibrations i'm always happy to have more things to play with.

[joecar]

CAX files are very handy...

it would be nice if the tunetool could recognize multiple cax files for a particular calibration (instead of just one).

[GMPX]

Joe, the .cax format will probably not get changed for V7, for V8 it will be a lot better (simpler) now that we know what people really need to be able to do with them.

[Longslyde]

:w00t: I am so relieved to hear this is going to happen!! I might have to sell a "product" I picked up recently if this pans out! Thanks for looking into this.....my tranny thanks you too! :rockon:

[APS Luis]

By the way everyone, there might be some interesting A6 development announcements soon (aside from Jesse's work), testing has been happening at a couple of shops here in Melbourne.

Absolutely..:drool:

By simply altering a newly found table we have a difference in the "reported" torque figure from the ECM to the TCM.

Early days yet , however there is a very obvious and noticeable change in the shifts , even when using a totally std TCM file with no editing.

stay tuned

[Dieselman]

Absolutely..:drool:

By simply altering a newly found table we have a difference in the "reported" torque figure from the ECM to the TCM.

Early days yet , however there is a very obvious and noticeable change in the shifts , even when using a totally std TCM file with no editing.

stay tuned

Good work Luis :coool:

[joecar]

Good job Luis, thanks :cheers:

[hymey]

Luis was kind enough to let me try the new settings in a customers car, I mainly tune VE's and can honestly say it makes a very noticable difference to the way the car shifts. The particular vehicle had the MAF removed and is a series 2 model the shifts were noticably softer before making the changes.

Thanks Ross and Luis for your findings(and whoever else involved)

[GMPX]

Thanks for the positive feedback Hymey, because positive feedback and the T43 is a rare thing :music_whistling_1:

[GMPX]

If anyone in the US is interested in testing these new tables please let us know, we'd like to get a little more feedback on a variety of vehicles before releasing the new calibrations, so far it's a winner on the Holden's.

[TBMSport]

Ooo ooo ooooo...over here....meee!!
12663 :drool:

[GMPX]

Sure thing, if you are interested I need to know the OS number in the ECM (not the TCM).

[Tre-Cool]

Can i get it emailed to me to please.

I can get another gearbox for $1500 so not bothered it blows up again. haha

[Rhino79]

Pm sent.

[GMPX]

I'll contact you all on Monday, AU time.

[Rhino79]

This torque model table works. I reset base pressures to 0. Left my pressure limiters bumped up some and I run no torque mgt with .2 to .25 shift times. Result is consistant quick positive shift! Prior to this it shifted ok but with some inconsistent behavior at times. I think altering the base pressures so much was giving the adapts fits. I started with a 13% increase in the recommended tq model table in the ecm. I am going to add another 3-4% to see how that feels as it settles in over the next few days. So far so good!
I can't express how greatful I am that this came about! Thanks Ross ans all involved. This is a much better method in my opinion. Gm did well with all the pressure maps, and it seems to respond better to the tq model changes as it seems to keep as many tcm parameters untouched! There is a lot in the t43 and this table allows us to keep it simple and ha ve great results with minimal changes!

Ryan

[Taz]

Great news Ryan. Thank you for posting. Who would have thought the solution (or part of the solution) was in the ECM, not the TCM.


Cheers,
Taz

[Rhino79]

It seems to like the additional 4% on top of the 13% I flashed it in at lunch and haven't driven much but during logging the shift times have been so much closer to the commanded. I haven't hammered it yet, but I will on the way home. One thing is recommend when tuning a 6 speed. Starting off, its good to clear the adapts and go through the self clean and fast adapts learn. When you puts some miles on it and it settles in, if its close, just do a cal reflash. The mileage learning when the tune is close is better than starting the relearn from scratch. So save yourself some unneeded shift flares...lol. just flash it and drive it at that point.

[GMPX]

There is a lot in the t43 and this table allows us to keep it simple and ha ve great results with minimal changes!

Thanks for the feedback Ryan, it goes in line with what everyone else is saying, the trans now shifts the best it ever has. It's almost like an injector table on the ECM, it seems to make a global change to how the TCM behaves. I feel the TCM is so smart that it doesn't seem to need a lot of tuning if it's getting sent the right data (Torque).
I just finished off yesterday the torque tables for all E38 & E67 OS's, so the next release (due next week hopefully) will give everyone a chance to have a play. We will also be including a new PID to allow you to log the calculated torque value so you know what direction you are heading.

[Rhino79]

Great new Ross. It couldn't get any easier than this!

[Rhino79]

If anyone would like I can post up my tune files. 2010 SS

[GMPX]

I have slightly altered the .calz files you were sent for testing, so please don't pass those on, I don't want people getting confused when the new versions come out next week.

[Rhino79]

No problem. I could not believe the differnce.

[APS Luis]

I have slightly altered the .calz files you were sent for testing, so please don't pass those on, I don't want people getting confused when the new versions come out next week.

Did you get rid of the confucius stuff ? :tongue:

[GMPX]

Yes, i did :Eyecrazy:

[Tre-Cool]

Thanks for the feedback Ryan, it goes in line with what everyone else is saying, the trans now shifts the best it ever has. It's almost like an injector table on the ECM, it seems to make a global change to how the TCM behaves. I feel the TCM is so smart that it doesn't seem to need a lot of tuning if it's getting sent the right data (Torque).

I just finished off yesterday the torque tables for all E38 & E67 OS's, so the next release (due next week hopefully) will give everyone a chance to have a play. We will also be including a new PID to allow you to log the calculated torque value so you know what direction you are heading.


That to me, seems to perhaps justify my reasoning why maf tuned car's seem to have firmer shifts to mafless based ones?

I had to increase the shift times and add more torque delay timing to soften the shifts on my dads ve-ss after doing a maf tune, yet my own supercharged car has nice smooth shifts with increased pressures for casual driving, but hard shifts at wot.

[swingtan]

I've not done a lot of T43 tuning, but I have thought about this a lot. As has been said, I feel that the important part is ensuring the TCM is getting the correct data, especially for the commanded/desired torque. I've looked at the 3rd gear flare problem in some of the T43's and believe there is a correlation between "derived torque" and "clutch pack pressure". Basically, the TCM is reducing clutch pack pressure mid gear as it believes the engine is only maxing a certain amount of torque. However, in FI engines, the torque is well over this point and results in a mid gear flare.

I know it's not TM specific, but I think it helps describe the thinking behind the tuning in the TCM.

Simon.

[Tre-Cool]

i dunno about the 3rd gear flare. my old box used to do it all the time between 2nd to 3rd. i did a gearbox relearn and it disappeared from that shift. but it put one in the 3rd to 4th.

my new gearbox, ala 2nd hand. was flashed with my old tcm os/cal and it shifts perfectly in every gear.

[Rhino79]

Just an update. I'm at 18% added to the torque model table, .2 on all upshift times. Rpm pressure limited at 1000 kpa in all forward gears. All the base tables are stock. Man the shifts have a nice bump at light throttle and it follows the throttle input nicely. At wot, the shifts are mildly aggressive but instant. I have not had 1 flare yet.

[joecar]

Rhino, thanks for the feedback :cheers:

[APS Luis]

Sweet spot seems to be anywhere from 10 - 25 %

[Longslyde]

Tre-cool, Are you running a stock box, or built? How much power you running through it? How's it holding up?

[Tre-Cool]

434rwkw or 588rwhp on dyno dynamics.

1st box lasted 140k kms. new 2nd hand box has 25k km's. both are stock

[Rhino79]

I'm at 20%, .15 shift times except for 6th. It is .25on shift time. I manually bumped pressure table for 6th up 3% and am about to do the same with 4th. They seem to be the softer of all gears but not sloppy. They just are a lil softer than 2,3,5.

[Rhino79]

After some learn time, the shifts felt real lungy w no tq mgt. I added tq mgt in, and in the lower load cells I have shift times at .25 blending down to .15 in thehigh load and rpm cells. All pressures are stock, I used the minimal final timing table to adjust how low the timing will pull on shifts. Light load is at 8* minimum blending up to 13* at wot load and rpm cells. Pressure rpm limiter is at 1100, and the max adapt values are at 300 instead of 200. I thought this would give more room for the tcm to adapt. Results so far are clean quick shifts, not jerky, and wot is very quick and firm. It's a nice balance so far.

[Rhino79]

Tq model still at 20% BTW.

[Patrick G]

How can one obtain these new calz files? I need them ASAP. Thanks!

[GMPX]

Send me a PM Patrick.

[Rhino79]

Well I have found my final and best setup. Tq mgt on, low load shift times are .25 1750 rpm and below, blending down to .15 by 4000 rpm. All base pressure tables stock. Dropped the tq model back to 15%. Pressure limiter at 1100 kpa. Max adapts at 300 for all gears. I control the timing being pulled on shifts via minimum final timing table in ecm. I left it stock except for high load/rpm cells. I set them to 13* .

My conclusion is the 6l80 will never shift like a th350 or 4l60. And for obvious reasons. It likes tq mgt, and shifts are quicker with it on. Also going to high with tq model or base pressures will cause funky shifts, some flare and harsh bang.

With my setup now, wot is very crisp, tire chirpping in 2 and 3 upshifts. Not harsh tho. Part throttle is quick and clean, no herky jerky lunging shifts. Afterall we are going for quick shifts, not necessarily violent ones. I can upload my files if anyone wants to have a looksie.

[Tordne]

I'm playing with my own T43/E38 as well, so I'd like to see your before and after calibrations if you've got it real nice.

[The Alchemist]

" I can upload my files if anyone wants to have a looksie.[/QUOTE]

That would be great !. Thanks for sharing. I only get the opportunity to have a play with these trans when I'm tuning a car over a few days as I don't own one myself. Great to hear you're getting good results without all the tables available (no crack intended at EFILIVE) . I'm sure it will only get better once the tables are completed.
cheers,
Mike

[Rhino79]

I'll upload the stock and modified files tonight when I get home from work.

[Rhino79]

Here are the files, if you don't have the cal file for the torque model, you will need to hit up ross. My setup is basic, 93 octane, 1 7/8 longtubes, no cats, stock catback and tuning. I ran a similar tune but less aggressive and went 12.8 @ 108 before the headers. With this tune and the headers, it should go 12.4's on a good run! I'll upload a log from when I tuned for the headers too, you can look at the 0-100 and 0-60 times, Ittl scoot! Enjoy, comments or suggestions welcome as always.

Note: this log was with no tq mgt. I will try and get an updated one soon.

[GMPX]

Here are the files, if you don't have the cal file for the torque model, you will need to hit up ross.
They will be included with RC10 which will probably hit the streets this week some time.

[Rhino79]

Anyone tried these settings yet? Looking for air feedback. I haven't changed anything since those files were flashed and the shifts still feel great. For once it hasn't softened over time.....lol.

[Longslyde]

Waiting for the release to hit so I can try them myself... :D

[GMPX]

Hey guys, we won't be sending out any more test files, these tables will be in the next release, it's too time consuming to send them out and then spend more time Emailing back and forward what to.

Cheers,
Ross

[Rhino79]

Guys I have changed 1 thing since tunes posted. I dropped all shift times in the low load cells from .25 to .20. Then blended down to the .15 cells. Results so far are good. A little firmer at part throttle but not harsh. I haven't had any weird flares or anything either. And there is a big difference believe it or not for the feel andquickness of .25 to .20!

Edit** going back to .25. The shifts at light load started feeling sloppy at .2 within 60 miles.

[GMPX]

For the benefit of others awaiting these new tables, do you think it would have been possible to get your trans to shift like it is now without the new tables you are testing?

[Rhino79]

No. The problem I've found is too much pressure vs too little shift time makes for flare and sloppy shifts. I have not had success with adjusting just the pressure tables individually. I think this is so much better because ALL the hidden pressure and shift time modifiers are being adjusted according to tq output via the new tables. Hell I've only messed with one table in the torque model. I feel like with this we are tuning many parameters we arent even seeing. I personally like it much better. I have had best success with my shift timing in the files I upladed. Too short at low tq and it will flare. Too much pressure will flare. My ideal setup is 15% tq model and a minimum of .25 on low rpm/torque shift times. High rpm and tq i have had success with a minimum of .15 times.

Always follow the reset/preset learn procedure in the sticky. It makes a big difference.

[Tre-Cool]

i increased the b3033 table by 15% and left all the pressure tables set to 1700kpa and that seems to have firmed up the low to mid throttle shifts a bit. i have a 3600 stall so it takes a bit to notice the gear shifts.

i haven't done any wot changes but it dont see any problems arrising as it was allready great.

[Rhino79]

What are your shift times.

[Longslyde]

are the tables out for use yet? if so, I am missing where they are at...

[GMPX]

Yes, they are in RC10, though I do need to do a little write up on how they work.
Edit: Write up is done (http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?18710-Improving-shifts-via-the-ECM).

[Tre-Cool]

i leave the shift times alone, but i remove (zero out) the torque modifiers.

[The Alchemist]

I have to say, I've been following Rhino's guide/suggestions on tuning the T43 trans. We are currently doing a demo car for the local Holden Dealer and I have been doing mostly road tuning at the moment sorting carpark driving, cold starts, cold running, town driving, overrun settings etc. I decided to also get stuck into the trans tuning which makes such a huge part in how a car "feels" when you drive it. The shifts are now what I'd call tight yet not harsh and really complement the sporty feel of a cammed car. We have also redone shift points both up change and down change. This is the first one I have really had the oppurtunity to tune and thoroughly test and its fantastic! You can really make a huge difference from factory with very little effort. I am tweaking minimum engine spark timing at present to modify torque management input on gear changes. Works perfectly.

[scottcmb]

i leave the shift times alone, but i remove (zero out) the torque modifiers.

which tables are the "Torque modifiers" you are refering to Tre?

[scottcmb]

I have also noticed that there is differences between Rhino's base trans tune and the trans tune i have.........mine has parameters for "Base shift times" and Rhinos doesnt.........and also big differences between my stock TCM tune and Rhinos stock TCM tune in the shift times tables.

128251282612827

I made a tune basically exactly the same as Rhinos tune and flashed it in........took the car for a 45 mile run and it was HORRIBLE!!!.
I believe that the differences between the two base tunes played a big part in that result........so now i have made different changes to my tune based on Rhinos suggestions and will post the results.
And BTW before i made changes to my TCM tune.....I did some changes just to the Torque Model and Minimum final timing and just left the TCM tune stock and noticed VERY good results in the feel of the shifts in the trans. so i have this to base this test off!!
And before anyone says anything........yes i changed my torque model and minimum final timing to Rhinos suggestions aswell eg: 15% increase and 13 degrees timing in the suggested cells.

Cheers Scotty

[dc_justin]

I have also noticed that there is differences between Rhino's base trans tune and the trans tune i have.........mine has parameters for "Base shift times" and Rhinos doesnt.........and also big differences between my stock TCM tune and Rhinos stock TCM tune in the shift times tables.128251282612827I made a tune basically exactly the same as Rhinos tune and flashed it in........took the car for a 45 mile run and it was HORRIBLE!!!. I believe that the differences between the two base tunes played a big part in that result........so now i have made different changes to my tune based on Rhinos suggestions and will post the results. And BTW before i made changes to my TCM tune.....I did some changes just to the Torque Model and Minimum final timing and just left the TCM tune stock and noticed VERY good results in the feel of the shifts in the trans. so i have this to base this test off!! And before anyone says anything........yes i changed my torque model and minimum final timing to Rhinos suggestions aswell eg: 15% increase and 13 degrees timing in the suggested cells.Cheers ScottyThe base shift table in your calibration is added to the desired shift time input torque mod table. The newer calibrations have that total time wrapped up into the single desired shift time input torque mod table.

[scottcmb]

The base shift table in your calibration is added to the desired shift time input torque mod table. The newer calibrations have that total time wrapped up into the single desired shift time input torque mod table.

So in the case of my tune, which one does the system use most the base time or torque mod table?

[Taz]

So in the case of my tune, which one does the system use most the base time or torque mod table?

Hello Scotty,

Some T43 calibrations have two shift time parameters, others have only one shift time parameter.

As an example the 1>2 shift.

Some calibrations will have a D9000 parameter (Base Desired Shift Time) and a D9005 parameter (Desired Shift Time Input Torque Mod). These times are added together to achieve the final shift time. As an example if the D9000 parameter was 0.1504 seconds, and the corresponding RPM / Torque cell had a value of 0.0703 seconds, the final shift time would be 0.2207 seconds.

Other calibrations have only the D9005 parameter - so the shift time in the RPM / Torque cell also represents the final shift time.

Hope this helps ...


Regards,
Taz

[scottcmb]

Hello Scotty,

Some T43 calibrations have two shift time parameters, others have only one shift time parameter.

As an example the 1>2 shift.

Some calibrations will have a D9000 parameter (Base Desired Shift Time) and a D9005 parameter (Desired Shift Time Input Torque Mod). These times are added together to achieve the final shift time. As an example if the D9000 parameter was 0.1504 seconds, and the corresponding RPM / Torque cell had a value of 0.0703 seconds, the final shift time would be 0.2207 seconds.

Other calibrations have only the D9005 parameter - so the shift time in the RPM / Torque cell also represents the final shift time.

Hope this helps ...


Regards,
Taz

Cheers for that Taz. that has helped alot with what im going to try next.........legend mate!!! :)

Scotty

[Rhino79]

Scotty, in tunes where dual shift time tables are used, I usually 0 the base times and tune soley off the tq input table. Makes life easier and really eliminates any kind of other modifiers that may be tied to the base table in the background.

Alchemist,
Glad to hear everything is working well. I have not had one issue and it shifts so so good. I love how the shift aggression follows throttle input.

[scottcmb]

Thanks for that Rhino, i have looked at the differences between Rhino's stock TCM tune and mine and looking at D7010 shift pattern A and D7011 shift pattern B. I see that Rhino's tune has shift pattern A selected as Normal and shift pattern B selected as Sport/Performance, but on my standard tune it has "Pattern1" selected for D7010 and "Cruise" selected for D7011. Looking in the drop down box where you can make the selection for these two parameters i see a whole heap of choices that would accommodate a range of various types of vehicles and driving conditions and styles.
My question is, with the selections in this drop down box, is there a table that we cant see that shows the differences between these selections? and if i change my tune to have "Normal"and "Sport/Performance" would it have a good effect on my vehicle or would it be damaging?

Cheers Scotty :)

[scottcmb]

UPDATE:

After making a tune based off Rhino's suggestions, flashed it in and done all the resets etc etc.........I went away for the weekend and did about a 500km trip in the car so the adapts could settle down........after this trip i went out and logged some WOT runs to check my shift times....... i have now got constant 0.2 second shift times in all gears and in cruise and moderate throttling i get mostly 0.1 second shift times with the occasional 0.2 seconds.
In the past with a stock TCM tune and an increase of 20% on the torque model on the ECM tune i only got a best of 0.3 seconds with a firmer feel on the shifts.

Cruizing at 100kph in 6th and then stomping on the throttle i get mostly 0.3 second shift down to 3rd, traction control then kicks in from wheel spin (Totally dry road and perfectly sunny day and great tyres) and for info about the car.....totally stock LS3, stock exhaust, stock intake but has a moddified tune, shifts feel good and solid at cruize and modderate accelerating, WOT shifts feel awesome with that great throw you back in the seat feeling and traction control kicking in with each shift 1st, 2nd 3rd.

Thanks Rhino, Tas and Tre for you help and guidance.....Legend :)

Scotty

[scottcmb]

Thanks for that Rhino, i have looked at the differences between Rhino's stock TCM tune and mine and looking at D7010 shift pattern A and D7011 shift pattern B. I see that Rhino's tune has shift pattern A selected as Normal and shift pattern B selected as Sport/Performance, but on my standard tune it has "Pattern1" selected for D7010 and "Cruise" selected for D7011. Looking in the drop down box where you can make the selection for these two parameters i see a whole heap of choices that would accommodate a range of various types of vehicles and driving conditions and styles.
My question is, with the selections in this drop down box, is there a table that we cant see that shows the differences between these selections? and if i change my tune to have "Normal"and "Sport/Performance" would it have a good effect on my vehicle or would it be damaging?

Cheers Scotty :)

Has anyone got any info on my question here???

Scotty

[Tre-Cool]

with my tcm tune i also run the same shift parameters for all modes. because i have a stall in my car im not worried about firm shifts cruising around. i figure this also helps to keep the learned data consistant across the board.

i.e i use pressure pattern A for all shift modes.

[Boost]

What do all the modes stand for, and how does it vary by model?

[GMPX]

I've never figured that out as I think it's platform specific. But generally the first is 'normal' and B might be 'sport' mode, or 'performance'.

[Tre-Cool]

my normal mode is called cruise. changing it doesnt seem to do a thing anyway.

as anyone played with b3001-3003 yet? im going to give them a shot next.

[minytrker]

The new tables are great but I dont see anything for controlling converter lockup for aftermarket converters or did I miss it. I havent had a problem with shifting, just aftermarket converters locking and unlocking.

[Taz]

The new tables are great but I dont see anything for controlling converter lockup for aftermarket converters or did I miss it. I havent had a problem with shifting, just aftermarket converters locking and unlocking.


See post #27 & #28 in this thread ...

http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?18246-T43-TCC-Desired-Slip-and-Adaptive-Pressure&p=166856&viewfull=1#post166856

[joecar]

Are the new tables in build 201...?

[scottcmb]

Are the new tables in build 201...?

The new tables are in the E38 tune Joe under the name of Torque Model

[joecar]

Ok, thanks.

[minytrker]

See post #27 & #28 in this thread ...

http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?18246-T43-TCC-Desired-Slip-and-Adaptive-Pressure&p=166856&viewfull=1#post166856

EFI knows what the tables are and what we need in our terms as tuners, I understand that doesnt help them in code.

I

[minytrker]

The new tables are in the E38 tune Joe under the name of Torque Model

Those dont address the lockup issues.

[scottcmb]

Those dont address the lockup issues.

I never said they did!!!......was just answering Joes question about the new tables!!!

[minytrker]

i never said they did!!!......was just answering joes question about the new tables!!!

ok!!!!!

[GMPX]

EFI knows what the tables are and what we need in our terms as tuners, I understand that doesnt help them in code.
Nearly got them done...

http://download.efilive.com/Staff/GMPX/TCC_Slip.png

[minytrker]

Nearly got them done...

http://download.efilive.com/Staff/GMPX/TCC_Slip.png

I can't express with typing how happy that screen shot made me just now. :mrgreen:

[GMPX]

I can't express with typing how happy that screen shot made me just now. :mrgreen:
Do you 'really' need the AFM slip tables too?

[Tre-Cool]

i'd be interested to know what my tables are set to, seeing as i dont have a problem with my converter slipping at wot.

fire the cax my way when your done. david at vyssute dot com
OS-24239353
Cal-24239647

interesting that they have slip per gear too.

i'll be in melbourne tomorrow, happy to send a special bottle of your choosing or bag of your favourite coffee beans for your hard work. lol i know bribery often helps get things done sooner.

[GMPX]

Actually, they won't be .cax files, Lorenz sent me enough bad vibes I had to pull my finger out and fix it, the guilt trip finally got the better of me, they'll be in the next update (I promise this time!!)
From what I have seen all the Holden calibrations have these tables zeroed!! No tolerance, or, they turned the test off elsewhere.
Bribery doesn't work, sorry, nice gesture though :sly:

[Tre-Cool]

Actually, they won't be .cax files, Lorenz sent me enough bad vibes I had to pull my finger out and fix it, the guilt trip finally got the better of me, they'll be in the next update (I promise this time!!)
From what I have seen all the Holden calibrations have these tables zeroed!! No tolerance, or, they turned the test off elsewhere.
Bribery doesn't work, sorry, nice gesture though :sly:

might explain why it's only our american buddies complaining about slip then?

[minytrker]

Do you 'really' need the AFM slip tables too?


I would think they are only needed a very small percentage of the time. Most people who have went to a big cam and or stall have already removed the AFM or turn it off because it doesnt hardly ever go into AFM.

[GMPX]

Most people who have went to a big cam and or stall have already removed the AFM or turn it off because it doesnt hardly ever go into AFM.
That's what I figured, but I added them anyway, you know if I didn't someone would ask.

[scottcmb]

That's what I figured, but I added them anyway, you know if I didn't someone would ask.

In D7010 and D7011 with the selections in the drop down box, are there tables that we cant see at the moment that show the differences between these selections? and if there is...can they be added please?

Cheers Scotty

[GMPX]

I'm not sure what you mean. The list just shows the 'marketing name' GM would assign to the tables. It doesn't mean there is 12 or more sets of shift tables.

[scottcmb]

I'm not sure what you mean. The list just shows the 'marketing name' GM would assign to the tables. It doesn't mean there is 12 or more sets of shift tables.

So basically you are explaining that in the drop down box of selections, that choosing any of them will make no difference to the tune of the transmission and that those selections are just words ONLY??......if that is the case....then why are they there in the first place??? ( please dont take this as critisizing you, im just trying to understand this further) EG: my HSV has "Pattern1 selected for D7010 and "Cruise""selected for D7011 in the stock tune, where as in Rhino's standard tune he has "Normal" selected for D7010 and "Sport/Performance" selected for D7011.
It just seems strange that with all those choices and the names of them EG: pattern 1, pattern2, normal, cruise, sport/performance, winter etc etc that there is not more to them than meets the eye instead of just face value word only... Was just wondering whether it was another secret thing hidden deep in this""T43 Pandora's Gearbox" :)

Cheers Scotty

[gmh308]

So basically you are explaining that in the drop down box of selections, that choosing any of them will make no difference to the tune of the transmission and that those selections are just words ONLY??......if that is the case....then why are they there in the first place??? ( please dont take this as critisizing you, im just trying to understand this further) EG: my HSV has "Pattern1 selected for D7010 and "Cruise""selected for D7011 in the stock tune, where as in Rhino's standard tune he has "Normal" selected for D7010 and "Sport/Performance" selected for D7011.
It just seems strange that with all those choices and the names of them EG: pattern 1, pattern2, normal, cruise, sport/performance, winter etc etc that there is not more to them than meets the eye instead of just face value word only... Was just wondering whether it was another secret thing hidden deep in this""T43 Pandora's Gearbox" :)

Cheers Scotty

You might run that question by GM in Detroit or Holden at the "Bend". Always more than meets the eye. 2mb of mem and 256k (2mbits) of calibration, plenty dark corridors in these things, especially with the Bosch noodle boxes. :)

[joecar]

"Bosch noodle boxes"

I like that euphemism, thanks Ian :cheers:

[restless@westnet.com.au]

any more updates