PDA

View Full Version : EFI Crew Please!!! TCM Table



SteveFord
October 22nd, 2009, 01:27 PM
I know Ben had brought this up before in the past and now it seems we need this more than ever with all the high hp trucks. Our TCM isn't allowing lock up when we want it because of the slip it sees. We need to be able to tune this table to what we are looking for per truck. Is there any way you guys could dig into our tcm and find the table that is limitting us on when our converter lock up occurs? All models are in need. It would be greatly appreciated if this could happen. We all know you guys/gals are very busy. Thanks for any insight on this for us!

bballer182
October 22nd, 2009, 01:32 PM
This probably should have been posted in the Allison sub-forum, but...

http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?t=11786

thats just another table to look for...

GMC-2002-Dmax
October 22nd, 2009, 11:59 PM
This problem has more to do with Converter choice than tuning.

Too loose of a converter and the slip rpm vs. lock-up rpm gets too great and the tcm will not allow a lock up to occur.

You are correct the high hp trucks do blow through the converters, especially when you have a big single and are trying to go with a loose TC to get the charger to light quicker.

Tony

fire0021
October 23rd, 2009, 03:18 AM
This problem has more to do with Converter choice than tuning.

Too loose of a converter and the slip rpm vs. lock-up rpm gets too great and the tcm will not allow a lock up to occur.

You are correct the high hp trucks do blow through the converters, especially when you have a big single and are trying to go with a loose TC to get the charger to light quicker.

Tony

The problem for alot of people is they where directed to use one converter an it turned out it will not lock up under wot conditions becuase of what you metioned above. so now there stuck with ditching a 1500 converter. or getting the tables to make the adjusment. this is happening with sc and some ats converters. In my case it was fine for about 3,000 miles untill the converter got broke in then no locky condition. so I agree if the table can be found it will be a huge asset and be much apreciated and also allow better adjusmtent and mor choices of converters.

DURAtotheMAX
October 23rd, 2009, 03:36 AM
I know Ben had brought this up before in the past and now it seems we need this more than ever with all the high hp trucks. Our TCM isn't allowing lock up when we want it because of the slip it sees. We need to be able to tune this table to what we are looking for per truck. Is there any way you guys could dig into our tcm and find the table that is limitting us on when our converter lock up occurs? All models are in need. It would be greatly appreciated if this could happen. We all know you guys/gals are very busy. Thanks for any insight on this for us!

Steve heres a thread that I started in the allison section:

http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?t=12166

GMC-2002-Dmax
October 23rd, 2009, 09:32 AM
The problem for alot of people is they where directed to use one converter an it turned out it will not lock up under wot conditions becuase of what you metioned above. so now there stuck with ditching a 1500 converter. or getting the tables to make the adjusment. this is happening with sc and some ats converters. In my case it was fine for about 3,000 miles untill the converter got broke in then no locky condition. so I agree if the table can be found it will be a huge asset and be much apreciated and also allow better adjusmtent and mor choices of converters.

I have been tuning these trucks for over 4 years with big singles and twins, the big singles have trade-off's, they have little or no boost on the street and are generally pigs until they hit between 2500-3000 rpms.

You can try pushing part throttle shift points out to 2800-3000 rpm and WOT to 3600-4000 rpms in an effort to get on top of the turbo easier but slip rpm is still a problem under WOT and big power.

You can get them to lock, you have to play around with it, it is hit or miss unfortunately.

:shock:

DURAtotheMAX
October 24th, 2009, 01:46 AM
slip rpm is still a problem under WOT and big power.

You can get them to lock, you have to play around with it, it is hit or miss unfortunately.

:shock:

Been playing with it for 4 years (we both got efilive same time), thats why back in march/early 2006 my truck was running 108mph in the 1/4 mile...............but never better than high 12's. Because my converter wouldnt lock. My 1/8 mile times were basically what a stock LBZ runs.

You are cheating because you have a co-pilot mister! :hihi:

Suncoast just screwed me with this converter "refresh". Either they didnt even refresh it, or they gave me back some piece of crap thats not a 1057. I have 25,000 miles on it of a friggin STOCK tune (well, stock, but with dipper injectors) and I can easily stall it to 2500rpm before it walks through the brakes. So my converter is "loose", and yeah, Id like that fixed/to get a converter thats not JUNK, but I dont have the money now....so the next best thing would be for EFILive to find this anti-lockup table. :)

ben

GMC-2002-Dmax
October 24th, 2009, 10:24 AM
Been playing with it for 4 years (we both got efilive same time), thats why back in march/early 2006 my truck was running 108mph in the 1/4 mile...............but never better than high 12's. Because my converter wouldnt lock. My 1/8 mile times were basically what a stock LBZ runs.

You are cheating because you have a co-pilot mister! :hihi:

Suncoast just screwed me with this converter "refresh". Either they didnt even refresh it, or they gave me back some piece of crap thats not a 1057. I have 25,000 miles on it of a friggin STOCK tune (well, stock, but with dipper injectors) and I can easily stall it to 2500rpm before it walks through the brakes. So my converter is "loose", and yeah, Id like that fixed/to get a converter thats not JUNK, but I dont have the money now....so the next best thing would be for EFILive to find this anti-lockup table. :)

ben

No,

I run/test my LB7 stuff on the street without the Co-Pilot turned on, why you ask ???? Because not everyone has one, those that do are guaranteed a harsher lock-up and quicker track times usually.

My 2002 has a Precision ML/TC, never had a problem, my 2007 has a SC-IV/1054 built by Dipper, again no problem, and no Co-Pilot in the 2007.

I tell you what, stop by, I have some 14ga wire, a SPST switch and a Allison wiring diagram, we'll get you TC lock up.

:cucumber:

Back to our regularly scheduled whining.....:hihi:

DURAtotheMAX
October 24th, 2009, 10:49 AM
I tell you what, stop by, I have some 14ga wire, a SPST switch and a Allison wiring diagram, we'll get you TC lock up.

can you get me a "no-limp" after you do that though. :D :tongue:


if I do the "manual" lockup switch...I get lockup right away, or if I command it with the tech 2.

Randy5.0
October 24th, 2009, 10:49 AM
My 1054 will lock up, but right about at the 3-4 shift. I still would like to be able to lock it up with EFI in 2nd without a co-pilot or controller.:help2:

DURAtotheMAX
October 24th, 2009, 10:50 AM
My 1054 will lock up, but right about at the 3-4 shift. I still would like to be able to lock it up with EFI in 2nd without a co-pilot or controller.:help2:

x1,000,000 :D

GMC-2002-Dmax
October 24th, 2009, 11:15 AM
Log the TCM and you can sometimes see the attempt to lock the TC and then the failure to lock it up.

If you get the lockup when you want it you will probably pull the truck down off the charger more frequently.

On some trucks I have tuned with big singles if you do not push the TC lockup out to higher rpms/TPS% you can pull the rpms down quick enough to bark the charger on lock-up...................:bad:

Ben,

Your truck doesn't make enough power to overpower a TC...........:hihi:, so I think you need the switch..........:angel_innocent:

GMPX
October 25th, 2009, 09:47 AM
I must confess that we haven't invested a great deal of time on additional Allison tables because most people choose to use the co-pilot, which from where I sit appears to solve all the problems associated with high power trucks?

SteveFord
October 25th, 2009, 10:29 AM
Yes it does but I would belive to be able to tune the lock up with tunning would be more benifical for everyone.

Sparky8370
October 25th, 2009, 11:00 AM
I must confess that we haven't invested a great deal of time on additional Allison tables because most people choose to use the co-pilot, which from where I sit appears to solve all the problems associated with high power trucks?

I wouldn't say most. And I bet if they had the alternative, they'd rather do it right with EFI Live. Sort of like a comparison between EFI and box tuners. There's a way that works, and a way that works right.

DuramaxPowered
October 25th, 2009, 11:08 AM
I just swapped converters for one that is supposed to lock at the right time and I still have issues...... :bad: $$$$$ :cussing:........ We need this, it is one of the most needed tables IMO

Randy5.0
October 25th, 2009, 11:21 AM
I must confess that we haven't invested a great deal of time on additional Allison tables because most people choose to use the co-pilot, which from where I sit appears to solve all the problems associated with high power trucks?

But there really wasn't a choice in the matter, if you wanted the converter to lock up on time it was the only option that was presented as a fix. It is also kind of a bandaid approach to the lock up problem. It is sometimes easier and quicker to force something on mechanically than it is to do it the correct way with programming. Racers do that out of necessity all the time. It would be better all the way around if it was done with EFILive. One less device that you would have to monitor while your concentrating on other things like racing and it would be easier to troubleshoot a problem if you could just look at a log for reference. JMOP. I work on integrated electronic controls for a living, so of course this would be my preference on how to handle lock up.:grin:

fire0021
October 27th, 2009, 04:47 AM
I agree I dont think the co piolt is the correct answer. PLus spending another 1000 plus labor to put a co piolt in just so the converter will lock kinda blows.

Racehemi
October 27th, 2009, 05:54 AM
If EFILive supplies the table/tables, how long will the convertor clutches will hold up? Will we begin seeing convertors unable to lock up under any circumstances because the convertor clutches are junk????

Sparky8370
October 27th, 2009, 02:11 PM
If EFILive supplies the table/tables, how long will the convertor clutches will hold up? Will we begin seeing convertors unable to lock up under any circumstances because the convertor clutches are junk????

?????? That's a risk you take with any programming. That's like saying if you release EFI Live, people are going to blow up their motors. The answer is, don't be an idiot. I think most will go conservative and watch to see where people tend to fry them. And I'm sure some will while pushing the envelope, that's racing.

Racehemi
October 27th, 2009, 02:59 PM
?????? That's a risk you take with any programming. That's like saying if you release EFI Live, people are going to blow up their motors. You don not know me very well, that is NOT what I was implying! The answer is, don't be an idiot. I think most will go conservative and watch to see where people tend to fry them. And I'm sure some will while pushing the envelope, that's racing.

It is a legitimate question and I think you misunderstood me. I have slipped a few clutches in my day and it usually means that once they have been slipped they only get easier to slip each additional time that you beat on them.

THEFERMANATOR
October 27th, 2009, 03:05 PM
If EFILive supplies the table/tables, how long will the convertor clutches will hold up? Will we begin seeing convertors unable to lock up under any circumstances because the convertor clutches are junk????

It wouldn't be any worse than what the CO-PILOT or ALLYLOCKER that people are currently using.

GMC-2002-Dmax
October 27th, 2009, 11:14 PM
?????? That's a risk you take with any programming. That's like saying if you release EFI Live, people are going to blow up their motors. The answer is, don't be an idiot. I think most will go conservative and watch to see where people tend to fry them. And I'm sure some will while pushing the envelope, that's racing.

Whenever you turn up the power you risk damage. Allison built in protections for the transmission, we built a stronger transmission, but it can still be damaged.

I have a Co-Pilot, I do not use it for daily driving or tune testing and my original 1050 TC was never an issue racing, but I had a Co-Pilot, my new ML has always locked up firm without the Co-Pilot and again, no problems with the SC-1054.

If Ross does find the tables and releases them it still will not duplicate what a Co-Pilot does mechanically due to the way it diverts main line pressure, so it will not work the same as a Co-Pilot will.

I do not know how the Ally-Locker works, but if it does in fact lock the TC and people are not breaking TC's then if Ross finds the tables I think it would be fine, unless guys start snapping stock input shafts.............:hihi:.




It wouldn't be any worse than what the CO-PILOT or ALLYLOCKER that people are currently using.

Probably not,

:angel_innocent:

Sparky8370
October 29th, 2009, 11:41 AM
It is a legitimate question and I think you misunderstood me. I have slipped a few clutches in my day and it usually means that once they have been slipped they only get easier to slip each additional time that you beat on them.
I thought what you were saying is it would not be a good idea to find these tables because it would somehow cause people to damage their transmissions.

fire0021
October 30th, 2009, 04:02 AM
If EFILive supplies the table/tables, how long will the convertor clutches will hold up? Will we begin seeing convertors unable to lock up under any circumstances because the convertor clutches are junk????


It cant Be any worse then heaveing the truck up to 3700 rpm at WOT still not locking then letting off and haveing it lock IMo if done right it may help save the converters. I just want it to lock where it suposed to nothing more nothing less. I dont think most guys are looking for a co piolt replacement as that does something difrrent. Just to have a converter that locks when it should. To me this is almost as big as dsp for LBZ/LMM

killerbee
October 30th, 2009, 06:22 AM
Is it possible there are other undisclosed tables can also control line pressure? I am admittedly ignorant of the hardware limtations to such a notion.

DuramaxPowered
October 30th, 2009, 07:59 AM
to me this is almost as big as dsp for lbz/lmm

x2!!!!!!

Randy5.0
October 30th, 2009, 11:16 AM
[QUOTE=
If Ross does find the tables and releases them it still will not duplicate what a Co-Pilot does mechanically due to the way it diverts main line pressure, so it will not work the same as a Co-Pilot will.

I do not know how the Ally-Locker works, but if it does in fact lock the TC and people are not breaking TC's then if Ross finds the tables I think it would be fine, unless guys start snapping stock input shafts.............:hihi:.
QUOTE]
"Copilot unlocks the gain valves and that can make the Alli suseptable to spike pressures. I like this idea much better."
That comes directly from a post by Mike L. He was commenting on an electrical lockup controller being better than a co-pilot. Again, this leads me to believe that these missing tables would be the best overall means to control lockup.
I know the EFI crew are all working hard, but I hope they can get to us some time on this as I feel it is just as important as anything else.:)

bballer182
October 30th, 2009, 12:05 PM
Is it possible there are other undisclosed tables can also control line pressure? I am admittedly ignorant of the hardware limtations to such a notion.

AFAIK, the only way to do that is with a co-pilot, because it actually adds hardware to the transmission to boost line pressure. Could be wrong though.

GMC-2002-Dmax
October 30th, 2009, 02:01 PM
Don't get the wrong idea, I am all for new tables or missing tables.

As far as a Co-Pilot, mine works fine, IMHO it was worth 2/10's of a second at the track, and it has never given me any problems.

:cheers:

Danville Performance
October 30th, 2009, 02:07 PM
So far the Ally Locker from FPE has been the only fix I have found to get them to lock up when they need to. Several of my customer's with high horsepower pulling trucks with Copilots wouldn't lock the convertor till half track when the load dropped. Would be nice to have this in the TCM tuning but until then the Ally Locker is getting the job done.

Randy5.0
October 30th, 2009, 02:54 PM
So far the Ally Locker from FPE has been the only fix I have found to get them to lock up when they need to. Several of my customer's with high horsepower pulling trucks with Copilots wouldn't lock the convertor till half track when the load dropped. Would be nice to have this in the TCM tuning but until then the Ally Locker is getting the job done.

I would buy one of those before I would buy a co-pilot, but I can't find a price on FPE's website. How much are they? I would guess around $500, and like Ben said, it would be my luck that the tables would be discovered and released and make the new toy obsolete.:doh2::hihi:

jpowel29
November 1st, 2009, 01:46 AM
The Co-Pilot is not a cure for lock-up issues on LBZ trucks with loose converters. The Ally Locker has worked well on my truck but It would still be very benefical to have the ability to work with the tables in question.

Brayden
November 1st, 2009, 04:04 PM
The AllyLockers are 450.00

Extra for realtime programmable version.

Randy5.0
November 21st, 2009, 05:51 PM
Is it possible there are other undisclosed tables can also control line pressure? I am admittedly ignorant of the hardware limtations to such a notion.

Line pressure is mechanically fixed with a spring. The only way to change it or raise it is with a shim on the stock spring(Suncoast) or change to a heavier spring like the one ATS sells. Ford transmissions have the ability to raise or lower the line pressure electronically which is cool, that's one of the reasons the 6.4 trucks don't have to do trans mods before they add power.

Bump to the top to beg some more. Please guys, Pretty please can you look for the table to help us out.

Thanks

GMPX
November 22nd, 2009, 09:56 AM
Bump to the top to beg some more. Please guys, Pretty please can you look for the table to help us out.

ThanksYeah, it's on the list, but so are lots of other things :help2:

Randy5.0
November 22nd, 2009, 10:24 AM
Yeah, it's on the list, but so are lots of other things :help2:

Thank you so much. If you need me to log anything to help out, just let me know. I wish I could help you out more.

Thanks, Randy

DURAtotheMAX
November 22nd, 2009, 11:02 AM
Thank you so much. If you need me to log anything to help out, just let me know. I wish I could help you out more.

Thanks, Randy

Ross let me know if you need me to log anything/test anything as well for 5-speed stuff...ive been battling this issue for years and know the allison TCM's lockup inhibit quirks inside and out. :D

ben

GMPX
November 23rd, 2009, 09:46 AM
Just so I am clear on this, we have the TCC apply tables v's throttle. Are you saying that these are getting bypassed based on some slip ratio the TCM calculates?

Randy5.0
November 23rd, 2009, 10:43 AM
Just so I am clear on this, we have the TCC apply tables v's throttle. Are you saying that these are getting bypassed based on some slip ratio the TCM calculates?

There is an additional "override" table that dictates if turbine vs. input speed difference (slip) is over 600rpm, the TCM will not lock the converter. It doesnt care if D5010 and D5013 are set to 2mph or 200mph, if tcc slip rpm is over 600, its NOT going to lock.

This is from one of Ben's posts. Ben will be better at explaining it in detail. Hope this helps.
Thanks, Randy

DURAtotheMAX
November 23rd, 2009, 01:38 PM
Just so I am clear on this, we have the TCC apply tables v's throttle. Are you saying that these are getting bypassed based on some slip ratio the TCM calculates?

Correct. If input speed vs. turbine speed 'delta' (I feel so scientific now :D ) is over 600rpm or so, the TCM will not lock the converter. This "magic table" bypasses/overrides all of the other TCC lockup tables.

Also, another thing is the earlier 5-speed OS's unlock the converter during a WOT downshift. IE, if you are on the highway locked in 5th gear at 65mph, and floor it to pass someone, the converter unlocks and then the trans does a 5-4 kickdown...of course the converter is supposed to relock immediately after the shift completes, but due to looser converters, with that immediate inrush of power from the RPM increase and turbo spool, the engine "blows through" the converter, crosses that "tc slip lockup inhibit" threshold and then you sit there screaming in 4th gear unlocked, not even accellerating...then after 3 seconds or so the converter will finally lockup, and only THEN will it shift back into 5th. Because WOT in 4th gear unlocked, the truck wont actually accellerate (to the WOT 4-5 shift mph) because of the power required to make a 7,000lb brick accellerate at 65mph gets lost when the converter isnt locked. Sometimes its bad enough that Ill sit in 4th gear rpms screaming, trying to pass someone, ill have to let off the throttle a bit to lower the slip rpm's, converter locks, then I mat it again and accellerate back up to the WOT 4-5 shift point at 80mph or whatever, and then I pass the car.

NOW....interestingly the LLY (or at least the 05 LLY TCM) operating systems DO NOT DO THIS. If you are on the highway in 65mph locked 5th gear, and go WOT to pass someone, the converter stays LOCKED. Which is very nice, because then you can actually pass cars effortlessly....you dont have to sit there not accellerating waiting for the converter to relock after the shift.

My thinking on this is on the early LB7 TCM OS's GM carried over thinking from the 4L60/4L80 transmissions, that the converter has to unlock during a WOT downshift to not shock the trans or damage it. The allison isnt susecptable to damage like this; even a stock allison is perfectly fine doing locked WOT upshifts and downshifts. They probably figured this out by the time the LLY came out (and maybe even due to people complaining about the 5-4 WOT downshift and converter not wanting to relock??) and changed some code in the TCM to make the converter stay locked during WOT downshifts.

Also, if it helps in tracking down the code, I THINK trans fluid temperature is a factor in this calculation/inhibit table. Because to me, TC lockup seems more "deliberate" and "prompt" when the fluid is colder. As the fluid warms up above 130* or so, lockup seems to get cushioned a fair amount.

And finally, D5072 doesnt seem to do anything. Im not sure if its mislabeled or something, but Ive severely modified it various ways and it doesnt really have any effect on how "harsh" or fast lockup occurs. The PSI in that table I dont think is correct either, as the Allison TCM doesnt really have any reference to actual TC pressures.

Final question, from what I have seen, varying the torque tables does not seem to have an effect on lockup harshness/speed/delay...but that might just be me? I dont know if lockup references torque in any way or not???

Ross let me know if you need anymore info or logs, or if any of my above descriptions dont make sense.

Ben

DURAtotheMAX
November 23rd, 2009, 01:48 PM
Another thing ive noticed is I can "fake out" the tcm; if im accelerating from a stop at less than full throttle in tow/haul mode (so the converter is supposed to lock at 20mph in 2nd gear or whatever), and I know (in my head) that im RIGHT at the point of the TCM beginning to apply the converter clutch...Ill feel the TCM JUST BARELY begin to apply the converter clutch, and at that instant Ill jab/violently play with the throttle, and as soon as I do that the TCM will quickly back off "whoaa ok easy killer...you're freaking me out here, I cant lock the converter just yet", then Ill let off just a little, the clutch will start to come on again, then Ill jab the throttle, TCM halts lockup, etc... I can usually play this throttle game about 3 or 4 times and get up to 45mph or so in 3rd gear before the TCM finally says "ok fine!" and locks up.

BUT...as with everything in this TCM, sometimes it does sometimes it doesnt. Seems like nothing is "black and white" defined in the TCM...EVERYTHING revolves around some sort of fuzzy logic complicated stupid algorithm it seems like...which makes it hard to pinpoint problems and hack the programming to do what WE want it to do.

ben

DURAtotheMAX
November 23rd, 2009, 02:02 PM
some threads that give a litlte more info on it:

http://www.duramaxdiesels.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13813

DURAtotheMAX
November 23rd, 2009, 02:03 PM
http://www.duramaxdiesels.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13228

DURAtotheMAX
November 23rd, 2009, 02:21 PM
http://www.duramaxdiesels.com/forum/showthread.php?p=225050

DuramaxPowered
November 24th, 2009, 01:22 AM
And finally, D5072 doesnt seem to do anything. Im not sure if its mislabeled or something, but Ive severely modified it various ways and it doesnt really have any effect on how "harsh" or fast lockup occurs. The PSI in that table I dont think is correct either, as the Allison TCM doesnt really have any reference to actual TC pressures.

Ben, on my LMM, D5072 does for sure have an effect on lock-up harshness. I believe that the table is labeled wrong and instead of PSI the numbers relate somehow to solenoid duty cycle. I maxed out the table on a tune to 145 across the board and on light throttle acceleration when lock-up occured it was definately harsh. So much to the point my wife asked if something was wrong.:grin:...........But that still doesn't do anything for WOT.......Maybe this table works on 6 speed Ally's and not 5 speed

DURAtotheMAX
November 24th, 2009, 02:53 AM
Ben, on my LMM, D5072 does for sure have an effect on lock-up harshness. I believe that the table is labeled wrong and instead of PSI the numbers relate somehow to solenoid duty cycle. I maxed out the table on a tune to 145 across the board and on light throttle acceleration when lock-up occured it was definately harsh.

ahh ok, well admittedly I didnt modify them THAT far! :)


[QUOTE=DuramaxPowered;109362]So much to the point my wife asked if something was wrong.:grin:...

hahaha I know what you mean, anytime girls are in my truck and it does a weird shift or some other high-performance dmax quirk, they grumble "UGH ben whats wrong with your truck.. :rolleyes:"

ben

DuramaxPowered
November 24th, 2009, 03:05 AM
I believe that the "145 PSI" reference in the scan tool and on this table actually means something like 97% duty cycle on the f solenoid.......

GMC-2002-Dmax
November 24th, 2009, 11:45 PM
I think that Allison was in charge of writing the lock-up strategy for the Duramax/Allison Combo.

The table or "magic table" as it is called is not a problem on a stock truck with a stock converter, it is only a problem when you push the HP/TQ where we have pushed it too.

If the table is there I am sure there will be other related tables that need to be found as well.

If you find the table Ross I am sure it will wind up like the TQ elimination table D5197 that was abused by some that masked their sloppy tuning on the ecm side on shift quality.

I predict some broken input shafts and major carnage when both are used together.........:hihi:

But I am all for new tables, the transmission shops will love it.

Just my 2 cents

:cheers:

Randy5.0
November 25th, 2009, 03:00 PM
I think that Allison was in charge of writing the lock-up strategy for the Duramax/Allison Combo.

The table or "magic table" as it is called is not a problem on a stock truck with a stock converter, it is only a problem when you push the HP/TQ where we have pushed it too.

If the table is there I am sure there will be other related tables that need to be found as well.
If you find the table Ross I am sure it will wind up like the TQ elimination table D5197 that was abused by some that masked their sloppy tuning on the ecm side on shift quality.

I predict some broken input shafts and major carnage when both are used together.........:hihi:

But I am all for new tables, the transmission shops will love it.

Just my 2 cents

:cheers:

Hmmm. That makes sense. I'll bet your right about that.
As far as major carnage goes, Ill be OK, I only want to try it just once .:angel_innocent:

DURAtotheMAX
November 27th, 2009, 05:07 AM
If you find the table Ross I am sure it will wind up like the TQ elimination table D5197 that was abused by some that masked their sloppy tuning on the ecm side on shift quality.

I predict some broken input shafts and major carnage when both are used together.........:hihi:

Actually Tony I kinda disagree on this part...I think it will be EASIER on hard parts if we can get the converter to lock ASAP before the input vs. turbine speed difference jumps too far apart.

Think about it; locking the converter when the input speed is 3700rpm and turbine speed is 3000rpm is going to be a LOT more harsh than locking the converter when the input speed is 3000rpm and the turbine speed is 2900rpm...

Thats the whole reason allison put this inhibit table in; they want the turbine vs input speed difference to be fairly low before the converter is allowed to lock. The problem is we go past this threshold so fast that before the TCM even has an idea of whats going on, its too late...

I think in addition to the basic "input vs turbine speed difference" lockup inhibit table, there is also another modifier based on trans temp. AND MAYBE another modifier based on the rate at which the engine is "getting away" from the converter. IE, if the converter isnt coupling fast enough and the input speed is climbing "away" from the turbine speed at over X rpm per second, it also inhibits lockup...

Just trying to cover all bases and think of everything that I can in order to help Ross find these mystery tables... :D

ben

JoshH
November 28th, 2009, 09:28 AM
I think that Allison was in charge of writing the lock-up strategy for the Duramax/Allison Combo.

The table or "magic table" as it is called is not a problem on a stock truck with a stock converter, it is only a problem when you push the HP/TQ where we have pushed it too.

If the table is there I am sure there will be other related tables that need to be found as well.

If you find the table Ross I am sure it will wind up like the TQ elimination table D5197 that was abused by some that masked their sloppy tuning on the ecm side on shift quality.

I predict some broken input shafts and major carnage when both are used together.........:hihi:

But I am all for new tables, the transmission shops will love it.

Just my 2 cents

:cheers:How is the table going to be any different than using a CoPilot or AllyLocker to get lockup?

GMC-2002-Dmax
November 29th, 2009, 01:25 AM
How is the table going to be any different than using a CoPilot or AllyLocker to get lockup?

I don't know how either are programmed, so you would need to ask ATS or Brayden for sure.

Maybe there is not difference, maybe there is.

:secret:

But either way I suspect it will be good for some and bad for others, like the de-fuel disable table was, Ally Lockers and Co-Pilots don't disable TCM controls to my knowledge.

:welcome:

GMC-2002-Dmax
November 29th, 2009, 01:30 AM
Actually Tony I kinda disagree on this part...I think it will be EASIER on hard parts if we can get the converter to lock ASAP before the input vs. turbine speed difference jumps too far apart.

Think about it; locking the converter when the input speed is 3700rpm and turbine speed is 3000rpm is going to be a LOT more harsh than locking the converter when the input speed is 3000rpm and the turbine speed is 2900rpm...

Thats the whole reason allison put this inhibit table in; they want the turbine vs input speed difference to be fairly low before the converter is allowed to lock. The problem is we go past this threshold so fast that before the TCM even has an idea of whats going on, its too late...

I think in addition to the basic "input vs turbine speed difference" lockup inhibit table, there is also another modifier based on trans temp. AND MAYBE another modifier based on the rate at which the engine is "getting away" from the converter. IE, if the converter isnt coupling fast enough and the input speed is climbing "away" from the turbine speed at over X rpm per second, it also inhibits lockup...

Just trying to cover all bases and think of everything that I can in order to help Ross find these mystery tables... :D

ben

To answer your question Ben, if you cause TC lockup to occur too low in the rpm you get under the bigger charger trucks, the fix was a looser converter to allow rpms to climb quicker but still couple to help light the bigger charger trucks.

Your asking for something that in reality might help 500 HP trucks but will IMHO hurt the bigger singles, twinned trucks will probably be alright.

I am all for the table if Ross can find it, I just do not think it is the panacea you think it is, but if I am wrong I'll stand corrected.

:cheers:

Randy5.0
February 17th, 2010, 04:49 PM
With racing season coming up, I was wondering how this was progressing? Anything yet?