IFR table vs vacuum mapped fuel pressure regulator

[Rich Z]

OK, I've got a basic question that I'm wrestling with trying to find the answer to.

My car (2002 Corvette Z06 with custom, well everything) has an external Aeromotive fuel pressure regulator (FPR) that is attached to manifold vacuum via a vacuum manifold block I installed. I set the pressure with the vacuum disconnected to 55 psi. At idle, my fuel pressure gauge shows approx 45 psi and increases as manifold vacuum decreases.

Now, from everything I have read, it appears that one of the basic steps in setting up the fuel system begins with the IFR table and either setting this table as a sloped line based on some nebulous values I haven't yet figured out with an unmapped FPR, or as a straight horizontal line (again, the value of which is still unknown to me) if using a vacuum mapped FPR.

So here's the puzzle I am pondering (among many). My tuner is using both. With my vacuum mapped FPR the IFR (Injector Flor Rate) table has a straight diagonal line running with a value of 79.6762 at 0.0 psi to 87.6749 at 11.6 psi.

I am a newbie at this and certainly don't understand even a fraction of all this, so my assumption is that my tuner is just using tricks I don't come close to understanding. But I would like to understand this before puttering around with my own tuning on my car. Everything I read indicates that other tuners don't do it this way, so I'm wondering how much that is going to confuse issues with my own efforts to make changes in my tune. Don't get me wrong, my car does run pretty well, and it's only the low RPM stuff that appears to need some minor tweaking. Well, probably the higher RPM stuff too, since my tuner didn't have my car on a dyno, and the car wouldn't stay straight on the road when the turbos kicked in..

So can someone give me some insight on this so I can have a better idea of what I am looking at?

Thanks.

[slows10]

Post your tune file up so people know exactly what you have for settings. Alog would be good as well.

[Rich Z]

Post your tune file up so people know exactly what you have for settings. Alog would be good as well.

Sorry, but since my tune is someone else's work, I'm not prepared to publish it without his permission. I can take screen shots of the relevant tables (as long as you tell me which ones you want to see), if that will help. Sorry, but I don't want to step on anyones' toes in the pursuit of learning this stuff. Hope you understand my perspective of this.

[slows10]

Well since you dont have much of an idea on what your doing, and you have plenty of doubt on your tuners ability it would help people to help you. But oh well lol. Good luck you will need some serious handholding here on this forum to keep you from hurting yourself or someone else. Post some logs and post all the relative injectors tables. Do you know what size injectors and brand you have.

[Rich Z]

Well since you dont have much of an idea on what your doing, and you have plenty of doubt on your tuners ability it would help people to help you. But oh well lol. Good luck you will need some serious handholding here on this forum to keep you from hurting yourself or someone else. Post some logs and post all the relative injectors tables. Do you know what size injectors and brand you have.

I doubt you will find any statements I have made disclaiming that I am a newbie at this. And I am not intending to play with the tuning of anyone else's cars but my own. And please note that this is why I am asking lots of questions so that I will understand what I am doing rather than jumping in blindly hoping for the best with a "let me try this and see what happens" sort of attitude. Yeah, if I feel like I've gotten comfortable with this, I would help someone who needed help, but I retired and want to play with my cars, and putter around in the yard, not get myself sucked into going into another type of business and have to deal with retail customers again.

I'll gather up a couple of logs and screen captures later. But if you let me know exactly which tables you need to see, it sure would help me keep from providing superfluous info here. For now I've attached the Excel file I got from FuelInjectorConnection for the injectors in my car. I believe I was told they are LS9 injectors at 72 lb/hr. But I'm guessing all of the pertinent info is embedded in this file. It looks to me that the info needed for the IFR table is there, and I see the value that apparently needs to be plugged in for a vacuum mapped FPR. Quite honestly, this is the first time I have looked at that file and ANYTHING in it made any sense to me. :) So heck, I feel like maybe I AM getting somewhere figuring some of this stuff out.


Thank you for your help.

[Rich Z]

I've uploaded one of the later log files when I had the wideband hooked up, but before I fixed the IAT problem I was having. I'm trying to get that CALC.VET procedure figured out before I do any more logging.

It's getting late, so I won't be doing any table screen captures till maybe tomorrow.

Thanks.

[joecar]

In the spreadsheet, Jon@FIC made this note:



Grams/Sec LB/Hr
9.074 72.020
*If FPR Referenced (manifold)


that is the IFR value to use in all cells for referenced FPR set to 58 psi (GM factory stock pressure)...

if you use a different pressure, 55 psi for example, then you scale that IFR by sqrt(55/58);



if the IFR is sloped (when it should be flat) then the VE table can be made to compensate (it has a MAP axis), but the MAF cannot be made to compensate...

so the airmass model will be wrong (meaning that fuelmass will be wrong), but I suppose PE can be manipulated to compensate for fuelmass;

this does make the matter of sacling for boost complicated because now nothing scales by a straight percentage all across anymore

[joecar]

The other problem is, if you paid a tuner to do a tune, then that tuner basically owns your tune, and if you touch the tune in any manner then he will disown it.

[Rich Z]

Just for the record, the tuner hasn't abandoned me nor the tune, and he is working with me. I can always play with my own copies of the tune, as needed, but then flash his back in if needed.

But I think I would like one or the other. Either use the vacuum mapped fuel pressure regulator OR use the sloped values in the IFR table. But is one method "better" than the other?

[Rich Z]

In the spreadsheet, Jon@FIC made this note:



that is the IFR value to use in all cells for referenced FPR set to 58 psi (GM factory stock pressure)...

if you use a different pressure, 55 psi for example, then you scale that IFR by sqrt(55/58);



if the IFR is sloped (when it should be flat) then the VE table can be able to compensate (it has a MAP axis), but the MAF cannot be made to compensate...

so the airmass model will be wrong (meaning that fuelmass will be wrong), but I suppose PE can be manipulated to compensate for fuelmass;

this does make the matter of sacling for boost complicated because now nothing scales by a strait percentage all across anymore

Yes, I have my FPR set at 55 psi with the vacuum line removed. At idle, it's running at around 45 psi.

[joecar]

Yes, base pressure with FPR exposed to BARO is what is used to scale the IFR from the rated flowrate/pressure.

IFR = sqrt(55/58) * 9.074 g/s


At idle, the drop to 45 psi is due to manifold vacuum, in your case 10 psi vacuum which is approx 20 inHg vacuum (MAP would be 5 psi or 35 kPa).

[Rich Z]

Been talking with my tuner and he's going to help guide me through flat-lining the IFR table and working on the tune after making that change. There is also a new an improved set of tables for my fuel injectors that I need to transfer over to the tune. So this seems to be working out OK.

[joecar]

Ok, this is good.

Yes, the injector characteristic tables are as important as the IFR, especially during transient airflow.

[Rich Z]

So I got a new spreadsheet from the FuelInjectorConnection for my injectors. I told my tuner I would take a stab at putting the new values from the spreadsheet into the tune and changing the IFR to a flat horizontal value. This new file is attached to this post.

Argh, not as self explanatory as I had hoped. According to the intro page, the values in those tables are only valid for 43.5psi, so apparently I have to modify them for the 55 psi I have the FPR set at. Now, do I apply the offset (1.124441 if my calculations are correct) to EVERY table in the spreadsheet? If not, which ones? I notice that some of the tables in the spreadsheet are identical to what is already in the EFILive tables in the tune. So I am thinking that not everything needs to be changed. Which then leads me to the thought that not everything has to be interpolated for the different fuel pressure offset value.

Then there is another note saying that if using a manifold referenced fuel pressure regulator to ONLY use the row that is in red. So does that mean the Offset Table (B3701)? And do the values in that single row need to be multiplied by the 55 psi offset I calculated?

What I HAVE done is to use the single value in the IFR table that was in red and multiplied that times 1.124441 and then copied that value into all of the cells, producing a straight horizontal line. The new value is 10.2032.

B4002, B4003, and B4004 I didn't change at all because they are the same value in the tune as is shown in the new spreadsheet. Right or wrong?

I copied the values, as is in B4005 without multiplying the values by the psi offset. Right or wrong?

I'm guessing that the Short Pulse Limit is B4006? I didn't change that one. Right or wrong?

So right now I'm pondering over what to do with B3701. That has the top line in red, so does that get multiplied by the new psi offset and then that line copied down through the rest of the rows in that table?

Darn, not as easy as I had hoped it would be.

[joecar]

So with the MAP-referenced FPR, the pressure difference across any one injector will always be a constant;

this constant pressure difference is equal to the FPR base pressure which you measured to be 55 psi;

the IFR calculated at zero MANVAC using this base pressure is the only flowrate that your injectors will ever see (as long as the FPR remains functional);


so then:

B4001: set all cells to the zero MANVAC cell value, i.e. to sqrt(55/43.5) * 9.074 = 1.1244 * 9.074 = 10.2 g/s <-- just like you calculated

B3701: copy the zero MANVAC row to all other rows (can you see why...?)

other injector tables: copy from the spreadsheet (just like you said in post #14 above).


Then go File->Save As and let the tunetool add _0001 to the end of the filename (before the dot)

[ actually I like to name the first unedited file with postfix _0000, and then I let the tunetool increment the postfix on each Save As ]

[Highlander]

Rich, are you the same one on CorvetteForum?

Thanks

[Rich Z]

Rich, are you the same one on CorvetteForum?

Thanks

Yes. If you followed my thread there about my car, then you know what I went through with it. I had to learn the wrenching myself through some help and advice there.

So then I come here hoping to learn the tuning stuff and find a newbie hostile group of people who are basically saying that EFILive is for professionals only. Yeah, I've got a lot of nerve wanting to learn this and thinking that the EFILive forum was the place to come to in order to find answers for my questions. Of course, it all does make sense. I'm sure EFILive makes a lot more money off of licenses bought by professionals, so why would they want to have newbies learn the ropes? And I thought all the outdated tutorials and incorrect info was just honest mistakes. And it certainly explains all the dead threads I found from newbies that apparently didn't get answers to their questions and likely got chased off of here like I did.

[Highlander]

Well Rich... I would say this community is a lot more helpful than the other side... honestly the tuning world is a very closed circuit...

I would recommend you buy Greg Banish DVDs.. both beginner and Advanced... Those dvd will REALLY get you up to speed. The problem is that it takes so much time and tuning and testing on a dyno, and a lot of money at that, that most of the tuners don't want to "share" unless they get something back. There are only few tuners that would really splatter the info on the Forums and that is my good Friend James over at RWTD.

Shoot me an email with your issue and I'll help you out. desaintpreux at gmail

[Highlander]

Remember... efilive are NOT tuners... they just develop the software... while I am sure paul and ross can tune their own cars I am pretty sure they are not the best at it.. but they do make the best tuning tool available in the market for ANY car that I have seen.

[Rich Z]

Well Rich... I would say this community is a lot more helpful than the other side... honestly the tuning world is a very closed circuit...

I would recommend you buy Greg Banish DVDs.. both beginner and Advanced... Those dvd will REALLY get you up to speed. The problem is that it takes so much time and tuning and testing on a dyno, and a lot of money at that, that most of the tuners don't want to "share" unless they get something back. There are only few tuners that would really splatter the info on the Forums and that is my good Friend James over at RWTD.

Shoot me an email with your issue and I'll help you out. desaintpreux at gmail

Thank you. I may take you up on the private correspondence.

But a question or three. If this forum apparently is NOT for newbies, then is there a forum anywhere that is willing to be a bit more newbie friendly and help us new guys learn this tuning stuff? Otherwise, where do people go to get answers to their questions trying to LEARN? If this forum tends to want to cater to the already experienced tuner, and most of the more experienced tuners are not willing to share their expertise on a public forum, then I guess I'm just a bit confused about what exactly the TARGET audience of this site is.

[hog]

This site is for EFILIve customers, so people who buy EFILive products. Keep asking questions, and be sure to READ everything. Highlander has listed some great resources. There are classes that are run if you are interested, IIRC the school is called EFIUniversity.

I find that many people get frustrated answereing the same basic questions over and over. There is an extensive wealth of knowledge contained in all the previous threads. I'd be surprised if most answers cant be answered by researching past threads, esp. on the topic of tuning a common vehicle such as a C5 Corvette.

There are plenty of people here who are more than willing to help if people get stuck. Tuning is not the walk in the park that people think it is, the learning curve is steep and it can be VERY expensive when things go wrong. Even if the issue is mechanical, the tuner often gets blamed. Or the tuner is expected to make up for a bad selection of components. This can account for some of the apparent secrecy in the tuning world. People have trialed and errored many combos to come up with what works well, that isnt cheap, but its so easy to make a copy of a tune and rop it into another car. People forget the hardships that might have been encountered to get that particular combo working so well.

Just keep reading and asking questions, you'll get there.

peace
Hog

[joecar]

I edited the Calc.VET thread a little to try to make it easier to understand: Calc-VET-correcting-MAF-and-calculating-VE-in-single-log (http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?15236-Calc-VET-correcting-MAF-and-calculating-VE-%28in-single-log%29)

[Rich Z]

This site is for EFILIve customers, so people who buy EFILive products. Keep asking questions, and be sure to READ everything. Highlander has listed some great resources. There are classes that are run if you are interested, IIRC the school is called EFIUniversity.

I find that many people get frustrated answereing the same basic questions over and over. There is an extensive wealth of knowledge contained in all the previous threads. I'd be surprised if most answers cant be answered by researching past threads, esp. on the topic of tuning a common vehicle such as a C5 Corvette.

There are plenty of people here who are more than willing to help if people get stuck. Tuning is not the walk in the park that people think it is, the learning curve is steep and it can be VERY expensive when things go wrong. Even if the issue is mechanical, the tuner often gets blamed. Or the tuner is expected to make up for a bad selection of components. This can account for some of the apparent secrecy in the tuning world. People have trialed and errored many combos to come up with what works well, that isnt cheap, but its so easy to make a copy of a tune and rop it into another car. People forget the hardships that might have been encountered to get that particular combo working so well.

Just keep reading and asking questions, you'll get there.

peace
Hog

Sorry, but newbies are just going to ask questions here. It can't be helped. The tutorials are out of date, as is some of the info provided in threads here. At least that is what I have been told, and what I have looked at myself seems to support this. Even with 100 percent up to date and correct info, just FINDING pertinent info is pretty daunting. There are a lot of topics that using the search would just prove to be useless. I've been trying that route, but quite honestly, the point of diminishing returns based on effort is quickly reached. But this is the same thing on nearly every forum site. Unless there are NO newbies coming into that field of interest, the same newbie questions will be asked over and over again. If you can figure out a way to keep that from happening, heck, I would like to know myself so I could implement that algorithm into my own message board sites.

BTW, my car is not a run of the mill C5 Z06. It's anything but that. But that's another VERY long story.

I never once thought that this tuning stuff would be easy. The reason I came here originally was to ask question BEFORE I got myself in trouble. I wasn't sure about what level of tuning I was going to be forced to jump into. I didn't know my tuner was going to be there for me when I finally got back to the point to resume the tuning. Luckily he is, and quite willing to work with me, but I didn't KNOW that. So I felt it best to presume the worst, and anything that took place that wasn't the worst would be in my favor. I am not shy about admitting I don't know something. I've had more than my fill of dealing with people who pretended to know what they were doing, so I have certainly seen what I don't want to be. I'm just damned glad to find out that my tuner isn't one of those pretender types.

And yes, I got at least one person pissed at me because I refused to post my tuner's work here publicly. It's just common courtesy, in my opinion. If that pisses some people off, then so be it.

To bring this back on topic, my tuner has been very accommodating with how I expressed I wanted the tune to progress, and my tune is now using the straight horizontal IFR values. I've been running logs and sending them to him, with a description of my seat of the pants observations, and he then sends me a new tune, often with some description of what he did and why. And I will also look over the changes he made to give me a feel for the methodology behind this. So this is helping me to learn this tuning stuff. His strategy is tune for the AFR first, then work on the timing advance. I believe this is MUCH better than me just jumping in and trying stuff to learn by trial and error. I've got way too much sunk into this car to destroy the engine doing such nonsense anyway.

Quite honestly, the car is driving quite well now. Just some minor surging at low RPM and I would like throttle response to be just a bit sharper at initial throttle engagement at low rpm. Which I think might be tied to the surging issue. To say I was astounded when I saw 32 mpg holding steady on the display on my DIC when cruising at 65 mph on a level road is quite an understatement.

I've actually been spending a lot of time just looking at log files and trying to figure out the relationship between what those lines are telling me about what the engine is being told to do and what it actually DOES. For instance, I had to narrow the scale of the RPM display drastically so I could see minor changes in relation to the timing advance trace, and it is pretty obvious that the fluctuating rpm at low speeds (which I'm guess is causing the surging) is inversely related to the timing advance. Timing retards, engine speeds up. Timing advances, engine speed slows down. So I think if I could figure out why the timing advance is fluctuating, then that should help cure the fluctuating engine speed, and therefore the surging.

Anyway, I took a video of one of my later logging drives, if anyone is interested.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3Ktqv-mCeA

It's sounding pretty healthy, I think, and is actually a bit startling with the acceleration it has when the turbos spool up. I still have an intermittent drive train noise when engaging the clutch from a dead stop, but otherwise it's pretty much a drivable car now.

[joecar]

Post #1 of the Calc.VET thread has almost everything you need, read thru and understand it before proceeding.

[Rich Z]

Post #1 of the Calc.VET thread has almost everything you need, read thru and understand it before proceeding.

Well, I did read over that thread, but the problem here (I think) is that I am not using LTFTs in my tune. Just STFTs. Is Calc.VET still going to be of value to me?

[joecar]

Questions:
- does your tune have CL/LTFT disabled and STFT in OL enabled...?
- are you running with or without MAF...?

If you're running MAF-less then you want the Calc.MAFT thread with the CLC-00-032 edit, but you can ignore the part that calculates MAF.

Study and compare post #1 of the Calc.VET and the Calc.MAFT threads.

[Rich Z]

Questions:
- does your tune have CL/LTFT disabled and STFT in OL enabled...?
- are you running with or without MAF...?

If you're running MAF-less then you want the Calc.MAFT thread with the CLC-00-032 edit, but you can ignore the part that calculates MAF.

Study and compare post #1 of the Calc.VET and the Calc.MAFT threads.

Well, beats me. Here I was thinking that the definition of Open Loop was that the PCM wasn't using feedback from the O2 sensors. :( And I thought LTFT an STFT were values derived from the O2 feedback. What did I miss there with my understanding?

Looking at the log during cold start up when it is on OL I don't see any active input from the STFTs, so I presume they are disabled then.

I do have the MAF installed, and I know one of the PIDs my tuner listed that he needed was for the MAF raw frequency, so I am presuming it is being used in the tuning.

I sent you a copy of the tune, didn't I? Would you like the latest rendition to look it over?

Thanks.

[joecar]

How is your tuner using STFT's...?

When CL/LTFT are enabled, then both STFT and LTFT are used.

When CL/LTFT are disabled, then STFT can be enabled for OL mode (where the STFT trims on the stoich cells of B3605 or B3647), or STFT can be disabled.

You can send me the latest.

[hog]

Sorry, but newbies are just going to ask questions here. It can't be helped. The tutorials are out of date, as is some of the info provided in threads here. At least that is what I have been told, and what I have looked at myself seems to support this. Even with 100 percent up to date and correct info, just FINDING pertinent info is pretty daunting. There are a lot of topics that using the search would just prove to be useless. I've been trying that route, but quite honestly, the point of diminishing returns based on effort is quickly reached. But this is the same thing on nearly every forum site. Unless there are NO newbies coming into that field of interest, the same newbie questions will be asked over and over again. If you can figure out a way to keep that from happening, heck, I would like to know myself so I could implement that algorithm into my own message board sites.

BTW, my car is not a run of the mill C5 Z06. It's anything but that. But that's another VERY long story.

I never once thought that this tuning stuff would be easy. The reason I came here originally was to ask question BEFORE I got myself in trouble. I wasn't sure about what level of tuning I was going to be forced to jump into. I didn't know my tuner was going to be there for me when I finally got back to the point to resume the tuning. Luckily he is, and quite willing to work with me, but I didn't KNOW that. So I felt it best to presume the worst, and anything that took place that wasn't the worst would be in my favor. I am not shy about admitting I don't know something. I've had more than my fill of dealing with people who pretended to know what they were doing, so I have certainly seen what I don't want to be. I'm just damned glad to find out that my tuner isn't one of those pretender types.

And yes, I got at least one person pissed at me because I refused to post my tuner's work here publicly. It's just common courtesy, in my opinion. If that pisses some people off, then so be it.

To bring this back on topic, my tuner has been very accommodating with how I expressed I wanted the tune to progress, and my tune is now using the straight horizontal IFR values. I've been running logs and sending them to him, with a description of my seat of the pants observations, and he then sends me a new tune, often with some description of what he did and why. And I will also look over the changes he made to give me a feel for the methodology behind this. So this is helping me to learn this tuning stuff. His strategy is tune for the AFR first, then work on the timing advance. I believe this is MUCH better than me just jumping in and trying stuff to learn by trial and error. I've got way too much sunk into this car to destroy the engine doing such nonsense anyway.

Quite honestly, the car is driving quite well now. Just some minor surging at low RPM and I would like throttle response to be just a bit sharper at initial throttle engagement at low rpm. Which I think might be tied to the surging issue. To say I was astounded when I saw 32 mpg holding steady on the display on my DIC when cruising at 65 mph on a level road is quite an understatement.

I've actually been spending a lot of time just looking at log files and trying to figure out the relationship between what those lines are telling me about what the engine is being told to do and what it actually DOES. For instance, I had to narrow the scale of the RPM display drastically so I could see minor changes in relation to the timing advance trace, and it is pretty obvious that the fluctuating rpm at low speeds (which I'm guess is causing the surging) is inversely related to the timing advance. Timing retards, engine speeds up. Timing advances, engine speed slows down. So I think if I could figure out why the timing advance is fluctuating, then that should help cure the fluctuating engine speed, and therefore the surging.

Anyway, I took a video of one of my later logging drives, if anyone is interested.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3Ktqv-mCeA

It's sounding pretty healthy, I think, and is actually a bit startling with the acceleration it has when the turbos spool up. I still have an intermittent drive train noise when engaging the clutch from a dead stop, but otherwise it's pretty much a drivable car now.
You asked for alternatives to this site that might be more newbie friendly, there arent. This site is for EFILive customers, newbie or experienced. Of course newbie questions will get asked AND answered here, I agree with you there is no way around that. I dont get all hot and bothered about asking questions, in fact it bothers me when people get all bent out of shape when someone new asks a question. We were all new at one point, asking questions is how we learn

The parts on your car may not be run of the mill, but the platform and its PCM are. Tuning methodology will be the same on your car as any other similar car was my point. I apologize if you thought I was putting your car down. I'm sure its as fun as heck.

I'm glad that you dont think that tuning is easy. There are so many people that think that it is. They buy tuning software thinking that its only a matter of a few keystrokes here, a few mouse clicks there. Sounds like you found someone who is decent and is willing to work with you.

Hows the turbo response with the rear mounts? Do you like the combo thus far?

The exhaust sounds really nice when idling in the garage in your video.

peace
Hog

[slows10]

Richz wasthe guy that told me to go fu8k myself in a pm. Here is some easy advice to follow. Tuning is so simple for people with understanding a an efi engine works. Beyond simple really. I f you want first grade simple go buy a holley efi or install a megasquirt, Even a motec system. But if you want to mess with the factory ecm that none here or at hptuners know how they fully operate you are setting yourselfup for failure. Lets face it efilive and hp tuners give you less than half of what you need to to fully see what is inside a factory ecm. That is FACT. No offense to the efilive guys or anyone else but it is what it is. There are the nutswingers that say they can do the perfect tune with whats available , but the fact that seeing many unhappy customers on many forums leads me to believe its a crock. 14 years later there isnt anyone that even knows how a simple 512kb ecm works. At least one that posts on the net. I would not pay 2 bucks for anything Banish ever wrote.

[slows10]

I dont sympathize with a guy like richz one bit. I never liked anyone with more money than basic common sense. To many ceo's in this country have proven that. This aint the 50's and 60's richz get out and earn it. If not get lost.

[Rich Z]

I dont sympathize with a guy like richz one bit. I never liked anyone with more money than basic common sense. To many ceo's in this country have proven that. This aint the 50's and 60's richz get out and earn it. If not get lost.

And I'll say it again to you. Screw you. Yeah, I know, you came out of your mother's womb just knowing everything there was to know.

You have personal inferiority issues, bub. BIG ones. Yeah, I know, you are a genius and everyone else is just not as smart as you are. Yeah, you keep telling yourself that. I've seen lots of losers like you. I run my own forum sites, and kick anti-social jerks like you off of it at every opportunity when they show their colors. Your kind of personality taints everyone else trying to use a forum site in the manner it was intended.

And I'm really REALLY sorry that your financial situation isn't as good as you would like it to be. So yeah, blame everyone else for it. That's the ticket. Here's a clue, bub, work HARDER. You can be anything you want if you work hard enough to get there. Apparently this basic methodology of success has been lost on you.

So if you don't have anything constructive to add to this thread, then YOU get lost, loser. I don't need your sympathy and obviously your opinions aren't worth much neither. So I'm just going to put your ass on ignore and I don't ever have to read another word you type here. And I would bet BIG money that I would miss absolutely nothing by never hearing another word from your sorry ass.

[Rich Z]

Tada!



This message is hidden because slows10 is on your ignore list.
View Post
Remove user from ignore list

[joecar]

Rich,

If B3801 is set to disable and B4205 is set to a high temperature then CL/LTFT is disabled (i.e runs OL always).

Now, if OL, look at B4206 if it exists, if it is enabled, then if B3605 contains any stoichiometric cells, these will be trimmed to using STFT (in OL).

Regardless of B4206, if you have a COS (Custom Operating System), then if B3647 or B3649 contains any stoichiometric cells, these will be trimmed to using STFT (in OL).

[joecar]

BTW: the AutoVE tutorial does not mention B4206 because in the F-car and Y-car files of the day it was already disabled.

[Rich Z]

Rich,

If B3801 is set to disable and B4205 is set to a high temperature then CL/LTFT is disabled (i.e runs OL always).

B3801 = DISABLE
B4205 = 140 for -40,-22,-4. 92 for all other values.


Now, if OL, look at B4206 if it exists, if it is enabled, then if B3605 contains any stoichiometric cells, these will be trimmed to using STFT (in OL).

B4206 does not exist.
B3605 does not exist.


Regardless of B4206, if you have a COS (Custom Operating System), then if B3647 or B3649 contains any stoichiometric cells, these will be trimmed to using STFT (in OL).

Yes, using a COS for the 2 bar MAP sensor.
B3647 - most of the table contains a value of 1.00 for the lower kPa cells. At 85 kPa values drop to .94, then 90 kPa = .90, 95 kPa = .85, 100 kPa = .80
B3649 does not exist.

I'll send you the latest tune via email.

Thanks.

[joecar]

B4205 = 140 for -40,-22,-4. 92 for all other values.
What what units are those values...? (when looking at that table, look at the upper right, you will see the units).


Yes, using a COS for the 2 bar MAP sensor.
B3647 - most of the table contains a value of 1.00 for the lower kPa cells. At 85 kPa values drop to .94, then 90 kPa = .90, 95 kPa = .85, 100 kPa = .80
What units are the cells of B3647...?


I'll send you the latest tune via email.
Ok.

[Rich Z]

What what units are those values...? (when looking at that table, look at the upper right, you will see the units).

*F


What units are the cells of B3647...?

1.00 Lambda.


Ok.

You should have the tune by now.

Thanks.

[joecar]

ok, I'm running a bit behind, so give me a day or two.

[Rich Z]

I took some screen captures of those tables with the values indicated earlier...

http://www.corvetteflorida.com/pics/B4205_01.jpg

http://www.corvetteflorida.com/pics/B3647_a.jpg

http://www.corvetteflorida.com/pics/B3647_b.jpg

[Rich Z]

ok, I'm running a bit behind, so give me a day or two.

How long are your days? :)

[joecar]

How long are your days? :)lol, I get about 4 hours sleep each night, so my days are 20 hours (still insufficient time)...

I've been looking thru your tune file... give me a day and I'll comment on it.

[Rich Z]

lol, I get about 4 hours sleep each night, so my days are 20 hours (still insufficient time)...

I've been looking thru your tune file... give me a day and I'll comment on it.

Well, I guess I can presume that your day equals at least a week for me....... :nixweiss:

[joecar]

Hi Rich,

I'm sorry it took so long to finish looking at your file (I took a week off with my wife and everything got severely backed up);


I've been walking thru all your tables, and I collected observations/comments as I proceeded, most of them you can address yourself (check your email).

Regards
Joe

[Rich Z]

Hi Rich,

I'm sorry it took so long to finish looking at your file (I took a week off with my wife and everything got severely backed up);


I've been walking thru all your tables, and I collected observations/comments as I proceeded, most of them you can address yourself (check your email).

Regards
Joe

Heck, everyone needs some downtime now and again. Actually I've been trying my hand at wet sanding the paint job to try to get rid of some abuses the paint has been put through, so the car hasn't moved in a couple of weeks anyway.

Got your email and I've put comments in the reply email I sent back to you.

Right now the biggest issue seems to be cold startup. Idle is VERY rough till it warms up. Another wrinkle that has recently cropped up is that I am getting a SERVICE TRACTION CONTROL error with REDUCED ENGINE POWER after the engine idles for about 5 or so seconds. I let it run for just a little bit so the engine warms up a bit, shut it down, then restart it and the error goes away. Anything in the poor cold start response that could cause this sort of error?

Thanks...

[ferocity02]

Is there a point/need to adjust the IFR table if one is using stock injectors with the stock IFR table?

[joecar]

Is there a point/need to adjust the IFR table if one is using stock injectors with the stock IFR table?Usually not.

[joecar]

...

Right now the biggest issue seems to be cold startup. Idle is VERY rough till it warms up. Another wrinkle that has recently cropped up is that I am getting a SERVICE TRACTION CONTROL error with REDUCED ENGINE POWER after the engine idles for about 5 or so seconds. I let it run for just a little bit so the engine warms up a bit, shut it down, then restart it and the error goes away. Anything in the poor cold start response that could cause this sort of error?

Thanks...Hi Rich,

A0008 may help with commanded fuel during warmup, this may be contributing to cold roughness.

REP is usually caused by the ETC/MAF/MAP sanity tables being exceeded due to the increased airflow requirements of the engine/tune (see these tables in the Engine Diagnostics folder of the tune).

[Rich Z]

Hi Rich,

A0008 may help with commanded fuel during warmup, this may be contributing to cold roughness.

REP is usually caused by the ETC/MAF/MAP sanity tables being exceeded due to the increased airflow requirements of the engine/tune (see these tables in the Engine Diagnostics folder of the tune).

I made some changes based on your suggestions and it made a world of difference on the cold startup idle. So yes, I believe you were correct about A0008. Also, the REP error didn't show up, but I'm going to wait through a few more startups before thinking that has been resolved. But got my fingers crossed. This was a rather new development, and appeared to be coincident with the rough startup problem.

I did a video of the startup and idle with the log file display running. -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOZ0tcCHHiA

I may take it out for a drive tomorrow and perhaps start working with some throttle response improvement.

Thanks for your help with this.