Head Cam Intake ls1 2002 trans am

[statesman]

Is your throttle DBW or DBC?

[oreobadr]

Is your throttle DBW or DBC?

My throttle is DBC

[joecar]

I think you may have to put back to stock some of the idle/TC/TF tables (see 2002transamstocktune.ctz that you posted a while back).

[statesman]

Do another log, but log the following....

GM.IAC
GM.IACDES_B
GM.IAC_STD_DMA
GM.IAC_STPN_DMA
GM.IAC_LTD_DMA
GM.IAC_LTPN_DMA
GM.IAC_TC_DMA
GM.IAC_TF_DMA
GM.IAC_WD_DMA
GM.IAC_WPN_DMA
GM.IDLEDES or GM.IDLRPM (whichever one you can log)
SAE.TP
SAE.VSS
SAE.MAF
SAE.MAP
SAE.IAT
SAE.ECT
SAE.SPARKADV

[Jetmech442]

Do another log, but log the following....

GM.IAC
GM.IACDES_B
GM.IAC_STD_DMA
GM.IAC_STPN_DMA
GM.IAC_LTD_DMA
GM.IAC_LTPN_DMA
GM.IAC_TC_DMA
GM.IAC_TF_DMA
GM.IAC_WD_DMA
GM.IAC_WPN_DMA
GM.IDLEDES or GM.IDLRPM (whichever one you can log)
SAE.TP
SAE.VSS
SAE.MAF
SAE.MAP
SAE.IAT
SAE.ECT
SAE.SPARKADV
BTW oreo, statesman also tunes in full on beast mode. [emoji3] I would highly recommend grabbing another log with his proposed channels, he's asking for a reason and this is what he needs to help. He's helped me and countless others. I think he's got a business too, but he steps in when dumb dumbs like me get lost. Okay, enough swinging from the berries, play on.



Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[joecar]

+1 follow what statesman says.

[oreobadr]

Do another log, but log the following....

GM.IAC
GM.IACDES_B
GM.IAC_STD_DMA
GM.IAC_STPN_DMA
GM.IAC_LTD_DMA
GM.IAC_LTPN_DMA
GM.IAC_TC_DMA
GM.IAC_TF_DMA
GM.IAC_WD_DMA
GM.IAC_WPN_DMA
GM.IDLEDES or GM.IDLRPM (whichever one you can log)
SAE.TP
SAE.VSS
SAE.MAF
SAE.MAP
SAE.IAT
SAE.ECT
SAE.SPARKADV

Here ya go! I noticed that my idle steps were super high so I turned the throttle body screw out a bit, rezeroed the tps, and took this log. There was also 30 channels so the sampling rate was a little slower.

[oreobadr]

Also, I would have taken a longer log but there was a weird smell I think from going lean and I had a ton of spark timing. Let me know if you need more data.

[statesman]

Try this fix.

This time log....

GM.MAF
GM.MAFFREQ
GM.IAC
GM.IACDES_B
GM.IAC_STD_DMA
GM.IAC_STPN_DMA
GM.IAC_LTD_DMA
GM.IAC_LTPN_DMA
SAE.TP
SAE.VSS
SAE.RPM
SAE.MAF
SAE.MAP
SAE.IAT
SAE.ECT
SAE.SPARKADV

[oreobadr]

I just ran it. I still have the same problems. It idle hunts less but still there and the swings seem to be larger. The revs also jumped up to 2000 every time I had the clutch in and when I put it in neutral it eventually went lower but would then do the idle swing I was talking about. Here is the tune that you just gave me and the log file.

[oreobadr]

When it surges and when it is at 2000 RPM at idle it seems to be going lean and I think thats what the weird smell was.

[statesman]

The log looks like it's a lean surge. I've made a couple more changes to your tune file.

Log the same as last time but this time also add to your log...

SAE.SHRTFT1
SAE.SHRTFT2
SAE.LONGFT1
SAE.LONGFT2
GM.HO2S11
GM.HO2S21

[oreobadr]

The log looks like it's a lean surge. I've made a couple more changes to your tune file.

Log the same as last time but this time also add to your log...

SAE.SHRTFT1
SAE.SHRTFT2
SAE.LONGFT1
SAE.LONGFT2
GM.HO2S11
GM.HO2S21

Here is my log and my tune. I changed the idle conditions on the tune to think that when the speed is at 0 and the TP is below .5% it will be in idle conditions. I think this helped a bit as it made the transition from the high 2000 RPM holding rev to a swinging idle from 300-1500 RPM. The car drove better but there is still cruise control(not as bad) and the rev to 2000 when I clutch in. It also stays at 2000 when I am in neutral cruising. I also see that my o2 sensor on the one side is still not working. Did I change out the wrong O2 sensor when I replaced the fuel pump last weekend(which O2 sensor isnt working). I got a lot of data this time and a full tank of gas :))). Let me know what else I should change/data log. Sorry for the long delay, work ran late and thanks again for all the help!!!

It also still has that weird smell which I attribute to possibly a clutch that is starting to slip a little because I leave at 2000 RPM so often. I only smell it when I leave and it goes away when I idle.

[Jetmech442]

Oreo,
Here is a great opportunity to use another awseom feature of EFILIVE. load your tune and then load Statesmans alternate tune(CNTRL F11). This allows you to see what is different between the two, and what a things a pro thinks should be altered. You'll notice he turned back on Cracker and populated your P/N tables for like, everything. Find some time to get in depth into his suggestions, if theres osmething you disagree with or are unsure about..ask.

I notice in your last log, " idle tuning log 4", that your extra airflow (~20 g/s) occurs whenever vehicle speed is greater than 0 and off pedal. once you hit 0 mph, it drops to ~14 g/s.

One last thing. IIRC(getting pretty long of a thread to go back and look), don't you have a bigger throttle body? Did you alter IAC effective area? I see that statesman made some changes and I'm wondering if it's in response to that. I cruised through this thread, I wonder if it would help you.... http://ls1tech.com/forums/pcm-diagnostics-tuning/309671-iac-position-vs-effective-area-5.html

[statesman]

I had a quick look at your log. Your bank 1 front O2 sensor needs replacing. Your idle air trims are not reporting any activity. It looks like direct airflow correction is trying to hold it all together. The spark moves around but it looks a bit odd. Your TP is reporting 0.8 while it's holding high idle. I think you've got some issue with either your OS or your PCM.

I'm not well right now, so I probably won't be online for a couple of days... but until I get back you can replace that dead O2 sensor and you can also try getting a factory tune file for your OS (12212156), do a FULL FLASH with that stock tune and then do a cal flash with your current tune file. Also check your throttle body... see if the throttle blade is loose and can move without the cable moving.

[oreobadr]

Oreo,
Here is a great opportunity to use another awseom feature of EFILIVE. load your tune and then load Statesmans alternate tune(CNTRL F11). This allows you to see what is different between the two, and what a things a pro thinks should be altered. You'll notice he turned back on Cracker and populated your P/N tables for like, everything. Find some time to get in depth into his suggestions, if theres osmething you disagree with or are unsure about..ask.

I notice in your last log, " idle tuning log 4", that your extra airflow (~20 g/s) occurs whenever vehicle speed is greater than 0 and off pedal. once you hit 0 mph, it drops to ~14 g/s.

One last thing. IIRC(getting pretty long of a thread to go back and look), don't you have a bigger throttle body? Did you alter IAC effective area? I see that statesman made some changes and I'm wondering if it's in response to that. I cruised through this thread, I wonder if it would help you.... http://ls1tech.com/forums/pcm-diagnostics-tuning/309671-iac-position-vs-effective-area-5.html

I have been looking at the "history" after each time he makes alterations so I have been watching what he is doing. I did alter my IAC effective area because I have a fast 102mm throttle body and then I think he changed it back to stock. I assumed it was for trouble shooting reasons to see what would happen. I will look into that feature later today.

Maybe I should make it so it thinks its in idle conditions anytime it goes in neutral so that the speed doesnt play a factor and it goes to 14 g/s as it is supposed to at any mph . I can set idle conditions for over .5% TP and then under 50 mph and this would let the idle speed go down accordingly.

[oreobadr]

I had a quick look at your log. Your bank 1 front O2 sensor needs replacing. Your idle air trims are not reporting any activity. It looks like direct airflow correction is trying to hold it all together. The spark moves around but it looks a bit odd. Your TP is reporting 0.8 while it's holding high idle. I think you've got some issue with either your OS or your PCM.

I'm not well right now, so I probably won't be online for a couple of days... but until I get back you can replace that dead O2 sensor and you can also try getting a factory tune file for your OS (12212156), do a FULL FLASH with that stock tune and then do a cal flash with your current tune file. Also check your throttle body... see if the throttle blade is loose and can move without the cable moving.

is my bank 1 O2 sensor on the driver side or passenger side?
Why wouldnt my idle air trims report any activity? is that because my O2 sensor is not working?
When I reset my TP it goes to 0 and stays at 0, I was just trying to adjust the screw but I will zero it out later today.

I hope you feel better!
I will replace that O2 sensor and zero out that TPS. I will also do the full flash like you said.
Also (as JETMECH said) Should I change my IAC effective area back to the original value that I had set(I think it was .0122 or .122) as I am using a 102 throttle body and not the stock ls1 throttle body?

[oreobadr]

I already have replaced the driver side O2 sensor (just over the weekend) so I wonder why it is not working...

I only am running two stock O2 sensors, the other two were deleted. I replaced the driver side O2 sensor with a pre cat O2 sensor(When I went to autozone I could pick from pre cat or post cat). Did I use the wrong O2 sensor? or is my wiring messed up?


Also, is my throttle blade supposed to be completely closed at idle or is it supposed to open a little?

lastly, When my car goes into non idle conditions, when vehicle speed is greater than 0 or TP is greater than 0, where does that extra airflow come from? If I can take some airflow out of there maybe it wont rev to 2000 when Im in neutral cruising.

[joecar]

statesman get well.

[oreobadr]

It turns out that smell was my ECU and now it wont let me flash it ( the car still starts). Is my ECU bricked? (statesman was right:(( )

If it is, it would explain my issues, could this be from the new fuel pump or O2 sensor I just installed or what?

Also, which one should I get? and do you think it will happen again if I simply get a new one?

[joecar]

The smell was the ECU frying itself...? Somewhere early on statesman did indicate that your ECU was the problem.

Can you open the ECU's case and eyeball the circuit board, see if you can find what fried, this will lead you to any external problem (for example too much current into a driver).

[oreobadr]

I opened her up and it looks perfectly clean and no burn marks or anything nor does it smell. Maybe my judgement was off.....

I reconnected her and still no flashing capabilities. THe lights on my v2 scanner are alternating orange when the key is turned on. I think that signifies that the pcm is dead even though it did not burn out. Could this be because I did a full flash in vehicle?

[oreobadr]

So i got a new PCM and installed it but now I have to use a credit to activate the controller. I dont have those weird alternating blinking orange lights and instead of one orange light blinking so I think this is a good sign.
Now for more bad news. I need to use V8 to activate my license but it wont cooperate. Everytime I go to click it to use it, it makes a weird beeping noise and wont let me use it. I tried shutting down my computer and have uninstalled both v8 and v7 and then reinstalled to no avail. So it seems that I cannot even test my new controller.............

[oreobadr]

I was able to get it to work but deleting every file associated with efi live throughout my entire computer besides the actual data files and then reinstalling it.

[Jetmech442]

I was able to get it to work but deleting every file associated with efi live throughout my entire computer besides the actual data files and then reinstalling it.
Dude. Did you kick a little puppy recently? You've had a rash of bad luck. I think the only way to get rid of it is to do 3 smokey burnouts...

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[oreobadr]

I must have done something lol....
I was able to reflash my new controller this morning. Do you think it is ok to run this new controller or do you guys think the same thing will happen again?

[joecar]

...
THe lights on my v2 scanner are alternating orange when the key is turned on. I think that signifies that the pcm is dead even though it did not burn out. Could this be because I did a full flash in vehicle?You mean the 2 orange leds flash alternately...?


( that means the V2 is in dead poll mode, it is waiting for firmware to be flashed into it... does not make sense for it to be in dead poll mode )

[joecar]

When this sort of stuff happens, take cell phone videos of your V2.

[joecar]

So i got a new PCM and installed it but now I have to use a credit to activate the controller. I dont have those weird alternating blinking orange lights and instead of one orange light blinking so I think this is a good sign.
Now for more bad news. I need to use V8 to activate my license but it wont cooperate. Everytime I go to click it to use it, it makes a weird beeping noise and wont let me use it. I tried shutting down my computer and have uninstalled both v8 and v7 and then reinstalled to no avail. So it seems that I cannot even test my new controller.............
Weird...

do you have any videos or screenshots...?

[oreobadr]

You mean the 2 orange leds flash alternately...?


( that means the V2 is in dead poll mode, it is waiting for firmware to be flashed into it... does not make sense for it to be in dead poll mode )

yes this is what was happening with the OLD ecu.

[oreobadr]

Weird...

do you have any videos or screenshots...?

I should have taken some but I did not. I spend like two hours trying to figure it out. I ended up deleting everything but the data files and reinstalling it and that did the trick. I successfully flashed and put a new calibration on my ECU this morning so all is good.

Currently I am just worried about this happening again with my new ecu.

Will EFI live give me my credit back because my old ECU bricked?

[Blacky]

Will EFI live give me my credit back because my old ECU bricked?

Email a copy of the invoice for the purchase of the replacement PCM to me ([email protected]) and EFILive will send you a replacement VIN license.
Regards
Paul

[Jetmech442]

Email a copy of the invoice for the purchase of the replacement PCM to me ([email protected]) and EFILive will send you a replacement VIN license.
Regards
Paul
More reasons why efilive rocks!

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[oreobadr]

Email a copy of the invoice for the purchase of the replacement PCM to me ([email protected]) and EFILive will send you a replacement VIN license.
Regards
Paul

Thank you so much I will do that ASAP

[oreobadr]

Update....
I can flash the car now and everything is well. I still need to adjust that tune:(

[oreobadr]

Update.
While I am waiting for the return of statesman, I took my stock tune from a 2002 trans am and left the throttle cracker and follow tables alone and changed a lot of the tables to how I had them in my more recent tunes. I took some of the desired airflow and parked airflow out(like 3 g/s) and it idles good, doesnt jump as much when I clutch in but it wants to die when I come to a stop. I figured it was better to start over now that I have a bit more experience.

I am going to adjust the VE table and MAF table a bit more tonight when I get home but I think it is a better starting point. I used all of the values that statesman gave me for my new tune but I didnt really use many of the idle tutorial values for my stuff. I figured it should idle fine and not swing so much and then I can start make adjustments to those tables.

[oreobadr]

Also how do I get it so that it does not want as much airflow while going 20 mph? Is the only thing that adds airflow while cruising, throttle cracker and follower? and would changing the decay rate, but not the value for throttle cracker, alleviate my cruise control? RIght now I have cruise control up to about 35-40 mph.

[joecar]

I would compare the TC/TF tables to stock and think about it (that's what I'm doing now)...

[oreobadr]

The tc and tf tables from the tune I just uploaded are stock. I redid the tune

[Jetmech442]

Also how do I get it so that it does not want as much airflow while going 20 mph? Is the only thing that adds airflow while cruising, throttle cracker and follower? and would changing the decay rate, but not the value for throttle cracker, alleviate my cruise control? RIght now I have cruise control up to about 35-40 mph.
There are others like "rolling idle" , but last I checked it was deactivated. I'm pretty certain tf and tc aren't the issue, cause it steadily ads airflow and doesn't decay.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[joecar]

Let's critically review all the idle parameters, one by one...

[oreobadr]

Wait another 5 hours as I just made another adjustment to my tune and will take another log. Once we look at this one we can this go over each parameter. Where should we start?

[oreobadr]

Well I just has a moment where everything came together and I made steps to tune my car and I was able to fix a lot of problems. The cruise control is mostly gone (I have to lower my desired airflow tables a bit more), my idle is nice and smooth, it also no longer jumps rpm when I come to a stop or push the clutch in, and the car drives pretty darn good (a lot better than it did a day ago). The only thing I currently need help on is how to keep my car from idle surging(and sometimes dying) when I rev it and when the engine RPM comes and the car dying when I am coming from a hard stop.

My question is do I need to adjust my idle steps or what else to help stabilize this RPM oscillation?

I will be performing CALC VET again to get my MAF and VE tables on point hopefully tomorrow. Here is my current tune and here are my two logs. The shorter of the two logs is more about idle characteristics and the second one is very related to CALCVET but I seemed to have used the wrong PIDs for some by accident:((

[statesman]

statesman get well.

Thanks Joe... I'm getting there.

[statesman]

Well I just has a moment where everything came together and I made steps to tune my car and I was able to fix a lot of problems. The cruise control is mostly gone (I have to lower my desired airflow tables a bit more), my idle is nice and smooth, it also no longer jumps rpm when I come to a stop or push the clutch in, and the car drives pretty darn good (a lot better than it did a day ago).

I haven't had a chance to look at your log yet, but it sounds like your tune is heading in the right direction.



The only thing I currently need help on is how to keep my car from idle surging(and sometimes dying) when I rev it and when the engine RPM comes and the car dying when I am coming from a hard stop.

You tune a cammed engine a little bit differently to how you'd tune a stocker. Keep an eye on your MAP readings... they'll tell you if the changes you're making are good or not.

[oreobadr]

I haven't had a chance to look at your log yet, but it sounds like your tune is heading in the right direction.




You tune a cammed engine a little bit differently to how you'd tune a stocker. Keep an eye on your MAP readings... they'll tell you if the changes you're making are good or not.

what should I watch for in the MAP readings to know that im doing a good job or that I am doing a poor job?

[statesman]

what should I watch for in the MAP readings to know that im doing a good job or that I am doing a poor job?

Ideally, as the engine revs are coming back down to idle, the MAP readings should not dip too much below what the MAP normally reads at idle... and then as the engine settles at idle the MAP should climb back to what's normal at idle without any fluctuations. If your MAP readings look like a rollercoaster ride on the scanner, then that's an indication that you've done a poor job.

[oreobadr]

Ideally, as the engine revs are coming back down to idle, the MAP readings should not dip too much below what the MAP normally reads at idle... and then as the engine settles at idle the MAP should climb back to what's normal at idle without any fluctuations. If your MAP readings look like a rollercoaster ride on the scanner, then that's an indication that you've done a poor job.

If my MAP readings dip too much how would I counter this? Would I increase the decay rate on whatever air adder I am using?

Update..
I have worked out a ton of the idle swing by playing with my throttle cracker decay rate and I was driving it last night and it did really good. At this point I could daily drive it If i watch the RPMs when I take turns at idle (might die).

I have noticed that until the engine gets warm the RPMs are at 1700 at idle. So I have changed the IAT and ECT airflow idle tables accordingly. We will see today If i fixed it.

[Jetmech442]

I need to find some time to get back into your current tune.
Stalling due to turning at idle is a symptom of idle airflow being too low.
I'm still confused why removing idle air fixes unwanted cruise control. It idles fine at 0mph, but when you are moving it uses idle air values from the cold temp range.
Dropping those may help now, but when cold weather comes, it'll be a different story.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[oreobadr]

The car does not get driven in cold weather and I can adjust accordingly when the time comes.

It was stalling due to turning as I was coming to a stop and turning at the same time because the RPMs dip below idle when I am coming to a fast stop some times(which I am working on and it is getting better)

I had to much idle air initially and because there was too much air my engine would idle surge and change the timing to allow it to run at a lower RPM with too much air. This extra air(if used from the desired air tables) is also used in non idle conditions so whatever values of airflow from throttle cracker were added to the desired airflow. Due to the desired airflow already being too high this would cause cruise control and by lowering it and changing my decay rates I can get the car to come to an idle without idle surging and a constant spark advance.

[oreobadr]

Update....
I would like to thank you guys a TON!!!! I drove my car today and it has never pulled this hard before, It didnt idle surge once, it didnt try to die once, and it drove great. I have a few more tweaks to make but it is doing WAYYYY better.

Questions,
If I have to use around 19% throttle at 70mph in 6th gear do I need to add more airflow?
What is the best way to do WOT tuning?

[Jetmech442]

Update....
I have a few more tweaks to make but it is doing WAYYYY better.


lolz, yeah thats what I said a year ago.:banana::banana: I have continued to tune and fine new ways/maps to make it exactly perfect as time goes on.

I'm super stoked you got it running the way you like it. Seriously man thats a great accomplishment.

19% throttle at 70mph...I dunno. Thats how much airflow you need to go that fast. I fyou want to push the pedal less, you can dial it in with cracker at that speed. you still get the same airflow, but the pedal is less.

WOT tuning. best way = dyno.
My way...stay in first gear to limit top speeds, use brakes to evenly load up the engine and collect at least 15 counts in each cell. At first I was using 2nd gear so it would have less torque multiplication, but that was putting me at 90mphat the top of the gear.:Eyecrazy: first works great, be sure not to overheat the brakes or be anywhere near people, deers... etc. And be sure to either fix your NB02 or change the PID to just read the good one...lemme know if you need help with that..

I'll be expecting a youtube video when your all straightened out!:cheers:

[joecar]

VE/MAF: 30-60 minutes
Idle: 1-2 years

[oreobadr]

VE/MAF: 30-60 minutes
Idle: 1-2 years

That is no joke!!

[oreobadr]

lolz, yeah thats what I said a year ago.:banana::banana: I have continued to tune and fine new ways/maps to make it exactly perfect as time goes on.

I'm super stoked you got it running the way you like it. Seriously man thats a great accomplishment.

19% throttle at 70mph...I dunno. Thats how much airflow you need to go that fast. I fyou want to push the pedal less, you can dial it in with cracker at that speed. you still get the same airflow, but the pedal is less.

WOT tuning. best way = dyno.
My way...stay in first gear to limit top speeds, use brakes to evenly load up the engine and collect at least 15 counts in each cell. At first I was using 2nd gear so it would have less torque multiplication, but that was putting me at 90mphat the top of the gear.:Eyecrazy: first works great, be sure not to overheat the brakes or be anywhere near people, deers... etc. And be sure to either fix your NB02 or change the PID to just read the good one...lemme know if you need help with that..

I'll be expecting a youtube video when your all straightened out!:cheers:

I will probably add some airflow after 65 mph just to help with that.
I might wait on the WOT or just do 3rd gear pulls at the track. I will let you know when I get closer with this and yes there will be tons of videos!!

[oreobadr]

So I was cruising today and at around 1500 RPM at 35MPH I was experiencing some bucking. I looked back at my logs and it appears that I was running consistently lean for all 1500 RPM cruising speed. Why would this be?

Besides that the car is pretty dialed in. It drives like stock now!

[oreobadr]

Any ideas guys??????
Still running lean when im off the throttle it seems and even at idle. Here is a log and my new tune.

[joecar]

I've been swamped the last few days, I'm slowly catching up...

[oreobadr]

Gotcha, Take your time. I think it is related to either my VE tables or my MAF table.
If my VE Values were too high would I be running lean or rich?

[Jetmech442]

Gotcha, Take your time. I think it is related to either my VE tables or my MAF table.
If my VE Values were too high would I be running lean or rich?

If VE is too high, you will run rich.

Looking at the log, you LTFT are 0 for the entire run. I'm pretty sure they should at least be doing something. since they are zero, *CLC-00-120(CALC.LTFTBEN) is showing 1 because : "({SAE.LONGFT1}+{SAE.LONGFT2})/200+1".
and .*CLC-00-220 below says if you are closed loop, use the value for LTFTBEN which will still be 1, so no correction. so whenever you are closed loop, you aren't really correcting the VE table. And no, just in case you ask, you will never ever get it that perfect. If SSpeedemon, and Statesman can't, neither can we.:w00t:

iff({CALC.CL}, {CALC.LTFTBEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN})"

I believe the issue lies with the LTFT and the fact that your other 02 is still not reading properly.

[oreobadr]

I still have one O2 reading properly and my wideband is reading properly as well. So all of that work done for the VE table didnt really do anything? It seemed like I was making progress.....

I wonder why my ltftben is still at that value

[Jetmech442]

I still have one O2 reading properly and my wideband is reading properly as well. So all of that work done for the VE table didnt really do anything? It seemed like I was making progress.....

I wonder why my ltftben is still at that value
When you go into open loop, you are definitely making VE corrections based on wb02 data. But nothing I'm seeing is correcting CL. At least in that last log....

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[Jetmech442]

Oh...um, B3809 is your LTFT boundaries. Your LTFT will populate from 2500 to 6503 rpm. I don't think that's what you want. You want LTFT to store corrections for the areas you most often drive in,. My stock values are from 1200 to 2200.

Take a look and let me know if you think this might be something. Did you maybe change these to prevent the "the last LTFT value is added to WOT thing..."? If so, I probly wouldn't worry about it too much and set it back to stock.

[oreobadr]

I dont ever remember changing those values at all...... I set them to 1000, 2400, and 2401 so hopefully now I will get some feedback. Will the results of this correct my lean situation? and I dont really want to run my car with it running so lean so what can I do to correct this first?

[Jetmech442]

Your running lean at part throttle, and not knocking, is not a huge deal IMO.

I would not do 2400 and 2401,you lose the usability of the ltft. I'd recommend equally spacing them, and maybe start higher than 1000 since it's so close to your idle rpm.



Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[Jetmech442]

If you can't get the other 02 to read properly, your ltft will never update and the whole thing will be off by half.

You could modify the Pid to use only the good Ltft, or use the wb02 exclusively by changing iff({CALC.CL}, {CALC.LTFTBEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN to say

iff({CALC.CL}, {CALC.W02BEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN}.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[statesman]

Your running lean at part throttle, and not knocking, is not a huge deal IMO.

Not a huge deal?.... do you know how many people are out there trying to get a lean cruise?:laugh:

Jetmech, I haven't been keeping up with this thread lately but it looks like you've got it all under control. :thumb_yello:

[oreobadr]

Not a huge deal?.... do you know how many people are out there trying to get a lean cruise?:laugh:

Jetmech, I haven't been keeping up with this thread lately but it looks like you've got it all under control. :thumb_yello:

Isn't lean at part throttle and cruising bad for the engine? or is it only bad if it causes knock retard? Also, could it eventually cause knock retard?
Why would you want lean cruise lol?

[oreobadr]

If you can't get the other 02 to read properly, your ltft will never update and the whole thing will be off by half.

You could modify the Pid to use only the good Ltft, or use the wb02 exclusively by changing iff({CALC.CL}, {CALC.LTFTBEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN to say

iff({CALC.CL}, {CALC.W02BEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN}.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

I still want to use the good stock O2 sensor so how would I do that?
What would the advantages and disadvantages be by using only the good stock o2 sensor or using only the wideband?
Also, how do I made the above modifications? like where do I go and such.

[oreobadr]

Your running lean at part throttle, and not knocking, is not a huge deal IMO.

I would not do 2400 and 2401,you lose the usability of the ltft. I'd recommend equally spacing them, and maybe start higher than 1000 since it's so close to your idle rpm.



Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

So should I go lik 1200, 1850, 2500? and Should all three points be equally spaced apart?

[statesman]

Why would you want lean cruise lol?

For increased fuel economy. Australian LS1's have lean cruise enabled, but the USA EPA doesn't like the increased NOx emissions so it's not allowed in the USA.

[Jetmech442]

Jetmech, I haven't been keeping up with this thread lately but it looks like you've got it all under control. :thumb_yello:
Highlight of my week!

Oreo,
In my engineering opinion, evenly slaved ltft frame ending under 3000rpm should be ideal. However, SSpeedemon had a tune out there that covered up to like 6000 rpm. He had his reasons, and looking at single maps doesn't tell the whole story, so it may or may not work for someone else. This is the danger of finding tunes and trying to piece wise implement them(talking about me here, not you...) .

NB02S are great around stoich. Using them for part throttle stuff is best. To eliminate the effect of a dead 02 and this a dead ltft, go into the clcxxx and replace the ltftben"dead"with the active one. The formula is (ltft1+ltft2) /200 +1 if I remember right(still at work sorry).
Now rerun calc. Vet and you should see meaningful change



Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[Jetmech442]

CLC-00-120 is the Pid to modify...

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[joecar]

If you can't get the other 02 to read properly, your ltft will never update and the whole thing will be off by half.

You could modify the Pid to use only the good Ltft, or use the wb02 exclusively by changing iff({CALC.CL}, {CALC.LTFTBEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN to say

iff({CALC.CL}, {CALC.W02BEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN}).

Sent from my Nexus 6P using TapatalkIf you do this, make sure that CL/LTFT/STFT/SOL are disabled (or the NBO2's are physically removed).

Could also do this (which forces WO2BEN always): iff(0, {CALC.LTFTBEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN})

[joecar]

If you're suspecting NBO2 problems, then remove them and use WO2BEN.

[oreobadr]

If you do this, make sure that CL/LTFT/STFT/SOL are disabled (or the NBO2's are physically removed).

Could also do this (which forces WO2BEN always): iff(0, {CALC.LTFTBEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN})

I think I will just use the wideband based on what you guys are saying.

[oreobadr]

Highlight of my week!

Oreo,
In my engineering opinion, evenly slaved ltft frame ending under 3000rpm should be ideal. However, SSpeedemon had a tune out there that covered up to like 6000 rpm. He had his reasons, and looking at single maps doesn't tell the whole story, so it may or may not work for someone else. This is the danger of finding tunes and trying to piece wise implement them(talking about me here, not you...) .

NB02S are great around stoich. Using them for part throttle stuff is best. To eliminate the effect of a dead 02 and this a dead ltft, go into the clcxxx and replace the ltftben"dead"with the active one. The formula is (ltft1+ltft2) /200 +1 if I remember right(still at work sorry).
Now rerun calc. Vet and you should see meaningful change



Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

I will make sure they are evenly spaced between 1300 and 3000 RPM and see how that works using only the wideband as I know that it is working correctly. I will hopefully get some stuff saturday morning and let you know how it turns out. THanks again!

[oreobadr]

If you do this, make sure that CL/LTFT/STFT/SOL are disabled (or the NBO2's are physically removed).

Could also do this (which forces WO2BEN always): iff(0, {CALC.LTFTBEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN})

How do I make sure that the CL/LTFT/STFT/SOL are disabled? Do i do that within in the tune itself?

Also, I made the change
*CLC-00-220
factor 0.5 1.5 .4 "iff({CALC.CL}, {CALC.WO2BEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN})"

Is this the only change I need to make to not use the stock narrow band O2 sensors?

[Jetmech442]

B3801 LTFT disable
B4108 STFT Idle disable
B4205 CL disable
I'm not sure what SOL is (Semi-Open Loop)?

I think the reason Joecar is recommending this is cause you will be using the CALC.WB02BEN = {GM.EQIVRATIO}*{EXT.WO2LAM1} and GM.EQIVRATIO doesn't account for all the STFT/LTFT adders.

If you want to keep everything as is, then just paste this in place of *CLC 00 120 in the calc_pid.txt file.

*CLC-00-120
factor 0.5 1.5 .4 "({SAE.LONGFT1}+{SAE.LONGFT1})/200+1" ***I haven't seen a recent log with LTFTs working, so make sure LTFT1 is the one that's actually working. If not replace the SAE.LONG"1" with a "2" for both spaces.

Modifying that pid will be making corrections to your CL part throttle VE map based on just one side of your engine. I prefer this way because of the accuracy of the NB02's around stoich.

[joecar]

How do I make sure that the CL/LTFT/STFT/SOL are disabled? Do i do that within in the tune itself?

Also, I made the change
*CLC-00-220
factor 0.5 1.5 .4 "iff({CALC.CL}, {CALC.WO2BEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN})"

Is this the only change I need to make to not use the stock narrow band O2 sensors?If you're going to go this way, yes, correct, disable any NBO2 trimming (see below).

CL: B4205: disable
LTFT: B3801: disable
STFT(OL): B4206: disable
SOL: B3605, B3647: eliminate stoich cells.

[joecar]

If you're going do LTFT, do what Jetmech said, use only LTFTBEN in CLC-00-220.

[Happy Jim]

SOL: B3605, B3647: eliminate stoich cells.

Translation = if you enter EQ of 1 then it will assume you want closed loop and trim accordingly - even if you don't have NB O2's fitted.... I forgot about that, once, unsurprisingly it ran like a bag of spanners as I have zero NB O2's fitted :-). Solution is to enter either 0.99 or 1.01

PS - great thread, am enjoying the evolving story

Jim

[joecar]

Translation = if you enter EQ of 1 then it will assume you want closed loop and trim accordingly - even if you don't have NB O2's fitted.... I forgot about that, once, unsurprisingly it ran like a bag of spanners as I have zero NB O2's fitted :-). Solution is to enter either 0.99 or 1.01
...
Hi Jim,

it will use the NBO2's to do STFT trimming to stoich (EQR 1)... even if you have CL (B4205) disabled (but the NBO2's must be physically present).

( you must have had them on, but CL not enabled ) :)

[oreobadr]

B3801 LTFT disable
B4108 STFT Idle disable
B4205 CL disable
I'm not sure what SOL is (Semi-Open Loop)?

I think the reason Joecar is recommending this is cause you will be using the CALC.WB02BEN = {GM.EQIVRATIO}*{EXT.WO2LAM1} and GM.EQIVRATIO doesn't account for all the STFT/LTFT adders.

If you want to keep everything as is, then just paste this in place of *CLC 00 120 in the calc_pid.txt file.

*CLC-00-120
factor 0.5 1.5 .4 "({SAE.LONGFT1}+{SAE.LONGFT1})/200+1" ***I haven't seen a recent log with LTFTs working, so make sure LTFT1 is the one that's actually working. If not replace the SAE.LONG"1" with a "2" for both spaces.

Modifying that pid will be making corrections to your CL part throttle VE map based on just one side of your engine. I prefer this way because of the accuracy of the NB02's around stoich.

I will try this way first and see if I get results and I will also try the 2 version. If this does not work I will switch to my wideband exclusively.

[oreobadr]

Translation = if you enter EQ of 1 then it will assume you want closed loop and trim accordingly - even if you don't have NB O2's fitted.... I forgot about that, once, unsurprisingly it ran like a bag of spanners as I have zero NB O2's fitted :-). Solution is to enter either 0.99 or 1.01

PS - great thread, am enjoying the evolving story

Jim

I think I got a hold of it now haha Thanks! and the story will keep evolving as my need for power increases lol

[oreobadr]

So I did a test run after changing each to 1 and to 2 and the LTFT didnt move for either case. It looks like it is time to go Wideband only. Here are the logs if you guys want to see if I am just being stupid. One log is for longft1 and the other is for longft2. Each drive was at least 10 minutes after reaching operating temperature and cruising around 2000 RPM, so I think I let there be enough time.

[Jetmech442]

Just to make sure, this is with the ltft cells changed from like 1100 to 2600 or something like that right?... Not the 6000 and 6001?

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[Jetmech442]

Translation = if you enter EQ of 1 then it will assume you want closed loop and trim accordingly - even if you don't have NB O2's fitted.... I forgot about that, once, unsurprisingly it ran like a bag of spanners as I have zero NB O2's fitted :-). Solution is to enter either 0.99 or 1.01

PS - great thread, am enjoying the evolving story

Jim
Oh yeah thanks! That's an important one that isn't very intuitive. It's nice when others confirm what I'm trying to convey/or correct me if I'm wrong,or fill in knowledge gaps.

This has been an awesome thread, although long, I think it details a lot of good info. It's definitely helped me get a deeper understanding of the ls1b cause want to know what I'm saying will help. When I tuned mine, there was a lot of "let's see what this does" type flashing.

And actually oreo, seeing how clean and stable you got your idle has convinced me to go back and redo mine since I'm running hybrid open loop at idle (I clearly don't need to since yours had a larger cam than mine).

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[statesman]

I will try this way first and see if I get results and I will also try the 2 version. If this does not work I will switch to my wideband exclusively.

Your bank1 O2 sensor is dead... I would suggest you tune in open loop and stay in open loop until you get the bank1 O2 sensor working.

[oreobadr]

Your bank1 O2 sensor is dead... I would suggest you tune in open loop and stay in open loop until you get the bank1 O2 sensor working.

Thanks for your advice. I agree with you at this point and will make the adjustments later this afternoon.

[oreobadr]

Just to make sure, this is with the ltft cells changed from like 1100 to 2600 or something like that right?... Not the 6000 and 6001?

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

yeah I changed them to 1400, 2200, and 3000 RPM

[oreobadr]

Oh yeah thanks! That's an important one that isn't very intuitive. It's nice when others confirm what I'm trying to convey/or correct me if I'm wrong,or fill in knowledge gaps.

This has been an awesome thread, although long, I think it details a lot of good info. It's definitely helped me get a deeper understanding of the ls1b cause want to know what I'm saying will help. When I tuned mine, there was a lot of "let's see what this does" type flashing.

And actually oreo, seeing how clean and stable you got your idle has convinced me to go back and redo mine since I'm running hybrid open loop at idle (I clearly don't need to since yours had a larger cam than mine).

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Thanks man I definitely owe my success to you, Joecar, and Statesman! Yeah my idle is definitely very stable now. It wasnt an easy process but once I found out the base air flow I just modded the decay rates enough to get it where I want it. I am thinking about even lowering it to 800 RPM because I am still not having stalling problems. I also have the FAST 102mm throttle body which I heard of professional tuners not even trying to tune it because of idle problems so I feel pretty accomplished to say the least lol!

[joecar]

+1 statesman said to go OL until you get bank 1 NBO2 fixed.

[Jetmech442]

+1 statesman said to go OL until you get bank 1 NBO2 fixed.
I also agree, but why doesn't his other bank record values? His log shows both LTFT flat-lined, even though the other 02 is reading (albiet not very well).

He also shows OL for sae.fuelsysA the whole log

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[oreobadr]

If you're going to go this way, yes, correct, disable any NBO2 trimming (see below).

CL: B4205: disable
LTFT: B3801: disable
STFT(OL): B4206: disable
SOL: B3605, B3647: eliminate stoich cells.

I dont have a b3647. What was this supposed to do? Also, for B3605 I just made the highest value .96

[joecar]

I dont have a b3647. What was this supposed to do? Also, for B3605 I just made the highest value .96
GM OS has B3605, this is ECT vs RPM.

EFILive COS replaces B3605 with B3647 which is MAP vs RPM.

[joecar]

You can use 0.98 EQR or 1.02 EQR, these are sufficiently far from stoich to avoid STFT trimming during OL (aka semi-open loop, SOL).

[joecar]

...

EFILive COS replaces B3605 with B3647 which is MAP vs RPM.which gives much better OL fueling control over the MAP range.

[oreobadr]

which gives much better OL fueling control over the MAP range.

Gotcha thanks.

So I ran some more testing and updated my tune accordingly. I am pretty sure the car does not run lean anymore! It runs really well, idles great, and I think the data is more consistent now that I am only using the wideband.

Now to tackle another issue. I have bucking at 0% to light throttle from 1500-1800 RPM. My timing isnt jumping so what could it be?

[statesman]

Now to tackle another issue. I have bucking at 0% to light throttle from 1500-1800 RPM. My timing isnt jumping so what could it be?

Your cam.... you can try adjusting timing and airflow to minimize it, but some cams just like to buck at lower rpms.

[joecar]

What was the cam spec again...?

[Jetmech442]

Oreo,
2 things still on my mind.

1) why does your log never enter CL. I don't want to let this one just slip away, I think it's the answer to why your LTFT don't populate.
2) Can you post your latest and greatest tune/log and try to find out the exact cam specs(duration ICL, LSA). IIRC your cam was lower to mid 230's and should be able to drive surge free(I have no evidence of this, just my opinion).

[oreobadr]

What was the cam spec again...?

low 230 duration on exhaust and intake and approx .605 lift on intake and exhaust

[oreobadr]

Oreo,
2 things still on my mind.

1) why does your log never enter CL. I don't want to let this one just slip away, I think it's the answer to why your LTFT don't populate.
2) Can you post your latest and greatest tune/log and try to find out the exact cam specs(duration ICL, LSA). IIRC your cam was lower to mid 230's and should be able to drive surge free(I have no evidence of this, just my opinion).

1. I dont know why it never enters CL. What reasons could there be? I will be post my most recent tune in the next post.

2. I cannot get the exact cam specs I already tried :(. I also think that the surge is partially due to the long duration on the camshaft as well as the fact that I am running a FAST 102 intake and TB. I have heard of very similar problems with this.

[oreobadr]

In more recent news I developed a type of problem. Let me explain,
I must have stripped the positive terminal battery threads and the bolt fell out while it was idling in my garage. I have since replaced the battery but now I am getting these DTCs
p0106(Manifold absolute pressure sensor)
p0134(02s circuit insufficient activity)
p0121(throttle position sensor)
I am also running super lean for part throttle after this happened(wideband and o2 sensor verified(good o2 sensor)). I cleared these codes and they came back after 30 mins of driving.
Here are two logs where the tune changed very minimally. One was taken before this battery incident and you can look at the average lambda value from the wideband and see its like .95 where the more recent one is like 1.3 or something.

[joecar]

Is the alternator ok...? With engine running what voltage do you see...?

[oreobadr]

My alternator is fine and my voltage is like 14.5V. I also checked all of the fuses and they are also good.

Just to note, the car was still running well and had lots of power even though it was running lean. So maybe there is a sensor problem?

[joecar]

Logs show NBO2's not working, and possibly MAP is not right.

[statesman]

Here are two logs where the tune changed very minimally. One was taken before this battery incident and you can look at the average lambda value from the wideband and see its like .95 where the more recent one is like 1.3 or something.

Firstly, I don't see a significant change between the two logs and....

Secondly, any change to the tune is going to change what you see in the logs... even if you think that the change is only minimal.

[oreobadr]

So of course Statesman is right. Small adjustments to the MAF table made me go lean!

So update,
Car runs great tons of power as usual.
HOWEVER, in a attempt to fix the lean condition for part throttle and idle I adjusted the MAF table even more and VE table(CALC VET) and got my idle to be running below 1 on lambda(rich). The bad news is that now I am having idle stability problems because I am running slightly rich. Does that make sense?
So effectively my tuning has made the engine run at a safer F/A ratio but it negatively affects the idle performance. What should I do now? should I adjust the MAF table until it runs slightly lean and I have more idle stability?

I would also like to note that once the idle stabilizes(with the aid of my foot on the gas after I come to a stop) it idles perfectly fine and stays at a constant RPM. I am thinking that I will have to tap into the the airflow decay tables a bit like a did before. I just want some input that I am not running too rich at idle and that is my problem.

here is the log and the tune.

Also!
Pretty soon I will be building my next car a 24k 2002 camaro ss! Turbo 4.8l then to 6.0l after the 4.8l blows up. s480 billet turbo, t56 magnum from RPM transmissions, 9" moser, all the good stuff and maybe even a little nitrous! so I will start a new topic for that once I get a bit further.

[Happy Jim]

got my idle to be running below 1 on lambda(rich).

<1 Lambda is Lean
<1 EQR is Rich

I'm not at home to can't check your tune now to see where it actually is, but mine is a lot happier running slightly rich at tickover.

Rgds

Jim

[oreobadr]

are you sure about that Jim?

Also, I went to log today and for some reason all of the PIDs in my list had a red X through them except for the calculated PIDs. Would anyone know why it would be like this?

[oreobadr]

I think im done with this MAF stuff and im just going speed density. I think having this big cam and a fast 102 just makes it hard to run stable and at the right A/F. I have to learn speed density regardless when I go to turbo so might as well learn it now. If i drive in 70 and 90 degree weather should I be ok with speed density? Also, which should I tune in?

I think before I tune I should switch my timing tables back to the z06 tables except for where it idles as my engine more resembles an ls6 than an ls1 and I noticed a difference last time.

[joecar]

<1 Lambda is Lean
<1 EQR is Rich
...

Jim, the second one is inverted.

Edit: Sorry, my mistake: I meant to say "those are inverted".

[joecar]

Also, I went to log today and for some reason all of the PIDs in my list had a red X through them except for the calculated PIDs. Would anyone know why it would be like this?
Check the following:
- File->Select Controller shows correct PCM/ECM.
- File->Enter VIN.
- Info->Validate Pids.

[oreobadr]

Jim, the second one is inverted.

if the second one is inverted wouldn't the first one be inverted as well.

[oreobadr]

Check the following:
- File->Select Controller shows correct PCM/ECM.
- File->Enter VIN.
- Info->Validate Pids.

My VIN was not entered correctly for some reason. Thanks.

[oreobadr]

What I decided to do was use CALC MAFT and compute my VE values with no MAF. I will be doing this calculation with only using my wideband sensor.

What should I do to my CALC PID file from before? would it be the same as my calc vet PID file?

[oreobadr]

By the way I will be running OLSD. Is this a bad idea?

[oreobadr]

More questions I hope someone can answer these

b3618(PE modified based on RPM), I was reading the AutoVE tutorial and it said to make these stoich for OLSD. It also said to make my VE table 15% rich. I understand the VE part but I do not want my PE table to be stoich above 3200 RPM. Is this correct and does the rich VE table allow me to do this?

I also looked at what theys said the COS 5 A/F table should look like and it was only rich above 80 KPa in MAP and below that pressure it was stoich for all RPMs. wouldn't I run into detonation problems for 6400 RPM, 60 KPa Map, and stoich?

[joecar]

What I decided to do was use CALC MAFT and compute my VE values with no MAF. I will be doing this calculation with only using my wideband sensor.

What should I do to my CALC PID file from before? would it be the same as my calc vet PID file?Calc.MAFT does this:
1. it corrects the VE table;
2. it calculates a MAF table based on 1. above, but it requires the MAF to be installed because you need MAFFREQ in order to be able to create a MAF table.

So, yes, Calc.MAFT is done in SD (and certainly in OLSD, see OL note below), but your MAF must be present (and disabled in the tune so it causes a MAF DTC), and you log MAFFREQ from it.


OL: to do Calc.MAFT or Calc.VET in OL (i.e. using WB only), edit CLC-00-220 to always select CALC.WO2BEN as follows:

change this:


*CLC-00-220
factor 0.5 1.5 .4 "iff({CALC.CL}, {CALC.LTFTBEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN})"


to this:


*CLC-00-220
factor 0.5 1.5 .4 "iff(0, {CALC.LTFTBEN}, {CALC.WO2BEN})"

the 0 is a zero.


Yes, it is the same calc_pids.txt file (I made it that way on purpose).

:)

[joecar]

By the way I will be running OLSD. Is this a bad idea?See note above on OL.

If you don't have a MAF, you can still calculate CALC.MAFT (and display it on chart/graph), but you can't populate table B5001 unless you also have MAFFREQ.

[joecar]

More questions I hope someone can answer these

b3618(PE modified based on RPM), I was reading the AutoVE tutorial and it said to make these stoich for OLSD. It also said to make my VE table 15% rich. I understand the VE part but I do not want my PE table to be stoich above 3200 RPM. Is this correct and does the rich VE table allow me to do this?

I also looked at what theys said the COS 5 A/F table should look like and it was only rich above 80 KPa in MAP and below that pressure it was stoich for all RPMs. wouldn't I run into detonation problems for 6400 RPM, 60 KPa Map, and stoich?
I wouldn't... I would set B3618 sufficiently rich to prevent/avoid motor damage (detonation).

With the COS, you can do either or both: set B3618 rich and/or set the high load area of B3647 rich... I do both.

Also, note that while tuning, any stoich cells in B3647 will cause OL STFT trimming to stoich (this is a feature of the COS)(this is same as B4206 in GM OS).

Also: make sure PE enables ok, copy B3616 from a Camaro/Firebird tune.

[joecar]

Are you running boost...?

[joecar]

if the second one is inverted wouldn't the first one be inverted as well.

Yes, you are correct, my mistake, I think I was very sleepy at that time...


I meant to say "those are inverted".

[joecar]

<1 Lambda is Lean
<1 EQR is Rich

Jim,

In my post above, I meant to say "those are inverted".

[oreobadr]

Are you running boost...?

I am not running boost but my next car will be boosted.

[oreobadr]

I wouldn't... I would set B3618 sufficiently rich to prevent/avoid motor damage (detonation).

With the COS, you can do either or both: set B3618 rich and/or set the high load area of B3647 rich... I do both.

Also, note that while tuning, any stoich cells in B3647 will cause OL STFT trimming to stoich (this is a feature of the COS)(this is same as B4206 in GM OS).

Also: make sure PE enables ok, copy B3616 from a Camaro/Firebird tune.

Brilliant answer. Thank you so much. I will try tonight.

[joecar]

...

With the COS, you can do either or both: set B3618 rich and/or set the high load area of B3647 rich... I do both.

...What I said here ^ applies to OL.

In CL, you would use B3618 only since B3647 would not become active at WOT.

[oreobadr]

What I said here ^ applies to OL.

In CL, you would use B3618 only since B3647 would not become active at WOT.

Why would b3647 not become active at WOT?

[joecar]

Why would b3647 not become active at WOT?
Going from CL to WOT puts you in a limited CL mode, the LTFT are not being updated but are contributing to fueling (negative trims are first rounded up to zero), so this is not OL, so B3647 is not active, so B3618 is the only active table in this case.

Going from OL to WOT retains OL, so now both B3647 and B3618 are active, the richest of those two is selected on cell-by-cell basis.

[oreobadr]

I uploaded the tune I had initially from doing all of those Calc Vets and the car ran ALOT better. No more lean spots, throttle response is a lot better, and it pulls a lot harder. Also just generally driving is much more of a joy, idle is great, It is also a lot more consistent in terms of the data when driving it. I should have done this a longgggg time ago.

Now for some tuning questions, Look at my b3647 table in this tune and tell me if it is good or not in terms of where can it be a bit leaner and if it is rich enough as well. I am still adjusting the VE table from the most recent data log so Do not look at that yet.

[oreobadr]

I am also thinking about using the TPS, RPM, table for VE instead of the MAP one. Is this a bad idea?

[joecar]

I'll look at your B3647 later tonite.

What is your cam specs (intdur/exhdur lsa adv)...? At idle what MAP kPa do you see...?

The TPS x RPM VE table (alpha-N mode) is good for cams that make hardly any vacuum at idle (i.e. huge overlap).

[oreobadr]

I'll look at your B3647 later tonite.

What is your cam specs (intdur/exhdur lsa adv)...? At idle what MAP kPa do you see...?

The TPS x RPM VE table (alpha-N mode) is good for cams that make hardly any vacuum at idle (i.e. huge overlap).

Oh. I didnt realize it was only for huge cams. I think I will just stick to the current process then. Thanks for the input and let me know what you think about b3647!

[joecar]

4sdcos.ctz (https://forum.efilive.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=20039&d=1469993124)Are you running NA or boost...?

If you're NA, see attached _0001 (B3647 and B3618).

If you're boosted, see attached _0002.


Also note: your HO spark table may need editing for NA (and even more so for boost); and your LO spark table is too high in general.

edit: ( also note that I edited the out-of-range cells to be in-range )

[oreobadr]

Are you running NA or boost...?

If you're NA, see attached _0001 (B3647 and B3618).

If you're boosted, see attached _0002.


Also note: your HO spark table may need editing for NA (and even more so for boost); and your LO spark table is too high in general.

I am NA for my current setup.
I will look at the changes you made later tonight when I have my EFILIVE computer.

Also, What changes should I make to my HO spark tables?
and where should I take out timing in my LO spark timing table?

The majority of these tables about are from a 2001 corvette z06 spark table and I also copied the auxiliary spark tables relating to these too like ECT and IAT. The only thing that differs is idle and very light throttle.

[oreobadr]

Also, I think I see what you mean for the HO spark tables after I looked at them. I will modify the idle timing so that it is a lot smoother and take out some timing for the 1200-1800 RPM cases for low values of dyncylair. I will also make my low octane table identical to my high octane table but subtract out 2.5 degrees. Is this the right move?

[statesman]

So of course Statesman is right. Small adjustments to the MAF table made me go lean!

Did you ever doubt me? :laugh:

[oreobadr]

Did you ever doubt me? :laugh:

NEVER lol You know what you are doing a lot more than I do. I did not realize at the time how small of a change in MAF can make a huge change in how the car runs. This is part of the reason why I am no longer using a MAF ! I am correcting my MAF table as I go but I doubt I will go back to it.

[oreobadr]

Ok. I adjusted my spark timing tables to what I think is better tell me how they are.

Also, tell me how my VE tables are with this tune such that the table looks good.

Thanks again guys!!!

[joecar]

I'll look at it tonite.

[oreobadr]

I'll look at it tonite.

Any luck yet?

[Jetmech442]

Took a look at the timing tables, heres my observations.
1) I see an appropriate dip at full load(.72g/s) around 4000-5200 rpm.
2) BSIG (B5932) at idle (800 RPM), is 24 degrees : HIgh and low octane spark are 22.5- it is my opinion that these should be the same because it can cause timing fluctuations which lead to parking lot surging. At idle(foot off gas and less than 4kph, base spark commands idle timing).
3)your LO table is less than HO.this is fine of course, but you probly will never then be commanding full HO as it is always interpolating-this is a preference sort of thing.
4)I prefer to set B5917 to 412hph. doing so says that whenever my foot is off the gas, my BSIG table defines my timing, this allows me to custom tailor engine braking separate from low load transitions. (another preference thing)

I can't say anything about magnitudes of timing-thats for a dyno or perhaps a phone app to help decide based on accelerations(or well calibrated rear end).

as always, hope this helps.

[joecar]

Any luck yet?Sorry, I got distracted... I'll get back on track tonite.

[oreobadr]

Here is a log I took last night just for an update.
It seems to be way too rich anytime I get over 35% throttle so I need to change my VE tables a bit but otherwise it is doing pretty well!

[joecar]

Here is a log I took last night just for an update.
It seems to be way too rich anytime I get over 35% throttle so I need to change my VE tables a bit but otherwise it is doing pretty well!Log wasn't attached.

[joecar]

You have to put these in-range:



Out of Range calibration summary: 08:14:44 am, Friday Aug 12, 2016

EFILive Custom Calibrations
{A0001} Forced Octane Scaler Percentage, was out of range when loaded.
{A0002} Octane Scaler Limiter, was out of range when loaded.
{A0004} MAP Disable TPS VE Table, was out of range when loaded.
{A0005} RPM Disable TPS VE Table, was out of range when loaded.
{A0006} TPS Disable TPS VE Table, was out of range when loaded.
{A0017} N20 Monitor VE Multiplier Table RPM Enable, was out of range when loaded.
{A0018} N20 Monitor VE Multiplier Table MAP Enable, was out of range when loaded.
{A0007} TPS VE Table, contained one or more out of range values when loaded.
{A0015} N20 Monitor VE Multiplier, contained one or more out of range values when loaded.
{A0016} N20 Monitor Timing Table, contained one or more out of range values when loaded.


VE table looks good (are the 105 kPa columns of B0101 and A0009 identical...?).

HO and LO spark tables still have too much timing for boost.

[oreobadr]

Why is it needed that those be in range? like will anything go wrong?
Is there a way to disable them without putting them in range?

I will make those two spots at 105kpa identical later on.

I am NOT running boost. This is a naturally aspirated, NO nitrous turbos or superchargers.

Knowing that this is a NA setup, are my timing tables good? and where can I add more or take some out?

here is the log from before and the tune(so you dont have to go digging through the thread)! and thanks again!

[joecar]

Yhe PCM has to evecute exception case logic when it hits an out-of-range value... now while we trust GM's software engineering ability, it may be prudent to avoid hitting any exception cases.

[joecar]

I'm taking a closer look at your VE table.

[oreobadr]

I'm taking a closer look at your VE table.

ok sweet sounds good.
Dont forget to look at my timing tables from an NA perspective!

[oreobadr]

Yhe PCM has to evecute exception case logic when it hits an out-of-range value... now while we trust GM's software engineering ability, it may be prudent to avoid hitting any exception cases.

I tried putting them in range and a0007,15,16 will not go away. Here is the tune.

[joecar]

You have to set them to max-1, save file, exit tunetool, restart tunetool, set them to max, save file.

[oreobadr]

So I finally got to do some WOT testing and the car runs great! Just some quick figures for yall.

I wanted to run rich to be safe so I made my VE tables a bit on the high side. At WOT my afr was approx 11.0.
1. how much power can be had by leaning this out to an afr of 12.4-12.6?

I also went conservative with timing as my wot timing was approximately 22.5 degrees. I have since upped this to 24 degrees and added about a degree everywhere else.
2. Will this have a noticeable effect?

Lastly, after recalculating my VE values with it running at the correct AFR(accounting for it running rich), I found my air flow rate to be approx 390-400 g/s using DYNCYLAIR instead of cylair as dyncylair calculates air flow based on VE values to my understanding. This is easily over 500 hp to my understanding. what do you guys think?

[joecar]

So I finally got to do some WOT testing and the car runs great! Just some quick figures for yall.

I wanted to run rich to be safe so I made my VE tables a bit on the high side. At WOT my afr was approx 11.0.
1. how much power can be had by leaning this out to an afr of 12.4-12.6?Quite a bit... if you don't get any knock, you can go to 12.8-13.0.


I also went conservative with timing as my wot timing was approximately 22.5 degrees. I have since upped this to 24 degrees and added about a degree everywhere else.
2. Will this have a noticeable effect?yes, you will increase TQ/HP... you may be able to go to 26-28* as long as you don't get knock, and keep an eye on AFR (watch that it does not get leaner)... if you do this on the dyno, if you don't see an appreciable increase in TQ then back it down to 24*, this gives you a knock safety margin.


Lastly, after recalculating my VE values with it running at the correct AFR(accounting for it running rich), I found my air flow rate to be approx 390-400 g/s using DYNCYLAIR instead of cylair as dyncylair calculates air flow based on VE values to my understanding. This is easily over 500 hp to my understanding. what do you guys think?Depending on your heads/cam, sounds about right.

Remind me of your cam spec (intdur/exhdur lda +adv)...?

[oreobadr]

Quite a bit... if you don't get any knock, you can go to 12.8-13.0.

yes, you will increase TQ/HP... you may be able to go to 26-28* as long as you don't get knock, and keep an eye on AFR (watch that it does not get leaner)... if you do this on the dyno, if you don't see an appreciable increase in TQ then back it down to 24*, this gives you a knock safety margin.

Depending on your heads/cam, sounds about right.

Remind me of your cam spec (intdur/exhdur lda +adv)...?

I have cnc ported 243(ls6) heads from AI, cam is like 23x/23x for duration (forgot), .60x and .60x lift, It is in between a stage 3 and 4 camshaft(when looking at BTR or texas speed) and I think it is 112 LSA. I also have a fast 102 intake and fast 102 throttle body.
I was talking more about does 400 g/s of air equate to 525 hp? or is there some correlation between the two?

[oreobadr]

Quite a bit... if you don't get any knock, you can go to 12.8-13.0.

I will have to watch for this. I think I will also stay at approx 12.5 for my AFR just to be safe.


yes, you will increase TQ/HP... you may be able to go to 26-28* as long as you don't get knock, and keep an eye on AFR (watch that it does not get leaner)... if you do this on the dyno, if you don't see an appreciable increase in TQ then back it down to 24*, this gives you a knock safety margin.

I think I will just stay at 24 just to be on the safe side. Ive been reading about advancing timing is usually no longer beneficially after about 25-26 on ls6 heads because they are so much more efficient than ls1 heads.

[joecar]

( I took the liberty of fixing your quote/unquote tags )


24* is safe and it still makes good TQ/HP

( I don't have to say it: on the street you want to err on the side of safe )

:cheers:

[SOMhaveit]

I learned a thing or two about optimal spark advance a few weeks back on the dyno with my cars. I have to say I was surprised. My LS6 Z06, stock block, TFS 215 heads, Tooley Stage II cam, LS6 intake, LG pro headers,no cats, stock exhaust, made the most HP @ WOT with 17* advance. My stroked Camaro 383,AFR 205 heads, custom CamMotion cam, Kooks 1 7/8 headers, FAST 90, no cats, dual dual exhaust, made the most HP @ 28* advance. I already knew the Camaro liked more spark advance because I had had it on the dyno a few years back, but I was surprised at how much less spark advance the Z06 wanted.

With the cutouts opened up on the Camaro, it only wanted about 24* spark advance and only netted an additional 7 HP.

Unfortunately, moral of the story, you don't know until you spin it up on a dyno.

[joecar]

...

Unfortunately, moral of the story, you don't know until you spin it up on a dyno.+1 good moral.

[oreobadr]

Yeah wow that is very strange. I usually gauge the amount of power it is making by watching the estimated air it using and looking at my air to fuel ratio to have an estimation of horsepower. It is making more power based on my analysis from 4000-6400 RPM with the more advanced timing.

[oreobadr]

Also, I would like to say that I plan to do a turbo build on this car shortly. I am going to start with the ls1 that is currently in the car and keep it at low boost until it either blows up or I get bored. I am already building a studded gen 4 lq4, lsa heads, a big turbo cam, and 1000cc injectors. I also have a stage 4 RPM t56 and will most likely have a 12 bolt or a 9" in the future. The thread will continue!!!

[joecar]

I'll be here.

[dian]

having looked through the thread i want to say thanks to everybody contributing. this forum is just great. i also wonder why op doesnt get ridd of the maf. has it been suggested? it would make life so much easier.

[oreobadr]

If you read further I did in fact get rid of the MAF. I had a devotion to try and keep it but the combination of a fast 102/ 102 combo and a big cam made that idea not take place. If you have any questions or want to look at the finalized tune let me know!

[dian]

yeah, i dont know what that contraption is really for.

[oreobadr]

Hey guys,

So long story short, I live in michigan and I went to start my trans am (operating on speed density) and it was running weird which I assume is due to the varying IAT temperatures from when I tuned it. At the time, the temperature outside was 32F and I am currently using COS5 to allow for a IAT VE multiplier. Can someone determine if my A0014 table is accurate?

I also noticed that when I revved it a bit, my rpm hung a while and there was a lot of overshoot when the rpms were coming down (would go to 600 when idle is set at 900), anyone know what I can change to affect this? I had slight problems with my car during the summer with spark knock and then it had a harder time idling due to the varying spark advance.

20827

[joecar]

It seems to me that A0014 should slope the other way... i.e. cold air is denser and has more mass per cylinder volume.

[oreobadr]

That is what I initially thought too but after I read all of the different threads online when I made the table values, everyone had it in opposite order. I am not sure why this is the case.

[dian]

i cant see the file, but i have a0014 slope up. otherwise the engine runs lean when it warms up.

[joecar]

Ah, yes, you're both correct, this table has to slope upward (to the right) to add more air (which causes more fuel), it clicked in my head (again for the n'th time... I got to start writing some more of this stuff down).

[dian]

well, this topic seems to be 10 years old:

https://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?2270-Show-me-your-A0014-s/page5&highlight=A0014

has this issue been clarified in the meantime? is the table backwards? if so, how come it has not been corrected?

[oreobadr]

Hey guys,

quick note, So I am just working on my idle some more and it is coming along a lot better. Each time I do it I seem to apply my knowledge much better. HOWEVER!

I noticed that after I flash my ECU my trans am runs fine, if I have 0 TPS going 30 MPH my airflow is approximately 13-14g/s however after I turn the car off (to get a sandwich), if I am cruising at the same 30 MPH and 0 TPS, my airflow is now 20g/s and I have a cruise control effect. Throttle follow and cracker are both 0 in both cases, could this be the car learning something? (Car is OLSD)

If I were to flash the computer with the same calibration, the car will not have the cruise control effect until I turn it off and run it again.

I Was thinking it might to do with the short term and long term idle airflow correlations so I changed some delays and made some margins longer in hopes of that working but any ideas would be appreciated. For reference, my desired airflow at idle matches my parked airflow at idle which correlates almost perfectly with what my VE table is calculating. So they are all in alignment at approximately 13g/s.

Thoughts?

Also, my turbo engine is basically all built, I will be building the car soon!

[joecar]

Post some more logs...

[oreobadr]

Hey guys so here it is.

Quick question, Joecar can you also take a look at my spark tables? It seems that I am getting spark knock but I am not sure if its fake or not. Sometimes my header vibrates against the subframe so I am not sure.

For the log, I turn the car off around frame 4000, before this frame you can see my airflow is approximately 14-15 g/s when warm and tps is 0. As you can see when cruising and throttle is 0, the airflow is 22-24g/s, it was weird though because towards the end of my log it started acting normal again so maybe it is based off of time running after startup?

Also, is my throttle follower too high? sometimes the RPM goes too high when I push the clutch in and sometimes it is just right. I probably need to take a deeper look at this.

here is my tune and log(I will be adjusting for low MAP where it is running richer than normal)2102821029

[joecar]

Spark tables look ok for NA, but for boost you need to remove some advance as boost increases

( also, you can lower the LO table a little to give you a bit more range in adaptive knock )


Check intake manifold for signs of oil coming in via PCV.
Can you prevent the header from banging the chassis...?

[oreobadr]

Currently I cannot prevent the header from banging the chassis, I will try and fix this next time I change the oil. The reason I have the LO tables the same as the HI is because its speed density and the MAF fault will force it to LO spark tables. Do you think it is possible to add more spark down low to give me more throttle response? or is my current setup what I have to deal with just because of the cam size?

Why do you think I would have oil coming in via PCV? Blowby? Should I be worried?

Lastly, did you think of any reasons why my airflow changes based off when I start it as described in recent posts?

[joecar]

...
The reason I have the LO tables the same as the HI is because its speed density and the MAF fault will force it to LO spark tables.
The COS allows HO/LO adaptive spark to function when MAF DTC's are present (but it doesn't allow misfire detection to function).



Why do you think I would have oil coming in via PCV? Blowby? Should I be worried?Oil getting sucked into intake via PCV is a known problem (on many engines)... the oil reduces the effect octane which can then allow knock to occur.


Lastly, did you think of any reasons why my airflow changes based off when I start it as described in recent posts?I'm still thinking about this.



~ posted by phone ~

[statesman]

Lastly, did you think of any reasons why my airflow changes based off when I start it as described in recent posts?

That's something we can only guess... but it's also something which you can find out for yourself for sure. EFILive is a diagnostic tool... use it! Log everything airflow. Blow your 24 channel count, you don't need a fast frame rate for diagnosing this kind of problem... you need as much airflow data as you can get.

[oreobadr]

fixed all of the recent problems. Now I just have a quick question about possible false knock. So I took a drive in the trans am today and everything was running as it should, towards the end of my 30 minute drive I randomly got a knock retard of 5 degrees in a mid load operating condition where I dont normally have problems. What do you guys think?

[statesman]

What do I think?... I think you need to look at your cylinder charge and re-consider what you would classify as a "mid load operating condition". I think you've also got a lean tip-in. Yeah, I think that the knock is probably real.

[oreobadr]

Yeah it actually is kind of high load isnt it lol. Well besides that, how do I get rid of a lean tip-in and avoid this knock region? Also, should I still retard the timing or should fixing the lean tip in problem fix the KR issue?

I was thinking because I am speed density, I could just richen up the surrounding cells in my VE table and pull some spark in the neighboring cells for my high octane spark table. I am not sure if this will solve it though.

Lastly, how bad is 5 degrees of KR? is that substantial knock? what is the limit of LS1s with KR?

Thanks for the help!

[oreobadr]

Hey guys another KR issue, as I was leaving from a stoplight I got 7.7 degrees of KR because I let the clutch out too fast, RPM dipped, and it just stumbled hard. The KR carried into surrounding cells but it started at 600 RPM as seen. Is this real KR? and should I be worried about it due to the amount of it happening but at very low loads? I normally never have KR problems besides this.

[joecar]

Looks like it might have been real (did you hear it...?) and then the decay rate is too slow so you can't see if it knocks again.

Maybe try some burst knock retard (preemptive retard based on load rate) to see if it helps.

[oreobadr]

I did not hear anything to make me think its knock but then again my exhaust is pretty loud.

So the decay rate is the reason why I have KR in multiple cells?

What would burst knock retard do and what should I do with it?

Could KR of that magnitude hurt my engine at those low RPM and loads?

[joecar]

I did not hear anything to make me think its knock but then again my exhaust is pretty loud.
Make sure exhaust is not banging on chassis.


So the decay rate is the reason why I have KR in multiple cells?
Yes, you can see it decaying very slowly (takes about 4 seconds).
It decays so slowly that it won't knock again...
if the decay was quicker, any real knock would immediately show up again, making the KR waveform look like sawteeth (when you see this you know it is real knock).


What would burst knock retard do and what should I do with it?
BK enables when the load suddenly goes high (i.e. cylinder airmass exceeds the threshold), it then subtracts some timing in anticipation of knock.
BK has these tables:
B6210: this is the cylinder airmass threshold.
B6212: this is subtracted from current spark timing.

BK is designed to preempt knock in situations where a very sudden high load occurs.


Could KR of that magnitude hurt my engine at those low RPM and loads?If it happens very frequently, then yes; if it happens occassionally, then no; you're probably ok.