Good VE numbers except at idle?

[hquick]

Hi All,
I'm currently AutoVE'ing my 98 Burb and after just running a long, high speed log I have good numbers throughout the logged area of the VE table.
I seem to be very rich at idle....I can smell the fuel and my AFR is around 10.8 to 11 or so.
I'm having trouble hitting some of the low RPM, high Kpa cells but if I apply the log to my VE table I end up with a huge downward spike in the idle area.
What should I do?

Edit: I have the 0411 PCM and using COS3.
The burb is Whippled and I'm using the PLX wideband and 2 bar sensor

[mr.prick]

you might want to tell everyone witch wide band you are using.
and why is the log a zipped file?

[hquick]

Sorry, maybe you haven't had your coffee yet :D
It says in the last line of my post PLX wideband. (that edit was done 10 seconds after I posted).
I think, unless I'm missing something, I can't upload a log file as is.
Maybe because of the size of the log...it's a good long log.
I'll have another look.
It's 5.22am here....so now it's time for my coffee! :D

[eboggs_jkvl]

You can upload a TUN file on here. THe problem might be the size of the file. How big is it? I tried to updoad as an attachment a 1 meg file and it would not load. I think the EFILive webmaster needs to increase the file size on the TUN file allowance a little bit bigger. Might I recommend 1.25 megs or so?

Elmer

[hquick]

Yeah....you're right Elmer.
My .tun file uploaded OK but my log file which is 900k won't.
Here's an idle log I took this morning from crank to op temp (RAFPN).
Can somebody please tell me what this means?
I'll run another log this afternoon on RAFIG.

[joecar]

Howard,

Some observations:

a. B3647 has areas set to EQ 1.00 (AFR 14.63)... AutoVE tuning won't work in those areas since EQ 1.00 enables "semi-closed loop mode" where the STFT's are used to trim the AFR around EQ 1.00 (AFR 14.63); during AVE tuning, you want to set those areas to something like EQ 1.03 or AFR 14.55.

b. VE table seems a little high at idle (even though there's a downward spike there) [and my comment means the area surrounding idle seems too high], which may be causing your idle to be so rich; but see comment a.

c. unrelated, B3647 is leaner in the high map low rpm corner... just think what happens when you open the throttle and pull from low speed in high gear... I think you need to run richer in that corner (it will also prevent knock in that situation).

Cheers,
Joe
:)

[hquick]

Thanks Joe,
that's unusual.
I had those numbers set to 14.63 and after reading on a different thread that 14.63 is EQ 1.0 I changed them to 14.70 as suggested, and that is what it was displaying for me.
I just tried changing the table to display EQ and sure enough....1.0???
So, does that mean the converter within the software is wrong?

[hquick]

I just changed to EQ 1.03 which shows as AFR 14.25.
I sure hope I don't have to make a 170kph log again :D

[hquick]

OK. Just for the hell of it I just changed the table values to AFR 14.55 and then checked the EQ by converting to EQ.
When I reloaded the tune and checked B3647 it displayed as 1.01???
I think the converter must be wrong???

[joecar]

Howard,

In the tunetool, go Edit->Configure Display Units, and find B3647 and set it's precision to more digits (0.0000).

Something to note: the various tables store discreet values, and I belive the tunetool rounds to the closest; you have to close/reopen the tunetool to see the rounded values;

[hquick]

Mmmmm...
The plot thickens! :lol:
This is the thread I was working from originally when I set the AFR to 14.70
http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?t=5087

[joecar]

In my B3647, I changed units several times and this is what I saw:

EQ 1.179688 -> AFR 12.400380 (which calculates to 14.63/12.400380 = 1.179803)

The error is (1.179688-1.179803)/1.179688 * 100% = -0.01%

I think what you're seeing is due to roundoff and not enough digits.

Edit: I thought I was seeing the same thing, but it was lack of digits.

[hquick]

OK....Just to try it out....again:Eyecrazy: I changed to the 4 decimal places as you suggested.
I then went back and changed to 14.7 AFR.
Next, I converted to EQ and it comes up with 0.9990.
Is this going to keep it Open Loop?

[joecar]

Hmmmm.... when I tried that I got 0.9951.

[joecar]

I'll pm Paul and see what he thinks...

[hquick]

I think I'm going crazy!
I just converted back to AFR and it came up as 14.6954 :bash:

I just tried going backwards and forwards a couple of times and it stayed at EQ0.9990 = AFR 14.6954

[joecar]

Howard,

In your tune B3601 is set to 14.68 (instead of 14.63)...

I think that this is the problem.

Cheers
Joe
:)

[joecar]

Crunching numbers on my trusty TI calculator:

14.68/14.70 = 0.999
14.63/14.70 = 0.995

[hquick]

Thanks again Joe,
That's pretty interesting. I've never changed that number. It may be a good idea to include some of these things in the AutoVE sticky. It can be a big trap for geese like myself!

[joecar]

Howard, noted, I'll let TAQUickness know (the author). :cheers:

[hquick]

Yup!
Just changed to 14.63 in B3601. Went back and changed to 14.7 in B3647 and then converted to EQ...came out as 0.9951.
Changed back to AFR and it came up as 14.7004

[joecar]

Ok, that should be good. :cheers:

[hquick]

Here's the tune I'll load before heading home from work.
Does this B3647 look appropriate to you?

[joecar]

Looks good... I would richen the low rpm high map corner.

[hquick]

Thanks Joe...yeah, I went the wrong way before and leaned it out.
I'll edit my uploaded tune with that corner richened a bit.

[hquick]

I just changed the above attached tune with the B3647 table richened up in the area you suggested.
It looks unusual...is that normal?

[joecar]

Oh... I meant like this...

[hquick]

WOW! Thanks Joe.
That's....ahhhh.......different!

[Chevy366]

How many of the decimal places (precision values) does the PCM use ?
I mean if you set the values to 6 places will the PCM use those or does it ignore some ?

[joecar]

The PCM stores values in some "fixed point" format.

For example, say a particular parameter is stored as a byte;
a byte can hold 256 discrete values (0-255);
say the range of this parameter is 0.000 to 9.999;
then the step between each discrete value is (9.999-0.000)/(255-0) = 0.039211764705882352941176470588235294...
and after rounding for display this looks like 0.03921;
but note that 0.03921*255 = 9.99855 which is not 9.999.

So it's not a matter of how many decimal places does the PCM use, but it's a matter of how many decimal places are used to display a real number which has discrete values, which causes the number to be displayed imprecisely.

[hquick]

I have another question Joe, if you don't mind?
I just ran a BIG log on the above tune.
I first ran a RAFIG log first...but I guess that's not going to be appropriate to use until I get the idle area of the VE closer?
How do I tune B3647?
I hit some knock at around 3200pm and 135Kpa. I didn't get that on the last tune...that I noticed!

[Tordne]

B3647 is simply the open Looped commanded ARF at various RPM vs. MAP points. It allows you to control the fuel enrichment at a pretty granular level. I use this table instead of PE mode for instance.

[hquick]

Thanks,
I'm kind of stumped.
Just for the sake of trying something, I changed the first two lines of the VE table (400 and 800rpm) to the same as the base table of the 2002 Express van.
When I first started the Burb it seemed like it was going to work. Idling at 40 kpa and around 750 rpm it was right around 14.6. As soon as it dropped to 35Kpa the AFR started to drop and headed right down to 10.5 or so.
I'm not sure what to do about this?
Any suggestions please?

[Chevy366]

The PCM stores values in some "fixed point" format.

For example, say a particular parameter is stored as a byte;
a byte can hold 256 discrete values (0-255);
say the range of this parameter is 0.000 to 9.999;
then the step between each discrete value is (9.999-0.000)/(255-0) = 0.039211764705882352941176470588235294...
and after rounding for display this looks like 0.03921;
but note that 0.03921*255 = 9.99855 which is not 9.999.

So it's not a matter of how many decimal places does the PCM use, but it's a matter of how many decimal places are used to display a real number which has discrete values, which causes the number to be displayed imprecisely.
Got it , thanks .

[mr.prick]

Sorry, maybe you haven't had your coffee yet :D
It says in the last line of my post PLX wideband. (that edit was done 10 seconds after I posted).
I think, unless I'm missing something, I can't upload a log file as is.
Maybe because of the size of the log...it's a good long log.
I'll have another look.
It's 5.22am here....so now it's time for my coffee! :D
after you edited it?

[hquick]

But I originally edited it about 10 seconds after I posted it. ;)
I'm still not sure why I can't upload the log's directly....maybe they're too big. Less than 1mb though?

[joecar]

Howard,

I would get the VE table dialed in first (the scantool map should show BEN's at 1.00+/-0.02... or very close to 1.00);
do one thing at a time.

If the IFR table (depends on actual fuel pressure and injector rated values) isn't correct, then it may be hard to tune idle;
I haven't had to tune idle yet, so I'm not too familiar with "idle stuff".

When you see knock, do this:
a. If the AFR (or EQ) is not rich enough in that area, richen it in B3647.
b. Reduce timing by about 1 degree in that area of the correct spark table.

(use the scantool->tunetool pid linking feature to highlight the "area").

There's other things you have to consider:
- was it real knock...?
- does the motor have carbon deposits, is it ingesting oil thru PCV, is your petrol good...?
- is burst knock getting involved: Tordne (Andrew) can tell you somethings about this.

Cheers
Joe
:)

[hquick]

Thank's Joe,
I applied my last log to the tune above and used the spread sheet I found in here called 'interpolation' to smooth it. That sheet does a great job. It actually felt a little smoother and slightly more responsive to drive this morning. Of course, that could be the cool weather.
I'll keep working on this idle thing. I don't know....seems it hits around 80oC whilst running the RAFPN log and then the AFR just plummets to 10.5 from around 13.
If I pull up at lights etc...it does the same. The rest of the VE table is pretty good (alot of 0.99's and 1.0's). Just shows extremely rich around idle 35-45 Kpa 800rpm.

[hquick]

I noticed this morning whilst logging RAFPN the idle AFR was dropping when I hit around 80oC.
After some more reading I found that I need to max out B4501???
Does that sound right?
It was set at 80oC.
I have now set it to 140oC.
I'll see what difference that makes.
Is this the correct procedure or should I be looking for something else?

[joecar]

Howard,

That idle log shows ECT increasing and then at some point the actual AFR transitions while the commanded AFR stays steady...

The actual AFR seems to match the Engine Protection AFR in your tune, but EP looks like it's disabled (and I'm thinking that the commanded AFR would reflect the EP AFR), so that's not it.

EGR and AIR appear to be disabled.

It looks like it may be an external influence... exhaust air leak that seals up when temperature is reached... something to do with cats...?? :nixweiss:

I can't see anything in your tune that is doing that... we need a few more pairs of eyes...

Cheers
Joe
:)

Edit: I posted this before seeing post #39 show up.

[joecar]

B4501 "Idle learning temp enable" seems to match the transition...

But I don't know enough about idle learning... I didn't think it would modify the AFR like that...

[hquick]

Thanks again Joe,
You are a great help.
I read a post somewhere that Doc had been involved in and it said to set B4501 to max setting during AutoVE.
I'm still confused. After following the AutoVE tutorial to a 'T' (for tutorial :D ), it seems there are alot of things which need 'tweaking' in the tutorial.
I understand people are busy and I appreciate all of the effort everyone on this forum puts in to help people such as myself but some of those issues could really be leading people astray...like the EQ/AFR issues already discussed and the decimal points.
Hopefully someone else will also chime in here with their thoughts on the B4501 or anything else really :D .
I have my VE so close...it's just this damned idle that's killing me!

[hquick]

I tried maxing out the B4501 table and it made no difference at all to the idle AFR's dropping. It did make a difference to the idle AFR's in the map in that area.
That probably doesn't make much sense. :Eyecrazy:
What happened was, it actually went lean at idle before dropping. It still dropped to around 10.5 AFR.
It's a bit perplexing. If I were to drive and pull up to idle for only seconds, I would never see the AFR's drop in those cells and I would be thinking I had the VE dialled in correctly.
The real givaway was the smell of fuel. I know it's rich but I don't know how to fix it? :nixweiss: :bash:

[hquick]

Well, this morning I ran a RAFIG log and watched the data.
As soon as the temp hit 80oC the AFR's plummeted to 10.5 from 14.5.
As the temp hit 80, the commanded AFR goes to 14.63.
During AutoVE...aren't I supposed to command anything but 14.63?
Where would this be coming from?

[TAQuickness]

There are a few afterstart enrichment tables in the Fuel -> Crank/Start section. Might find a culprit in there.

[hquick]

Thank's TA,
I looked in that area but didn't see anything.
I'll take another, closer look!

[hquick]

OK: Looks like I need to do some looking into, and work on B3632

[Doc]

Howard
What OS are you running? Could you post or send me a copy of your tune?

Ooops! I found it on the first page-sorry. I'll have to take a peek when I get off work. No EFI Live here at work today.

[hquick]

I'm running 02020003 COS3.
thanks for any advice you can offer.
I've been looking at other tunes and studying their B3632 and they are way different to mine.

This one is the latest as of this morning.

[Doc]

Okie Dokie,
B3632 is pulling alot of fuel in your table. Comparing the descriptions btw COS #5 and COS #3 reveals a discrepancy. The description of the COS #5 table is as follows...

"When using {B3647} "Commanded Fuel vs RPM (Normal)" to define the commanded fuel, this table is used as multiplier based on engine coolant temperature.
A number of 1.00 will add no more fuel based on the engine coolant temp, any number higher than that will add fuel."

In COS #3 it merely tells you...

"This value is subtracted from the open loop commanded fuel EQ Ratio.
See Appendix-B in the Tuning Tool Users Manual for more information about EQ Ratio modifiers."

I wasn't trying to be cryptic in an earlier PM about checking out Appendix B. now that I am home and have reviewed your tune. I really do believe that the info in Appdx B is key to mastering the whole Commanded Fueling bit. I don't know why the descriptions are different?

Furthermore, RedHardSupra nailed the whole idle thing in another recent thread...

http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?t=5155

But back to your tune...

So right at 80deg C in B3632, your modifier table for B3647 you are throwing in .1(which is lower than "1," thus, leaner);
and .08 @92degC; .08@104; etc, etc

From 80deg C and up you are essentially fully warmed up and ready to VE Tune exclusively hence, all of your modifier tables such as B3632 should be an EQ ratio of "1" so you can do the raw tune of the main VE table undisturbed by all of those shouting voices.

This is key to understanding...If the powers that be would put up with my skull full of mush for a second in order for me to make some grunts and noises.

Mathematically the pcm can't digest what all of the modifier tables do to make up the final Commanded Fueling...this is why you have to "Walk like an Egyptian" and get your gearhead to start to think in EQ vice AFR. I have some handy EQ vs. AFR & AFR vs. Lambda strip charts on my big ass laptop that sucks batteries quickly.

No more lies. Straight up EFI Live Truth.

So in other words the pcm is just doing exactly what you are telling it to do.

[hquick]

Thanks Doc,
Sorry, I wasn't accusing you of being cryptic.
I understand after reading...I think...nearly every thread in these forums that some members like to make us 'newbies' work for the results. I'm all for that .
I think it forces people to actually learn rather than just get a quick, 'cheap' fix!
Thanks so much for that detailed post.
I'll take another look at my tune!

[hquick]

Don't know that I explained myself correctly Doc.
My truck goes super rich at idle..not lean.
Moving at idle, it's lean. As I pull up it drops to AFR 10.4 or thereabouts.
Does that make sense?

[5.7ute]

I think that what he is saying is that when the modifiers are being used is when you are getting the correct reading. When you hit 80deg there are smaller modifiers in play which will richen up the readings. You may need to redo your autoVE & filter out the temp ranges that run on the modifiers. This will give you your base table & you can tune the rest in after you get the solid benchmark.
That is what I think he is trying to say. I could be wrong though.

[joecar]

I have a question: why arn't the modifiers reflected in the commanded AFR...? That has me puzzled.

And Doc's right, we have to get away from AFR and think/speak/breathe EQ.

:)

[joecar]

Another observation: my 02020005 COS5 shows the COS3's description for table B3632... so what's going on with mine...?

[hquick]

Trying to Joe....it's messing with my mind! :Eyecrazy:

[hquick]

Well, just to see what would happen...and because I'd been reading alot about this table on various threads on this forum, I thought I'd set Table A0008 to all 1's so as there'd be no adjustment.
I ran a RAFIPN log and then another log on the way to work (where I am now at 12.30am).
As soon as I started the Burb it first went very lean for a couple of seconds and then it went rich---10.5 and stayed there for the whole log.
I noticed as I pull up to lights it jumps lean and then drops down and goes rich again???

[Doc]

I think that what he is saying is that when the modifiers are being used is when you are getting the correct reading. When you hit 80deg there are smaller modifiers in play which will richen up the readings. You may need to redo your autoVE & filter out the temp ranges that run on the modifiers. This will give you your base table & you can tune the rest in after you get the solid benchmark.
That is what I think he is trying to say. I could be wrong though.

I thought about this as my post was right before bed. I am glad you caught on to what I was thinking.

hquick your VE is probably tangled up in these modifiers in like a sine wave in a sort of way where at some points your are lean and then rich. It all goes back to the ultimate goal of getting your WBO2 readings to be as close to what you are commanding in EQ.

joecar, what is the date and version on/in your COS #5 cal definition file?
Mine is July 10, 2006 version 7.85

[hquick]

Doc, are you saying it would be a good idea to set all of those 'modifying' tables to 1...or to a setting where they hae no effect?
Then dial in my VE table. Then work on adding whatever modifiers may be necessary?

[joecar]

My 02020005.cal:
- calibration version is 7.90, calibration date is 3/15/2007.
- file is dated 4/18/2007 9:51am (from 742_515_644_622_55.zip).

[hquick]

Well, it's 2.45am and I've been called into work. Whilst I'm waiting to do the work, I decided to go out and have a play with the tune and table A0008.
I upped the area at 80oC and it had the desired effect of keeping the AFR up at that point. As soon as the temp hit 90 it dropped again.
Next I lifted the whole area between 80 and 100oC. This time I cause it to go rich and bog down. It had trouble starting. I played a little more and got the Commanded AFR to almost match the measured AFR.
This is a good result right?

[joecar]

Well, it's 2.45am and I've been called into work. Whilst I'm waiting to do the work, I decided to go out and have a play with the tune and table A0008.
I upped the area at 80oC and it had the desired effect of keeping the AFR up at that point. As soon as the temp hit 90 it dropped again.
Next I lifted the whole area between 80 and 100oC. This time I cause it to go rich and bog down. It had trouble starting. I played a little more and got the Commanded AFR to almost match the measured AFR.
This is a good result right?Post your log and your tune.

[hquick]

I found it easiest to just watch the data tab and keep an eye on the Commanded AFR and Measured AFR.
Obviously it still needs alot of work but I think I'm finally getting somewhere.
When the truck's cold I'll run a log and hopefully get a better/bigger picture!

[Doc]

Doc, are you saying it would be a good idea to set all of those 'modifying' tables to 1...or to a setting where they hae no effect?
Then dial in my VE table. Then work on adding whatever modifiers may be necessary?

What I am saying is after 80c set everything to "1" (which has no effect) and solely focus on the VE table. Prior to that the modifiers (along with the TB set screw if you have a cable driven TB with respect to IAC counts and A/F) such as Desair, Spark, and all the other coolant temp modifiers will help give you a smooth warm up.

Joe,
I didn't realize that there was an update. I wonder what significant mods took place btw 7.85 and 7.90?

[hquick]

OK...thanks Doc. I'll give it a try in the morning.
This is a log I just ran a few minutes ago on my way home.
Whereas before the warmup was a little rough...this time it was as smooth as silk.
The commanded AFR and the actual AFR were very close all the way to operating temp.

[joecar]

Doc, I don't know what changed, but here's a copy of it (see post #4): showthread.php?t=5074 (http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?t=5074)

[Doc]

Thanks Joe,
I just have been so busy lately some things have been slipping by.

[hquick]

Hi All,
Doc, I just tried as you recommended.
As soon as the temp hit 90 it did the same as it was doing before...went super rich -> 10.5 AFR.
So, I put the figures back into A0008 and went for a drive. Not going rich at idle anymore.
Infact...a little lean, but no too bad.
Atleast, if nothing else I'm learning what function A0008 plays. :)
Now, what do you suggest?
Apply 1 to everything above 104...'cause I'm not likely to hit it and then adjust my VEtable, or...play with the numbers in A0008 and try to get my commanded and measured AFR's to match?...Or something completely different? :Eyecrazy:
You guys are a great help and an inspiration.
Thankyou

[5.7ute]

You will need to adjust your ve table to a good baseline. With the varying weather conditions up here this is how I got my bens in line.
Set the a0008 table to 1.0 on all settings above 60deg.
Set the A0014 to all 1.0.
Waited until engine was up to operating temp then started logging. Filtered out all transients & ect temps that were away from my baseline, then applied ben factors to the VE table using the interpolation sheet.
Repeated this until bens were in line.
With the VE table set for a constant temp then I logged from a cold start with a map using the a0008 table & bens to dial this table in with a constant IAT temperature. Then I did another log with constant ECT & dialled in the IAT temperature. This last step was a pain as I have a self made otrcai that suffers from heatsoak when standing for long periods.

[hquick]

I'll give it a try.
I'll put it back to a base Express Van tune and go again from there.
Can you please explain what you mean by
Filtered out all transients & ect temps that were away from my baseline ?
Is the interpolation sheet you're talking about the 'smoothing' one which was posted somewhere in this forum?

I also just noticed that even though my B3647 Table figures were earlier set to 14.7004, they had at some stage chaned back to 14.7.
I just re-changed them but also swapped to EQ and made them 1.0300. I then swapped the tune to my laptop and opened B3647. They had changed to 1.0303???

[5.7ute]

I basically followed the filter used in the autove tutorial with a few extras.
I also filter out KR, TP under 2% and whatever coolant & IAT temps that are outside the baseline I am after. As has been stated on here many times you are better off getting good data than filtering it all out so try to keep good throttle control & if you have to lift, lift off completely so you do not get lean transients.
The temp baseline will be evident when you map the bens against ECT.
PM me your email addy & I can send through the sheet & or maps & filters if you want them.

[hquick]

Thanks again.
Thankyou for explaining about the 'lean transients'....which I was getting.
I'm heading out to run a log right now.
PM on the way.

[5.7ute]

Should of read lean/rich transients but Im sure you get the idea.

[hquick]

:Eyecrazy: Yeah....I understood...i've been watching it happen everytime I log!

[hquick]

Ok, I just built the filter and I applied those two maps to my log (thanks 5.7).
What do you mean by
"whatever coolant & IAT temps that are outside the baseline I am after"

How do you decide what the 'baseline' is?
It'll sink in..it just takes time :D

[5.7ute]

When you map the logged temperatures you will see where the bulk of the readings are taking place when you use the cellcount button. This will be your baseline. On that log you just sent the baseline IAT was between 58 & 67 deg C.
The baseline ECT was between 89 & 100 deg C.
Filter out anything that is not in these regions & apply the corrected map to your VE table after a quick stop in that interpolation spreadsheet.
When you do your next run use the same filter so that you are setting the ve table with the same baseline temperatures. When you get the VE table in line then you start correcting your modifiers.

[hquick]

OK...cool!
Got the filters built...applied everything as you suggested.
This is what I get.

[joecar]

I'll give it a try.
I'll put it back to a base Express Van tune and go again from there.
Can you please explain what you mean by ?
Is the interpolation sheet you're talking about the 'smoothing' one which was posted somewhere in this forum?

I also just noticed that even though my B3647 Table figures were earlier set to 14.7004, they had at some stage chaned back to 14.7.
I just re-changed them but also swapped to EQ and made them 1.0300. I then swapped the tune to my laptop and opened B3647. They had changed to 1.0303???Quantization due to storing a real number as a discrete (non-real) value.

[hquick]

Sorry Joe...you lost me! :D

But I understand what you're getting at.

[hquick]

Is this what the filter should look like?

[joecar]

Howard, change those 2 AND's to OR's.

[hquick]

Thanks Joe,
that's what I wasn't sure of.

[hquick]

OK, with thanks to ALOT of help from 5.7 ute and the rest of you, I am starting to get somewhere.
Something I'm having trouble working out is why the max commanded AFR in my logs is 14.22?
I have my B3647 table set at EQ 1.0303 which equates to ......OK. I just changed back to AFR and it comes out as 14.1987?????
I don't know..... :nixweiss:

[hquick]

Here's where I'm at!

[hquick]

Latest update.
Getting there with thanks to Mick!

[joecar]

I'm travelling so I can't view those files.

[Lennart]

Howard,

after reading this entire thread I was wondering if you are running stock injectors with the Whipple? Do you use the Whipple add-on injectors?

[hquick]

Hi Lennart,
yes...at present I am riunning the stock injectors and Whipple 'craptronics'.
I have the marine intake sitting in the garage but it's not quite ready to go on yet. That will incorporate using Bosch 42lb injectors and removal of the Whipple stuff.

[350SS]

Howard,

after reading this entire thread I was wondering if you are running stock injectors with the Whipple? Do you use the Whipple add-on injectors?

Wow Howard, I picked up alot of good info from reading this thread you got going, sorry to hear that you're still chasing this. I thought the question above was a good one, and might be a red herring, but did you try disconnecting the Whipple injectors, just to make sure that they aren't firing when they're not suposed to be? Probably has nothing to do with the situation, but it's always good to remove as many variables as possible.

[hquick]

Hi Max...glad it all helped.
I've learned ALOT in the last couple of months with the help of so many great people on this forum.
My Whipple kit doesn't have the extra injectors. It just has the 'boost-a-pump' unit which up's the voltage of the fuel pump to give higher pressure whilst in boost.
Whilst logging at present, I'm trying to get the table inline below 105kpa anyway so that's irrelevent (I think???).
I'm sure my issues now lie in the IAT area's.

[hquick]

Tried to upload a large log (700k....so not at the 1MB limit) but couldn't. Keeps faulting.

[hquick]

Managed to upload the log

[Lennart]

Howard, from your ECT I assume you are still running the stock thermostat?! Your IAT is rather high....what was the ambient temp during the log? I typically see +3°C to +20°C with the Whipple supplied air filter setup.
The Whipple filter will have to go soon as the sucking noise is almost unbearable!!

[hquick]

Hi Lennart,
I guess the ambient was around 20oC so not really warm.
I'm running an air filter setup out of which model vehicle I have no idea.
It does use a K&N panel filter.
And yes, I'm running the stock stat. I see it open at around 97oC whilst watching a log. I do have a 160F stat here.
During most normal running at speed on the freeway...the numbers are pretty good at around 0.99 - 1.00.

[hquick]

Been playing with A0014 with promising results so far.

[purrvert]

You are loosing timing in boost 3 to 5 deg can be seen from A0010 and possibly 1 to 2 deg from burst knock, the rest you will have to find using spark pids, probably torque related.
Hell I thought I was a prolific flasher, but I believe you've outdone me. Nice work.

[hquick]

Lol! Can I be arrested for that? 'Prolific Flashing'.
Latest tune and log.

[purrvert]

Well I see your timing is dropping from the IAT. Prolific Flashing is not a crime, yet......

[hquick]

Any suggestions/idea's as to what to try next?