PDA

View Full Version : Use MAF for off boost/2 Bar SD when in boost



Earl H
May 5th, 2007, 07:53 AM
Guys,

I have a TT all bore '03 Z06. It currently runs high 9's at 144+mph. I want to get a bit more aggressive (i.e. turn up the boost). My car is currently tuned with the MAF. My tuner is responsible for the progress thus far. I have tuned my car in the past and I am slowly getting back into the swing of things. Now, I have just recently loaded in the COS. I have a 2 bar map sensor on order and will be installing it asap. I am getting my tune ready for 2 bar tuning(see attachment). My question is, can I use the current MAF tune for 105kpa and below and the 2 bar SD tune above that? If so, could I get some advice on how to set it up?

I am currently reading as much as i can while awaiting responses to this thread. Thanks in advance for the help.

diynoob
May 6th, 2007, 10:28 AM
Earl,

I'm putting COS5/2bar on my car ASAP. Just reading a little more before taking the plunge. 2bar sensor is sitting here in front of me so it's really just a matter of me finding the right COS5 for my 12593358 PCM :)

JMHO, and there are other experts here that I am sure will chime in soon, but I think you really want to tune the car "completely", e.g., not rely on VE data from a tune that depended on the MAF (unless you know for sure that Phil tuned VE with the MAF disabled at some point). Anyway, to tune your boost table you have to log the same PIDs as you'd need to tune your main VE table so you might as well go over the whole thing and make sure both of them are nice and clean. Plus I would imagine things could get ugly transitioning from one VE table to the other if you didn't do a fresh AutoVE for both together.
:cheers:

hquick
May 20th, 2007, 04:34 PM
I adjusted the Boost VE table to what I believe the tutorial says it should be.
50% though instead of 300.

5.7ute
May 20th, 2007, 05:02 PM
As diynoob states the ve table will be incorrect with the help of the boost so it will need to be remapped.
As for running off the maf & then SD this will not work. If the maf fails over 105 kpa It will use the 1bar ve table only. If the maf fail is before 105 kpa it will transition into the 2 bar table but will not reenable the maf until the engine is switched on & off & the pcm runs through its tests. If you are going to be going over the 512g/sec limit of the maf just tune in SD. Otherwise tune both ve tables & then recheck your maf tune.

trudynosports
May 22nd, 2007, 12:20 AM
With the 03 OS you shouldn't have to worry about retuning the 105kpa and below if the original MAF included tune was mapped correctly. The VE should have already been mapped independent of the MAF and the MAF independent of the MAP. This would result in you being able to copy the tables from the MAF tune over to the new COS. At that point you should really only have to fine tune the below 105kpa and then tune boost pressure tables. What kind of boost pressure is your setup running?

Earl H
May 22nd, 2007, 12:47 AM
Update: decided to go ahead and spend the time to do a full SD tune. I have been working for about a week re-learning the software and re-learning some old tuning procedures and learning many new ones. My BENs are almost all in the .99 to 1.01 range for the cells that matter (i.e. not decel and other parts of the map that aren't really used).

I will be tuning WOT at the track this friday. My baseline runs on the street show that the vehicle is tracking pretty well to what is being commanded at 105+kPA range.

hquick
May 22nd, 2007, 06:27 AM
Has the AutoVE tutorial been changed yet regarding the 'setting the commanded AFR to 14.7' which allows LTFT's to operate?

vatman02
May 22nd, 2007, 12:18 PM
i have a question how can this car be running with the maf enabled i am only seeing 6# of boost and that is setting off a maf frequency fail i am running sd anyway just curious

Earl H
May 22nd, 2007, 12:46 PM
Has the AutoVE tutorial been changed yet regarding the 'setting the commanded AFR to 14.7' which allows LTFT's to operate?

Please elaborate..I thought commanded was supposed to be 14.63 (stoic)?

joecar
May 22nd, 2007, 01:08 PM
Any cells in B3647 that are set to AFR 14.63 will cause the PCM to run in "semi-closed loop" mode...
for those cells, the PCM uses NBO2 feedback and applies STFT; you can't do AVE like this.

vatman02
May 22nd, 2007, 01:09 PM
i believe that if you command stoich it allows the LTFT to become active thus throwing off your auto ve
yea what he said

hquick
May 22nd, 2007, 01:16 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong Joecar....after we went through this stuff a while back with my autoVE wasn't it understood that even commanding 14.70 is no good as that equals EQ 1.00?
Mine is set to 1.0059 EQ. which equates to around 14.58 AFR.

joecar
May 22nd, 2007, 01:25 PM
Howard,

Good point...

that was because your B3601 was set to 14.68... showthread.php?t=5144 (http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?t=5144)

(that's why it's better to use EQ units instead of AFR units).

Earl H
May 22nd, 2007, 02:20 PM
Howard,

Good point...

that was because your B3601 was set to 14.68... showthread.php?t=5144 (http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?t=5144)

(that's why it's better to use EQ units instead of AFR units).

So 3601 and 3647 must be different to prevent the pcm from slipping into semi close loop?

5.7ute
May 22nd, 2007, 02:22 PM
As Redhardsupra points out elsewhere, the commanding stoich & disabling pe step is no longer necessary when using a wideband. These steps are only an offshoot of using trims to tune.

joecar
May 23rd, 2007, 01:08 AM
So 3601 and 3647 must be different to prevent the pcm from slipping into semi close loop?That's correct.

Earl H
May 23rd, 2007, 09:04 AM
So what should we set it up to command 14.7 or 14.5? Once BENs are at ~ 1.0, then what?

joecar
May 23rd, 2007, 10:52 AM
If you command 3% under or over, it should be fine.

When BEN's are close enough to 1.00, then you can command stoich if you so wish...
but do keep the high MAP columns of B3647 rich (12.6 or what you want at heavy load).

joecar
May 23rd, 2007, 01:22 PM
Here's what semi-open loop looks like (look at AFR_WBOS1)...

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/4484/semiopenloopng8.png

Earl H
May 23rd, 2007, 01:40 PM
Can you guys tell me what you think of these two files? BENS close enough. Commanded is at 14.6 on these passes. I haven't had a chance to adjust.

joecar
May 23rd, 2007, 02:09 PM
Can you guys tell me what you think of these two files? BENS close enough. Commanded is at 14.6 on these passes. I haven't had a chance to adjust.I'll hve to look after I get home tonite.

5.7ute
May 23rd, 2007, 02:37 PM
There is a lot of crud in them logs that you cant easily filter out. When decellerating during a log you should back your foot right off the pedal quickly so you can filter out the rich spikes that are caused. By letting your foot off slowly you can accumulate richer readings in your log file which will throw your BENS out.

joecar
May 24th, 2007, 01:09 AM
I agree with 5.7ute...

The rest of the BEN's look good.

Are you using then LC-1 to simulate HO2S11...?
You might try to program the high voltage higher by 0.050V and the low voltage lower by 0.150V to bring it closer to HO2S21.

purrvert
May 24th, 2007, 04:08 AM
LTFT has to be turned off in order to get BENs in line. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong!

joecar
May 24th, 2007, 07:01 AM
LTFT has to be turned off in order to get BENs in line. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong!That's correct... and a few other things also.

Earl H
May 24th, 2007, 10:59 AM
Why not just disable trims? {B3801} and {B4108}

joecar
May 24th, 2007, 11:58 AM
Why not just disable trims? {B3801} and {B4108}It will still go into semi-open loop mode (for stoich cells in B3647)... or at least mine seems to.