View Full Version : E38 VVE problems
johnv
April 11th, 2008, 06:49 PM
Having hassels with VVE :help2:
Downloaded latest verion of 7.5.3 build 36
Still have 7.4 as well
Seem to be missing heeps of pids including E38 pids
Getting commanded AFRs way out of wack 2.5 :1:angel_innocent: so impossible to use auto VE. (AFRs are close to desired at idle and cruise but i get correction factors of 5.5 plus in some of these cells)
When I modify the 2bar VVE open loop table ,it worked fine for about first 10 flashes, now :bad: try as i might i can not save any changes to the table, they just disappear when i save the tune file.
any help apreciated
John
hymey
April 11th, 2008, 10:20 PM
So you are having dramas with logging? Try the latest calibration files?
I'd say your dma pids aren't validated. Thats the reason for crazy readings.
johnv
April 12th, 2008, 04:37 PM
So you are having dramas with logging? Try the latest calibration files?
I'd say your dma pids aren't validated. Thats the reason for crazy
readings.
I don't even have the E38 dma pids in my pid selection so am unable to validate.
still no luck.
I think i'll uninsall 7.5.3 and reload it
I take it the latest version is the one on the download page ?
hymey
April 12th, 2008, 09:37 PM
Yeah Uninstall and try again mate.
ringram
April 25th, 2008, 12:05 AM
Dont forget vve tables are only visible with v2 plugged in. They are calculated from the table. You need to click the update coefficients button to update the actual values. No point pasting changes into the vve and saving, nothing will happen. Click update values first, then save. All will then be well.
johnv
April 25th, 2008, 09:34 AM
Yes was doing the upgrade coeficients properly:doh2:
Just need to get my head around the fact that when you make big changes to an area of the VVE table then generate coeficients, the result that you save are often quite different to what you have asked for, as the table becomes blended to a large degree when you generate coeficients.
But all good , got there in the end:thankyou2:
ringram
April 26th, 2008, 01:50 AM
Yes I think its because it doesnt exactly match, so it losses some definition during the calculations.
GMPX
April 26th, 2008, 11:09 AM
Mathmatically you are a little more limited than say an LS1, but in the end with correct manipulation you can get it just as close.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.