Calc.VET: correcting MAF and calculating VE (in single log)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ecir45

Would there be any benefit from running Calc.MAFT after using Calc.VET or is Calc.VET good enough at getting the VE table right. The only advantage possibly I can see is by using Calc.MAFT you could see how far you are off in the VE table in % instead of a calculation.

Thinking out the box since I have only done one Calc.VET so far and think my MAF is spot on but think VE Table probably needs some refining.

---

Post some log files.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redhardsupra

Also, it can drive you insane, because they will never be perfect, and you'll just end chasing your tail forever. Just a warning ;)

---

I'll keep that in mind. :bangin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joecar

Post some log files.

---

Only one log right now, the ones I made corrections from. Won't be able to get another till this weekend. Will post one next week for evaluation.

Log file is after second Calc_VET. Looks allot better, notice rich on deceleration and at low TPS%. At least its not throwing P0172 Fuel Trim System Rich Bank 1 and P0175 Fuel Trim System Rich Bank 2 codes which it did after first Calc_VET.

Using a 160 degree tstat that need to swap to a 180 but haven't set up my electric fans in the calibration yet.

Hopefully I am on the right path, opinions welcomed :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joecar

Upper MAF range:
- dragging the brakes (increasing load on engine) usually helps to get good data.

---

Need to remember to do the above on next Calc_VET.

Used the Interpolation SpreadSheet for VE tables then manually smoothed un-hit cells and extrapolate the un-hit cells on MAF tables.

http://forum.efilive.com/showthread....on-SpreadSheet

Can you post that spreadsheet here, I get "404 not found".

Sorry forgot spreadsheet in firt post didn't work see post 31

http://forum.efilive.com/showthread....l=1#post156166

When you log for performing the Calc.VET procedure (or any other tuning) make sure you keep the pid channel count to 24 or less

i.e. 10 samples/second vs 5 samples/second (or less).

I always read 24 or less but didn't think going 25 would make that big a difference :bangin:. As you probably noticed that log was a log of the tune and not setup with Calc_VET pids, I'll get another log soon.

Yes, I thought it was a log taken after you performed one iteration of Calc.VET.

I'm so late to the game with this question. Should B0120 be set to 400 for this procedure?