Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Cranking VE, generally increase/decrease?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    51

    Default Cranking VE, generally increase/decrease?

    I've searched and was suprised there was not as much as I would have figured relating to cranking VE.

    I know there are many variables, but if I were to ask a for a general answer, for cammed cars do you typically find that cranking VE needs to be reduced, or increased?

    My assumption was more air(cam) you need to increase cranking VE...but the few threads I did find led me to believe that most cammed cars end up reducing cranking VE?

    from the few threads stating anything about cranking VE, it seemed it is a "outcast" misunderstood table and more people go after friction air or another table.

    right now I have periodic stalls on hot restarts (very periodic) but still would like a general theory on what is typically done with cranking VE on cammed cars.

    I'll search hot start threads as well, no problem, but in the dark on cranking VE....

    thanks!
    2000 SS, A4 conv to M6, FAST 90/90, 224/230 581/592 XER, 2002 ECM 436HP/397TQ

    Melbourne Florida

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    51

    Default

    So does this mean leave the cranking VE stock?
    2000 SS, A4 conv to M6, FAST 90/90, 224/230 581/592 XER, 2002 ECM 436HP/397TQ

    Melbourne Florida

  3. #3
    Lifetime Member SSpdDmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,558

    Default

    My theory was to do it after you do the Main VE....

    After I completed my main VE, I did a quick comparison between the stock VE and the new one in Excel. Using the percent difference between stock and new, I altered the cranking VE similarly for the RPM rows in common (400, 800, 1200). I then adjusted the rows inbetween and brought them in line with the ones I just changed.

    For example, if the 800 RPM row was generally 45% lower than stock was, I reduced the 800 RPM row in the cranking VE 45%. If the 400 row was 55% below stock, I reduced the cranking VE 400 row 55%. Then, the rows in between were reduced 780-46%, 760-47%, 740-48%, etc. (assuming it's 20 RPM increments - I can't remember for sure).

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Thanks, that gives me a good starting point!
    2000 SS, A4 conv to M6, FAST 90/90, 224/230 581/592 XER, 2002 ECM 436HP/397TQ

    Melbourne Florida

  5. #5
    Lifetime Member 5.7ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,840

    Default

    There was a cranking VE table excel spreadsheet on Redhardsupras blog. It seemed to do the job. Here it is.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    The Tremor at AIR

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 5.7ute View Post
    There was a cranking VE table excel spreadsheet on Redhardsupras blog. It seemed to do the job. Here it is.
    I thought I saw that somewhere in the past, thanks guys!
    2000 SS, A4 conv to M6, FAST 90/90, 224/230 581/592 XER, 2002 ECM 436HP/397TQ

    Melbourne Florida

  7. #7
    Lifetime Member samh_08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    299

    Default

    Funny I was just going to post about that spreadsheet. Does it actually work well? When I just did it, it seemed like the numbers were WAY different. Is stock just off that far?

  8. #8
    Lifetime Member 5.7ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,840

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by samh_08 View Post
    Funny I was just going to post about that spreadsheet. Does it actually work well? When I just did it, it seemed like the numbers were WAY different. Is stock just off that far?
    How far out was your main VE table when you finished?
    This sheet was just a quick fix to transpose your VE table into the cranking VE table. I have never tried it with a stock tune to see what the factory does but I will have too now.
    The Tremor at AIR

  9. #9
    Lifetime Member hquick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,371

    Default

    My stock {B0102} table is set at 75.0 across the board. After using the spreadsheet it looks ALOT different but works well.
    I do however get an 'out of range' message on that table now...and I have no idea why.
    Howard

    YOU ONLY NEED TWO TOOLS IN LIFE - WD-40 AND DUCT TAPE. IF IT DOESN'T
    MOVE AND SHOULD, USE THE WD-40. IF IT SHOULDN'T MOVE AND DOES, USE THE
    DUCT TAPE.
    IF YOU CAN'T FIX IT WITH A HAMMER, YOU'VE GOT AN ELECTRICAL PROBLEM.


    98 K1500 'HOLDEN' Suburban.
    Custom Whipple SC, Mercruiser Marine intake, 0411 PCM, 4L80E w/shift kit

  10. #10
    Lifetime Member samh_08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    299

    Default

    My table is also set to around 75 across the board. After the spreadsheet the values start at 39 and rise progressively to 83. Im just curious as to how this works and if it is effective. You would think if you change these values by this much you would get a drastic result, not?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. e38 cranking help
    By ringram in forum E37, E38 & E67 PFI ECM's
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: March 20th, 2010, 01:47 AM
  2. Sudden increase in Air/Cyl
    By Mileage in forum E37, E38 & E67 PFI ECM's
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: June 9th, 2009, 11:09 AM
  3. Mileage Increase on Trucks
    By MSURacing in forum Tuning For Economy
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: May 12th, 2008, 11:42 AM
  4. LBZ defuel/rpm increase progress?
    By Cobra#3747 in forum Duramax 06 LLY / 06+ LBZ & LMM
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 7th, 2007, 11:34 AM
  5. fuel pump prime - increase time?
    By 350SS in forum General (Petrol, Gas, Ethanol)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: April 8th, 2007, 09:06 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •