Still looking for the elusive...

[killerbee]

You say pull fuel in those areas. There is maybe a dozen different ways to do this. Pressure, pulse, a number of torque limiting tables...

I am curious about any methodologies that may work better than others.

[Racehemi]

EQ of .5-.6 sounds about right for cruise, I was tuning WOT and did not really care that much about cruise conditions. An EQ 1.0 =s stoich and will yield a haze out of the pipe. How are you going check that you are in fact at 1.0 after playing with your calculations? I strongly suggest an LC-1 or a NGK WBO2 for reference.

I agree. One vehicle specific constant. Should be easy to solve for a new one.

What did you see for eq when running highway unloaded, no boost? I seem to remember around 1.0??? Or was it 0.6?

[killerbee]

I personally don't need it to be accurate to a nat. For me, it is one of many tools, and I use it for the quick visual of high departures from desired.

I am much more interested (in this thread) in coming up with good methodology for tuning out the smoke.

[bballer182]

You say pull fuel in those areas. There is maybe a dozen different ways to do this. Pressure, pulse, a number of torque limiting tables...

I am curious about any methodologies that may work better than others.

In my dsp5 tunes i have made sure that all 5 of my tunes have the "pedal to desired toque" (B1115 and B1116) the exact same trough out the 5 tunes, because that one tables can reek havoc on the TCM if one were to have a non-standard pedal to desired torque table. So that would usually not be an option for me. So that brings me down to TBIQ, pulse, and pressure. This is where it gets to be kind of preference area. I think i remember reading that you had built your tunes around a base pressure? so that ould bring us down to just TBIQ and pulse. Personally i think i would end up using the TBIQ just because I think it's a little easier to work with that table than the pulse table. On the other hand it might be more wise to adjust the pulse table because there are no compensation tables and adjust tables that deal in pulse time. they all seem to be in the TBIQ tables. So if you go straight to the source and play with the pulse table you might not even have to examine all of the adjusting and correcting tables???

[bballer182]

EQ of .5-.6 sounds about right for cruise, I was tuning WOT and did not really care that much about cruise conditions. An EQ 1.0 =s stoich and will yield a haze out of the pipe. How are you going check that you are in fact at 1.0 after playing with your calculations? I strongly suggest an LC-1 or a NGK WBO2 for reference.

I have read in a couple different sources that an EQ of 1.0 was not stoich and was a little over stoich. (not in forum talk mind you) Do you have any info that would lead us to believe 1.0 is stoich? Keep in mind that stoich is in a perfect world and is theoretical. so it may very well be stoich when talking about and LBZ???

[killerbee]

...so if I understand the pulse idea, that would require a timing considerations as well?

[bballer182]

Yes, good point. So i guess the difficultly level is the same...???

[killerbee]

Got a problem. ENGTRQREF is not validating for my LMM logs. I know it worked for LBZ logging.

I can log it, seems to be correct, but I have the red X.

[GMPX]

What about table B0795 for limiting fuel via MAF flow?
Though I think the missing piece of the puzzle with B0795 & B0796 is how that is then transformed in to either a torque limit or mm3 limiter.

[bballer182]

Got a problem. ENGTRQREF is not validating for my LMM logs. I know it worked for LBZ logging.

I can log it, seems to be correct, but I have the red X.

OOO, dunno about that, I would have thought it would have worked on the LMM. In BBL there are quite a few to choose from. try some of them out.