Confused about MAF

[wcj]

Ok so my B0120 is set to 400. I guess I can set it to 0, but Im figuring 400 is probably low enough and like you said, the rest can be filtered out.

I wanted to work with Calc.VET because I know my MAF is a lot closer than my VE. I know my VE table is all jacked up so I wanto to get that right before I work on any other part.

[joecar]

400 is good because that is below the operational range (it only sees 400 rpm during starting).


Ok, Calc.VET is a good decision (it corrects the existing MAF and calculates a new VE from it).

[wcj]

Ok. I relogged my drive to work this morning using the calcpid you fixed. This is what I got.

MAF 'corrected'


VE table 'calculated'


Log_0029.efi

[joecar]

The MAF correction looks pretty good, everything is very close to 1.0.


The VE calculation looks to be lower than what it should... can you post a pic of your previous/original B0101 table.

did you enter the correct displacement (in scantool go Edit->Log File Info);

did you apply the transient filter and the low cell count button...?

[wcj]

The VE calculation looks to be lower than what it should.

Agreed.

I updated the log file info with 5669 for displacement. Applied map temp/throttle filters and Im using low cell count of '10'. I could increase the low cell count to 25 or even 50, but I dont think it will move the 'calculated' VE much even if I did that.



Here are the mods for the car.

Fast 102 w/ LS2 tb
Hand ported 61cc 799 heads (285 cfm@600)
228/236 .588/.601 @ 114
Delphi 42lb injectors
ARH LT Headers w/cats
SLP Underdrive pulley
Halltech Venom CAI

This is my tune after making VE adjustments from this morning's log.
2003 FAST102_CALCVET_0002.tun

[wcj]

I'm wondering if I should now switch to calcMAFT and just update the corrected VE table.

[joecar]

After looking at your B0101 VE table (post #25), I think the Calc.VET map (post #23) is actually ok.


Take some more logs, let's see if we can get consistent repeatable results... then we can try Calc.MAFT after that.


BTW: thanks for posting your results

[wcj]

Thanks again for looking through this with me.

Alright, here are the results from this morning's drive to work. Same filters/low cell count.

Corrected MAF shows a little rich compared to yesterday but it doesnt too bad. Most of the CalcVE is consistent with the CalcVE from yesterday.





Log_0031.efi

[joecar]

So Log_0031 is from CALCVET_0002.tun...?

Looks like it's repeatable/consistent (I'll analyze it deeper later today)... take another log later in the day and lets compare it to Log_0031.

[wcj]

Yes. It is from that tun. I will relog my drive home for us to compare.