Serial logging and tuning with 2 LC-1's

[truethinker]

Thanks a lot! I just got done modifying my original file per your previous suggestions and was about to go out to the truck when I got the email notice that you had replied. Glad I didn't waste my time with the out of order PID's.


The analog pid's are for a '96 chevy 1500 that was my first fuel injected project/daily driver. I did the 411 and 4L80E swaps along with a ramjet 350 intake, mid-performance cam and heavily ported/polished heads. The thing idles horribly and dumps fuel out the exhaust so needless to say, it needs tuned. From what I've been reading, tuning for heads and cam is no small task. I'm trying to get my feet wet with legitimate tuning on my '03 so that I can get the '96 running better as I gave it to my brother who is going to be a sophomore and the college allows everyone but freshman to have vehicles on campus. The problem is he plays football for them and due to this, his summer is very short.

I pretty much have 3 weeks to get both trucks tuned as I am driving mine to Northern Maine mid-summer and would love to see some better fuel mileage and driveability.

Thanks again for your help. I've attached a screenshot of my pid's list per your request. I also, included my calc_pid file as I made a slight change. I changed CLC-00-300 to reflect the pid in the CALC VET turtorial.

One other thing, in looking at my file, I have to admit that I'm not even sure why I have *CLC-00-273, *CLC-00-430 or *CLC-00-435. I'm sure there was a reason I put them in there but who knows as I don't remember. I don't see what they would be used for with my current set-up.


Thanks

[joecar]

I had used the pid {CALC.DAT.K} as a concise shortcut for ({GM.DYNAIRTMP_DMA.C}+273.15) and its chart label is easier to see... but either can be used and both are correct

(actually I updated the Calc.VET tutorial thread with the newer calc_pids.txt which uses CALC.DAT.K/CLC-00-273).

Those other pids are used for comparing the various dynamic air masses.

[truethinker]

ooh okay, so that's where I got it. And then I updated it from the PDF version which is written the other way. In that case I'm going to change back to the original way I had it.

Alright, so I think I have it all nailed down. I'll log my way to work in the morning and see how it turns out.

[joecar]

Yes, the pdf hasn't yet caught up. sorry.

[truethinker]

No worries! I got everything hooked up and logging today on the way to work. Seems to have worked well. I was a little confused for a moment when I first looked at the map data and say a bunch of regular percentages. I knew that's what would happen but some part of my brain was still stuck on regular autoVE and I was expecting to see a bunch of 1.1's and 0.92's and so on. haha I'll load my new tune and log on my way home from work tonight.

On a side note,(and I know this isn't related to the title of this thread) do I need to adjust my setting to account for the fuel around here being 10% ethanol? I've been reading a bunch of posts about that and just trying to see what, if any, changes are really necessary. I'm mostly concerned because I intend to try activate and fine tune lean cruise. My end goal is maximum fuel mileage possible.

I think I have a decent of understanding of what gets changed and how. But my question is simply, do I need to and will it help or hurt mileage. My "B3601" appears to be set-up with the ability to deal with flex-fuel but it is flat lined at 14.63. My truck is an '03 and is not flex-fuel(and "B3101" is set to "no").

[joecar]

If you're running E10, set B3601 to 14.2 in your tune.

[joecar]

Relationship between AutoVE/AutoMAF and Calc.VET/Calc.MAFT, see post #29 here: Summary-Notes

[truethinker]

Very interesting reading. Thanks again for your help

[truethinker]

So I logged my drive home from work, making sure I included some highway, mountain and in-town driving. I tried to keep my throttle as steady as possible and used lower gears as opposed to braking. Upon comparing the log to the OEM VE table, my log look sadly low. I didn't expect to see my VE that much lower than Factory.



Can you take a look at this and see what you think? Is this a logical log or do you feel I might have something wrong?

See attached original VE and Logged File

I entered the PE value incorrectly so the filter removed anything over 1.06lam. (Yea, I went lean in PE rather than rich but I fixed it with no harm done.)

[joecar]

Post your tune file, log file and the calc_pids.txt you used (unless you used the one from post #10 above).