From what I can figure out, if the table is running opposite it means either your IAT sensor is either suffering from heatsoak, or your charge temp blending is in error. Personally I leave this table set to 1 in the cells the IAT normally will run in during the year. Then just change the extreme areas where you know it is a heatsoak condition causing an incorrect AFR.
The Tremor at AIR
I personally dislike this table, because it gives people the wrong idea of what it's for. It should be an aide to deal with situations where the regular bias and lag filter tables aren't enough. But since these two are hard to deal with, people just misuse or ignore them, and use the A0014 as a replacement for the temperature estimator. So you end up with 3 tables fighting each other, trying to arrive at the 'correct' temperature. How about just using what we already have properly instead?
This reminds of a Woody Allen line: "Two wrongs don't make a right. But nobody said anything about three wrongs!"
Ha Ha Ha.Originally Posted by redhardsupra
Going from the 2000+ tables in the ls1 pcm just for the engine there is a lot of potential for wrongs to try get things right.
I'm just looking to ensure that the SD cars that I tune using COS 3 or 5 are going to be at their best over various conditions... it is impossible to have a customers car long enough to check the AFR in varying weather/temperature conditions. SOL takes care of part throttle, but I get concerned about WOT variences...
GM EFI Tuner
02 WS6 9.41 @ 143 MPH 3675#, drag radials, pump gas, through the mufflers - sold
Problem is BLK that a change in the charge temp factor value changes the actual error percentage.
With some quick calculations, a misreported IAT of 10 degC with a factor of 0.15 will give an error of just under 2.8%. Where the same 10 degree error with a factor of 0.25 is now a 2.4% error. Increase the reported IAT error to 20 deg & the same factors then the errors run to 5.7% & 4.9%.
Since the higher the airflow, the lower the factor. Under WOT conditions the correction will need to be set at it's highest. Over 3% per 10 degrees in IAT error.(based on a standard calibration factor of 0.09 at 150 G/SEC.)
So IMHO, all we can do is position the IAT where errors from heatsoak are minimised. Tune the charge temp tables as best we can, & use A00014 to counteract the extreme cases of a heatsoaked sensor.
Old thread, but can anyone assist
Running 01290003, I battled with A0014 for a long time, as it does not work. Logging VE shows no change whether you set A0014 to max (1.3) or min (.8) with no changing in fueling.
Upgraded to a 1mb pcm running 04110003, and A0014 works perfectly - increase/decrease the vaue, and VE increases/decreases accordingly with the desired effect on fueling.
Have had to revert back to 512mb pcm running 0129003, as I could not get traction control to work with the 1mb pcm
Is there any other 512mb COS3 that would work with cable throttle body (other than 01290003)
I tried 0202003, but even changing all the tables affecting ETC/Cable the car will not run (VX cable auto)
2011 VE SSV 419 + CAM + Whipple 2.9FF SC + PPV front struts + Bilstein rear shocks + 6L90E with single piece carbon fiber prop
Got 12212156 / 02020003 to work
A0014 does not work at all in 0129003.
2011 VE SSV 419 + CAM + Whipple 2.9FF SC + PPV front struts + Bilstein rear shocks + 6L90E with single piece carbon fiber prop
Thanks for the feedback.
Back to square one.
A0014 works, but many other problems due to different platform in base calibration
.
How can I get A0014 fixed in 0129003, or and other calibration that will work in VX platform
2011 VE SSV 419 + CAM + Whipple 2.9FF SC + PPV front struts + Bilstein rear shocks + 6L90E with single piece carbon fiber prop
What about trying 0129005, the COS5 version?
See if A0014 works properly in that?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
