Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: 2010 Camaro with Kenne Bell Liquid Cooled supercharger tuning issues

  1. #1
    Senior Member mowton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    148

    Default 2010 Camaro with Kenne Bell Liquid Cooled supercharger tuning issues

    Evening all...I have been struggling with this Camaro for almost 2 months now and have just about run out of ways forward.....

    Customer did the install and we have reviewed it thouroughly to make sure all is right and so far we have only found minor issues and have fixed them (i.e MAP sensor placement and type). Has a 232/236 on a 112 cam (9.5 degrees overls) and as delivered to shop, the tune was unusable (surging, stalling etc). Worked out most of the initial issues and began to tune the MAF. From the onset, the fueling was erratic (even for a newly flashed E38 :-)) and it seemed like we were chasing our tails. That is when we discovered a large difference in the 2 banks (eventually went from OL to closed loop). Tried open close loop, MAF only, speed density etc and all strategies yielded the same results. as you are "filling the boxes" during MAF scans, at approximately 4000 hz or so the wb/trims (depending on OL/CL) will slowing ramp to lean (15-20%) and then come back down to like 10-15% rich!!!!! The would result im "bumps" in the MAF curve if you tried to correct for them....very strange. The events occur closely at the same points in the scan each time and can ocurr in several different rpm/hz points throughout the scan as well.

    Today we tried to "average tune" using the SFTF's (Closed loop with disabled LTFT) in closed tune to keep the trims away from the p0172/174 criteria and let closed loop correction take care of the anomaly and then plow forward to the wot tuning.....as luck would have it, the placement of the MAP wouldn't actually read boost, so we relocated back where it belonged and went to 5000 rpm. While PE activated right on schedule and the MAF/Dyn Air rose linearly, the injectors weren't commanded (in an instant) to their levels (10+ ms) for almost 2 secs.....meanwhile all PE delay settings were set to zero.

    Here is the latest tune/half pull log as well as a few other logs to help. I am at my wits end and am hoping it isn't something stupid I missed. Let me know if you need anything else and thanks in advance for your efforts.

    Ed M

    Log_0039.efihalf pull after map sesnor.efi2010 Camaro manual Stock GM reflash 102715 updated OL_ID850 3bar map_zl1 fp settings_0000 58_cl_.ctzLog_0034.efiidle split difference.efi
    Last edited by mowton; December 2nd, 2015 at 06:23 AM. Reason: typo and original map location wouldn't read boost....
    2004 Corvette Coupe, LS2 Shortblock, MN6, Vararam, American Racing Headers/CATs, Magnaflow, 4:10's, Trickflow 215 Heads, 30# SVO, Vette Doctors Cam, Fast 90/90, Performance Clutch, DTE Brace, Hurst shifter, Bilsteins etc.....480 rwhp and 430 rwtq

    ERM Performance Tuning -- One stop Learning Center...from tuning software help to complete custom tunes
    visit our website: www.ermperformancetuning.com
    http://www.facebook.com/ERMPerformanceTuning
    C5edstoy@aol.com

  2. #2
    Lifetime Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    735

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mowton View Post
    Tried open close loop, MAF only, speed density etc and all strategies yielded the same results. as you are "filling the boxes" during MAF scans, at approximately 4000 hz or so the wb/trims (depending on OL/CL) will slowing ramp to lean (15-20%) and then come back down to like 10-15% rich!!!!! The would result im "bumps" in the MAF curve if you tried to correct for them....very strange.
    The MAF curve already has some "bumps" in it... your airflow for 6750Hz is less than for 6600Hz. The MAF curve isn't that good to start with so just give it what it wants.

    Quote Originally Posted by mowton View Post
    From the onset, the fueling was erratic (even for a newly flashed E38 :-)) and it seemed like we were chasing our tails. That is when we discovered a large difference in the 2 banks (eventually went from OL to closed loop).
    I'd be testing the injectors by swapping them bank to bank and see if the lean bank follows the injectors. That's too much of a trim imbalance and needs to be fixed.

  3. #3
    Lifetime Member 5.7ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,840

    Default

    Looked at the half pull log and the throttle position pid is incorrect for etc. could be a torque limiter applying that you won't see because of this. Virtual be is strange to say the least. Also did you remember toanually reset the fuel trims?
    The Tremor at AIR

  4. #4
    Senior Member mowton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by statesman View Post
    The MAF curve already has some "bumps" in it... your airflow for 6750Hz is less than for 6600Hz. The MAF curve isn't that good to start with so just give it what it wants.



    I'd be testing the injectors by swapping them bank to bank and see if the lean bank follows the injectors. That's too much of a trim imbalance and needs to be fixed.
    The MAF ccurve has been massaged and smoothed so many times trying to remedy the problem. This is one of the later logs that I would soon put through a smoother to get the shape back and start again. It is not bad enough to cause the issue. the event is producing 20% lean followed directly with 15% rich. What I meant by a bump was where I would increase the fueling in the area it began to go lean, but it is so close to where it goes rich that you would end up with a 20-25 g/sec bump over say 300-400 hz. Obviously not the right fix.

    We are going back over the injector swap as well as anything else that may be contributing to the STFT bank to bank difference. As stated before, the PCM and NB O2's are producing varying IPW's to get to stoich so it appears to be either fuel delivery or an air distribution variance caused by the KB SC?????

    Ed M
    2004 Corvette Coupe, LS2 Shortblock, MN6, Vararam, American Racing Headers/CATs, Magnaflow, 4:10's, Trickflow 215 Heads, 30# SVO, Vette Doctors Cam, Fast 90/90, Performance Clutch, DTE Brace, Hurst shifter, Bilsteins etc.....480 rwhp and 430 rwtq

    ERM Performance Tuning -- One stop Learning Center...from tuning software help to complete custom tunes
    visit our website: www.ermperformancetuning.com
    http://www.facebook.com/ERMPerformanceTuning
    C5edstoy@aol.com

  5. #5
    Senior Member mowton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 5.7ute View Post
    Looked at the half pull log and the throttle position pid is incorrect for etc. could be a torque limiter applying that you won't see because of this. Virtual be is strange to say the least. Also did you remember toanually reset the fuel trims?
    Will change the PID but believe this one is indicating the true position of the TP which would indicate TM intervention. Also if you see the IPW during the event, they seem to be increasing linearly with the airflow which says its not a fuel intervention and the spark is true which further supports no Spark TM is in play.

    And yes, did reset trims each session and of note are running these tests in STFT only...disabled LTFT and they are checked for 0 before each session.

    Ed M
    2004 Corvette Coupe, LS2 Shortblock, MN6, Vararam, American Racing Headers/CATs, Magnaflow, 4:10's, Trickflow 215 Heads, 30# SVO, Vette Doctors Cam, Fast 90/90, Performance Clutch, DTE Brace, Hurst shifter, Bilsteins etc.....480 rwhp and 430 rwtq

    ERM Performance Tuning -- One stop Learning Center...from tuning software help to complete custom tunes
    visit our website: www.ermperformancetuning.com
    http://www.facebook.com/ERMPerformanceTuning
    C5edstoy@aol.com

  6. #6
    Lifetime Member 5.7ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,840

    Default

    That's the last time I post from my Iphone lol. First time I have read it since posting and I made a ton of spelling mistakes.
    FWIW where the delay in the pulsewidth and the lean AFR is present for that 2 second span. The pcm is referencing that huge valley in the virtual VE table. I wonder if it getting lost in some sanity check or dynamics calculation.
    The Tremor at AIR

Similar Threads

  1. Kenne Bell Boost-A-Pump with returnless fuel system questions
    By turbo_bu in forum Gen III V8 Specific
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: November 2nd, 2012, 04:05 AM
  2. 2010 camaro with aftermarket supercharger slower than stock
    By mellor in forum E37, E38 & E67 PFI ECM's
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: July 12th, 2010, 03:04 PM
  3. 2010 Camaro Supercharger Project
    By mirage in forum Gen IV V8 Specific
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 10th, 2010, 02:26 PM
  4. Replies: 12
    Last Post: June 24th, 2010, 03:38 AM
  5. 2010 Camaro tuning
    By GMPX in forum Gen IV V8 Specific
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: August 1st, 2009, 12:32 PM

Posting Permissions

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