did you change you PE table? Cause mine is still showing in the 33x range
did you change you PE table? Cause mine is still showing in the 33x range
No I still have my PE like it was at about 12.4-12.8AFR. What does your torque drop off to at high rpms?
Are you logging deleivered trans torque or deleivered engine torque?
I dont no if that makes a diffrence or not.
Have you done some tuning on your spark yet? Ive always had knock when the TC is locked under loads like going up a hill. Ive never really cared that it did it and usually it stopped if I ran 93, but this time I took out a lot of timing in the low rpm high grams per cyl. range. So now most of the table is going to be a couple degrees from stock. At low cyl. airmass levels wouldnt the stock tune have the optimal timing becuase there is less chance for knock?
I would think that but I dont know.
Im going to test it out tommarow.
im only a beginer here and dont know 2 much about tuining but there was a couple of things in your log i noticed that somebody might be able to shed some light on.
1. i thought that there seemed to be alot of timing in places
2. there seemed to be some huge dips in timing advance then sudden rise back up
as if it was knock but no knock has been logged, maybe burst knock?
3. there was knock retard logged in your stock log but none on your other log, was something done to fix this?
once again this may be nothing i just thought it was a little strange
I agrees with you that there was a little to much timing I was using to much of my optimal timing.
I notice the huge drops in timing too, there always at part throttle, and I believe they are the reason for a jolt feeling right before its about to shift. Ive udated os to a 2002 os so mabey that fixed it.
Im pretty sure I left the Knock Retard Settings stock. But your right I never see any knock retard anymore, but its always been about like that. I can hear knock but can't see it.
I am logging engine torque. Seems to peak around 3600-4000 range. I was looking at an log and saw 383 and was like wtf and then I noticed it was an auto VE log.
Does the auto ve make the torque read high?
Mine peaks around 3600-4000too but only by about a couple ft. lbs. It remains in the 290+ range from 2000-4500 then starts to fall to 220ft.lbs. at 5600rpm.
On one log after switching to a 2002os I noticed my Predidcted grams per cylnder climb to as high as .76. Before it would only go to as high as about .64. I logged again and they were lower back to about high 60's but they still looked higher than they were originally.
The troque looks like its the same mabey +5ft.lbs.
One thing that might explain it, I think I was using your ve table when the grams were at .76, but now im using a stock ve table from a 2002.
so is the 02 os working better for you? aslo you found any timing tables or more info about them?
The 2002os seems to make my shifts a little better. It would clunk on every downshift especially on the 3-2 and give a hard 2-3 at low tps. The 2002os seemed to help it a lot but it kind of seems its coming back, so I think ill just give up and deal with it shifting bad.
After copying and pasting all my idel stuff over it seems to be normal.
I havent found any spark tables from anybody but im still looking.
One thing ive been thinking about:
If people sell custom tunes for trucks that require 93octane for their best tune, then I would think that my timing should be just about whats in the optimal timing table becuase I have to run 93 to make the knock stop.
They have no benifit if you run 93 octane and they want the tune to make the most power, so I must be right in my thinking that the 27-30WOT timing is best.
Stock it goes up to about 27.
Ive found that with the optimal timing the low rpms high airmass needs to be dropped a lot. Like when the TC is locked (the gm settings keep it locked for a lot of the throttle) it starts to knock but stops after I drop the timing 3-5 degrees to about 1-3 degrees from stock.
Im also using the timing table from a 05+ truck when I blend it with the optimal timing.
Either way the optimal timing is only about 2-3/4 degrees off in the normal airmass ranges, but in the high airmasses its about 3-6/7degrees more.
But then you still have the question as to what condition gm got the table.
Mabey they got it at an AFR of 12.5 with a IAT of 50degrees with high octane fuel? But arnt there SAE standerds they have to follow, so what would the IAT's be then?
If they tested it with 93 then I guess we be just right running the full optimal timing. The LM7 only has like 9.5:1 compression so it seems you would be able to run optimal timing with a relativly low octane, but I don't know.
I would think that they would tune for the worst conditions, since the tunes are all the same. That way it covers them and gives a safety net in there for when people pull loads with them. If they had them set up for best performance then it would be 93 octane and no heavy loads right?