Results 1 to 10 of 741

Thread: Calc.VET: correcting MAF and calculating VE (in single log)

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    49

    Default

    Hello Everyone,

    I have been away from tuning for quite sometime! I sold my TA back in 2012, but I have a friend with a Camaro asking me to do some tuning. Since i was pretty involved, i said yes. Fast forward today, and now we have this badass Calc.VET tuning! Pretty impressive and really neat if you ask me. I set everything up, but i got some results that I am a little confused on, so here is the following setup:

    2002 Camaro Auto
    Completely Stock, except Lid, Kooks long tube headers with Kooks dual 3" exhaust, and removed Air Pump assembly. This includes a completely stock tune file.
    Has front O2's installed and MAF (as opposed to the OL-SD I used to tune), so I am doing the Calc.VET tuning instead of autoVE

    What is confusing me, is the following:

    I got my calc.pid setup for use with the AEM wideband setup, but the wideband is currently NOT installed. I went ahead and did a run anyway to log at least the non-PE portion of the VE table (<50% throttle) and MAF just to see how it works. What was surprising to me is after logging a run, the VE figures actually went down in the lower RPM bands compared to stock (i didn't get enough logged for upper rpm >2,400 rpm). I figured that with the addition of the kooks headers/dual exhaust, that they would actually be up. Additionally, the fueling (from what I saw on the trims) was +6% on average (according to the log file). So, I'm just wondering if because of the way I have it setup if it is not working correctly. Would it not work because of the following:

    1) Not having my Wideband hooked up to give actual readings? Would this cause some sort of mistake in the formula for anything below PE mode?
    2) I am using the AEM wideband (http://www.aemelectronics.com/Images...%2030-4100.pdf), and the instructions are not VERY clear as to what it considers "stoich", could a difference between 14.65 and 14.7 have a significant impact? Does Stoich on B3601 being the stock 14.63 value somehow mess up calculations if compared to the AEM wideband stoich of 14.65/14.7?
    3) Am I somehow not using the correct PIDs? (I have attached my PID file for your review AND calc_pid.txt file)
    4) Have I somehow used the incorrect data for the adjustments on my MAPs in EFILive Scan? I have attached my log file. My VE table Map used Calc.VET (%) data from "Calculated VE, BEN corrected (%)" and my MAF table used data from Calc.SELBEN from "BEN selected from LTFT or WB (factor)".

    If someone sees anything funky, please let me know! If I am doing everything correctly and I should just carry-on, tell me that too, ha. I suppose I was just not expecting lower VE figures from those changes in the lower rpms.

    Thanks a lot,
    Haans249
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by Haans249; February 28th, 2014 at 07:26 PM. Reason: added link to AEM wideband I'm using

Similar Threads

  1. Please explain table A0007 TPS VE TABLE cos5
    By WHYTRYZ06 in forum General (Petrol, Gas, Ethanol)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 18th, 2008, 06:26 PM
  2. OLFA table vs. Custom OS A0008 table
    By 1bar in forum General (Petrol, Gas, Ethanol)
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: January 6th, 2007, 06:25 AM
  3. Table Names vs Table Number
    By lplott in forum Custom Operating Systems
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 17th, 2006, 05:14 AM
  4. Main VE Table ?, Logged data vs VE Table
    By dbaxter_ss in forum Tips and tricks
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: December 26th, 2004, 03:36 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
  •