Printable View
What the hell now. I have looked through four "stock" tunes including mine and there's something different in all of them. For instance, in my car and another car, the MAF airflow table is missing values where two vehicles that show up as Holden's have values. I've also noticed fan desired % differences in the tunes.
Opps, Guess I shouldn't have said less timing everywhere, I didn't have the files in front of me at the time I made the post.
Maybe if someone else has a 2013 they can post up a file to compare.
Gonna take a break from this for a bit. Giving me a headache trying to understand it all with no way of knowing what any of it does.
It was slow one day while doing pre delivery inspections so I grabbed a few different ones of these. They were read with a beta before they were fully supported but I suspect the files should still be good just the editor updated to handle them.
WOW!! it looks like they pulled boost in all the eco accel areas to save gas when possible. and also gave some timing umpff to take off and pulled some up top. these things needed it anyway... tq management is pulled down low and the knock decay and kr is aggressive in areas that needed attention.. this is a detune guys.. i like the timing map tho... am i wrong?
ghost... may be a shot in the dark, but last year we were doing ecm recalls and shit left and right. . maybe gm is fine tuning still?
Thanks! I'll take a look against the other 2013 tune and see if they are similar.Quote:
Originally Posted by goofee
Wouldn't surprise me. My other vehicle(Equinox) has had other ECM/TCM updates. The Silverado I had also had different tunes over the years that seemed to be improvements.Quote:
Originally Posted by rallycar2001
Thanks! This matches the other 2013 tune I was looking at. Very strange how much of a diference there is. Lowered stoich for Im' assuming E10, more timing in cruise, but less in high airmass cells, big change to cam timing and a bunch of other changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by goofee
First off - thank you for taking the time to post the changes you're making and the results that they are delivering.
I have a 2013 eco cruze 6m, and I've noticed the low load cruising KR on my stock tune, as well as on some mild modifications I've made (maf trims dialed in, torque tables raised mildly). It's especially bad when climbing a hill when the absolute pressure hits 100-130kpa. And I run 93 octane on mine. I guess the proper thing to do in those cases is downshift, but if I wasn't logging the KR, I'd never suspect anything was up because the car just happily lugs along. When time permits, I'll pull timing in those cells and see if the KR is reduced/eliminated.
Since we have access to fuel pressure tables, has anyone tried increasing the pressure above the max of 58psi? Can the variable fuel pressure regulator deliver more than 58 psi? This may buy the little extra head room needed to save the injectors for those of us running out up top.
I think I'm almost done with my tune to share with everyone, but I'm still frustrated that I can't figure out why Desired Boost is scaling over time and/or MPH.
For instance:
Scenario 1: 20-70mph run the desired boost ramps from 200kpa to 240kpa based on what appears to be my MPH.
Scenario 2: Hit the gas at 50 and get to 70, desired boost really doesn't ramp.
I've messed with the Pressure Delta Factor table that is supposed to allow boost to be added per cycle. I'm not sure what a cycle is, but I have I think 2000-4000rpm at 3 and I still have ramping issues. I wonder if I need to move this even higher to get that desired boost up?
I'm logging(with a custom PID) pressure ratio and I don't look like I'm hitting the limits imposed in the tune and I'm not seeing my ETC go below 99% ever. I might be at the point where I need some supporting mods to help the actual boost itself climb faster, but it does hold well to the desired for the most part.
Gh0st, are you happy with the trans portion of you tune?
To be honest, I've spent really no time at all on it. only thing I've done is moved the WOT shift RPM down a little bit and reduced the shift times to .100. There is so much new in there that I haven't seen that it's probably the last thing I'll mess with.Quote:
Originally Posted by snowvette
Attached is my current tune. I consider it a hack job especially since for the Engine Torque Mgmt tables I just set them to 500 to rule them out of the equation(well at least I believe...).
This tune is letting me hit 240kpa, but I haven't tested it over the previous tune I have where the major difference is I increased the Pressure Delta Factor even more to see if the desired boost scales with it. The reason I haven't tested it is because it is 92 degrees out I should have a log tomorrow morning though for sure.
Fun fact:
IAT 1 = 108F
IAT2 = 113F
Intercooler isn't too bad in that regard.
It looks like the overspeed limit min has been holding me back a lot. I still don't understand what it is, but once I upped that limit the car began to reach boost faster and be more consistent.
Let me fix my comment here. Boost still ramped in a little slow, but now I'm making boost PAST my Desired Boost which I'm assuming is a result of modifying this table as its the only thing I changed. So, I'm now making my max of 240kpa while Desired Boost is around 230kpa and climbing with RPM.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gh0st
So with that said, it seems the Overspeed Limit Min Airmass table does not play in to the Desired Boost value, but the overall boost the turbo will put out.
I don't think it's the Knock Airmass limit determining my Desired Boost, that doesn't make sense to me because why would my desired boost ramp up with MPH? That's the weird thing...as MPH goes up, Desired Boost goes up.
With modifying the Overspeed Limit Min Airmass, the car seems to be ignoring the desired boost and just letting me hit my upper boost limit(or Knock Airmass if I was limited there). This goes along with something Chris said in the other big Cruze 1.4t thread in which setting these values will just let the wastegate stay closed up until you reach your max limit...
there are so many values in the cruze ecu, someone should tweak with those variable camshaft profiles... im scared to mess with them on the street!
I did a quick and dirty tune to my Cruze yesterday.
I followed this formula to do the tune, but I didn't max out any of the values.
I have to say...its a night and day difference.
I also made some changes to the trans (removed a little TM from the 1 thru 4 shifts).
I haven't had any time to do a log run yet, and I dont have a wideband, so I set the fuel ratios fairly high. I am sure I can up the timing or lean out the fuel, but I wont dare until I get a wideband.
I would like someone to do some dyno tuning on the cams too. I'm sure there's some good power to be gained there. If you could get up around 180 hp/tq this would be a nice driving car. Now, if only someone could tune my seats to be more comfortable...LOL
ya this car is a lot different with just a few changes... i think there is a lot more to be gained
i would speculate that 3 times a week we get a customer asking for any kind of updated seats for the cruze. lol
I'm going to go see my local upholstery shop and see if they can add some foam in there. The seat back seems ok, but the ass pad is just horrible. My legs go numb on trips where I sit more than a half hour.
I just cannot get the seat in a comfortable position.
The seats suck...
I will do more testing when the weather clears up.
The 2013 Cruze has completely different cam tables. I haven't messed with vvt tuning yet so I really have no clue what I would be changing. The LSJ guys have their stuff figured out but it looks like our stuff works a little different.