How does everyone stabilize Idle Torque and/or Timing at Idle?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TriPinTaZ

I've been saying this for months in random threads lol. I don't know if it is the correct way to do things, but it definitely has an effect on idle and part throttle timing meaning if you lower these values the car will not be pulling timing. Basically lowing the VT tells the car its making less torque so it doesn't try to pull timing out to bring the torque value down. Now this also makes me think we still don't have defined tables that show what the torque limit is per RPM before it starts pulling timing.

I have also been messing with the Increasing Torque Rate limits in the Driver Demand section and I THINK this also has an effect on how much Torque Management Advance is active on idle and part throttle pedal movement. Meaning if you raise the values, TMA kicks in less just off idle. I was testing this on a ported throttle body and so far have seen lower TMA values when taking off from a stop light vs leaving these tables stock. But I don't have enough yet to say this is actually the case.

---

I have raised the values and tried maxing them out. I haven't notice much difference besides if you max out the decreasing torque table you get extremely annoying and bad NVH problems from the driveline when coasting/cruising, when you let off the wheels immediately being to drive the engine it takes up the backlash in the pinion and makes the awful extremely annoying clunk that makes the car feel cheap a lot more evident.

In my case I do acknowledge we can get higher average timing at idle, it has worked a little for me. By adjusting the idle/low airmass cells (<1000 rpms/<300grams/<70kPa) by about 75ft lbs and then slowly not decreasing as much as you get higher on spark (like how 32vape suggested) it works to bring idle up to about 10-15 sometimes 20, I think given the cam we need above 30 to ensure complete combustion but that is my speculation with no evidence or proof (we dont' have combustion analyzers or in cylinder pressure testers). I think if I go any more above about 100 ft lbs decrease it screws up the speed control and the idle speed will slowly start oscillating.

I still am a really firm believer and it seems like common sense that the torque tables do not need adjusting. If the cam is less efficient at lower rpms because the intake valve is open too long and its allowing fresh air charge to bleed off back into the intake manifold then the MAP and MAF should pick this up as a lower airmass in the cylinder and the torque table should reference a lower cylinder airmass in its tables and indicate a torque value less than stock and everything should be fine. I don't know maybe when you have a bigger cam than stock with the longer exhaust duration and late exhaust valve closure it maybe needs even more reduction in virtual torque than what's on the stock tables? since the stock tables are obviously designed with the stock cam? So maybe I am not really correct in my assumption?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cmitchell17

I have raised the values and tried maxing them out. I haven't notice much difference besides if you max out the decreasing torque table you get extremely annoying and bad NVH problems from the driveline when coasting/cruising, when you let off the wheels immediately being to drive the engine it takes up the backlash in the pinion and makes the awful extremely annoying clunk that makes the car feel cheap a lot more evident.

In my case I do acknowledge we can get higher average timing at idle, it has worked a little for me. By adjusting the idle/low airmass cells (<1000 rpms/<300grams/<70kPa) by about 75ft lbs and then slowly not decreasing as much as you get higher on spark (like how 32vape suggested) it works to bring idle up to about 10-15 sometimes 20, I think given the cam we need above 30 to ensure complete combustion but that is my speculation with no evidence or proof (we dont' have combustion analyzers or in cylinder pressure testers). I think if I go any more above about 100 ft lbs decrease it screws up the speed control and the idle speed will slowly start oscillating.

I still am a really firm believer and it seems like common sense that the torque tables do not need adjusting. If the cam is less efficient at lower rpms because the intake valve is open too long and its allowing fresh air charge to bleed off back into the intake manifold then the MAP and MAF should pick this up as a lower airmass in the cylinder and the torque table should reference a lower cylinder airmass in its tables and indicate a torque value less than stock and everything should be fine. I don't know maybe when you have a bigger cam than stock with the longer exhaust duration and late exhaust valve closure it maybe needs even more reduction in virtual torque than what's on the stock tables? since the stock tables are obviously designed with the stock cam? So maybe I am not really correct in my assumption?

---

I don't mess with the decreasing values at all since that parts works well on the OEM values 99.999999999% of the time. I only change the increasing.

You're thinking is right from a mechanical standpoint but not from a tuning standpoint on the valve overlap at low rpms with a bigger cam. But with a larger cam you idle with less vaccuum because of it so the ECU sees a highe MAP value of say 65kpa instead of 30kpa but the Airmass values from the MAF aren't off as much and manifold vacuum is mostly irrelevant to the MAF(unless you get a real big cam and reversion is an issue). Since the ECU uses MAP and Airmass(derived from MAF and sometimes referenced by MAP) to lookup the torque tables it gets confused. You have to go into the MAP VT tables and shift all of the values you would normally see at idle areas for the 30-35kpa range and move them up to 60-65kpa range (depending on cam size). Then what is also interesting is just off idle with the cam your manifold vacuum actually increases meaning the MAP measures a drop in kpa for a moment even though you just stepped on the gas pedal. This creates a kind of hooking reference lookup on the MAP based tables instead of a linear increasing MAP value with RPM. So you have to account for this in VVE as well. I would recommend you graph MAP and AIRMASS vs RPM in the scanner and watch how they both move across the tables differently. You might find you need a higher VVE value at 45kpa at 1200-1600 RPM than you do at say 65 kpa at 1200 rpm. If your cam is locked at 0 then it will make this part way easier as you only have one VT table to tune.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TriPinTaZ

I don't mess with the decreasing values at all since that parts works well on the OEM values 99.999999999% of the time. I only change the increasing.

You're thinking is right from a mechanical standpoint but not from a tuning standpoint on the valve overlap at low rpms with a bigger cam. But with a larger cam you idle with less vaccuum because of it so the ECU sees a highe MAP value of say 65kpa instead of 30kpa but the Airmass values from the MAF aren't off as much and manifold vacuum is mostly irrelevant to the MAF(unless you get a real big cam and reversion is an issue). Since the ECU uses MAP and Airmass(derived from MAF and sometimes referenced by MAP) to lookup the torque tables it gets confused. You have to go into the MAP VT tables and shift all of the values you would normally see at idle areas for the 30-35kpa range and move them up to 60-65kpa range (depending on cam size). Then what is also interesting is just off idle with the cam your manifold vacuum actually increases meaning the MAP measures a drop in kpa for a moment even though you just stepped on the gas pedal. This creates a kind of hooking reference lookup on the MAP based tables instead of a linear increasing MAP value with RPM. So you have to account for this in VVE as well. I would recommend you graph MAP and AIRMASS vs RPM in the scanner and watch how they both move across the tables differently. You might find you need a higher VVE value at 45kpa at 1200-1600 RPM than you do at say 65 kpa at 1200 rpm. If your cam is locked at 0 then it will make this part way easier as you only have one VT table to tune.

---

Sorry for not responding I haven't forgotten about this post, because I really really think you are on to something here. However, trying to just copy the 30kpa values to the 60kpa values in the MAP Virtual Torque tables I can't get to work. I tried copying them and interpolating until the ends of the graph to smooth the transition and then interpolating horizontal as RPMs increase, but when I extrapolate coefficients button to calculate, it gives me a bad solution that looks basically the same as before I started. Also if we copy the values from 30 kpa, do we leave the values at the 30kpa cells the same?

I get the point of this and that is to look at what we idled at stock with the stock cam, and say its around 30 kpa, so we know that that MAP referenced airmass is how much air and therefore torque it took to balance everything out at idle, so we just move that to where the aftermarket cam will idle which is at less vaccum and higher MAP?

What you are describing TriPinTaZ I think is exactly what is happening here:

Attachment 99190

I see this a lot in my VVE tuning logs, you can see its linked in the scan tool to a normal MAP range (.56), but every now and then the idle will blip up to the .70 range and the timing will spike and this is my problem, this is when I get the surge and annoying bucking, then it goes back down, and of course during open loop speed density the wideband fueling is showing 10% lean.

Something is causing it to hook like you said when its referencing cells, I am just so confused right now I can't really think about what's going on. I still have a strong feeling that the torque model dosen't need to theoretically be changed, but I think its just overlap, reversion, EGR effect, etc on bigger cams is causing anomalies like this.

Just as a way to experiment, if I put 0 rpm in the High RPM Disable table for dynamic airflow would it go MAF only, and therefore I could see if this problem is still occuring? I think I may have tried this before, but im wondering if it will still use MAP for torque calculation? What if I unplugged the MAF sensor?

I am too fighting my VVE similar to you with some lean ridges and idling issues with a larger cam which lead me to this post. In your post from two weeks ago you mention the exhaust smelled richer when lambda went lean at 0.72-0.73 lambda.

Anything less than 1.0 lambda is rich and over 1.0 lambda is lean. That's the way I understand it and that would explain the exhaust smelling richer.

Just trying to help and understand at the same time.

In the simplest terms you will need to reduce VVE in the Idle(600-900rpm) and off idle(1000-1200) areas. You don't necessarily need to copy the values from 30kpa and paste in 60kpa. Instead, lower the new idle area in VVE starting at 20-30%. But before you make any changes, click on the "show zone numbers" to see the boundaries, then uncheck it and ONLY lower the values inside a section at a time or you will often get the errors you are describing. You should be editing Manifold Switch OPEN in the drop down. Once you are done you can paste the same values into the Manifold Switch CLOSED table but I never do, at least not on LT1/LT4 cars.

SO think about it this way, editing by section as described above.
#1) What is the value in the VVE idle area pre-cam? What is the value in the new idle areas post cam? Is the difference about 10% 20% 30%? Lower the idle section in VVE by the estimated difference(I wouldn't exceed 30%).
#2) When you tap the throttle and the car comes just off idle, look at the same thing above, pre cam VS post cam. Off idle due to increased overlap(and the aftermarket cam locked at 0 movement) there will be a lower Volumetric Efficiency for this area as well compared to stock. And the cells movement in the scanner, meaning your vacuum increases so KPA goes lower(less than idle) temporarily. This area is likely also less efficient than stock with the new cam and needs to be lowered but not quite as much as you would at idle. You really want to just start with a base of going from say 30% reduction at idle rpm and scaling towards 0% reduction near 2000 RPM. This is a rough estimate to get you in the ballpark so that it is driveable.

As for the "hook" that is the new cam overlap with zero cam movement. MAP values behave differently because science of air pressure and such lol. Think about the below example to sort of see what I am talking about.

Stock Cam:
-Idles at 600 rpm with a MAP value of 30kpa. You tap the throttle and the RPMs climb to 1500 and MAP moves linearly from 30kpa to 70kpa in an increasing manor. This is due to low overlap in stock cam which is even more reduced due the cams ability to move around.

231/246 Aftermarket Cam:
-Idles at 850 rpm with a MAP value of 60kpa. You tap the throttle and the RPMs climb to 1700 and MAP moves from 60kpa down to 45kpa then back to 70kpa in sort of a bump then fish hook(looking at the scanner) manor.


For these reasons alone the OEM VVE tables are wrong. So after the cam you might find the 1200 rpm area at 40-50kpa needs to increase and the 1200rpm area at 50-60kpa needs to decrease, and then at 1200rpm 70-90kpa needs to increase. I know this is all a bit weird to type out without charts etc. But lets forget the complications of tuning Gen V stuff and think about the physical operation of the engine. Even from the very first small block until now, even far more advances, the laws of physics still apply. Supercharges and Turbos add another level of complexity to the VVE but not in the sense where it behaves any differently than other cammed blower/turbo cars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MattofEarle

I am too fighting my VVE similar to you with some lean ridges and idling issues with a larger cam which lead me to this post. In your post from two weeks ago you mention the exhaust smelled richer when lambda went lean at 0.72-0.73 lambda.

Anything less than 1.0 lambda is rich and over 1.0 lambda is lean. That's the way I understand it and that would explain the exhaust smelling richer.

Just trying to help and understand at the same time.

---

I too get really confused with it sometimes, but after a while your brain starts to get used to thinking in EQ. Here is a good link where Chris @ HP Tuners explains it in good detail:

https://forum.hptuners.com/showthrea...EQ)-Discussion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TriPinTaZ

In the simplest terms you will need to reduce VVE in the Idle(600-900rpm) and off idle(1000-1200) areas. You don't necessarily need to copy the values from 30kpa and paste in 60kpa. Instead, lower the new idle area in VVE starting at 20-30%. But before you make any changes, click on the "show zone numbers" to see the boundaries, then uncheck it and ONLY lower the values inside a section at a time or you will often get the errors you are describing. You should be editing Manifold Switch OPEN in the drop down. Once you are done you can paste the same values into the Manifold Switch CLOSED table but I never do, at least not on LT1/LT4 cars.

SO think about it this way, editing by section as described above.
#1) What is the value in the VVE idle area pre-cam? What is the value in the new idle areas post cam? Is the difference about 10% 20% 30%? Lower the idle section in VVE by the estimated difference(I wouldn't exceed 30%).
#2) When you tap the throttle and the car comes just off idle, look at the same thing above, pre cam VS post cam. Off idle due to increased overlap(and the aftermarket cam locked at 0 movement) there will be a lower Volumetric Efficiency for this area as well compared to stock. And the cells movement in the scanner, meaning your vacuum increases so KPA goes lower(less than idle) temporarily. This area is likely also less efficient than stock with the new cam and needs to be lowered but not quite as much as you would at idle. You really want to just start with a base of going from say 30% reduction at idle rpm and scaling towards 0% reduction near 2000 RPM. This is a rough estimate to get you in the ballpark so that it is driveable.

As for the "hook" that is the new cam overlap with zero cam movement. MAP values behave differently because science of air pressure and such lol. Think about the below example to sort of see what I am talking about.

Stock Cam:
-Idles at 600 rpm with a MAP value of 30kpa. You tap the throttle and the RPMs climb to 1500 and MAP moves linearly from 30kpa to 70kpa in an increasing manor. This is due to low overlap in stock cam which is even more reduced due the cams ability to move around.

231/246 Aftermarket Cam:
-Idles at 850 rpm with a MAP value of 60kpa. You tap the throttle and the RPMs climb to 1700 and MAP moves from 60kpa down to 45kpa then back to 70kpa in sort of a bump then fish hook(looking at the scanner) manor.


For these reasons alone the OEM VVE tables are wrong. So after the cam you might find the 1200 rpm area at 40-50kpa needs to increase and the 1200rpm area at 50-60kpa needs to decrease, and then at 1200rpm 70-90kpa needs to increase. I know this is all a bit weird to type out without charts etc. But lets forget the complications of tuning Gen V stuff and think about the physical operation of the engine. Even from the very first small block until now, even far more advances, the laws of physics still apply. Supercharges and Turbos add another level of complexity to the VVE but not in the sense where it behaves any differently than other cammed blower/turbo cars.

---

Here is my VVE table, this is after months and 100+ logs of refinement. I have been using Bluecat's tool to calculate the table. First I use the VVE editor in HP Tuners to copy and paste the scanner feedback. Then I use the VVE editor to interpolate horizontally (since I can more safely assume linearized behavior between RPM, rather than interpolate vertically since I think you get more non-linear behavior through RPM). This get it more filled out. Then I use Bluecat tool to calculate the coefficients and if any come back above the integer hard limit in the tune file, I have to smooth. I try not to smooth too much because I think it takes out what you are trying to do. What I like about the Bluecat tool is that it will adjust the zone boundaries as well as a variable to get even more accuracy:
Attachment 99232

It may be worth it for me to go back to the stock VVE and do exactly as you said increase the 40-50Kpa area a certain percentage, decrease the 50-60kpa by a certain percentage, then increase the 70-90KPa a certain percentage. When you watch the O2 or fuel trim feedback in the histogram and watch the cells its referencing, you can see it kind of go in a circle or that J-hook think like you said. The drastically different cells it references, along with all the other modifiers very well could lead to some negative feedback loop causing instability which causes the timing to spike around.

Would you mind sharing what your VVE table looks like?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cmitchell17

Here is my VVE table, this is after months and 100+ logs of refinement. I have been using Bluecat's tool to calculate the table. First I use the VVE editor in HP Tuners to copy and paste the scanner feedback. Then I use the VVE editor to interpolate horizontally (since I can more safely assume linearized behavior between RPM, rather than interpolate vertically since I think you get more non-linear behavior through RPM). This get it more filled out. Then I use Bluecat tool to calculate the coefficients and if any come back above the integer hard limit in the tune file, I have to smooth. I try not to smooth too much because I think it takes out what you are trying to do. What I like about the Bluecat tool is that it will adjust the zone boundaries as well as a variable to get even more accuracy:
Attachment 99232

It may be worth it for me to go back to the stock VVE and do exactly as you said increase the 40-50Kpa area a certain percentage, decrease the 50-60kpa by a certain percentage, then increase the 70-90KPa a certain percentage. When you watch the O2 or fuel trim feedback in the histogram and watch the cells its referencing, you can see it kind of go in a circle or that J-hook think like you said. The drastically different cells it references, along with all the other modifiers very well could lead to some negative feedback loop causing instability which causes the timing to spike around.

Would you mind sharing what your VVE table looks like?

---

PM'd you

following along here as in the same boat now as did a cam and heads on my 17 zl1. Seeing a lot of the same issues on mine but with a pd supercharger that also is affecting the kpa at idle vrs if yours is N/A as mine is naturally higher due to over spinning it. So adding the cam took that up another notch. Going back to a stock vve today and start over in idle cells. That is if can get this thing into sd and not get reduced power as that seems to be random if will work or not.

so 30 attempts at vve as it kept wanting me to pull 10 percent every time I re wrote it and did a log I got it to idle at .95/1.00 so ill call that a good vve but yet timing is -6 to -12. I tried everthing up on vt down on vt i tried to hammer it with 50 percent on the main eq table both ways and adjust it in the virtual torque edtor just trying to push it one way or another. I tried small adjustments first I went down to 675 on the idle tring to force it to use torque to make it idle. So bounced from 750 to 675 I tried all the idle torque settings. all most of it did was move around the idle make it more unstable or stay with in what I was shooting for but all of it had low timing in the -5 and lower. At one point I put the stock throttle body scaller back in it and when it started it was at 13 degrees and sounded great for about 8 seconds then back to the shit idle with no timing. Its around 700 rpm . 75 kpa and .50 airmass when its at the lower timing. If timing crosses over 10 it will drop the airmass to .30 range and kpa to the 60s. This is also a blower cam with 0 overlap on a 118 while its 227-244 it does idle very good when it has timing in it. So I will say getting the vve correct is not the answer to this. Last time I did this it wouldnt idle with any timing until I added the maf back into it then it had like 3-6 degrees on the same tune that had -10 with sd only. Funny thing is lean on the throttle just a touch and it will drop the airmass raise the timing and kpa goes down. Gets really good with a tiny bit of throttle input so thought maybe this is in the driver demand so messed with that too. I put a few settngs on differnt maps and didnt do much of squat when changing between them. Will play with it more and report back if hit on something that can help.

Try raising the Peak Torque table in the idle RPM ranges and reducing your VT table by 20% in idle area and blending to a lower reduction as RPMs go up. If your cam isn't moving any then you would just have to edit one VTT table. You might need to adjust your SOI & EOI now for the cam as well.

Technically Driver Demand shouldn't affect idle stability while stationary because at 0% driver pedal its requesting no torque or negative torque. You can test this by changing the 0% pedal / 0 mph column to 0 or lower and see if it has an effect on idle torque requested but I doubt it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TriPinTaZ

Try raising the Peak Torque table in the idle RPM ranges and reducing your VT table by 20% in idle area and blending to a lower reduction as RPMs go up. If your cam isn't moving any then you would just have to edit one VTT table. You might need to adjust your SOI & EOI now for the cam as well.

Technically Driver Demand shouldn't affect idle stability while stationary because at 0% driver pedal its requesting no torque or negative torque. You can test this by changing the 0% pedal / 0 mph column to 0 or lower and see if it has an effect on idle torque requested but I doubt it.

---

I did add to the soi table but didnt touch the eoi. I looked at my cam events vrs the stock ones when I used a wallace calculator to get actual timing events and saw that I now have a larger window but its moved back quite a bit towards top dead center. My intake valve opening is around 1 degree before tdc vrs stock which was out at 20 i believe so common sense looking at how the stock cam is setup I should now move my soi back the same amount of degrees as my cam is moved? Its so hard to find the right way to do any of this and so many wrong ways posted out there. The banish video I watched didnt cover it the greatest so just tried to move the soi the same amount that my cam now has moved the intake opening.
Seems like no matter what I was doing if I am in SD that it will always revert back to around -10. It might do a cold start and have 20 degrees of timing and sound great but with in 20 -30 seconds its back to retarding it. I thought maybe changing the 0 value in the driver demand would help it by commanding a differnt torque reading but I only tired higher I didnt try lower then stock. Whats odd is when i re induce the maf back into the tune I then have closer to 0-5 degrees of timing in it. Im going to have to street tune the vve which I know is a pain and so hard to hit enough cells to make a good table i was attempting this on the bolt ons as the ported blower had it so far out of wack.
Seems no matter what I do in SD it wants to raise up the cylinder airmass to .50-.60 vrs when maf is in play its around 30 closer to stock .20 and of course makes it idle much better when getting that lower. I even put my high side pump to 300 psi as it was throwing 1500 plus at it when airmass is too high. It seems to be more important to get that cylinder airmass back down closer to stock so more of the tune lines back up. Even the mbt timiing table will be so jacked up if cylinder airmass is out over .30
This cam has no overlap its actually -.05 and on a 118 so i didnt expect so much grief from it trying to get the idle correct. I have played with other cars that people couldnt get to idle right or didnt attempt it with cams on a 114-116 with more over lap and had no issues getting it to idle with some timing. But then I never put any of those into SD either I was just trying to help a friend or someone get the tune a little more stable and drive better and not "Tune" the car correctly which is what I am attempting now on my own car. So big differnce in patching someone elses tune to work vrs doing it correctly or what you think is right by tons of info out there which much of it could be leading you in the wrong direction. Why I watched the banish video hoping for some more on all of this. good tips there but doesnt go into it as much as hoped.
This is nothing like gen 3/4 like he enjoys saying over and over as every small change on this platform will affect another. With out being able to look at a log and understand what the data is telling you to make the right changes is the biggest challenge. This is nothing like wot tuning or even part throttle which yes is more like other platforms at least gen 4 when comes to making the transmission work well with using virtual torque but that is about it.
Thanks for help from those that comment. Hoping I can help myself and the original poster here with replys as not trying to hijack his thread when having the same issues.

so after screwing with it all day and watching a few vidoes over I did manage to get a decent idle from it in SD holding some timing. Im commanding 750 but its staying under that and it sounds good even with only 5-10 degrees of timing in it. But when I put it into park It goes up to 750 pulls on the brakes the kpa shoots up the cylinder airmass shoots up and it goes back to -10 degrees so not sure what Im misssing on it.
Im trying to get it good enough just to do some logging and get the vve dialed in or attempt it anyway as some things I see just dont seem right.
I have it in open loop and it says open loop not ready yet its logging stft still where the ltft is showing 0 so not sure if that is right or not.
Then with the maf failed and on first error like typical early it goes to reduced power. So I then set it up to not report any errors and then it stays out of reduced power BUT its still showing maf HZ on the log so its still logging it. I went as far as unpinning the green and white wire so that I saw no reading on the log so that way I know the maf is not in play here still. Maybe over kill but I didnt like seeing it read as the same with the stft I dont like seeing it pretty much in line with what my wideband is saying which tells me the stupid thing is stull using trims. I guess the only verifcation its not is that the widebnd will not try to center at commanded and it is reading rich or lean if the vve is off in that area. Just very odd that it is still reading fuel trims though not using them same with Maf.
So took me like 30 trys to nail the park/neurtal down so if some one could check out my tune and log possibly and give some pointers on it.
I have found that once cylinder airmass goes up over 50 it screws with all kinds of stuff. The cam having no overlap I thought I was going to see better vacuum/kpa but maybe the blower is skewing it more then I thought it would as im idling around 73 kpa in parrk and goes up to 85 in gear and it gets all screwy at that point. On the log you can see it go between in and out of gear and go from a decent idle to shit when its got the added load on it.
Thanks for any help here on it

Got it almosst decent but still wont hit my target idle and it is all over though I finally got enough timing to not glow the headers in both park and in gear. Any advice off my log and tune would be great.

What threads are you reading to learn how to adjust the SOI tables????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonblarc7

What threads are you reading to learn how to adjust the SOI tables????

---

I had read a few on here and one of them had a chart someone had made that I had printed out and its has all the cam events on it. think it was called camshaft and injector timing. I also watched the greg banish gen v tuning videos.
After fighting some of it and it kept going into limp I got it to where i could actually drive the damn thing and after about 3 revisions its really good for the driving part anyway. Numbers are not perfect some cells I have showing 10 percent rich still but car is driving great on it right now. trans is clicking off firm shifts no longer lazy feeling at low and part throttle. Wot was still a little rich buit car felt good. Started to rain so waiting on that now to get back at it. I am not going to be so concerned with all of it being perfect as I will run it in maf most likely anway but more about how it drives and the fact it drives great right now other then rich off throttle which I am going to fix I feel confident that when add the maf back its going to be really good. the more I drive it the more stable the idle got too and added some timing to it on its own vrs doing a change then write car and test write test write test where went much of no where once I got to around 0 plus or minus 5 degrees. Now I was seeing upwards of 18 degrees at idle and it was not pulling on the brakes as its idleing around 650 and seems to be fine with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lt1z350

Got it almosst decent but still wont hit my target idle and it is all over though I finally got enough timing to not glow the headers in both park and in gear. Any advice off my log and tune would be great.

---

Apply the same VT changes to the E85 MAP and Airmass

so I had it pretty good and was driving on it for a few days and it was pretty hot out side here. Still not the amount of timing I want in it and cannot seem to make it increase the timing no matter If I go up or down on the virtual torque. What sucks is it drives even better then stock on what I have done to the virtual torque and vve.
Then yesterday we have a temp drop goes into the 70s and it starts hunting bad in gear. Its fine in park but pull it into gear and hunts like crazy up to 1200 sometimes and trys to drive off. Im on tune 30 this morning trying to make it go away and though I can see all these values move around and it change with each addation to torque or reduction it will still contiune to hunt in gear. Same thing as before lean on the throttle a little so push the pedal the tps goes down timing comes up kpa down airmass down and idle drops to a steady 550 push a tad more I can make it idle so good in gear but all it seems to be doing it closing the throttle and adding timing and the rest is working itself out.
You try to make sense of it looking over stock vt tables and say the car idles at .14-.20 airmass 35-40 kpa (pd blower) but only delivering -14 engine torque low tps around 12 percent or less and has 8-10 degrees. You try to wrap your head around all that on stock tables and think you make sense of it but yet trying to adjust the vt to that its not helping it. i can have it steady in park and pull into gear and hunts so bad it will try to run off. None of this happened until I had a temp swing out side. I never got it perfect as can never get the timing I want in it but not this hunting you cant even drive.So something is drasticly changing when transmission load is added to it and causing it to start trying to add all this timiing and torque for no reason that isnt there with no load. Its become baffling as it drives so good yet idle is just fighting me.