Printable View
Getting "this thing on a dyno" isn't going to solve everything. I would trust the pro's on here more than 99.9% of the "dyno tuners" out there. The only advantage of a dyno is for vehicles that are just to fast to tune on the street. If you don't want to tune it yourself, get one of the pro's on here to do it.
ok im gonna us this. im gonna tune from this point. do the ve first.Quote:
Originally Posted by dhoagland
I agree 100%.Quote:
Originally Posted by gtstorey
But before doing that i would get a quality throttle body.
yes sir i just did that yester day, in saying this i do have a new tps, and a new iac im gonna tho in it, and then tune again. i think after this time ill put the new ve settings to the main tuneQuote:
Originally Posted by RDF1
ok, guys here is alog and the updated tune. be gentle.....lol
i did my best with this
It definitely looks like you are making progress, your error percentages are looking alot better, try it out, see if it did what you were expecting, with the changes you made.
Agreed...Quote:
Originally Posted by twenglish1
I didn't see any knock either
its in speed densityQuote:
Originally Posted by dhoagland
i did put the ve to the main tune. not in speed density, blended. i will do a log in the am as i drive to work. its like 20 min drive to work, i always make sure im at op temp before i start logging.Quote:
Originally Posted by twenglish1
Did you run it in MAF only and calibrate the MAF? You need to do that before setting it back to blended
ok ill reset the\ ve in the maf tuning and do the maf... thanks for all the help.. you and the others saved my buttQuote:
Originally Posted by twenglish1
I haven't tried this and maybe slightly off topic, just some thoughts, might do some experimenting if i get time, but i have looked at some old logs and it looks like it should work, maybe it is something that is already done and i just haven't heard of it, unless i am missing something, assuming the VE is tuned and accurate, engine set to run in speed density, if you logged your dynamic air and plotted it against your MAF frequency, you should end up with a chart that can be directly copied into your MAF calibration table, and it should be very close. Everything i have seen over the years of tinkering with this stuff says to use fuel trims/wideband to calibrate the MAF, but it seems like this would be much faster, maybe even more accurate in less iterations, or at the least as a quick rough in to get a starting point. Or even calibrating the MAF first and using it as a baseline to generate a VE table as a starting point.
i went out and did one last run for the ve, what you guys think about this one. its very rich up top. im trying to knock it down. i guess this is what i need . :shrug:
As long as you don't encounter that weird scanner bug from a while back that screws with your readings while logging a failed MAF, I see no problem. I have logged dyn air to generate a starting point MAF curve while VE tuning several times. Some people have done the math on back generating a VE table from the MAF, but I have never seen the point. You would still have to hit the VE cells anyway, so I don't see that saving any time or effort.Quote:
Originally Posted by twenglish1
i have a maf error channel. made with the math from the afr error. this is what i use to tune the error out of the maf right? here is a copy of the tune i just made in sp density, and the log i used . sorry fellows i know im getting on you guys nerves, :banghead:Quote:
Originally Posted by gametech
Disregard my comment to Twenglish. No need to confuse this thread with alternative ways of doing things when you are trying to learn the basics. As he said, it was "slightly off topic". Sorry about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by mychevyisntheavy
will disregard. you guys are smart as heck , just hope i can learn from you guys. thanks again,,, man the truck is idling a lil funny in gear with my foot on the brake. it drops then cayches its self like every few secods, if i put it in park it goes away, but it is driving pretty dang good, still not did a wop. and i wont till i know i dont have any knock....Quote:
Originally Posted by gametech
ok i mad my changes to the ve iv done like 6 logs and six changes to0 the ve, im moving to the maf now. i dont think ill ever get the ve prefect. i just dont know how. but it is starting good it is idling lil weird. dut not dying at all. ill log a few times in maf to tune up the maf. then i guess it will be ok to , then im gonna get my new heads and the new injectors, and a dyno tune,, this thing is bear to do. thanks guys
i think i got it. i think i got the ve to a point of mybe one more tune. then the maf. then this thing will be tuned. whjat you guys think i took the ve started in the middle like started with 400rpm .5%-4400rpm to the top added 9.5%,then 4800rpm add 10% from 105kpa tp the top, then from like 5200rpm to the top add 9.5%-6400rpm from 105 to the top with.5% reshaped the ve . it looked really good, i loaded in and did a log, man it loved it. green everywhere expected for like two to three spots. so ilogged and tuned here is the tune after me up loading the log on to the newer ve i think i got it
Much betterQuote:
Originally Posted by mychevyisntheavy
You're getting the hang of it....
its taking me forever tho, i just hope i dont screw it up. ive moved on to the maf, i might once i get the maf done go back and do the ve again. if it wasnt for you guys id never figure this out. it has stopped that idle heckup.Quote:
Originally Posted by dhoagland
It takes everyone a while to learn, man. Even the senior guys in here are still learning stuff. Its always evolving... Its not easy stuff to do or wrap your head around even if youre very familiar with cars. Its definitely rewarding when you do end up getting everything to fall in line and run right though.Quote:
Originally Posted by mychevyisntheavy
I'm often humbled when I use the other platform for Diesel stuff..Quote:
Originally Posted by horsepowerguru427
Its almost like being decent with windows computers then switching to MAC... All of the sudden you remember what it was like at the begining of your journey...
I have been tuning GM ECMs and PCMs for 20 years and I still learn new stuff and improved methods regularly. I have touched up tuning on many vehicles I tuned 10+ years ago as well and been like WOW. The stuff that we did not know even 10 years ago about these Gen III controllers could fill a 300+ page book with ease. I have considered writing a book myself purely on Gen III operation, wiring, conversions, tuning and scanning. It would cover advanced settings and tuning not avaliable in HP Tuners without user defined parameters as well such as making flat response knock sensors work correctly.Quote:
Originally Posted by horsepowerguru427
I'd defintly be interested in thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Fast4.7
Id definitely buy a copy, dude. I try get my hands on anything and everything i can to increase my knowledge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast4.7
id buy one for sure, i buy everything under the sun to try to figure this out, but im throwing my towelin, its knocking or ping under power, so im done im gonna put this thing in speed density and wait on my heads and things to get this dyno tuned. im done. this is the main tune, and the log i just did.:banghead::banghead:Quote:
Originally Posted by dhoagland
a i redid the low spark table on this tune what you guys think. im just at my end.
I get your frustration. I was going through your first log posted this morning and saw extream differences in the exact same cells...
If I understand correctly you are using AFR error in your charts?
You almost have to be since your wideband is in AFR...
Look at this picture and notice the commanded AFR is clearly at 14.68 but you are in "open loop accll" mode. The commanded EQ ratrio of .85 confirms this. I saw this in mulitply spots on the log and it stayed that way all the way through the screen so its not just lagging behind.
This is showing extreamly rich error in the log (Yes the 10.92 on the wideband is rich, but the error is against 14.68 commanded vs the 12.XX that is should be)...
Maybe I'm missing something, but if not these error logs are going to have you chasing your tail
Attachment 163102
And yes. The commanded AFR did change at some points throught the log, but it was more often pinned at 14.6Quote:
Originally Posted by dhoagland
What is the sampling rate in your charts for the commanded AFR?
so is my aem wideband not calibrated right. is this why im chasing my tail. i followed the aem instructions. its a 30-0300 x-series uego. this is the one i have, i have another wide band on the truck its not hooked up to the hp tuners. i watch it sometimes to see if its the same. its on the passenger side and the aem is on the driver side. just how the bungs are made in my headersQuote:
Originally Posted by dhoagland
Low spark table looks better...Quote:
Originally Posted by mychevyisntheavy
I know you're tired of heraing me say I think your high table is too high for where you are in this tuning process, but fortuntaely the KR is helping ya out here...
I also must admit when you were SD I didn't see KR issues..
i only did the low at that time,, here is the tune i did for the spark tables.Quote:
Originally Posted by dhoagland
No..Quote:
Originally Posted by mychevyisntheavy
For some reason the commanded AFR channel that you are logging is not switching away from commanding stoich, which in your tune is 14.6
Look at the Equivilance Ratio Commanded channel.
See how it goes from 1 to .85 when you get into PE (open loop accel)... This also matches your wideband going from 14.6 to 10.92 in the log
Everthing seems to be working Except the AFR commanded channel
So your graph error is against an incorrect variable...
If you would like I coyld take a stab at adjusting your MAF curve based on closed loop LTST fuel trim error, and gestimations of MAF airflow and probably get this smoothed out a little
please,Quote:
Originally Posted by dhoagland
Not going to lie... I'm not to sure what to do here.
These next 2 pictures show your wideband going from 11.8 while being commanded 12.5, which is okay, to 18.5 while still being commanded 12.5. Obviously a big concern
Not much changed between these 2 screen shots (same screen just moved curser to show the 2 different points)..
Really until this gets figured out, which there could be a simple explination I'm over looking, I really cant see making any helpful changes.
I'll be happy to continue to help, just can't do much with this perticular log
Attachment 163109
Attachment 163110
aaaaaaa... i did something wrong .... it was in the open loop (eq ratio) i lowered it dont know why i messed with that, but i put it back to 1. i think it was part of my mess. smh, here is a log and the tune with changes back to 1 in op temp of the eq ratioQuote:
Originally Posted by dhoagland
in speed densty and maf it was set to one. dont ask why i changed that , smh. the tuning for both was dont set to 1, now the blended tune is at 1 now
here is two logs on the tune that is bleeded and eq set to 1 at op temps. drove to the store, log two different times same tune.