Exactly my thoughts.
I have dialed back the amount of tuning I do because they seem to have no interest in actually improving the software. They just want to add new vehicles and sell licenses.
...
Type: Posts; User: CCS86
Exactly my thoughts.
I have dialed back the amount of tuning I do because they seem to have no interest in actually improving the software. They just want to add new vehicles and sell licenses.
...
It's some combination of your TQ inverse and ETC tables that is causing part throttle load to be much higher than desired. Your IPC TQ errors are off the charts because of this.
Doesn't look like TC kicking in to me. Spark and ETC angle stay constant at the point that desired load plummets and air load stays high.
They did not, and don't seem to hold it as a priority:
Can you post a picture showing a slow, smooth pedal roll on to WOT?
I appreciate the reply.
I would agree that the inverse table is doing the real conversion from torque request to desired load, and that the TQ tables are more for error checking and they don't...
Correct. A big part of getting boosted (especially PD) cars to drive well is adapting the NA strategy to work with the massive ramp in VE as the bypass shuts. I have tuned maybe 20 PD blower Coyotes...
Right, that is the issue. Something is overriding the throttle position and closing it, outside the normal channels. During part throttle operation, sweeping through that ETC ~31* range, effective...
Yeah, that's less than a 1% difference. Definitely not enough to trigger an ETC closure.
Where in the log do you see that though? Under load I see desired load significantly higher than air all...
Yes, it is very close.
If that was the reason, we would see actual MAF/load exceeding desired and causing IPC TQ errors.
Not a bad idea to try. I have always been able to get good functionality here with values much closer to maximum. But, who knows, maybe some strategies apply pedal percentages differently?
Wow, now that would be interesting!
I will give this a try, thank you.
You always try to turn these discussions into something personal. I don't want to talk about you, or about me. I don't care "who is smarter".
Here is your advice: "Set desired higher"
What are...
Of course it follows the torque request.
It all starts with a pedal position, which gets looked up in driver demand to derive a torque request. Then, the torque request is fed into the...
Did HP Tuners really never fix the issue with crank relearn?
You don't really "set desired". It's a value derived from your driver demand, TQ/inverse, etc.
Why did you say my air load exceeded my desired load? The log data clearly shows that isn't the case....
How so?
126857
Mainly economics. HP Tuners licensing rules are absurd.
It should go like this:
- Read out stock tune, save as a backup (no licensing)
- Take new strategy, insert destination VIN number to...
I still can't get this thing to open the throttle!
126830
What is your indicator that an adjustment is needed, and the magnitude? Are you just adjusting locally where an issue like anticlunk arises. Or, are you globally correcting through logged channels /...
What method are you using to tune SD? On my personal 2012 I used an external MAP sensor and locked out each mapped point, sweeping all ranges of load and RPM. This isn't practical on a remotely tuned...
I'm going to have him check ignition, because that is definitely a lot of misfires. But, I need him to start sending full logs because this one starts with 67 misfires already, so I can't see the...
Exactly. I would think that if it was a specific limit not yet defined for this strategy, it would still show up as a number.
The base for this tune is essentially matched to another PD blower...
I can try. But, I'm having a hard time seeing it implicated in this situation, where WOT pedal position should be forcing full ETC angle. I have only ever seen a DD limit override this. Not even MAF...
Disabled.