LGX Camaro NA log needed

[Roland_Price]

Can anyone please share a couple of their NA V6 2016+ Camaro with LGX logs? WOT and part throttle would be ideal, I need to compare a cylinder airmass logged

Thank you

[CYN_CRVR]

See if these are helpful; each contains one throttle roll-on to redline. This is with aftermarket CAI, ported manifold, and tweaked cam timing.

[CYN_CRVR]

and here's a more diverse log

[Roland_Price]

See if these are helpful; each contains one throttle roll-on to redline. This is with aftermarket CAI, ported manifold, and tweaked cam timing.

Thanks a lot, these are just what I needed. I'm banging my head against the wall with my boosted setup issue and it seems that nobody can tell what the problem is so I'm starting from scratch

[KillboyPowerhead]

Saw your tune file in the V8 forum. Are those factory Driver Demand tables or have they been modified? I don't know too much about them but they are way different than mine (LFX but would guess the principles of these tables are the same between the two ECU's). Attached is mine (guessing mine uses Engine Torque and yours uses Axle Torque); you can see most rows have the same value in every column. These tables are a factor in torque calculations.

[Roland_Price]

Saw your tune file in the V8 forum. Are those factory Driver Demand tables or have they been modified? I don't know too much about them but they are way different than mine (LFX but would guess the principles of these tables are the same between the two ECU's). Attached is mine (guessing mine uses Engine Torque and yours uses Axle Torque); you can see most rows have the same value in every column. These tables are a factor in torque calculations.

Thanks a lot for bringing this in, I'm trying to find the cause of the major issue with TM and any info is useful. Yes, mine is stock so far

[KillboyPowerhead]

Maybe for starters try making all of the cells the same as the first column, so copy the first column to the last and interpolate. VVE (and maybe MAF?) also plays a role in torque calculations, and it seems that "Delivered Engine Torque" and "Engine Torque" need to be below "Maximum Engine Torque" or else the throttle won't keep opening. Believe once VVE is accurate the ECU can calculate a somewhat accurate engine torque, and then from there you can adjust the Driver Demand tables to reflect the engine torque (believe the DD tables tell the ECU how much torque you're asking for relative to pedal position, so you want to ask for as much as the engine is putting out, or something to that effect). Virtual Torque also plays a role, but I don't even know where to start with those... On my LFX I've done full intake, exhaust, cams, and my VT tables are stock and the car runs just fine, but maybe boosted would necessitate adjusting these tables.

Maybe others that are more experienced can chime in, but this is where I'd start.

[Roland_Price]

Maybe for starters try making all of the cells the same as the first column, so copy the first column to the last and interpolate. VVE (and maybe MAF?) also plays a role in torque calculations, and it seems that "Delivered Engine Torque" and "Engine Torque" need to be below "Maximum Engine Torque" or else the throttle won't keep opening. Believe once VVE is accurate the ECU can calculate a somewhat accurate engine torque, and then from there you can adjust the Driver Demand tables to reflect the engine torque (believe the DD tables tell the ECU how much torque you're asking for relative to pedal position, so you want to ask for as much as the engine is putting out, or something to that effect). Virtual Torque also plays a role, but I don't even know where to start with those... On my LFX I've done full intake, exhaust, cams, and my VT tables are stock and the car runs just fine, but maybe boosted would necessitate adjusting these tables.

Maybe others that are more experienced can chime in, but this is where I'd start.

I've done exactly that ) I already have the MAF within 1% and VE within 1-3% of error. The fueling is as close as I can get it, I did 20+ iterations of it. The issue is that the car shifts in Tour mode with a very serious kick over 3-4k RMP with Torque Management enabled, and that's how I trashed my TC. In Sport mode I have it completely disabled and I have set the pressure offsets the way that it shifts fast and reliable in any scenario except for downshifts when braking with the engine. So far I have no idea what's going on - everything seems to be dialed in except for the VT tables and that's where I'm stuck right now. I haven't found a reliable answer on how to tune VT with no dyno available, though I'm sure there are topics like that on the forum

[KillboyPowerhead]

I could be wrong, but I believe you tune the VT like VVE, except you're logging Delivered Engine Torque instead of fuel trims, but otherwise you make a bunch of tables to replicate the VT tables (RPM vs. Airmass and RPM vs. Manifold Pressure, for various spark advance). I created six tables for each (Airmass and MAP), 12 tables total, just as shown by default in the VT editor, and then for filters, among whatever other filters I have, I added [50110.161]>-5 & [50110.161]<5 for 0 deg advance, [50110.161]>5 & [50110.161]<15 for 10 deg advance, etc. Also like the VVE you'll want to keep your cams at 0/0 and adjust those base tables first. Again, not sure if this is correct, and I haven't used them yet (waiting to get my VVE within ~2% which I think it is now), but will try them out soon, on my next road trip.

[Roland_Price]

I could be wrong, but I believe you tune the VT like VVE, except you're logging Delivered Engine Torque instead of fuel trims, but otherwise you make a bunch of tables to replicate the VT tables (RPM vs. Airmass and RPM vs. Manifold Pressure, for various spark advance). I created six tables for each (Airmass and MAP), 12 tables total, just as shown by default in the VT editor, and then for filters, among whatever other filters I have, I added [50110.161]>-5 & [50110.161]<5 for 0 deg advance, [50110.161]>5 & [50110.161]<15 for 10 deg advance, etc. Also like the VVE you'll want to keep your cams at 0/0 and adjust those base tables first. Again, not sure if this is correct, and I haven't used them yet (waiting to get my VVE within ~2% which I think it is now), but will try them out soon, on my next road trip.

Thanks, you confirmed my thoughts on this one) The only thing I'm not sure is what PIDs should I compare to get an error percentage - the Immediate Torque Cmd vs Delivered Engine Torque I guess?

[KillboyPowerhead]

Again, not sure about this, but I believe you just log Delivered Engine Torque and compare that to the Virtual Torque tables. So if at a given cell on a given table you're logging 100 ft/lbs (or Nm), and the corresponding VT table cell is 80 ft/lbs, you'd change that cell to 100. Or I guess better to link the selections to adjust that cell in all tables and then multiply to get the same result, so in this case multiply by 1.25.

[Roland_Price]

Again, not sure about this, but I believe you just log Delivered Engine Torque and compare that to the Virtual Torque tables. So if at a given cell on a given table you're logging 100 ft/lbs (or Nm), and the corresponding VT table cell is 80 ft/lbs, you'd change that cell to 100. Or I guess better to link the selections to adjust that cell in all tables and then multiply to get the same result, so in this case multiply by 1.25.

Yep, that makes sense to me. Thank you, I will do this procedure after I get my new TC (the old one is literally undriveable now).

Did you have your LFX boosted or you're tuning for NA?

[GHuggins]

While you can use that method to get a general shape of the models, it won't give you accurate data. There are several other losses added to engine torque "the tables you can see in the cal" to come up with the delivered torque output. The biggest player being rotational losses from friction and drag that gets added into it. If it wasn't patented and made to where people have to pay access to look at it, I could send you an article that illustrates these losses as logged on a dyno as they can be quite substantial as the rpm's increase. Some of the older gen 3 cals actually showed some of this in their cals as hpt actually mapped it in them. That was the whole reason I started going off of the VE table's changes only as it is a direct reflection of fuel and air changes going into the motor vs engine load and you can use fuel and air consumption to calculate torque with several other knowns... With yours using axle torque it's also going to have another table (desired engine hp output) that will play on the delivered axle torque numbers and that's another one hpt hasn't mapped for anybody and also doesn't seem to be detrimentally needed. That one only appears to be in the ones using axle torque for the DD. With yours only acting up in one driving mode, it's most likely a multiplier just for the mode. For example sport mode will change timing output in some cars. I would make sure your torque settings in tm are good then focus on the individual dd tables and go from there. You've already had different torque models and it didn't make any difference not to say that reshaping them wouldn't fix it, but..... You can always try different combo's of tables - I personally don't "think" the torque model will be the answer you're looking for. Again, doesn't mean it's not... Your combo honestly shouldn't be having any problems at all with light throttle driving, so if it is I would look at each individual area to see if something got changed that maybe shouldn't have, then re-evaluate.

[CYN_CRVR]

For a car whose torque model is already in the ballpark, what about just focusing on Torque Management Advance? If you're consistently seeing TMA in a particular region, then add some torque to that area of the model, otherwise leave it alone.

Is this a reasonable method?

[Roland_Price]

For a car whose torque model is already in the ballpark, what about just focusing on Torque Management Advance? If you're consistently seeing TMA in a particular region, then add some torque to that area of the model, otherwise leave it alone.

Is this a reasonable method?

That's the thing, I see TM only in the areas it should be - during shifts. But it's so off that I trashed my torque converter with 3-4 of these on 5500-6000 RPM. So I'm looking for the root cause of this

[Roland_Price]

While you can use that method to get a general shape of the models, it won't give you accurate data. There are several other losses added to engine torque "the tables you can see in the cal" to come up with the delivered torque output. The biggest player being rotational losses from friction and drag that gets added into it. If it wasn't patented and made to where people have to pay access to look at it, I could send you an article that illustrates these losses as logged on a dyno as they can be quite substantial as the rpm's increase. Some of the older gen 3 cals actually showed some of this in their cals as hpt actually mapped it in them. That was the whole reason I started going off of the VE table's changes only as it is a direct reflection of fuel and air changes going into the motor vs engine load and you can use fuel and air consumption to calculate torque with several other knowns... With yours using axle torque it's also going to have another table (desired engine hp output) that will play on the delivered axle torque numbers and that's another one hpt hasn't mapped for anybody and also doesn't seem to be detrimentally needed. That one only appears to be in the ones using axle torque for the DD. With yours only acting up in one driving mode, it's most likely a multiplier just for the mode. For example sport mode will change timing output in some cars. I would make sure your torque settings in tm are good then focus on the individual dd tables and go from there. You've already had different torque models and it didn't make any difference not to say that reshaping them wouldn't fix it, but..... You can always try different combo's of tables - I personally don't "think" the torque model will be the answer you're looking for. Again, doesn't mean it's not... Your combo honestly shouldn't be having any problems at all with light throttle driving, so if it is I would look at each individual area to see if something got changed that maybe shouldn't have, then re-evaluate.

I doubt that it's a mod-dependent issue - I had this in Sport as well, until I turned off TM completely in this mode and set up the pressures and timings manually to compare with the TM enabled in Tour

[GHuggins]

OK, so you say it's hitting hard on the shifts for wot with tcc staying locked? Not sure why tcc is locked for wot shifts if that's indeed the case. That can be that max torque model map ref reading I mentioned in the other thread hitting it's limit, the torque model being too high in boost, shift pressure set too high for higher engine torque since you were never hitting those areas stock, torque management being killed in the trans, min timing being raised on the engine side, flare timing being raised on the engine side, DD being too high or too low - either can cause that with too low usually being with part throttle instances only and then a few others I'm sure I'm forgetting.

[Roland_Price]

OK, so you say it's hitting hard on the shifts for wot with tcc staying locked? Not sure why tcc is locked for wot shifts if that's indeed the case. That can be that max torque model map ref reading I mentioned in the other thread hitting it's limit, the torque model being too high in boost, shift pressure set too high for higher engine torque since you were never hitting those areas stock, torque management being killed in the trans, min timing being raised on the engine side, flare timing being raised on the engine side, DD being too high or too low - either can cause that with too low usually being with part throttle instances only and then a few others I'm sure I'm forgetting.

More like WOT-ish - I tried shifting on 3600-4000 RPM and it was shifting back and forth searching for the gear just like the extreme scenario I was having on 6000 RPM, but less violent. The guys at HPT did a lightning-fast job and added the parameters I asked for in the latest beta, and it turned out that my limit was 100 kPa, not even 150 like on the stock ZL1 tune. And because I'm at 11 PSI of boos at 3600 RPM with a 3.0" pulley you can imagine what torque error the TC was dealing with.

So... I really hope that this is it, but so far I can't tell. I will probably try this tune tomorrow, but it's 1-5 C here already and we're expecting snow any day now. The only thing that's left is a DD table - I have no suitable log for it but I should deal with it in the first place - the difference in Cmd and delivered torque is huge at some points:
Scanner1.png

[GHuggins]

More like WOT-ish - I tried shifting on 3600-4000 RPM and it was shifting back and forth searching for the gear just like the extreme scenario I was having on 6000 RPM, but less violent. The guys at HPT did a lightning-fast job and added the parameters I asked for in the latest beta, and it turned out that my limit was 100 kPa, not even 150 like on the stock ZL1 tune. And because I'm at 11 PSI of boos at 3600 RPM with a 3.0" pulley you can imagine what torque error the TC was dealing with.

So... I really hope that this is it, but so far I can't tell. I will probably try this tune tomorrow, but it's 1-5 C here already and we're expecting snow any day now. The only thing that's left is a DD table - I have no suitable log for it but I should deal with it in the first place - the difference in Cmd and delivered torque is huge at some points:
Scanner1.png

I'm surprised it was working right"ish" at all if yours maxes at 100kpa. This of course if yours works like the V8's do, because I've seen some serious timing "knock" pulls and other "ghost like" tm kicking in on them just being 20 kpa"ish" over the setting. You also need to make sure they defined it right. Map max should be and stay at 100kpa whilst the airmass max map setting is the one you raise.

[Roland_Price]

I'm surprised it was working right"ish" at all if yours maxes at 100kpa. This of course if yours works like the V8's do, because I've seen some serious timing "knock" pulls and other "ghost like" tm kicking in on them just being 20 kpa"ish" over the setting. You also need to make sure they defined it right. Map max should be and stay at 100kpa whilst the airmass max map setting is the one you raise.

Yep, I've set the one you advised to 250 kPa and will see how it reacts. It haven't switched normal at all in the hight boost scenarios, that's why I've set up the Sport mode manually. Switching to 3.0" pulley just amplified the issue and shifted the rough shift threshold lower. I don't see how v6 is fundamentally different in terms of ECU control from v8, I've seen my friend's gen6 ZL1's tune and the principals are the same. My theory that it shifted okay-ish down low is that I had it running off the MAF up from 3000+ RPM and there is no limit to the VT tables for airmass, so the ECU used the blend between MAP and MAF. But the further up it went, the more was the gap between MAP and MAF VT readings. But that's just the theory