Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: 2001 Cavalier Z24 N/A timing tables??

  1. #1

    2001 Cavalier Z24 N/A timing tables??

    I have a 2001 Z24 (2.4) 5 speed. After lots of datalogging I getting timing advance way over the High Octance tables (or low Octane tables). Is there any other place the ECU gets timing advance from? I have heard at least one of person has seen this as well, but could not answer this. They thought it could be related to EGR. My car does not have EGR from the factory. Any info would be helpful. Thanks

  2. #2
    Tuner REDFOCZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    68
    Sounds like a secondary table is adding timing on top of the high Octane table. When you are in the editor go under the spark advance tab, you should have a spark correction table next to it, and this table will add more timing under certain conditions. If you post your tune up I could take a screen shot of what I am talking about.

    Edit:

    Here is a pick of my tune about the Seconary spark table
    Last edited by REDFOCZ; 10-14-2007 at 06:15 PM.

  3. #3
    Thanks for the response. Here is a copy of my tune.

  4. #4
    Advanced Tuner TiredGXP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    259
    Are you getting more advance than the HO(PE) table?

    2005 Grand Prix GXP - 5.3 LS4 - HP Tuned, MF catback, 1.8 rockers, K&N, Some day I'll finish putting the LS6 intake on

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by TiredGXP
    Are you getting more advance than the HO(PE) table?

    Yes. My map maxes arounf 98+99KPA.

  6. #6
    Senior Tuner Russ K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Regina, Sask.
    Posts
    4,214
    Look at the High & Low octane spark tables, as they are higher then the PE spark tables.

    Russ Kemp

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Russ K
    Look at the High & Low octane spark tables, as they are higher then the PE spark tables.

    Russ Kemp
    Ok now question. I'm only concerned at this moment with spark in Power enrichment. SO I should only be looking at spark tables for PE correct? Normal HO and LO spark tables should not affect HO-PE and LO-PE correct?

    Thanks for the responses.

  8. #8
    Advanced Tuner TiredGXP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    259
    I believe that you want to use the HO(PE) table when in PE. Most values in that table are higher than in your high octane table (just doesn't look like it because the HO(PE) table starts at a MAP of 60 instead of 20kpa as in the High Octane table)

    Looks like 24 of the 160 cells are lower than the High Octane table, five or so the same and the remainder are higher.

    2005 Grand Prix GXP - 5.3 LS4 - HP Tuned, MF catback, 1.8 rockers, K&N, Some day I'll finish putting the LS6 intake on

  9. #9
    JMHZ2401, did you ever come to a resolution regarding this matter? I too have been beating my head against a wall dealing with a '97 Z24 commanding far more timing than the available tables suggest it should.

    I suspect that these cars do have the AFR Spark Correction table, we just don't have access to it....perhaps the HP guys could have a look at your tune file to confirm that is case, & possibly consider adding it for us.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Shane Hewitt
    JMHZ2401, did you ever come to a resolution regarding this matter? I too have been beating my head against a wall dealing with a '97 Z24 commanding far more timing than the available tables suggest it should.

    I suspect that these cars do have the AFR Spark Correction table, we just don't have access to it....perhaps the HP guys could have a look at your tune file to confirm that is case, & possibly consider adding it for us.
    No I have not. I seem to be getting 1-1.5 degree's extra timing than commanded.

  11. #11
    I'd be OK with 1-1.5 deg. I've been logging upwards of 3-5 in some cases.

  12. #12
    HP Tuners Support
    (foff667)
    Bill@HPTuners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Hailing from Parts Unknown
    Posts
    28,268
    Without the tune file along with a cooresponding scanner log its very difficult(at best) to find which tables(if any) are missing.
    It doesn't have to be perfect, it just needs to be done in two weeks...

    A wise man once said "google it"

  13. #13
    Here is the stock tune file of the car I've been dealing with.

    As an experiment, both JMHZ2401 & I have gone in & made all the corresponding cells in the HO(PE), LO(PE), HO(non-pe), & LO(non-pe) tables all match (although that isn't reflected in the tune file I attached) & still wind up with several degrees above what these tables suggest I should be getting, leading us to believe that another table must be contributing to the final timing we are seeing.

  14. #14
    HP Tuners Support
    (foff667)
    Bill@HPTuners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Hailing from Parts Unknown
    Posts
    28,268
    please post the .hpl file rather than xls.
    It doesn't have to be perfect, it just needs to be done in two weeks...

    A wise man once said "google it"

  15. #15
    Here is a short WOT log. If you take 5800-6000 rpm, the HO(PE) table suggests the car should be commanding at most 30 deg., but the logs show upwards of 33 deg.

  16. #16
    Here is a log from my car. If you look at the WOT part at 5317 RPM's KPA is 98 and I have 28 degree's advance. Under my tune ( posted in this post towards the top) at those settings it should be commanding 25 degree's in HO PE and between 19-21 in LO PE.