Spark Control when Dyno Tuning...

[CarsonTech]

What are you guys using to command timing for Spark Hook testing on the dyno? I can't control spark in any versions of the Scanner for HP Tuners for my 2006 Ion Redline. I am assuming no one else can either, as I can find no threads on any forum discussing how anyone commands timing for the P12 ECU LSJ cars.

Perhaps every other LSJ owner can command timing with the HP Tuners scanner and I can't... maybe HP Tuners doesn't support certain VCM Control functions for my specific OS version that is on my ECU? I wouldn't think that would be the problem, therefore I assume all the LSJ owners can't command timing with the VCM Controlls in the Scanner.

So, again, what are you guys using to command timing so you can tune for MBT in most cells of the timing tables? Or do we just have

Ah, I wish I had my LS1 cars back, almost anything could be modified and controlled in real time with the ECU that "God's Motor" used.

[Iam Broke]

No real time control on the E69 ECU I'm afraid. Drop an LS1 into it.

You have to write several tunes, dyno one & load the next, ect.

I'm playing with E47 in my LS1 now.

[silverbullet08]

Hows the LS1 liking it? I did a LS2 GTO a while back and it loved it. You dont happen to know if those factory injectors on your transam are big enough to run full E do you?

[CarsonTech]

No real time control on the E69 ECU I'm afraid. Drop an LS1 into it.

You have to write several tunes, dyno one & load the next, ect.

I'm playing with E47 in my LS1 now.

I was talking, specifically, about the P12 ECU the LSJ cars use. Sucks to hear about you LNF guys. Hopefully real spark control will be coming soon if the ECU can support it.

I was hoping someone would chime in and say they have real time spark control through the Scanner. Then I could just contact support and ask them why I'm not seeing it with my car.

If not through HP Tuners, maybe that other Big GM tuner package has the ability, or maybe one of the Scanning software and tools they sell on ScanTool.net may have the ability for real time spark control, maybe even real time Stoich AFR control. If anyone has those other tools, maybe they can chime in about it.

As for dropping in an LS1... I am not made of money, but I do plan on buying another LS1 car in the next few weeks.

[Iam Broke]

Hows the LS1 liking it? I did a LS2 GTO a while back and it loved it. You dont happen to know if those factory injectors on your transam are big enough to run full E do you?

47% E has the IDC up to 93%, still a little on the rich side as I work up the timing but so far so good. SLP Lid & Bellows, & some trans tweaking on the auto. It might make 60% E on the stock injectors when I lean it out and go catless, but it'll be close. Ford 42 lb. Green Tops are what most use on it for E85 from what I read.

I don't mind the blend, hell it only gets filled once or twice a year. It's a dog 60-100 compared to the LNF SS (6.7 sec vs 4.4) but I shaved 1/2 sec off the 60 - 100 time so far. Catless y pipe on order, SLP PowerFlo exhaust after that.

[Iam Broke]

I was talking, specifically, about the P12 ECU the LSJ cars use. Sucks to hear about you LNF guys. Hopefully real spark control will be coming soon if the ECU can support it.

I was hoping someone would chime in and say they have real time spark control through the Scanner. Then I could just contact support and ask them why I'm not seeing it with my car.

If not through HP Tuners, maybe that other Big GM tuner package has the ability, or maybe one of the Scanning software and tools they sell on ScanTool.net may have the ability for real time spark control, maybe even real time Stoich AFR control. If anyone has those other tools, maybe they can chime in about it.

As for dropping in an LS1... I am not made of money, but I do plan on buying another LS1 car in the next few weeks.

I haven't heard of any other support for the E69 other than HPT & Trifecta, unless you count Superchips.

[cobaltssoverbooster]

47% E has the IDC up to 93%, still a little on the rich side as I work up the timing but so far so good. SLP Lid & Bellows, & some trans tweaking on the auto. It might make 60% on the stock injectors when I lean it out and go catless, but it'll be close. Ford 42 lb. Green Tops are what most use on it for E85 from what I read.

I don't mind the blend, hell it only gets filled once or twice a year. It's a dog 60-100 compared to the LNF SS (6.7 sec vs 4.4) but I shaved 1/2 sec off the 60 - 100 time so far. Catless y pipe on order, SLP PowerFlo exhaust after that.

this may shave some time as well

[Iam Broke]

Just a wee bit me thinks.

[Leafy]

No, no of the 4 bangers have real time tuning at all. It fucking blows. Took a car with completely theoretical maps (aka 100% constructed in excel with math) on a haltech the first time I ever used a haltech, and the first time tuning on the dyno, and had it tuned for peak torque everywhere in an hour and a half. Thanks to rtt. Though if I had to tune like I do with hp tuners I'd have been sunk because haltech data logging is garbage.

[omega_5]

Well, I don't want to give away all my secrets... but I'll give you a hint at what works fairly well; a special IAT Spark table, and manipulate the IAT1 sensor.
It's not perfect, but it gets the job done.

[Leafy]

OOO that tricky. But I thought the iat spark table would be based off of the iat 2.

[CarsonTech]

Well, I don't want to give away all my secrets... but I'll give you a hint at what works fairly well; a special IAT Spark table, and manipulate the IAT1 sensor.
It's not perfect, but it gets the job done.

I thought about doing something with an input like that, especially since there is no fueling calculation based of of IATs for these cars, that I know of. I was just looking for an easier way first.

OOO that tricky. But I thought the iat spark table would be based off of the iat 2.

That's what I thought.

I guess I need to find the linear for the IAT2 sensor and do some testing.

[cobaltssoverbooster]

im used to motec rtt for the supra i used to have we had everything done including cam change and a start from scratch map and tables in two days with about 3 hours one day and 4 hours second day on the dyno. she ran good i miss her

[omega_5]

OOO that tricky. But I thought the iat spark table would be based off of the iat 2.

Fueling is based off of IAT2, spark is off of IAT1.
Why they did that is beyond be, cause it would make more sense to adjust the timing based on the air actually going into the engine.

I thought about doing something with an input like that, especially since there is no fueling calculation based of of IATs for these cars, that I know of. I was just looking for an easier way first.

As far as I've found, there isn't really a simpler way to do it.
There aren't any bidirectional controls that can manipulate timing, and we will never have an option for RTT.

[CarsonTech]

Wow, I always thought that with most factory forced induction cars, the temps picked up from IAT2 sensor helped with the fueling calculations and spark modifications.

I have heard some say, (I can't remember where) that IATs aren't even taking into account for the fueling calculations on these ECUs, and that only ECT is, instead of the usual equation where IAT/ECT is used. I think they got that confused with not being able to edit the table(s) that modify fueling. Like how some tuning software providers (HP Tuners included) give access to the Temp Bias tables for other ECUs.

I know that's not the case, but I did notice how much fueling can swing on these cars, depending on temps, when running in OL SD. When compared to other types of cars running in OL SD it seems pretty extreme. The extreme swing could be a less efficient equation for fueling modification that GM uses in these ECUs, or it could be the fact that the freaking HEaton is too much for the equation.... or both, lol.

Anyway, thanks for the idea of the IAT inpur for "commanding" spark tuning, trying that this week hopefully.

[gmtech16450yz]

Fueling is based off of IAT2, spark is off of IAT1.

Hey how accurate is that info? Not doubting you because I was never sure 100% which it used on the E69. If you read IAT "sensor", it reads the average of IAT1 and IAT2, which is what I assumed the ecu used for all "intake" temp calculations. That makes more sense to me, but I have no idea what the Bosch guys think makes sense! I end up logging 4 "IAT" temps, Ambient Air Temp, IAT1, IAT2 and IAT Sensor. All 4 will come from different sources or calculations and be different values, but obviously can all read the same also. (The ultimate goal obviously.)

Let us all know if what you quoted is good, solid info. Up to this point I was ASSUMING it was the average that it used. Again, not doubting, just never heard a definitive answer on this question.

[CarsonTech]

If you read IAT "sensor", it reads the average of IAT1 and IAT2, which is what I assumed the ecu used for all "intake" temp calculations.

I ran into the same thing. It was a long time ago, but I think I came up with this after some testing:

The scanner software gives an alias to certain PIDs that are being scanned. It just so happens that the IAT1 and IAT2 PIDs are given the same alias, [SENS.11] (Intake Air Temp). The scanner software sees this just takes the average of the two reported PIDs.

The "Sensor" aliases can't be added to the PID table, only the PIDs they're an alias of can. When you go to make a custom PID, you will see where you can create a Sensor alias for your custom PID.

Creat two custom PIDs, give them both the same Sensor alias, and then add them to the PID table:

If you setup the Sensor to be shown in the Chart Display, Gauge Display, or Histogram Display, you will see that it is averaging the two custom PIDs that have the same alias (Sensor Name).

I think its the same thing with STFTs and LTFTs on cars with two banks, such as V6 and V8 cars. There is only one sensor (alias) named [SENS.16] (STFT) and one named [SENS.14] (LTFT). The Scanner averages the bank 1 and bank 2 trims so it because STFT bank 1 and STFT bank 2 have they both same alias name.

It seems the alias thing is just a HP Tuners Scanner thing to assist in logging and tuning. I don't think it exists on the ECU level.

[gmtech16450yz]

HHMMMMM, very interesting! (Enlightenment usually is!) That makes perfect sense, Thanks!

The part that was the biggest mystery to me is that the alias thing just being a factor of the scanning software, and not in the actual ECU. That makes sense also. That would certainly mean it (meaning the actual ecu) wouldn't use the average of two sensors for any tables I guess? I guess in regards to your long term and short term fueling example the question would be are there any motors that physically use both left and right bank O2's, but the ECU DOES NOT adjust fuel trims separately per bank but as a global adjustment? Dunno. My buddy here at the dealership also works on scanner software development at Snap On, I should pick his brain about this.

[omega_5]

Hey how accurate is that info? Not doubting you because I was never sure 100% which it used on the E69.

Well, I'm referring to a P12 PCM, as that was what the OP requesting in the first post. I can't comment on the E69, as I've never actually tested it to any length.

My source on the P12 comes from my playing with the IAT1 sensor, and IAT spark tables.
As I recall, there is some GM documentation somewhere, but I'd have to looks again in order to give an exact source.

[Jar Jar]

What does the optimum spark table in the torque management tab do?