Good to hear that your engine is back together. Are you going to have Dave at DDM do the tuning for you?
Good to hear that your engine is back together. Are you going to have Dave at DDM do the tuning for you?
I am working on another idea about tuning. Oh, I can tell you who it won't be ...
I went through 2 tuners myself and while I had pretty good luck with both of them, I had the most success by tuning it myself. I read every LNF tuning post and watched the tuning videos several times and always had the scanner running just about anytime I was behind the wheel of the car. It does take some effort and time to learn but with the information that is available here, it can safely be done.
Good luck to ya!
I'm literally sick to my stomach right now. Somebody told me to look at a thread on the Sky forum and this is what I saw...
http://www.skyroadster.com/forums/f2...rmtuned-65529/
I recognized the OP's screen name so I did a little search to see why his name was familiar. He's been around for awhile and backed me up in my last thread on that forum. He actually backed me up twice in that thread, or really was just trying to inject some reason into the insanity and retardation of some of the members that forum. Anyway, I believe he's one of the "good guys". So that's why I feel so bad right now. I REALLY don't want to see another blown LNF thread. I don't want to read about another good person trying to figure out how he's going to get his car back on the road without a ton of money, time or trouble. I don't want to hear another person saying "If I'd only known before instead of after it was too late".
There's a reason we're all hanging out in a forum like this. It's because we like cars. This random forum member raving about his new Term2 tune isn't just "some guy", he's one of us. He likes the same kind of cars we do. He's probably proud of his car and likes to take good care of it. That's why it makes me sick to see this. Luckily someone already replied to his thread by posting a link to this thread. I hope he reads it. I hope he realizes the danger before it's too late.
I know I'm new here, but this thread has possibly thrown a wrench into my plans. I'm just starting to break in a new clutch and was going to have Term2 tune my car in a few weeks, he does have a pretty good reputation, but then I saw this thread. Not sure what to do now, not too many guys do remote tuning.
Andrew.
That sky thread is not good. You can't equate tune quality with traction in 2nd. I can't go wot in 1st or 2nd on 91. That's not what defines a great tune. smh
Yesterday started out good (did some business with a new client), then turned terrible (my 4 yr old grandson feel out of his house 2nd floor window landed on a cement drive way and has a fractured skull+ , then a little more good, then bed at 1 am after 400 miles and many hours of driving (plus the wife drove a segment too) my engine is now delivered to the person that is going to put my engine back into my car.
More later.
I can agreed with that, the tune I had would spend stock tires as soon as the turbo kicked in and would spin all the way through 2nd then you know what happen ... Poof!Originally Posted by codename Bil Doe
The largest issue I had was lack of logs and data. Literally weeks would go by and all I got was a few short 2-3 minute logs with very little data and then all of a sudden he sends the log of him going wide open in either 4th or 5th gear at around 50 mph and 2400 RPMs and I saw what happened (still shocked it could drop rail pressure on 93 octane my car never did and I will tell you I pushed mine a lot harder than that) and I warned him not to drive it like that especially with the cam sensor and boost leak codes showing up. I then turned the wg way down to around 75-80% around 3000 to 4000 RPMs to stop the boost spike but the customer wanted more midrange boost again so I turned the wg back up just a little in that file I posted up and the next time he drove it it went boom. Mostly I did not have the data I needed from proper logging to ensure this tune was safe on his car. This is the first and only LNF stock turbo on 93 I have ever seen drop rail pressure before. Also fans are not on that early cam sensor code should not be related to that. It also threw a P0101 code indicating a boost leak which the ECM was likely trying to compensate for by raising the desired torque beyond what the tune called for. I was not commanding 320% desired airload and the ECM has a temerature airload max table that limits desired airload to 255%.
Imagine how frustrating it is for me after asking for a good data logs for weeks (I should not have to do this I tell everone I need detailed 30 minute logs with several pulls in them in my emails), the first good log (one with actual WOT data) I see from the car looks ugly (does not help going wide open throttle at 2000 RPMs in top gear that is bad news) and the has a cam sensor code and the boost leak code as well. I warned him about driving it hard with the codes and it dropping rail pressure like that. Mind you droppind rail pressure on stock turbo not normal on 93 and a normal PE lambda and I immediately turned the wg duty cycle in the midrange down quite a bit, but then was told the car ran better but did not have as much midrange torque so I was asked if I could raise the torque some. Which I did by raising the wg back up some which is the tune file I posted. In the end I barely got past base tune with his car. I had many more changes I needed to make but unfortunately I did not have the data I needed to dial the tune in on the car.
Last edited by Terminator2; 05-09-2015 at 01:06 PM.
Hey David, can you show us a log where you were monitoring his boost levels?
BTW Thanks for finally coming back in here. I for one would appreciate it if you stuck around and answered some hard questions.
Mike, for ME this has NOTHING TO DO with "taking sides". I'm good at my job because I can look at a situation without bias, prejudice, emotion or preconceived ideas. I take in all the data available and come up with a conclusion. Sure, many times you don't have all the data you would like, but that doesn't mean you can't come up with a viable conclusion. This situation was VERY clear to me the minute I looked at the logs. No other information was really needed to know that whatever "tune" was in that car was the DIRECT CAUSE of that engine's failure. The logs clearly showed that. Listening to the personal "data" that the people involved have shared only clouds the reality of the situation. Like I've said many times here... All you have to do is look at the logs to know what happened. If David had seen those logs, which he said he did, he was grossly negligent in the way he modified that owners engine if for no other reason than the fact he didn't have control over ANY of the engine parameters after several tune revisions.
Please look at this screenshot of HHRfreak's Term2 log. This is David's 4TH revision of his tune. Do ANY of you seasoned tuners here see ANY evidence of proper tuning in this log screenshot? There is no control over boost, mixtures, ign timing (1.5 degrees! WTH?), fuel pressures, KR control, airload control, injection time, proper PE numbers, etc, etc. This log clearly shows total lack of control of the engine management system. Is there any other data that's needed to assess this screenshot? Do we need to know the name of the tuner? Do we need to know anything about the owner? All that is needed to OBJECTIVELY assess this screenshot is to know that the tuner has had 4 chances to gain control of the engine and has failed. Period. The End.
BTW 5.0Willie, if you're reading this...
This screenshot is how you blow up an LNF. 29psi boost at low rpm, severely retarded ign timing and lean mixtures caused by fuel starvation are pretty much what destroys these engines. If you have any logs of your engine, PLEASE PLEASE look at them and at the very least see what the boost levels are. The OP of this thread never even knew what his boost levels were because David didn't have him logging boost. From the airloads shown, his boost was AT LEAST 30psi on a stock engine! That's not an "IF it blows" situation, that's a "IT WILL BLOW" situation, which it did.
Last edited by gmtech16450yz; 05-09-2015 at 01:17 PM.
What other questions do you have John? You do not know the whole story here.
You quoted my question but didn't answer it?
Here it is again...
Hey David, can you show us a log where you were monitoring his boost levels?
I have it in a histogram and yes it did boost much higher than I had intended and I turned the wg duty cycle down to 75-80% in the midrange one revision before the final one. Mind you John that was the first log I had of him going wide open throttle in a gear other than 2nd gear (It barely hit 23.5psi in 2nd). This was a 4th or 5th gear wide open throttle pull from 2000 RPMs which is never a good idea IMHO.
Last edited by Terminator2; 05-09-2015 at 01:44 PM.
Can you explain this screenshot of the "Street Tune" you made for him? What else do I "not know" that would explain what I'm seeing here? I'll note some of the clues in this log...
Boost level is WELL OVER 30psi. Holy crap it could have actually been closer to 35psi! Compare the airload when it drops at the top of the rpm's and the boost sensor is still maxed out. I'm gonna safely say it was boosting to 35psi. Is that what you would call a "conservative" street tune?
Fuel pressure is at idle levels, 2379 desired but actual pressure was 809psi!
Injection duty cycle 41%, 14.6ms. Holy crap I'm surprised it didn't extinguish the spark when it fired. Oh, it didn't because...
Ign timing at 1.5 degrees at WOT? Do you have any idea how much worse that is than if it was at 15 degrees?
Solid 4.5 degrees of KR showing, also maxed out because that all the tune was allowing at that rpm level. The amount of actual knock could have been WAY higher.
Commanded Lambda was .89, that's ok, but actual was 1.07!!! Holy crap that's too high for lean cruise!
So my question is, what else do I "not know" that would explain a log like this?
tbsteck if parts are available can you take a picture of the charge pipe map sensor and manifold map sensor? it would help if we could see the part numbers.
My bad, the config was for 3 bar maps and the tune shows he's using stock maps. Hopefully they are actually stock maps in the car! So even with a stock map config file the boost is still looking like at least 30psi. Mike I know the airload numbers can't directly tell you what the boost is, I was looking more at the relative airload numbers compared to what the boost was showing. Either way, with any config in your scanner, the proper boost PID was NOT being logged. Not only that but the boost was most definitely maxing out the map sensors early on in the rpm's/boost building.
Good catch on the max retard also Mike. I was figuring it was maxed when I saw the flatline in the log but I didn't go back to look at the tune. Either way, it's just another red flag.
I think we're beating our heads against the wall here guys. If ANYONE reads this entire thread they will get a pretty good idea of what happened. I've spent WAAAAAYYYYY more time in this thread than I should have only because I feel information like this is extremely valuable to others. Because of this thread there's a guy on the Sky forum that MAY be able to avoid the same bad experience. THAT'S what these forums should be for, helping others to not make the same mistakes we all have. Learning. It's an amazing thing!
The information is now out there, it's up to anyone looking for a tuner to do his research and decide who to trust. If guys like 5.0Willie have access to information like this and don't use it or don't believe it, there's nothing more we can do. I honestly feel very badly for TBSteck AND guys like 5.0Willie that have paid good money only to get a product that has the potential to be devastating to their engines. In general, this "tuning" thing isn't something that should be taken lightly and in MY opinion, there are many "tuners" that should NOT be taking money for what they're doing. These are the risks of an unregulated, actually illegal business. "Tuning" has become so common that people forget that if the person doing it doesn't know or doesn't care about what they're doing, it could cost YOU a lot of headache and money. How many "tuners" have a business license? Or insurance? Or a tax ID number? Or training? Or certifications? Or repair licenses? Or actual job experience? 350 tunes David? I'm sure you claimed all of that income to the IRS, right? lol. Come on guys, open your eyes!
If this thread says nothing else, it should clearly show that paying some random person to modify your car when there are NO enforced regulations or requirements on that person or his business can and often does result in problems.
The car isn't here and I will ask to get pictures taken and will post when I receive them.
Are there different versions of stock parts that GM/Pontiac put on their cars? I didn't realize they put on different parts on same stock cars. We will see what version was put on my car.
The engine wasn't supposed to be put in until Sunday so it is probably still sitting out on the floor.
No GM used a specific set of sensors for bone stock application. The one in the charge pipe was a 4 wire and the intake manifold was a 3 wire bone stock. Gmpp 3 bar map sensors run a different calibration and both sensors are 4 wire.
I just want to know what is physically installed so we can match the calibration data to the tune file.
On either sensor pack I can see that tune file hitting 28 to 30 psi. off of commanded values. Problem is if the sensors were calibrated wrong it could have seen up to 35 to 37 psi physically while only showing lower pressure on the sensor sCans.
If pictures aren't clear just the part numbers that are etched into them will do.
these are the 2.5 bar sensors off of my 2008 cobalt I kept them for custom ecu work.
charge pipe sensor (left) # 125920172927
intake manifold sensor (right) # 125920163517
the Gmpp kit uses 2 of the same sensor which is # 55206797 or better known as Bosch # 0 281 002 845
2000 Ford Mustang - Top Sportsman
Reply With Quote
