Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 95

Thread: 2015 Mustang GT Boss Manifold Tuning

  1. #41
    Quick look at the tune and looks you are disabling MP 17 while you are using it in another tables.
    Copying directly values from roush file is bad way, but it helps to get idea. Looks you wanted to disable MP 18 as their tune. In my setup i was not disabling it.
    Last edited by caniggia; 04-19-2016 at 07:33 AM.
    Eastern and Central Europe American Muscle and Harley-Davidson tuning
    www.hd-customs.pl
    http://www.facebook.com/hdcustomspl

  2. #42
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    427
    Why is it bad to copy directly from the roush tune file? Only difference in setup should be a blower compared to the boss manifold. MP configuration should be affected by that should it?

    Kris

  3. #43
    Because you don't know what was their idea to modify distance tables etc. They did this fo boost, you don't have boost.
    Eastern and Central Europe American Muscle and Harley-Davidson tuning
    www.hd-customs.pl
    http://www.facebook.com/hdcustomspl

  4. #44
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    427
    I do agree with you. But we don't know they did it only for boost applications. I don't believe there is another map available for 15+ IMRC delete. We can only assume at this point. I will try my hand at identical tables to the Roush and work from there. Deciding which MPs should be enabled or disabled seems like a guessing game. Perhaps reviewing 11-14 MP configurations and comparing with the Roush file might reveal something?

    Kris

  5. #45
    Please read my pay again and fix what you wrong copied.
    Eastern and Central Europe American Muscle and Harley-Davidson tuning
    www.hd-customs.pl
    http://www.facebook.com/hdcustomspl

  6. #46
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    427
    MP configuration.PNG

    How about this? ^^^

  7. #47
    Yes, This is what I spoken about.
    Eastern and Central Europe American Muscle and Harley-Davidson tuning
    www.hd-customs.pl
    http://www.facebook.com/hdcustomspl

  8. #48
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    427
    Do you feel this is a good starting point?

    Kris

  9. #49
    Yes, your posiałem could be you blocked mp that was commanded in another table.
    Eastern and Central Europe American Muscle and Harley-Davidson tuning
    www.hd-customs.pl
    http://www.facebook.com/hdcustomspl

  10. #50
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    427
    I hope so. I feel it could also be due to the commanded position of the IMRC was at 0% instead of 100% and the threshold rpm of optimum stability when transitioning from closed to open was at 3200rpm. I think that could be related or possibly coincidental. We shall see. I'll test this afternoon.

    Kris

  11. #51
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    427
    Alright, so the manifold is on the car and for the first time is driveable lol. I played with the MP configuration a little last night trying different things. Noted, 18 enabled or disabled has yet to make a difference in smooth acceleration. However, what has significantly improved the breaking up and misfire is adjusting VCT at the MPs at the rpms the car would misbehave. What first gave me this idea is the Roush tune, showing an advance on the exhaust cam position from 50 degrees ATDC to 30 degrees ATDC. At the point where my car would be at this VCT timing, it would buck and break up very bad, making the car very difficult to drive. So the first change was the MP associated with 50 degrees of retard on the exhaust cam. Changed them all to 30 or less. Instantly better to drive, still some breaking up but I seemed to have reduced 3/4 of it. From there I adjusted the intake VCT advancing it in increments of 5 degrees, this too prove to improve partial throttle significantly. I have no cam retard more than 30 degrees on the intake or exhaust cam. This helped cruising smoothness, partial throttle smoothness, and even power output at those rpm. All in all, last nights tests were very successful. I would say around 90% of the bucking and misfiring is gone.

    Did WOT testing last night as well. Now VCT has been touched at WOT as of yet, but I have confirmed with intake, boss manifold, catless 1 7/8" long tunes, and full 2.5" x pipe exhaust, I am running E70 and having no fuel starvation issues. The car is hitting .82 lambda at 7800 rpm. MAF lb/min at those rpm is around 51. Car is advancing lots of timing as it did with the stock manifold for the E85. I will also be experimenting with how much timing the car really likes after VCT tuning. Just wanted to provide my first successful update.

    Kris

  12. #52
    Senior Tuner Higgs Boson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Texas Hill Country
    Posts
    3,299
    I killed the Snap to Line 14/21 relationship, set all the Fuel Economy cells to 1 and all the Drivability cells to 14, set the Fuel Economy Max table to .55, the Drivability Min table to .55.....

    Torque tables are all back to stock. IMRC set to open for FE and D above .55 and 2500 RPMs for all MPs.

    This has been the simplest way to fix surging.

  13. #53
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    427
    What exactly does the Snap to Line logic do? And what do you mean you killed the 14/21 relationship? Would you mind elaborating a little more on what you did when setting all fuel economy cells to 1 and the drivability cells to 14? Did you set them to mapped point 1 and mapped point 14?

    Kris

  14. #54
    Senior Tuner Higgs Boson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Texas Hill Country
    Posts
    3,299
    The Snap defines the dynamic relationship between the mapped points. The most obvious and immediate cause of surging was when the MP14 and 21 were shared. The last values in the list are 14/21 and I zero'd them.

    The Fuel Economy table also has values from 1 to 10 in it but you will notice (if I remember right) that Fuel Economy MP8 and 9 and up do not relate to MP8 and 9 and up they relate to 14 and 21 (something like that). In the Fuel Economy table you can see where it commands the MP to go to 14 and 21 (values of 8 and 9) in the higher load areas and mid RPMs. I made this whole table "1" so that when it is in Fuel Economy mode, it only targets MP1 at all loads and RPMs so it isn't bouncing around between cam events.

    I did the same thing with Driveability table, made it all command MP14 so the IMRC is open and it doesn't bounce around cam events.

    The Max and min load tables for FE and Dr I made the whole things .55 so that under .55 load it is in FE with closed IMRC and over .55 it is Dr with IMRC open.

    The IMRC opening load tables for Dr and FE I made .55 for all MPs up to 2500 RPM (and like .35 for closing) so that over 2500 RPM the IMRC are open no matter what load.

    This greatly simplifies the functionality of the VVT and IMRC but I think with this logic we can remove a ton of variables and get better control of it. It seems like the bouncing between MPs and partial opening of IMRC back and forth is what is causing the majority of the surging.

    Another thing I did is set my spark tables with the MBT tables all to 40, except OP, which I set to 30 and all the Borderline tables to 35 except for OP which I set to 25. Now my spark timing also doesn't bounce around chasing the MPs. My max spark add and retard is set to 5 and -5.
    Last edited by Higgs Boson; 04-20-2016 at 10:12 AM.

  15. #55
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    427
    Very nice! I have already zero'd out my 14/21 relation on the snap to line, per another's recommendation, my apologies for forgetting about that.

    If you target MP1 for fuel economy mode, won't that only target MP1's cam events, which is 0,0? Same thing for MP14, it is also 0,0. OR did you change cam events at those MPs?

  16. #56
    Senior Tuner Higgs Boson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Texas Hill Country
    Posts
    3,299
    1 is 20/0
    14 is 0/0

    and yes, it will target only those while in FE or BD. If you leave everything else alone it will still use OS and ER (and OP) properly when necessary.

    I have posted about the 14/21 before.

  17. #57
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    427
    Thank you very much for that advice. Since I have disabled MPs 1-13, I am using 14+. I have reconfigured my MPs for FE, ER, and OS and adjusted my MPs accordingly to reflect proper cam events at those MPs and rpm. We shall see if the cam events I have select perform and operate properly. I'll play with it and see what happens.

    Kris

  18. #58
    Senior Tuner Higgs Boson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Texas Hill Country
    Posts
    3,299
    Oh yeah, you have no IMRC. So I would just set your MP fixed to 14 in FE and set it to something that idles good (20/0) then make BD all, say, 21 and set it to something good for more load (0/0). Just IMO, I haven't played without IMRCs yet.

  19. #59
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    427
    Ha, we are thinking the same. I have configured MP 14 to be 0,0 based on the original MP0 being 0,0 and now MP15 is reflected to be like MP1 originally was for idling at 20,0 and I have locked fuel economy to target MP15. I have optimal stability and emissions reduction now targeting MP14, which is 0,0.

    Now all of this was set under the Mapped Points tables. Should I do the same under the distance tables?

    Kris

  20. #60
    Senior Tuner Higgs Boson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Texas Hill Country
    Posts
    3,299
    Quote Originally Posted by kris5597 View Post
    Ha, we are thinking the same. I have configured MP 14 to be 0,0 based on the original MP0 being 0,0 and now MP15 is reflected to be like MP1 originally was for idling at 20,0 and I have locked fuel economy to target MP15. I have optimal stability and emissions reduction now targeting MP14, which is 0,0.

    Now all of this was set under the Mapped Points tables. Should I do the same under the distance tables?

    Kris
    PM me your email and I will send you my tune file to reference. I'd post it but I don't feel it's ready for public consumption.