Procharged z06. Throttle Only ~60%

[RickClarke23]

Go to Engine-Airflow-Electronic throttle and putting both the A and B pressure ratio limits to 1.

[Sam88gta1]

Leave the peak tq table stock. Leave the DD table stock.
Lower the EQ ratio based Engine torque Coeff EQ Ratio table by 20%. That is a good starting point. You will also have to lower the Airmass A B C D tables by the same amount. Fooling the pcm into thinking its making less tq is the only way I have found to tune this combination. There may be another way but after 100's of street pulls and dyno pulls with the Z06 Procharged combination this is the best way ive found.

[Mike@G-Force]

Leave the peak tq table stock. Leave the DD table stock.
Lower the EQ ratio based Engine torque Coeff EQ Ratio table by 20%. That is a good starting point. You will also have to lower the Airmass A B C D tables by the same amount. Fooling the pcm into thinking its making less tq is the only way I have found to tune this combination. There may be another way but after 100's of street pulls and dyno pulls with the Z06 Procharged combination this is the best way ive found.

[doc350]

Leave the peak tq table stock. Leave the DD table stock.
Lower the EQ ratio based Engine torque Coeff EQ Ratio table by 20%. That is a good starting point. You will also have to lower the Airmass A B C D tables by the same amount. Fooling the pcm into thinking its making less tq is the only way I have found to tune this combination. There may be another way but after 100's of street pulls and dyno pulls with the Z06 Procharged combination this is the best way ive found.

Ok, but how will this affect the A8 cars? I agree that this works, I just feel like it is the wrong way to do it.

[Sam88gta1]

Ok, but how will this affect the A8 cars? I agree that this works, I just feel like it is the wrong way to do it.

I just finished a 16 A8 Z with a Procharger f1r that made 900rwhp on 91 octane. Trans shifted like stock (very well) using this method.

[Mep_q8]

Haven't checked your tune, but it seems your having a hardware limiter that won't let it boost as much as you want. Check your airflow maximum settings and adjust according to make things work the way you want.

[04blackgmc]

I'll have to get back in the seat of the one I did yesterday.

My only major issue was the throwing slow to go WOT only 5,000 RPMS on up. Did various adjustments to DD and PEAK engine toque along with other things. Did make good power but I would still like it to open 100% when I actually go WOT if it's 3k 4k and so on.

Also the 2016 Z M7 did not have the Electronic throttle A and B pressure ratio

[mowton]

I am not an expert by any means on the SIDI tuning (sooo much reading and understanding going on) but know that being torque based, the throttle will only be opened enough to develop the torque demanded by the driver as controlled by the Torque Based engine/transmission management settings. If actual exceeds demand, then the throttle and or spark/fuel are adjusted accordingly. That is why it is most important in tuning these setups to get the torque modelling correct. AN good example of this is in an NA setup where there is a complaint that the throttle was not at 100% at WOT. Yet the lg showed the MAP was 101....the engine was developing the proper torque settings to support full WOT but only needed say 70% throttle to get there.

Ed M

[Higgs Boson]

I am not an expert by any means on the SIDI tuning (sooo much reading and understanding going on) but know that being torque based, the throttle will only be opened enough to develop the torque demanded by the driver as controlled by the Torque Based engine/transmission management settings. If actual exceeds demand, then the throttle and or spark/fuel are adjusted accordingly. That is why it is most important in tuning these setups to get the torque modelling correct. AN good example of this is in an NA setup where there is a complaint that the throttle was not at 100% at WOT. Yet the lg showed the MAP was 101....the engine was developing the proper torque settings to support full WOT but only needed say 70% throttle to get there.

Ed M

I have yet to see an NA application not go 100.

[04blackgmc]

Yea the NA stuff is fine. Factory they won't go WOT until 3,500 or so on the stock tune.

Did another C7Z today 2015 with just long tubes and cold air. Very little fight on that one.

[AutoWiz]

what about this table? do you have all fields here set to 100?

[04blackgmc]

The C7Zs I've came across already have those at 100%

[Ben Charles]

C7 z and trucks do... C7 don't... But you can change it to 100

[GHuggins]

Leave the peak tq table stock. Leave the DD table stock.
Lower the EQ ratio based Engine torque Coeff EQ Ratio table by 20%. That is a good starting point. You will also have to lower the Airmass A B C D tables by the same amount. Fooling the pcm into thinking its making less tq is the only way I have found to tune this combination. There may be another way but after 100's of street pulls and dyno pulls with the Z06 Procharged combination this is the best way ive found.

I've never tuned a DI platform this way. Do you run into transmission burn up or slipping problems from the lower hold pressures being delivered with constant throttle input from this? Seems like your doing the exact same thing as increasing the dd and max torque values, just in a very "round a bout" way?

[Ben Charles]

I've never tuned a DI platform this way. Do you run into transmission burn up or slipping problems from the lower hold pressures being delivered with constant throttle input from this? Seems like your doing the exact same thing as increasing the dd and max torque values, just in a very "round a bout" way?

You are right in a round about way it somewhat accomplishes the same outcome, but I've tried this scenario and I didn't really like it.... I'd rather increase the DD and peak tq table and leave the tq coifficients alone...

Something that is interesting is since the scanner stops recording at 889 ( close to that) if some sort of scaling needs to be done past this value.... Other words tq cofficient scaling ( which would make the entire peak tq table needed re modeled)

Always doing experiments with stuff...
Got a lt4 blower in a stingray that I'm playing with currently on E85 12.1 cr

[GHuggins]

You are right in a round about way it somewhat accomplishes the same outcome, but I've tried this scenario and I didn't really like it.... I'd rather increase the DD and peak tq table and leave the tq coifficients alone...

Something that is interesting is since the scanner stops recording at 889 ( close to that) if some sort of scaling needs to be done past this value.... Other words tq cofficient scaling ( which would make the entire peak tq table needed re modeled)

Always doing experiments with stuff...
Got a lt4 blower in a stingray that I'm playing with currently on E85 12.1 cr

So you lower the coefficients at this point? In other words scaling the coefficient tables this way doesn't hurt how the transmission applies it's pressures?

Very interested in how that stingray turns out

Thanks Ben

[Ben Charles]

So you lower the coefficients at this point? In other words scaling the coefficient tables this way doesn't hurt how the transmission applies it's pressures?

Very interested in how that stingray turns out

Thanks Ben

In that scenario yes... It's theory currently but I plan to play with the idea more shortly.... Think about the max tq PID on the Gen 3/4 platforms.... Maxed out at around 655 I believe and we had to scale the tune to gain headroom on big power builds by lowering the coifficients (shift pressures, etc).
I BELIEVE the same needs to be done here as well... Peak tq maxes out in the high 800s, doesn't take much boost to past that value

[Ben Charles]

I did a test several weeks ago on my LT4 blown stingray... I copied the zo6 peak tq table and DD tables from a z06 file (also running LT4 injectors/hpfp)
I copied over all the coifficient tables too then performed a .88 Change so 12% decrease..... Throttle response off idle was night and day better than the stock zo6 coifficient tables but the tq model was clearly messed up... Car was still wanting to accelater off throttle with me holding the break...

Put it back and added to the DD and peak tq... Gain back most of the throttle response without any issues


The peak tq table is interesting... Played with this a lot and it's like hitting a moving target, since it goes hand in hand with the DD tables, which of course if you change the tq coifficients it changes these too... I've noticed increases in tq coifficients require increase in peak tq and DD and the same for lowering....

[Redline MS]

Hey great topic but it's always goes back to the basics..

The first step is by first acquiring an arbitrated torque request from the driver or some other torque intervention (e.g. traction control, etc.). This torque request is then inserted into an inverse APC (air per cylinder) based torque model in order to calculate a desired APC. This desired APC is then inserted into a desired MAF calculation, which determines the desired MAF through the throttle body.

The original torque request from the controller is also inserted into an inverse MAP based torque model to calculate a desired MAP. Desired MAP and Baro are used to calculate the desired pressure difference across the throttle blade for the compressible flow calculation. The CFC is the way all ETC based cars calculate blade angle?..

The pressure difference, air density, and desired MAF are then used in the desired area calculation using compressible flow. The compressible flow equation is used to calculate a desired throttle area. This desired throttle area is then given to the engine controller, which in turn opens the throttle body to achieve the desired area. Until you put a different size throttle body on and mess all that up?

Engine torque is calculated using the measured APC and the APC based torque equation. This is the key to solving the torque model. FIX IT!!! If you have changed the way air enters the MAF? FIX IT! If you are moving more air mass at a given MAP/RPM load?..FIX IT!

The torque estimate is compared to the original torque request from the controller. If they both are equal the system is functioning correctly and the torque request will not be adjusted. If they are not equal, a torque error is calculated and closed loop gains, steady state flags, and filters are used to correct the torque error while controlling response time, overshoot, oscillation, etc.

The auto cars take this torque control to another level by using the phaser to control torque. The desired APC input into the cam phaser schedule is also calculated during the Torque Control process. The desired APC is calculated from the inverse APC based torque model and then filtered.
When an automatic transmission upshift is commanded, the phaser feed forward algorithm can be used to calculate the post-shift engine speed and desired APC for the phaser schedule lookup to have the phaser move to the required position slightly ahead of time, to allow the torque control system to accurately achieve the torque request as the shift completes. The trans appreciates when the torque model is in line...

Head spinning? Stop playing with the airmass tables and fake the air model and just fix it? Unless your under qualified to be working on $100K customers cars and want to charge $200 and do it in your driveway?..these are very complex systems which many will never have the true control of the calibration.....the least you can do is fix what we can as close as we can?

[GHuggins]

Hey great topic but it's always goes back to the basics..

The first step is by first acquiring an arbitrated torque request from the driver or some other torque intervention (e.g. traction control, etc.). This torque request is then inserted into an inverse APC (air per cylinder) based torque model in order to calculate a desired APC. This desired APC is then inserted into a desired MAF calculation, which determines the desired MAF through the throttle body.

The original torque request from the controller is also inserted into an inverse MAP based torque model to calculate a desired MAP. Desired MAP and Baro are used to calculate the desired pressure difference across the throttle blade for the compressible flow calculation. The CFC is the way all ETC based cars calculate blade angle?..

The pressure difference, air density, and desired MAF are then used in the desired area calculation using compressible flow. The compressible flow equation is used to calculate a desired throttle area. This desired throttle area is then given to the engine controller, which in turn opens the throttle body to achieve the desired area. Until you put a different size throttle body on and mess all that up?

Engine torque is calculated using the measured APC and the APC based torque equation. This is the key to solving the torque model. FIX IT!!! If you have changed the way air enters the MAF? FIX IT! If you are moving more air mass at a given MAP/RPM load?..FIX IT!

The torque estimate is compared to the original torque request from the controller. If they both are equal the system is functioning correctly and the torque request will not be adjusted. If they are not equal, a torque error is calculated and closed loop gains, steady state flags, and filters are used to correct the torque error while controlling response time, overshoot, oscillation, etc.

The auto cars take this torque control to another level by using the phaser to control torque. The desired APC input into the cam phaser schedule is also calculated during the Torque Control process. The desired APC is calculated from the inverse APC based torque model and then filtered.
When an automatic transmission upshift is commanded, the phaser feed forward algorithm can be used to calculate the post-shift engine speed and desired APC for the phaser schedule lookup to have the phaser move to the required position slightly ahead of time, to allow the torque control system to accurately achieve the torque request as the shift completes. The trans appreciates when the torque model is in line...

Head spinning? Stop playing with the airmass tables and fake the air model and just fix it? Unless your under qualified to be working on $100K customers cars and want to charge $200 and do it in your driveway?..these are very complex systems which many will never have the true control of the calibration.....[B]the least you can do is fix what we can as close as we can[/B]?

I was interested in this because I've seen more than enough scaled 6speed tunes that didn't have the airmass tables touched (in other words they were about 30 to 50 percent under what they should have been after scaling) that caused the transmissions to start slipping withen a few hundred miles - I would see these after other tuners had all ready done "their magic".... SO I was curious what scaling the airmass and EQ coefficients tables together in the same "under fashion" would do?

I think my own tunes speak for themselves in quality, so won't get into that one