04 stock tune w/ enhanced logging applied

[superwagon]

I am working on this 04 and I applied the enhanced logging OS to the stock tune. I noticed that my main timing is not following the Base or low density timing tables. It seems to be following more closely to the IAT Adder table when viewing my data log? I will attach the tune file and log. I am also going to flash the truck with just the base stock tune and log that again. The first time I logged it with just the base stock tune it seemed to follow my main base timing table. Maybe I have missed something? Another set of eyes would be appreciated! Maybe I need to revisit logged parameters? Still trying to figure out what would be best to data log in HPT.

Thanks again!

Doug

[mcfarlnd]

First, logging the ECT and IAT channels would help to figure it out. I cant see if your truck is warm or cold nor how cold the air is entering the motor because the channels are not being logged. It could be a combination of both adding to your final timing. In regards to comparing to last time, Is it colder than the first time you logged?

[superwagon]

I noticed the change in logs as soon as we applied the upgrade. Within a hour of each other. I had him log it again this afternoon with stock tune and now it is following base timing table much closer. I will log again with ECT and IAT.

[superwagon]

Here is a data log and stock tune file without upgrade from today.

[Areynolds2016]

here are log with stable temps from 2-10-16

[muz79]

I feel that on '03 and early '04 trucks, the labelling that HP uses is not correct. Base and low density should be 'transient' and 'steady state' timing tables. It uses the transient tables in times of transient operation (ie changing load and speed) and switches/interpolates to the steady state table (which has higher stock timing) at periods of steady load/rpm. Final timing should be timing table plus ect/iat adders. I know this isn't exactly helping you, but hopefully sheds some light on how I feel the early ecu's work.

[Kill]

I feel that on '03 and early '04 trucks, the labelling that HP uses is not correct. Base and low density should be 'transient' and 'steady state' timing tables. It uses the transient tables in times of transient operation (ie changing load and speed) and switches/interpolates to the steady state table (which has higher stock timing) at periods of steady load/rpm. Final timing should be timing table plus ect/iat adders. I know this isn't exactly helping you, but hopefully sheds some light on how I feel the early ecu's work.

You might be on to something here. What if I told you all of the adder tables don't actually add anything and are actually minimum or maximum limiting tables depending on application.

[B00STJUNKY]

You might be on to something here. What if I told you all of the adder tables don't actually add anything and are actually minimum or maximum limiting tables depending on application.

what-if-i-told-you.png

[Moparmatty]

here are log with stable temps from 2-10-16

Using the 2nd log you posted and the stock tune file with OS that you posted. The scanner shows that the truck is following the timing it is being told to run.

Tune shows that 1800rpm and 25mm3 should be around 5.0* of main timing. Scanner shows that as well.

Untitled (1).png Untitled (2).png

[superwagon]

Yes the second one does follow. The second one is without os enhancement. I have not had a chance to view the 3rd or 4th logs and tunes yet.

Sorry i didn't look at your screen shots before posting. I thought you were talking about the second log in the thread. It looks like you are correct. I will review them when i get home.

Thanks!

[mcfarlnd]

Using the 2nd log you posted and the stock tune file with OS that you posted. The scanner shows that the truck is following the timing it is being told to run.

Tune shows that 1800rpm and 25mm3 should be around 5.0* of main timing. Scanner shows that as well.

In the first log, his timing looks as if it is utilizing the IAT adder table as a timing table, not an adder.

[Kill]

here are log with stable temps from 2-10-16

The reason the timing is so different in those two logs is because of the Air Inlet Temp. The first is 60 deg IAT, which puts it at a coefficient of 1, now look at the "Adder" table and you will see most of the time the main injection timing follows this table more closely than the base table. Unless the commanded mm3 are over 83ish mm3 then it goes back to following the base table. This is because the "Adder" table values are basically 0 here. This shows that the "Adder" table is more of a minimum timing allowed table. The reason the second log follows the base table is because both the IAT and ECT coefficient tables are at zero at each of their respective values from the log. If you want main injection timing to directly follow the base table all of the time set all of the main timing coefficients to zero and copy the values from your base table into the blend factor table.

[mcfarlnd]

The reason the timing is so different in those two logs is because of the Air Inlet Temp. The first is 60 deg IAT, which puts it at a coefficient of 1, now look at the "Adder" table and you will see most of the time the main injection timing follows this table more closely than the base table. Unless the commanded mm3 are over 83ish mm3 then it goes back to following the base table. This is because the "Adder" table values are basically 0 here. This shows that the "Adder" table is more of a minimum timing allowed table. The reason the second log follows the base table is because both the IAT and ECT coefficient tables are at zero at each of their respective values from the log. If you want main injection timing to directly follow the base table all of the time set all of the main timing coefficients to zero and copy the values from your base table into the blend factor table.

That is what i was thinking. Maybe HPtuners can change the labels. Is this the case for the 04.5-up as well?

[Moparmatty]

In the first log, his timing looks as if it is utilizing the IAT adder table as a timing table, not an adder.

I agree. But with out ECT and IAT logged there is no way to tell.

[Kill]

I agree. But with out ECT and IAT logged there is no way to tell.

Open up the log labeled 2-10-16 stock.hpl in the same post as the log you were talking about.

[superwagon]

I really wish i would have been logging IAT and ECT originally. I was just getting baseline data logs and figuring out scanner etc. I can only say that ECT should have been normal operating temps and as far as IAT goes ambient temps were probably 40-50*F and it was dry afternoon. Nothing extreme at all where i would have expected correction factors to come into play. Especially that drastic of a correction factor. I later noticed how close the timing had followed IAT table. I just got home so i will review the latest logs.
Thanks for input!

[Moparmatty]

Open up the log labeled 2-10-16 stock.hpl in the same post as the log you were talking about.

I noticed that after I posted.

[Kill]

I noticed that after I posted.

Well, what do you think? I'm working on starting a thread showing how I reached my conclusion on how the "Adder" tables work.

[Moparmatty]

What you are saying has merit for sure.

[superwagon]

I was just now able to review todays logs and I am seeing the exact opposite of what we experienced originally. It appears that the stock tune log is running high main timing compared to the file with OS enhancement? Getting very frustrated with this. I also see the Final timing correction differs between the two logs under similar conditions. The log labeled OS shows a correction Four D. The log labeled just Stock from tody shows timing correction Intake air.

After looking a little closer I am seeing how the IAT correction coefficient could be impacting this. One log is low 60F and the other mid to high 70*F. If that is it that seems cray to me that a 15* IAT swing would take main injection timing from 5* to 15*. That seems very extreme for such a small IAT change.