Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 46

Thread: Where does MAX TRQ come from?

  1. #21
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by MakesBadDecisions View Post
    What is the vehicle? Just for a reference point.
    2014 Silverado L83 A6 with a single S366

    From what I understand, the only thing the DD table does is convert a pedal position to a torque request, and that is it. You would think that the high values in the DD need to be larger than what the engine can produce to command 100%, but I don't think it is that simple.
    What I think happens is: the pedal sends a torque request to the computer, the computer maps the request against the VTT to determine a desired MAP and Airmass (spark and cam angle are controlled by RPM), if the VTT are not 100% correct, which I don't think they can be, then you will get a desired MAP and Airmass that results in a produced torque that is higher or lower than the commanded torque from the DD. To correct for this, I think the computer also estimates produced torque using the MAF and corrects for the VTT error to some degree. That is where fudge factor comes into play between the DD request and what the engines produces.

    You seem to be doing the right thing with your minor adjustments to the DD table for driving feel preference, and in general the top of the DD should be larger than the most power you want to make.
    I don't think the DD does anything with the trans. The trans seems to look at delivered torque, immediate torque,and predicted torque when it goes into a shift. If they are all not in a nice line then it does some wacky things with TM to try and fix things, which is causing the shifting problems that I am having.

    I have not found the equation for MaxTrq listed anywhere either, it would be nice if TriPinTaZ can provide a link.

  2. #22
    Senior Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    South FL
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by MakesBadDecisions View Post
    Thank you TriPinTaZ for adding to this conversation as you have been a huge help in other posts. I spent last night looking for the formula and struck out, only have a couple hours a night of alone nerd time and get up at 0430. I have most of the important threads bookmarked and re-read those and still could not find the equation. I thought had read about every GEN5 post and even some Ford threads, which were extremely helpful in understanding the concept and theory, and never came across an equation. I will keep looking as I only re-read bookmarks, tonight begins the el'google searching.

    I agree with and understand everything in your comment except one part of DD, not being argumentative. Just asking questions.

    Does or does not the top of the DD need to request 100% producible torque and not allow TM to limit throttle and/or timing? Am I wrong in that overly simplified statement?
    How does DD affect transmission shifting?
    Does the TCM not look at delivered/actual torque as the look up reference for timing, pressure, inertia,etc?
    Just like the 4spd trans, dont we go into the proper tables and bump some pressures, slide some inertia around and speed things up to make the trans shift firmer and faster than stock?

    My statement about adjusting the DD for "flare" was just about adjusting the requested torque to suite each person based on pedal position. I found the truck stock wanted to go full throttle at the strangest points and fine control was not to my liking. I spent a while knocking the low to top rows down until limiting started, then pushed the top rows back up until limiting went away. Smoothed and manually adjusted between low parts of the table and the top. It was pretty amazing how aggressive the top parts of the table were. Dont get me wrong I like to rip around like anyone else but it was in my opinion annoying. Since I had to tools and time I played with it to see cause and affect.

    In the end, DD should represent Driver Demand and in my case Driver Demand is rear axle torque and rear axle torque comes from engine torque multiplied by gearing and other factors. Once the axle torque is requested it is up to the TM logic to achieve the torque by whatever means it deems necessary to achieve or not achieve based on demand and limiting factors. Is that a correct statement?

    DD table is essentially what you are asking the ECU to give you in "torque request" but I think it is in Killowatts. The Manual cars and Auto cars use a different measurement that you can convert into a torque value. But essentially the DD table is how much torque you are requesting from the engine. If you increase the Max Torque value by changing the Air Model(increasing VTT or increasing VVE or MAF values or my simply flowing more air into the engine which the stock airflow model will show an increased Max Torque Value) you have to make sure your DD values are requesting enough. Typically the DD values are high enough at WOT to not really need an increase unless you greatly change the airflow. But at part throttle and semi max throttle it might need some increasing. You shouldn't change these values unless you are looking for a more responsive throttle or you have datalogged the values and you see the Torque Request values are not high enough at a particular throttle area to give you the Torque you are requesting. Just an example would be if you change enough things on the car where at WOT the Driver Demand Torque request value in the 100% row is not as high as the torque output the car can start to limit the throttle or timing because it thinks you don't want all of that torque. But it is not the end all table for this either. These Torque based ECU's can limit throttle or spark for various reasons. And the transmission references torque output on how firm and fast to shift to some extent. Most of that stuff is in the TCM but if the ECU sees you're requesting 60% of the available torque, but you're at WOT, the Transmission will shift like it would at 60%. This is over simplified but I'm just trying to give you the logical piece.

    Regarding DD flare, that could be an out of wack Air model or DD table. Same logic applies. This is why Higg's wisely recommends tuning VVE and MAF completely first, and then adjusting things that might be needed after. IF the car drives great and isn't limiting, the output of Torque and what not in the scanner might not be accurate(reading low) but it keeps the torque model in line and avoids unnecessary chasing your tail trying to tune all the tables because the professionals all say it has to be done. Granted, if they are a professional, then they already have a base airmodel they use and adjust from there. It is not wrong at all and in fact technically it is right. But if you're not scanning the car and hung up on the real torque numbers why does it matter? My car runs fine on stock VT and DD tables, but it had some very minor issues that I decided I needed to adjust. My lower RPM VT is actually lower than stock and my upper area is higher than stock. This required changing the Peak Torque curve and adjusting the Driver Demand to get everything in line. The car drove fine, but it kind of had a sluggish gas pedal off the light. I found a way to fix it.

    I am not a professional by any means but I have been tuning my own and friends cars since LT1 edit was the only GM tuning tool around. Also in my profession, it allows me to bridge the gap, not to mention I've been a gear head even as a child when my father had Corvettes and turbo cars etc. So I'm able to grasp the logic. Now I certainly didn't figure out the GenV stuff all on my own and I wouldn't say that I could be a pro tuner and just tune anything the shop puts out at all. It took a lot of reading and studying and re-reading and trial and error. I just try to help others grab ahold of the logic the best I can.

    As for the torque model formula, I've read it on here somewhere. There is a whole thread about it and to be honest its super complicated. I just know that Airmass, Spark, and VT are a few of the components in the equation and by changing one or all of those it will affect Max Torque and Torque. the trick is determining where you need all of the values. I have a thread I commented in not long ago that outlines the important values and which need to be always below, always above etc or you will have throttle limiting or spark limiting.
    [email protected]
    Owner/GM Calibrator
    Gen V Specialist - C7 Corvette, Gen6 Camaro & CTS-V3

  3. #23
    Senior Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    South FL
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by MORLOK View Post
    I have not found the equation for MaxTrq listed anywhere either, it would be nice if TriPinTaZ can provide a link.
    To be honest I found it one day while reading every single thread in the Gen V forum. Then I also searched in google about Torque Model or something appending it with "site:hptuners.com". I can't remember exactly which thread it was in but it was very complex. If I knew what thread it was in I would post it here. It was possibly in the very long thread when HP Tuners released the Virtual Torque feature. You're just going to have to search for it. Although once you see it you might realize that its not going to help you much lol.
    [email protected]
    Owner/GM Calibrator
    Gen V Specialist - C7 Corvette, Gen6 Camaro & CTS-V3

  4. #24
    Tuner MakesBadDecisions's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Montucky
    Posts
    194
    Quote Originally Posted by MORLOK View Post
    2014 Silverado L83 A6 with a single S366
    From what I understand, the only thing the DD table does is convert a pedal position to a torque request, and that is it. You would think that the high values in the DD need to be larger than what the engine can produce to command 100%, but I don't think it is that simple.
    What I think happens is: the pedal sends a torque request to the computer, the computer maps the request against the VTT to determine a desired MAP and Airmass (spark and cam angle are controlled by RPM), if the VTT are not 100% correct, which I don't think they can be, then you will get a desired MAP and Airmass that results in a produced torque that is higher or lower than the commanded torque from the DD. To correct for this, I think the computer also estimates produced torque using the MAF and corrects for the VTT error to some degree. That is where fudge factor comes into play between the DD request and what the engines produces.
    I agree with your comment as I believe the "predicted" and end result part of your comment has more affect on non-boosted than stock boosted vehicles. I have not spent a whole lot of time logging a factory boosted car so I can not say what their throttle behavior is like, but they also have full control over boost so that will play into the "predicted" part of throttle movement.

    Im still digging for the equation - I will post link when found. I want for no other reason than to see it, which may help unlock my thinking and help to make just that much more sense. Like TriPinTaZ pointed out it may not help much as it is very complicated, but still worth the look. If the thread it is in is that complicated than there might be some definition and explanation.

  5. #25
    Tuner MakesBadDecisions's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Montucky
    Posts
    194
    Quote Originally Posted by TriPinTaZ View Post
    Regarding DD flare, that could be an out of wack Air model or DD table. Same logic applies. This is why Higg's wisely recommends tuning VVE and MAF completely first, and then adjusting things that might be needed after. IF the car drives great and isn't limiting, the output of Torque and what not in the scanner might not be accurate(reading low) but it keeps the torque model in line and avoids unnecessary chasing your tail trying to tune all the tables because the professionals all say it has to be done. Granted, if they are a professional, then they already have a base airmodel they use and adjust from there. It is not wrong at all and in fact technically it is right. But if you're not scanning the car and hung up on the real torque numbers why does it matter? My car runs fine on stock VT and DD tables, but it had some very minor issues that I decided I needed to adjust. My lower RPM VT is actually lower than stock and my upper area is higher than stock. This required changing the Peak Torque curve and adjusting the Driver Demand to get everything in line. The car drove fine, but it kind of had a sluggish gas pedal off the light. I found a way to fix it.

    I am not a professional by any means but I have been tuning my own and friends cars since LT1 edit was the only GM tuning tool around. Also in my profession, it allows me to bridge the gap, not to mention I've been a gear head even as a child when my father had Corvettes and turbo cars etc. So I'm able to grasp the logic. Now I certainly didn't figure out the GenV stuff all on my own and I wouldn't say that I could be a pro tuner and just tune anything the shop puts out at all. It took a lot of reading and studying and re-reading and trial and error. I just try to help others grab ahold of the logic the best I can.
    Thank you for adding to this. I am sorry to ask the questions as this has all been gone over before and I have read and re-read most everything. I would rather ask the question than to assume. I am by no means a professional tuner, but I have learned the "logic" side about how most everything works. I just began to second guess some things as I began down that logging and tuning path on my cam swapped my Silverado. I agree 100% with you and Higgs as both air-models MUST be correct before going in to other parts of the tune to "fix" problems.

    I am the opposite, I have been in the automotive industry now 21 years, master tech for 18. When we started our business it was building rock crawlers, simple LS swap stuff. Then as the years have progressed as with the business model we began power mods and supporting tuning, that was 7 years ago. We have now stepped away from only rock crawlers to full custom builds, mostly GM. So most everything ends up LS swapped, LS3 to A6 is golden recipe. Most stay "stock" but some end up cammed and convertor and some with boost. We have had to create our own high performance market and in no way do enough "tunes" to make money. We use the dyno and tuning as a service for those that need it. So easy to treadmill a new build when it is winter time in the BigSky. I will only tune the things we drive, so GM it is. I am fortunate to be a part of some amazing builds with some amazing people and continually am learning and growing. Luckily for me I was able to go down the 1000hp at the tire path with an IT guy at the helm of the computer. From the mechanical side I built the car, installed the parts,facilitated the dyno time and helped, with my limited knowledge at the time, the tuning side. That car taught me more about this than anything I could have done on my own. This IT guy was able to help with how the "logic" works from the processing side of a computer. OMG It was so much information to take in, I still go back to my notes when second guessing something.

    Again thank you for taking the time add to this thread.

    Next step for me is dyno time and see how and where the torque changed. From that I could take some change% and apply to VTT. For no reason other than cause and effect. As of right now there is no limiting from TM at WOT, shifts good, part to mid throttle is clean and air models are with 3-5%.

    Now, if I could only get the trans to not downshift in TUTD mode at low RPM and WOT that would be awesome. I think the BCM is overriding some things. Any thoughts or ideas on that?

  6. #26
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    64
    This may be what he is talking about
    https://forum.hptuners.com/showthrea...el-Calculation

    This gives the torque equation, but does not say how it estimates "Max Torque".

  7. #27
    Tuner MakesBadDecisions's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Montucky
    Posts
    194
    Good find, thanks. Equation put into tuning notes, with asterisk and question mark to be further investigated.

    I was just comparing a 2017 L86 A8 file to the ZL1 A10 file. Just looking a prediction coefficients helped to add a thought to the prediction side of throttle movement.

    For cause and affect, in your case, would it worthwhile to mimic or copy the prediction coefficients from a boosted OS over as a test? Something to look at and try, maybe. I know that the prediction coefficient tables are for airflow, but like you said I have found that when adding boost to the non-boost vehicles all have the throttle "flare" which causes drive-ability problems, especially when DD is for engine torque. I have read you can change DD from speed to RPM, make sure to change everything pertaining to table, I think it was Higgs that mentioned it last October in a thread. When I get home I will add a link to the thread that talks about part throttle drive-ability on boosted application, MAXTrq, DD, MBT and other good info. But never gets to the where or how MAXTrq is estimated.

    The search continues as now I have gone down the rabbit hole for the answer.

    Again, thank you to all that have added valuable information to this thread.

  8. #28
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by MakesBadDecisions View Post
    Good find, thanks. Equation put into tuning notes, with asterisk and question mark to be further investigated.

    I was just comparing a 2017 L86 A8 file to the ZL1 A10 file. Just looking a prediction coefficients helped to add a thought to the prediction side of throttle movement.

    For cause and affect, in your case, would it worthwhile to mimic or copy the prediction coefficients from a boosted OS over as a test? Something to look at and try, maybe. I know that the prediction coefficient tables are for airflow, but like you said I have found that when adding boost to the non-boost vehicles all have the throttle "flare" which causes drive-ability problems, especially when DD is for engine torque. I have read you can change DD from speed to RPM, make sure to change everything pertaining to table, I think it was Higgs that mentioned it last October in a thread. When I get home I will add a link to the thread that talks about part throttle drive-ability on boosted application, MAXTrq, DD, MBT and other good info. But never gets to the where or how MAXTrq is estimated.

    The search continues as now I have gone down the rabbit hole for the answer.

    Again, thank you to all that have added valuable information to this thread.
    Wow! Yea! I had not messed with the prediction coefficients because I did not know what they did, but that may be what I need.
    What do you think would be a good boosted OS to copy from? All the gm V8 stuff is supercharged, so I don't know if those are a good copy. I am not sure what a good turbo comparison would be.

    A link to that thread would be great too!
    Thanks!

  9. #29
    Tuner MakesBadDecisions's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Montucky
    Posts
    194
    Here is a 17' ZL1 and Silverado, just look at how different the predictions look, all of them. Sure supercharged vs turbo is different but in the end those tables should give an idea to how it works between boosted and non-boosted OS. I remember reading a long time ago about how they work so there should be some research done before editing.

    I could very well be barking up the wrong tree on this, but a thought and idea is just that. As TriPinTaz and Higgs have said make sure both air models are dialed as those are used for most if not all calcs. If indeed everything lines up then it might be worth trying the predicted stuff, if anything for cause and affect.

    Update on this trial and error when you have some data. I have a specific test route I use that contains all the elements I look at. Idle, stop and go, interstate time and hilly back country roads, about 25 minute loop. I try and drive the same route replicating, within reason, the same scenarios so that when I overlay I can look at the specific scenarios without too much log editing. 2 big ass screens make this pretty nice.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by MakesBadDecisions; 04-26-2019 at 02:03 PM.

  10. #30
    Senior Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    South FL
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by MORLOK View Post
    This may be what he is talking about
    https://forum.hptuners.com/showthrea...el-Calculation

    This gives the torque equation, but does not say how it estimates "Max Torque".
    That is not actually the thread, but the formula looks like the one I saw. If I ever find it I will link it in here.
    [email protected]
    Owner/GM Calibrator
    Gen V Specialist - C7 Corvette, Gen6 Camaro & CTS-V3

  11. #31
    Tuner MakesBadDecisions's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Montucky
    Posts
    194
    Quote Originally Posted by MORLOK View Post
    A link to that thread would be great too!
    Thanks!
    Here you go. Great stuff in there and lots of great points, thoughts and ideas just no super clear conclusion. Took me reading it a couple more times but gave me several new clues.

    One for sure is to stop overthinking it. If you get your commanded's than stop making an issue of the trivial. With that said I would like to know more about the functionality of the torque based ECM. With the clues provided this week I have some ideas I am going to try.


    https://forum.hptuners.com/showthrea...e-values/page3
    Last edited by MakesBadDecisions; 04-26-2019 at 08:56 PM.

  12. #32
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by MakesBadDecisions View Post
    Here you go. Great stuff in there and lots of great points, thoughts and ideas just no super clear conclusion. Took me reading it a couple more times but gave me several new clues.

    One for sure is to stop overthinking it. If you get your commanded's than stop making an issue of the trivial. With that said I would like to know more about the functionality of the torque based ECM. With the clues provided this week I have some ideas I am going to try.


    https://forum.hptuners.com/showthrea...e-values/page3
    Adjusting the prediction coef ended up being a dead end. It noticeably changed the throttle, but was not an improvement.

    After that I just said screw it, I am going to crank the airmass values up and see what max torque does. I went directly into airmass table and mutliplied by 1.5 and.. max torque increased by 1.5.. which was awesome and solved by throttle flair issue (delivered torque no longer crossed max). And the shifting under boost is pretty good now, not perfect but much improved.

    So to help answer you original question, max torque is likely a super complicated formula that we don't really need to know (just like TriPinTaz has been saying). But pragmatically speaking, if your engine torque is exceeding the max torque value then the VTT needs more calibrating. I think part of the problem in my case is that i kept increasing the values for the 0 cam angle when it was actually around 7 for mid boost driving. If you are exceeding max torque but think your VTT is dialed in, you may still be missing something. And I think you are right to not over think it, make changes that make the truck run better and not worry so much about the exact numbers the VTT is showing..

  13. #33
    Tuner MakesBadDecisions's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Montucky
    Posts
    194
    Good to hear you made progress. I finished polishing out the air models and worked on getting some maths done in the scanner in preparation for some dyno time.

    So you only changed the VTT for airmass? What about the MAP VTT tables? If you changed only the airmass, what made you decide on just that one and not the MAP VTT?
    Just trying to track with your thinking.

  14. #34
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Miami,Fl.
    Posts
    290
    What about Engine Torque Coeff EQ Ratio? Why does it use less n less of it as one commands a richer Lambda value?
    2023 Ford Maverick 2.0T AWD

  15. #35
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    64
    I changed both airmass and map by the same proportion.

    As for Engine Torque Coeff EQ Ratio. Here is how I understand that table. I think the engine estimates actual torque based on MAF, but that estimate will change if the AFR is rich or lean. So when you are in power enrichment and command lambda is 0.8, you are making more power, but less power as a proportion of airflow so the model needs to correct for that.
    I don't plan to make any adjustments to this table, although I have seen others say they did to help dial in the torque.

    MBD - what maths and histogram do you use to calibrate the torque models? I made some that estimate torque from MAF and set up the histogram on the same axis as VTT airmass and map, then filtering for cam angle, seemed to work ok, but i ended up with tables that were too low (hence why cranking them up seemed to help), and they also seemed really inaccurate at low airflow.. Do you use maths to get the tables close and then adjust based on feel?

  16. #36
    Tuner MakesBadDecisions's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Montucky
    Posts
    194
    Quote Originally Posted by MORLOK View Post
    I changed both airmass and map by the same proportion.

    As for Engine Torque Coeff EQ Ratio. Here is how I understand that table. I think the engine estimates actual torque based on MAF, but that estimate will change if the AFR is rich or lean. So when you are in power enrichment and command lambda is 0.8, you are making more power, but less power as a proportion of airflow so the model needs to correct for that.
    I don't plan to make any adjustments to this table, although I have seen others say they did to help dial in the torque.

    MBD - what maths and histogram do you use to calibrate the torque models? I made some that estimate torque from MAF and set up the histogram on the same axis as VTT airmass and map, then filtering for cam angle, seemed to work ok, but i ended up with tables that were too low (hence why cranking them up seemed to help), and they also seemed really inaccurate at low airflow.. Do you use maths to get the tables close and then adjust based on feel?
    Ok, I did not want to assume on which one or both that you changed.

    I agree with your take on Engine Torque Coeff EQ Ratio and how it works. Wouldn't the MAP be the basis of estimated torque, as there is a MAP VTT? Maybe someone else can chime in to verify.

    I went back to stock VTT in my tune. I have been making sure my air models are as close as I can get them, my 3 airflows, VE, MAF and Dynamic are now traveling along with minimal error from each other, and trims are -3 to +1. I have no limiting, no random knock, everything is smooth, pedal feels good, trans feels great and engine runs strong. Still have the "flare", but stopped worrying about that for the moment as it has done this since "stock".

    I have tried many many different maths, filters, histograms and could not even back calculate the tables as they are stock with precision and repeatability. So, I have not found a way to conclusively calibrate the VTT. Without more tools, data and proper equations, I feel there is no way to calculate proper VTT. I have been swamped at work and have not had time to spend on the dyno. I have found old logs and dyno pulls to start some comparisons on when that time comes. Maybe once I am able to process new and old logs with dyno pulls, that may give a clue on how to properly calibrate VTT. I have read multiple accounts of changing VTT yet never read about how and why they did what they did.

    As I currently have no limiting or issues, it is like I am beating a dead horse. When it comes time for boost to be added, I need to know how to calibrate or at least manipulate the VTT, so beating dead horse continues.

    I did break down and ordered Banish's new Gen5 stuff, should be here thursday. I have all of his stuff, been happy with cost versus reward so far. I have even attempted to read the patent on the Torque based ECU and let me tell you, actually I cant because I couldnt make it a page without falling asleep or getting or getting a migraine. Shit is beyond me.
    Last edited by MakesBadDecisions; 04-30-2019 at 12:11 PM.

  17. #37
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by MakesBadDecisions View Post
    I did break down and ordered Banish's new Gen5 stuff, should be here thursday. I have all of his stuff, been happy with cost versus reward so far.
    I am considering this also. Let me know what you think of it.

    I keep thinking about the max torque value and it still bugs me that the VTT values in a ZL1 file look reasonable and have pretty low airmass values, but when I copy them to my file I end up with Max torque of 320, which is well below the output of the ZL1, so it must use a different max torque calculation. So there must be some table HPtuners is still missing.... Or we need a way to modify the equation.

  18. #38
    Tuner MakesBadDecisions's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Montucky
    Posts
    194
    Quote Originally Posted by MORLOK View Post
    I am considering this also. Let me know what you think of it.
    Good stuff, more of a broad overview with good tidbits. Was it worth it, yes, small price to pay for some education. I was hoping for more VTT info and how to edit if needed. He touched on all the same info found in this thread. Also confirmed it is absolutely critical to have all air models dialed and from there most everything will work itself out. Other helpful info in there as well, especially for a newb. I have now watched it twice and want to watch it a couple more times to see if I missed anything.

    Yes there has to be missing tables, lots of them. I want to think that the base equation has to be a set function and then the NA or Boosted OS modifiers modify the result from that equation differently. Not 100% but seems logical.

    Unfortunately for me, my truck was rear-ended last night and is not drive-able so testing is on hold for next 6-8 weeks, or longer, as I wait for body shop. Maybe the maggy 2650 blower will be ready by then.

  19. #39
    Senior Tuner eficalibrator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    1,023
    Quote Originally Posted by MakesBadDecisions View Post
    Good stuff, more of a broad overview with good tidbits. Was it worth it, yes, small price to pay for some education. I was hoping for more VTT info and how to edit if needed. He touched on all the same info found in this thread. Also confirmed it is absolutely critical to have all air models dialed and from there most everything will work itself out. Other helpful info in there as well, especially for a newb. I have now watched it twice and want to watch it a couple more times to see if I missed anything.

    Yes there has to be missing tables, lots of them. I want to think that the base equation has to be a set function and then the NA or Boosted OS modifiers modify the result from that equation differently. Not 100% but seems logical.

    Unfortunately for me, my truck was rear-ended last night and is not drive-able so testing is on hold for next 6-8 weeks, or longer, as I wait for body shop. Maybe the maggy 2650 blower will be ready by then.
    So I'm just making it to this thread. Thanks for the kind words. Obviously, this discussion wasn't around when I was filming a lot of the video stuff last year, but I'm glad your practical experience is lining up with what I teach and know to be true about torque based controls.

    YES, there are TONS of maps/tables/functions that you are not seeing in HPT. They display maybe a couple thousand parameters/tables. There are over 12,000 in a typical modern ECU. A lot of the torque model details (like torque inverse tables, for example) are not visible in HPT as I mentioned in the video. Luckily, we have enough access to hit the critical points to make these engines run properly with most common modifications.

  20. #40
    Tuner MakesBadDecisions's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Montucky
    Posts
    194
    Quote Originally Posted by eficalibrator View Post
    So I'm just making it to this thread. Thanks for the kind words. Obviously, this discussion wasn't around when I was filming a lot of the video stuff last year, but I'm glad your practical experience is lining up with what I teach and know to be true about torque based controls.

    YES, there are TONS of maps/tables/functions that you are not seeing in HPT. They display maybe a couple thousand parameters/tables. There are over 12,000 in a typical modern ECU. A lot of the torque model details (like torque inverse tables, for example) are not visible in HPT as I mentioned in the video. Luckily, we have enough access to hit the critical points to make these engines run properly with most common modifications.
    Thanks for adding to this thread.

    Questions for you.

    Following along with the issue MORLOK is having. As ACTTrq crosses over MAXTrq the TB opens 100%. Now in this case MAXTrq is not limiting as the TB is opening. Assuming, we know what happens there most times, that MORLOK has the air models in line why does this behave the way it does? I know that is a super broad question, but anything would help to unlock this mystery.

    Is the MAXTrq number, provided via the channels in the scanner, calculated differently from a NA OS and a Boosted OS? If there is an answer.

    Thank You