its not about gain, if your requesting more from the MAF or VVE meaning more fueling equates to more torque
gotta match your desired MAF/MAP torque to actual
its not about gain, if your requesting more from the MAF or VVE meaning more fueling equates to more torque
gotta match your desired MAF/MAP torque to actual
Follow @MASTUNING visit www.mastuned.com
Remote Tuning [email protected]
Contact/Whatsapp +966555366161
1+1=2
1(maf) +(vt) 1(vve) =2
2023 Ford Maverick 2.0T AWD
Originally Posted by HeavyChevy305
That equation is missing an operator between the VT and VVE. I'm not sure if you were trying to imply 1(maf) + (vt)[1(vve)] = 2 or 1(maf) + (vt) + 1(vve) = 2. Also I assume 2 is an arbitrary number because that equation couldn't possibly be true either way. Maybe you meant 1(maf) + (vt)[1(vve)] = Y ? And also what are the measurement value references for MAF and VVE in your equation?
Last edited by TriPinTaZ; 08-07-2019 at 08:50 AM.
maybe he was saying you have to:
adjust maf AND ALSO combination adjust ve together with vtt
That was the sort of response I was trying to trigger lol
TriPinTaZ don't over think it man lol.
Adjust Maf AND VVE and the virtual torque for the most part falls into place.
2023 Ford Maverick 2.0T AWD
Anyone else still having the crazy VVE values in certain cells when calculating the coefficients?
I had that issue fairly recently but smoothing out areas of change before calculating coeffocients seems to prevent that from heppening for me so far
LOL yes I gathered that much and was poking fun at your equation. Dry humor but I failed lol. My VTT tables and DD tables are bone stock. MAF and VVE is plenty unless you greatly change the airflow characteristics of the engine. Then you may have to deal with VTT, just depends on the setup.
I ran into this on a C7 once. I was able to get around it by just applying the changes to the cell boundaries. If you check the box that shows which cell boundary (0-23 i think as I'm not looking at HP Tuners right now), then apply only your changes to that group of cells in VVE. If you still get crazy numbers you will know which group of cells it is and you will need to adjust your % multiplier somewhere. There is a value that is causing a crazy long trailing decimal which seems to cause that glitch. It's been a while since I encountered that but from what i remember that is how I was able to get around it.
Thanks for the tips. I will try to get it straight hopefully in next few days. VVE has been the biggest pain so far.
Slight high Jack. Running Bolt ons. Car is running great mpg is up and gained 1.5 mph over my old tune since I did the vve.
The only thing I see is the demanded torque percentage falls under 100% at 5800rpm and tapers to 92% by 6500. Is this limiting? Ive m raised and lowered the 98-100 rows in dd +-10%, same with peak torque, also the vve in that area, nothings changing that.
Last edited by nicul15; 08-12-2019 at 09:28 AM.
If the throttle isnt closing and the car isnt pulling timing then it is not a problem. Also, torque goes down past 52xx RPM Anyhow.
Thanks, I dont fully trust the tps and timing pids(I do log all of them). I usually look at g/cyl and map to make sure its all wide open. By working with this one car a lot I have a sense of where it should read for the given conditions. Anyone else do that?
I dont have a reference in this case over 5800, I might have to assume its all good.
Also peak torque gets within 45-50 of max torque. Is that too close? Should it be 100 above?
Reply With Quote