Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 34

Thread: Speed density tuning

  1. #1
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Moline, IL
    Posts
    79

    Speed density tuning

    So I have tried to tune my car using the strategy From the coyote cookbook and the tuning school ford book. Following either of these books on the stock or Roush strategy has been incomplete to say the least . Constantly IPC torque through the roof, desired MAF vs actual MAF way off, and constantly going in to limp mode. There is lots of good information in these books but I found it to be incomplete to even get my car daily drivable. Even contacting the tuning school for tech support was not helpful. They said it?s the hardest car and combo to tune (coyote, PD blower, and Big TB) and he was Not able to tune one to run right (To paraphrase). Seems weird seeing they opened preorder for a coyote specific tuning book. Speed density has been the only way to tune my car to run well.

    My issue is why is none of the information shared? Even in books. I love the understanding that came with figuring out how to tune speed density myself, but after spending way too much on books and reading on the forums, SD tuning seems to be the best kept secret.

    Am I the only one who needed speed density tuning to get their car running right? Or are there others? Is there a reason one would not want to share this information? I write a lot of notes in Microsoft one note as a good way to store and search my notes. I have been considering posting a read only link to my notes. But thought their might be some reason no one has done this.

  2. #2
    I have had the same experience as you. I bought the tuning school coyote tuning book and was disappointed. I'm curious to see how the new book looks... The recipe seems like it would work alright for a Gen 1 (I have a '16 manual GT with the 2.3L Roush), but there were too many gaps to tune my car. I tried filling in the blanks with their online support, but it's a joke... I opened 2 tickets and never got a single bit of information out of them. They would say I don't know, don't have a procedure for that, never seen this before, etc.

    I recently started looking into speed density, but that page is pretty overwhelming. I don't quite fully grasp it yet. From my understanding you no longer use the MAF to measure air, but now make a calculation based on manifold pressure? I didn't think the Roush kit came with a MAP sensor

  3. #3
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Moline, IL
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by JFiorito View Post
    I have had the same experience as you. I bought the tuning school coyote tuning book and was disappointed. I'm curious to see how the new book looks... The recipe seems like it would work alright for a Gen 1 (I have a '16 manual GT with the 2.3L Roush), but there were too many gaps to tune my car. I tried filling in the blanks with their online support, but it's a joke... I opened 2 tickets and never got a single bit of information out of them. They would say I don't know, don't have a procedure for that, never seen this before, etc.

    I recently started looking into speed density, but that page is pretty overwhelming. I don't quite fully grasp it yet. From my understanding you no longer use the MAF to measure air, but now make a calculation based on manifold pressure? I didn't think the Roush kit came with a MAP sensor
    I read in to the speed density way more then necessary. Their isn’t a map sensor from the factory. Get a MAP sensor and wire it in using the pro features. Then you can create a multiplier from actual Map/calculated MAP and apply it to the speed density calculator. That’s very short description seeing I’m posting from my phone.
    Last edited by Relentless; 05-28-2020 at 05:49 PM. Reason: It turned my apostrophe’s in to question marks

  4. #4
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Tierra Verde, FL
    Posts
    157
    Being new to tuning, I will post a tune that I had to massage for the last 14 months. It was given to me be a very well known tuner. It has been a work in progress but will post it in am. Check back in am....2015-2017 tvs gen2r auto...

  5. #5
    Hm I'll keep that in mind. I would prefer to get the existing system figured out, but will definitely keep that in mind. Everything points to the torque tables being the source of my issues, but whenever I make a change there it never does what I think it is supposed to do. I particularly have issues at load load/load rpm. My desired vs actual MAF are actually pretty darn close, but then the spark source flips into torque control and then they get wildly off. What really puzzles me is at high load applications my actual MAF is way higher than my desired MAF, but it doesn't seem to care in these instances...

  6. #6
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Tierra Verde, FL
    Posts
    157
    For me it was having a good base line and go from there. Trial and error. Problem foe me was where the hell to begin with a stock tune. Dicking around with stuff for a year got a grasp on a lot of things. A good base line helps...will post in am

  7. #7
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Moline, IL
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by rryanfla View Post
    For me it was having a good base line and go from there. Trial and error. Problem foe me was where the hell to begin with a stock tune. Dicking around with stuff for a year got a grasp on a lot of things. A good base line helps...will post in am
    Yeah a good baseline can help a lot. I was thinking of an algorithm to get to that baseline. I feel there are strategies that should be able to get people to a smooth running tune.

  8. #8
    Well if your torque tables are / were the problem it should only be adjusted after you have the MAF and SD correct. How does the car run with MAF only? You turned off the filtering and anticipation when you did your MAF transfer correct? Even if you log actual MAP and do a correction factor, its only as correct at that point as your first input, the MAF.

    If your MAF and SD are not correct your not working off correct Cylair values, so trying to then diagnose changes required to the torque tables (and inverse) for a load value (that isn't accurate) gets you nowhere. you just bake error into many areas of the calibration.

    Piss poor SD tables will make the ecu use values for spark etc. based on a inferred MAP value that is off. So you scan, change the tables and think your doing gods work until you get to a different area and then start to bake in more junk data compensating for incorrect load. I did this and I had to start over, listen to the people that knew better, and realize it all falls flat without a solid aircharge value.

    I had folks look at my tables and they thought spark and a couple other areas were dangerous, but it turned out that the Whipple calibration over estimated MAP so badly it was always reading values from the tables that suggested more load than what was present, and this behavior was similar all across the torque and other important tables. Until all of these were flattened and normalized and all areas were adjusted and logged with good data, the car popped, surged, bucked, and hated starting. changing something in one area would break another.

    Murfie here gives a lot of information, I just wish I understood it all the first time. Greg Banish covers a-lot of these items however his Ford videos are a bit old. The high performance academy has some good videos, but I don't always agree with Andres approach, but he has probably forgotten more than I know.

  9. #9
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Tierra Verde, FL
    Posts
    157
    Here you go. This is a good baseline tune for TVS 17 Auto. Hope it helps


    17 TVS AUTO Baseline.hpt

  10. #10
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Moline, IL
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by superman07 View Post
    If your MAF and SD are not correct your not working off correct Cylair values, so trying to then diagnose changes required to the torque tables (and inverse) for a load value (that isn't accurate) gets you nowhere. you just bake error into many areas of the calibration.

    Piss poor SD tables will make the ecu use values for spark etc. based on a inferred MAP value that is off. So you scan, change the tables and think your doing gods work until you get to a different area and then start to bake in more junk data compensating for incorrect load. I did this and I had to start over, listen to the people that knew better, and realize it all falls flat without a solid aircharge value.
    This is exactly my point. One small change in the order you tune and you can be way off.


    Quote Originally Posted by superman07 View Post
    Murfie here gives a lot of information, I just wish I understood it all the first time. Greg Banish covers a-lot of these items however his Ford videos are a bit old. The high performance academy has some good videos, but I don't always agree with Andres approach, but he has probably forgotten more than I know.
    Murfie, CC86 and the HPTuner staff are on point. These guys are very knowledgeable and share a lot of very good detailed information. I absolutely attribute my ability to successfully tune my car to those guys.
    Last edited by Relentless; 05-29-2020 at 06:55 AM.

  11. #11
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    350
    I would love to see your notes, as I am getting ready to start on a Coyote. Hopefully the hive mind can look through them and help them progress as well.

  12. #12
    I've read Murfie's explanations and examples of coyote speed density calibrating over and over and still struggling to grasp it. From what I understand speed density is the only way to correctly calibrate Ecoboost. I bought the coyote cookbook, Greg Banish books and Master EFI tuning book. Each one gives a little bit to their understanding of Fords speed density. Not saying they do not know it. But for me its not enough information to grasp it.

    The engine I'm working on is 2017 5.0 manual, 2.9l whipple, 132mm throttle body, long tubes, ID1050X injectors, return fuel system on E85.

    I've followed Murfie's instructions for logging MAP with an external sensor. this is the thread i'm referring to these threads.
    https://forum.hptuners.com/showthrea...+speed+density

    https://forum.hptuners.com/showthrea...dratic+formula

    I'm not positive i'm doing the math right but Murfie always stresses that one should get as much data as possible so when calculating for speed density your as close to actual aircharge. I may have not made much sense but i'm trying to type this quickly.

    When I've done the math I only have a little bit of data and my numbers are way off.

    It would be great if we could keep this going to help each other understand the math. I feel the information that murfie has put out is correct. I've not ever been quick at math so seeing what other people are doing sometimes helps.

    Good luck!

  13. #13
    what calibration are you starting from? this is what seems to work for me.

    Injector and TB data must be correct first.
    I turn off the cylair filter and anticipation. I temporarily lock the cams to a single mapped point. I then ensure my MAF is correct and fueling confirms I have a good initial air mass value.
    I turn the cylair features back on, and return my mapped points to how I expect to drive the car.
    I went into the Airflow / Speed density tab and made sure my tables reflected the proper limits and thresholds for my car. I did not change max aircharge load, when I tried the car went crazy. It is still at 1.0. Dont change these values later unless you want to go back and re verify SD.
    I created histograms that filter for 50% plus weighting for each mapped point I am using. I created a math function for the histogram that returns the error percentage.
    I found that making large changes to the tables created errors, I made smaller changes based on the values and would walk the values into where I wanted it to be. The calculator does some smoothing on its own, but it hates trash data, so at times I did some smoothing myself before I calced it.
    If my logs are plus or minus a couple percent, and the values from cell to cell are + - I quit changing the table, if an entire area however needs a couple percentage points the same direction i will change it and relog.
    Once this was done, it was a new car. before I did this I chased my tail, sometimes the car would drive ok, but deep down I knew it was just a ton of bandaids.

    You need to check all compensation, multiplier, and other tables also if you are starting from a "OEM" SC companies cal. Honestly you never know what is in some of them.

  14. #14
    And this gets you to where you can then dial in torque or other areas that might need adjustments. once you are setup you may find that your spark or other tables also need adjusted based on the fact the car now uses the correct cells. Anything that referenced load or MAP values, so basically everything.

    I am by no means an expert, this is what worked for me, I could not use the Whipple cal, it was to me un-drivable, it was a embarrassment. There was a local tuner that backed out when I told him I expected more than a MAF only tune, and a remote tuner that basically gave up after 16ish files. We agreed to a partial refund and we went separate directions amicably. Now I can finally drive the damn thing.

    I could write a book on what not to do.

    GT350, WHIPPLE Gen 3, 132, long tubes, borla exhaust, id1050x
    Last edited by superman07; 05-30-2020 at 07:25 PM.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by superman07 View Post
    what calibration are you starting from? this is what seems to work for me.


    I created histograms that filter for 50% plus weighting for each mapped point I am using. I created a math function for the histogram that returns the error percentage.
    .

    Will you please share the histogram for such filter?

    Thanks

  16. #16
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Moline, IL
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by mrshanab View Post
    Will you please share the histogram for such filter?

    Thanks
    I am using one like this. I'm just trying to proof it out before sharing it. I should share it within the next few days. I have it set up with all of the maps and I will share my user math parameters also. I'm also going to post a link to my "one note" notes. It will be a read only link. This will explain a lot more and will be a live document (updatable) so as i get feedback and perfect things it will evolve.

    I would suggest doing one map point at a time. I have yet to fill my graph when i have multiple mapped points turned on. It doesn't take long to fill one mapped point graph. my only concern is my roush tune writes the whole tune even when i have it set to calibration only.

  17. #17
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Moline, IL
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by superman07 View Post
    what calibration are you starting from? this is what seems to work for me.

    Injector and TB data must be correct first.
    I turn off the cylair filter and anticipation. I temporarily lock the cams to a single mapped point. I then ensure my MAF is correct and fueling confirms I have a good initial air mass value.
    I turn the cylair features back on, and return my mapped points to how I expect to drive the car.
    I went into the Airflow / Speed density tab and made sure my tables reflected the proper limits and thresholds for my car. I did not change max aircharge load, when I tried the car went crazy. It is still at 1.0. Dont change these values later unless you want to go back and re verify SD.
    I created histograms that filter for 50% plus weighting for each mapped point I am using. I created a math function for the histogram that returns the error percentage.
    I found that making large changes to the tables created errors, I made smaller changes based on the values and would walk the values into where I wanted it to be. The calculator does some smoothing on its own, but it hates trash data, so at times I did some smoothing myself before I calced it.
    If my logs are plus or minus a couple percent, and the values from cell to cell are + - I quit changing the table, if an entire area however needs a couple percentage points the same direction i will change it and relog.
    Once this was done, it was a new car. before I did this I chased my tail, sometimes the car would drive ok, but deep down I knew it was just a ton of bandaids.

    You need to check all compensation, multiplier, and other tables also if you are starting from a "OEM" SC companies cal. Honestly you never know what is in some of them.
    This is very similar to my strategy. I feel 90%+ of my time has been dialing in my scanning math parameters, Graphs, charts and what PID's are worth logging at what stage of tuning I am at.

  18. #18
    Very Great.

    Will be waiting your feedback

  19. #19
    Great info Superman07. looking forward to using what you're sharing. I'll try to give good feedback. thank you

  20. #20
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Moline, IL
    Posts
    79
    (([Calculated MAP]/(([MAP Sensor]*[Slope])+[Offset]))-1)*100 This is the Math parameter needed to use my graph.Calculated MAP MAP .MathParameter.MathParameter.xmlSpeed Density.Graphs.xml The graph is currently set at >20% filter. I recommend doing one mapped point at a time though. It leaves less variable for the SD calculator (it will do its own thing if you allow it to).

    Im going to Write up a detailed how to on my notes. Ill share it on here also. I though there was a way to share a link to my OneNote file but all i can find right now is how to share it by email. If you are interested just PM me your Email.
    Last edited by Relentless; 06-01-2020 at 02:48 PM. Reason: Reloading file and Math Parameters