Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 35 of 35

Thread: MDS - 2006 Jeep SRT8 - HP Tuner Activation

  1. #21
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    873
    Take a look here, there are some useful links that may help you understand.
    https://forum.hptuners.com/showthread.php?71020-New-to-dodge-tuning-and-trying-to-find-out-the-basic-steps&p=525502&viewfull=1#post525502


    As for throttle, voltage is the main unit used throughout the calibration. For example, power enrichment under fuel uses throttle voltage as a threshold for WOT. Beyond that value the PE table is used.

    Why don't you post up your tune here?

  2. #22
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    21
    Thanks for the link, I will read through as much of that as I can as a primer for learning. Not sure how much I will understand, but hopefully, I learn something. Attached is the tune currently in the jeep.

    Just to clarify though, I am not trying to knock my tuner and his shop that did the work. They have come back time and again to address the issues. But this one just doesn't make sense so I am reaching out for help of any kind.Test_Log_2-070720_445pm.hpl
    Attached Files Attached Files

  3. #23
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    873
    Couple of things I noticed in your tune that you just posted (I am not terribly familiar with NGC controllers and I am no pro and hope the pros do chime in but here goes):

    1) Baro learn is not disabled - you don't want this enabled as the engine is now boosted so learning can drift.
    2) WOT PE threshold appears to be stock - usually lowered so PE tables can kick in sooner otherwise the PCM tries to maintain stoich which is FA = 0.0694 or AFR of 14.4 which you don't want when the engine sees boost.
    3) Sensed MAP is enabled - normally enabled in boosted applications but I believe some older models exhibit issues with it being enabled.
    4) Downstream O2 does not appeared to be disabled - ECT rear temp is at 14F, this is normally maxed out to ignore the rear O2s.
    5) COT appears to be stock - if the PCM thinks exhaust temps hit the stock target it will add fuel. Normally COT target temp is bumped up a little to prevent the onset of more fuel.
    6) also this tune has 6.1 across the board in the engine general section. I think the reason you saw a 5.7 in engine displacement is sometimes that is done to disable ESP/TC when it is being dyno'ed.

  4. #24
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Homer View Post
    Couple of things I noticed in your tune that you just posted (I am not terribly familiar with NGC controllers and I am no pro and hope the pros do chime in but here goes):
    6) also this tune has 6.1 across the board in the engine general section. I think the reason you saw a 5.7 in engine displacement is sometimes that is done to disable ESP/TC when it is being dyno'ed.
    Interesting. So my next question, on #6. The tune I posted is currently active in my jeep. Could the displacement of 5.7 hinder my performance outside of a dyno? Should it have been changed to be 6.1? I know for the dyno, the disconnected the motor on the transfer case to prevent it from engaging. They provided a dyno sheet showing 483 at the RW. But the 15.3 1/4 mile, doesn't feel like it is making anything close to that.

    That aside, all the other stuff makes sense. I will touch base with the second party to see what they think or if they identified the same issues. I read through a bunch last night. But I know I will need time to learn and gain knowledge so that I can at least know what I am seeing let alone attempt to identify issues.

    Thanks for the input, I look forward to others chiming in if they wish to look.

  5. #25
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    873
    Quote Originally Posted by furian76 View Post
    Interesting. So my next question, on #6. The tune I posted is currently active in my jeep. Could the displacement of 5.7 hinder my performance outside of a dyno? Should it have been changed to be 6.1? I know for the dyno, the disconnected the motor on the transfer case to prevent it from engaging. They provided a dyno sheet showing 483 at the RW. But the 15.3 1/4 mile, doesn't feel like it is making anything close to that.

    That aside, all the other stuff makes sense. I will touch base with the second party to see what they think or if they identified the same issues. I read through a bunch last night. But I know I will need time to learn and gain knowledge so that I can at least know what I am seeing let alone attempt to identify issues.

    Thanks for the input, I look forward to others chiming in if they wish to look.
    When I open the tune you posted, displacement is at 6.1. Changing it to anything but 6.1 will most likely disable TC/ESP so leave it as is.
    tune.JPG

  6. #26
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Homer View Post
    When I open the tune you posted, displacement is at 6.1.
    tune.JPG
    That is weird, here is what I see when I open the tune in editor, without changing anything. That's weird though. I am using the latest VCM suite from the site, not beta though.
    5.7_Disp-showing_070920.PNG

  7. #27
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    873
    Quote Originally Posted by furian76 View Post
    That is weird, here is what I see when I open the tune in editor, without changing anything. That's weird though. I am using the latest VCM suite from the site, not beta though.
    5.7_Disp-showing_070920.PNG
    I am using 4.7.282 beta. Try installing beta. Don't worry your stable version of VCM will still be there but you will have a new beta editor and scanner.

    Just tried it on beta 4.7.522 and still see 6.1. I will try the latest stable version next.
    Last edited by Homer; 07-09-2020 at 01:44 PM.

  8. #28
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    873
    Oh you are right, the latest stable version shows 5.7 and beta shows 6.1

    Stable
    Attachment 101267
    Beta
    Attachment 101268

    Looks like there might be a glitch that is propogating thru the betas?

    I would put a request into support but then they are going to ask for all this information. Maybe I will put in a request and just link this thread which has the file in quesiton.

    OK just submitted the ticket to support.
    Last edited by Homer; 07-09-2020 at 02:00 PM.

  9. #29
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Homer View Post
    Oh you are right, the latest stable version shows 5.7 and beta shows 6.1
    OK just submitted the ticket to support.
    You sir are a true gentleman. Thanks for walking that one through. But the true question, is it a visual glitch or something that could in fact be a problem causer. Or at least somewhat of a problem.

  10. #30
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    873
    Quote Originally Posted by furian76 View Post
    You sir are a true gentleman. Thanks for walking that one through. But the true question, is it a visual glitch or something that could in fact be a problem causer. Or at least somewhat of a problem.
    I think it is just visual but let's see what support says.

    Update: Support just contacted me and your file was sent to an engineer to look into it.
    Last edited by Homer; 07-09-2020 at 03:38 PM.

  11. #31
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    21
    attached are a few more log files from today. the first one actually had some almost stalls while backing up and 1 complete stall while at the light. Engine was not fully warm. Not sure if too much fuel or too little spark could do this. going to read more into that, but possibly related based on LTFT.

    Log 2 didn't have any issues.

    Both are much longer than normal. Was trying to get normal driving over time.Test_Log_1-071020_105pm.hplTest_Log_2-071020_216pm.hpl

  12. #32
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    873
    FYI - support just got back to me and said version 4.6 was wrong and the beta had it right.

  13. #33
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Homer View Post
    FYI - support just got back to me and said version 4.6 was wrong and the beta had it right.
    Nifty, I will download the beta then. I wonder if there are other weird bugs like that in 4.6
    Thanks for letting me know.

  14. #34
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by tbrtuning View Post
    How are you determining that you're getting that good of fuel economy... Dividing miles and gallons uses after filling up over a drive?
    So I finally put enough miles on it to make it worth filling up and give a better formula. Something is definitely off.
    A/B aligns with MPG shown on display (21mpg after all of the testing I did this past week). But total miles on vehicle compared with amount of gas put in shows around 11.5 (which is probably more accurate). Is there any reason or possible tuning error that could account for that kind of weirdness. Also, after fill up, the miles to empty reads 432 with about 17 Gallons of fuel (I put 16.421 into the tank).

    Honestly, that's the least of my issues. It may solve itself once I get the tuning redone.

  15. #35
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    21
    My OG Tuner finally got back with me. I sent over latest logs on Friday. He got back to me within a few hours and said I definitely have a boost leak. And thats pretty much where we stopped. Based on other inputs, I looked for exhaust leaks and vacuum leaks.
    1. Found exhaust leak (1/8"x2" gap) between the CAT down pipes and the new exhaust pipes at the flanges. Just poor fitment. You can see the black soot at 2 locations on each tube as well as the gaps.
    2. Built a pressure pump and connected it where the intake filters normally sit. tried to pressurize with 3psi. was not holding pressure and found that the zip tied vacuum cap placed over the nozzle on the vacuum block was leaking bad. it was over sized and zip tied down. SO I replaced with a properly fitted vacuum cap. The leak stopped.
    3. tried to send pressure into the system again. Still not holding pressure. So I checked engine bay. Nothing. Found a hissing sound near the rear. Turns out both waste gates are leaking heavily where the vacuum lines go into the waste gates. Not sure if it's the hose or if the fitting is leaking.

    Even with jacks I was not able to get the jeep high enough off the group to properly see it. I hope that if this is fixed that the other issues will resolve themselves. The OG tuner said that based on what he saw on the logs, this could have a direct affect on the other systems to cause issues.

    I will update once all the leaks are fixed and let you know if that solved the issue. Thanks for everyone's help and input. As a side note, It should be a no brainer function to do a pressure check of the system like I did before finishing it up. They might have, I am not sure, but dang, that's a huge miss if they didn't. The cost of the misc parts was like $10 at lowes not including the air fittings that most shops already have.