Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 40 of 40

Thread: Deceleration Rate Tuning

  1. #21
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    873
    Quote Originally Posted by spoolboy View Post
    Actually, I don't think the majority of them know either and want to keep that fact to themselves.
    Not to further hijack this thread as well but there are tuners on here that do give good advice on what works for them, in fact I just gave an example of one. The kicker is some cars seem to respond differently to some of the tweaks. For example, I have seen several tunes where PE enrichment rate is bumped up quite a lot but if I try that trick on my vehicle the injectors/PCM go nuts.

  2. #22
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by Homer View Post
    Well it is one thing to get the physics/math squared away but another to actually convert it into something that works with the engine controller and calibration as defined and mapped out by HP tuners.
    I guess this is the real kicker. Nobody really knows what is out there that still remains un-mapped. For my particular platform I've managed to get support to add around 15 extra parameters/tables so far which have helped a lot.

    Regarding deceleration rate I'm still convinced that there is a min sonic airflow vs RPM table or something similar in there somewhere as you can alter the deceleration rate (throttle opening) by messing with the throttle body airflow and small range tables (making them larger). However, this works against improving the actual throttle response where you want to decrease these values...

    You would think 35101 Desired TQ Minimum FW Tq table would help here as McCloud eluded to, and according to the table description which defines it as the "Represents the minimum flywheel torque request. This is the torque requested for a 0% flywheel request" this table should help but it does not.

    You can however increase the torque numbers here and make the deceleration rate worse, even to the point that the throttle stays open with a 0% torque request, so it does do something but the minimum torque seems to be capped by something else.

    I did experiment with a few things in this thread to no avail: https://forum.hptuners.com/showthrea...nse-with-a-S-C

  3. #23
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    813
    Yes, there are definitely a few tuners who do help out.

    Sorry to paint with such a broad brush. I think I'm just a little cranky lately due to all the things going on in the world right now.

    I also can't really say that I blame the tuners for not releasing intellectual property.

    What I am saying is, when compared to an LS for example, we are definitely not in the same place as far as sharing information and availability of quality tuners.

    And I also would say that support for our Mopar platforms from HPT is just not the same as other brands.

    Maybe it's us, not them?$$
    Last edited by spoolboy; 07-29-2020 at 05:27 AM.

  4. #24
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    873
    Quote Originally Posted by spoolboy View Post
    Yes, there are definitely a few tuners who do help out.

    Sorry to paint with such a broad brush. I think I'm just a little cranky lately due to all the things going on in the world right now.

    I also can't really say that I blame the tuners for not releasing intellectual property.

    What I am saying is, when compared to an LS for example, we are definitely not in the same place as far as sharing information and availability of quality tuners.

    And I also would say that support for our Mopar platforms from HPT is just not the same as other brands.

    Maybe it's us, not them?$$
    Maybe we should peacefully demonstrate (leave your timing guns and wrenches at home) in front of HP tuners demanding equality for all tuners. That we will not tolerate stand alone logging for just GM. Mopar to the people!!
    Last edited by Homer; 07-29-2020 at 08:18 AM.

  5. #25
    I Found a tune for a car that has multiple modes. I assume these tie into the different driving modes i.e.. sport mode vs. standard. Take a look at the power percent request tables, I assume this is what makes the pedal more responsive? I don't see multiple tables for the TB small/large to coincide with these. So maybe dropping the air in the tables has a similar affect to adjusting these tables. I assume these tables need to be kept in synch for how you want the throttle to feel i.e exaggerate the settings in one or adjust the settings in both. This also leads me to believe the decel is tied into the TQ request and how that ties into the TB Tables.. All guess work at this point however!!!
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by McCloud; 07-29-2020 at 12:24 PM.

  6. #26
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    813
    Quote Originally Posted by Homer View Post
    Maybe we should peacefully demonstrate (leave your timing guns and wrenches at home) in front of HP tuners demanding equality for all tuners. That we will not tolerate stand alone logging for just GM. Mopar to the people!!
    I'd settle for all of the tables and definitions to be in there and properly assigned.
    If in doubt, multiply everything by 1.1.

  7. #27
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    813
    Quote Originally Posted by McCloud View Post
    I Found a tune for a car that has multiple modes. I assume these tie into the different driving modes i.e.. sport mode vs. standard. Take a look at the power percent request tables, I assume this is what makes the pedal more responsive? I don't see multiple tables for the TB small/large to coincide with these. So maybe dropping the air in the tables has a similar affect to adjusting these tables. I assume these tables need to be kept in synch for how you want the throttle to feel i.e exaggerate the settings in one or adjust the settings in both. This also leads me to believe the decel is tied into the TQ request and how that ties into the TB Tables.. All guess work at this point however!!!
    Try logging accelerator pedal voltage and throttle position voltage. You'll get a better understanding of how the pedal and the throttle correlate based on those tables. You'll also see what's happening with your throttle position when you experience your issue. Also, log timing advance and actual torque (which is not actual torque).
    Logging is like 95% of tuning, maybe more.
    Spend some time logging and learning how to create graphs if you haven't already. Most people only use graphs to tune VE. Graphs can be used to tune spark, airflow, all kinds of fun things. You can even use them for trans tuning. You can basically recreate any table with a graph if you have the channels to support it (which sometimes you don't).
    If in doubt, multiply everything by 1.1.

  8. #28
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    873
    And by graph he means table...HP tuner calls the excel looking tables graphs and the graphs are plots (IIRC).

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by spoolboy View Post
    Try logging accelerator pedal voltage and throttle position voltage. You'll get a better understanding of how the pedal and the throttle correlate based on those tables. You'll also see what's happening with your throttle position when you experience your issue. Also, log timing advance and actual torque (which is not actual torque).
    Logging is like 95% of tuning, maybe more.
    Spend some time logging and learning how to create graphs if you haven't already. Most people only use graphs to tune VE. Graphs can be used to tune spark, airflow, all kinds of fun things. You can even use them for trans tuning. You can basically recreate any table with a graph if you have the channels to support it (which sometimes you don't).
    It seems that may be the only option. I'm pretty familiar with setting those up now. Took a me few minutes to figure out setting up the wideband to Lamba. Graphing/histogram the WB with the STFTs helps a lot with dialing in in the VE tables.

    I still hate having to log and make adjustments by trial and error to figure out this PCM. It may be easier to run an aftermarket PCM and figure out how to tie into the CAN bus.

  10. #30
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    813
    Quote Originally Posted by McCloud View Post
    It seems that may be the only option. I'm pretty familiar with setting those up now. Took a me few minutes to figure out setting up the wideband to Lamba. Graphing/histogram the WB with the STFTs helps a lot with dialing in in the VE tables.

    I still hate having to log and make adjustments by trial and error to figure out this PCM. It may be easier to run an aftermarket PCM and figure out how to tie into the CAN bus.
    Whew, out of the frying pan and into the fryer there bub.

    You'll still have to log, AND you'll have to start from scratch.
    If in doubt, multiply everything by 1.1.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by spoolboy View Post
    Whew, out of the frying pan and into the fryer there bub.

    You'll still have to log, AND you'll have to start from scratch.
    Logging isn't the issue, its not knowing what the tables are doing. I've taken classes on starting from a blank PCM, it may be easier than all of the guess work. At least you know what the tables are doing.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Homer View Post
    Maybe we should peacefully demonstrate (leave your timing guns and wrenches at home) in front of HP tuners demanding equality for all tuners. That we will not tolerate stand alone logging for just GM. Mopar to the people!!
    Amen brother, Amen.... Mopar to the People.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by McCloud View Post
    I need to check to see if the person that provided the tune is okay with me posting it. Also do I want to post a tune I paid $1k for.. LOL.. I guess if I want help right!!! Anyway the tuner I used is slammed right now and it?s taking weeks to get a revision back, that is what gave me the final motivation to dive in and learn this stuff. Pay $1k for a tune and have drivability issues for months is far from ideal. And this won't be my last build.. If he is okay with it I will post it up.

    Either way appriciate the help.
    My good man, not that my .02 is worth anything, but I'd like to share anyways. If you've purchased a tune from someone (especially at 1k) it is no longer intellectual property from a legal perspective. You have paid for a service. What you choose to do with or how you choose to use that service is up to you as you've paid for it. I say all of that to inform that you can post the tune if you feel it would be helpful, or you can protect your investment. Either way us working together here is how we will get to the level that the GM guys are at now. I'm sure they too had growing pains.

  14. #34
    Tuner
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Denver, North Carolina
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by DakBuilder View Post
    My good man, not that my .02 is worth anything, but I'd like to share anyways. If you've purchased a tune from someone (especially at 1k) it is no longer intellectual property from a legal perspective. You have paid for a service. What you choose to do with or how you choose to use that service is up to you as you've paid for it. I say all of that to inform that you can post the tune if you feel it would be helpful, or you can protect your investment. Either way us working together here is how we will get to the level that the GM guys are at now. I'm sure they too had growing pains.
    I have to agree with you. I own a shop and we build and tune cars every day. Tuners act like it's intellectual property, but my opinion is different. If that is their intellectual property then what about the data they are starting with? Meaning, we as tuners of OEM computers are taking the intellectual property of auto manufacturers and using/modifying it for our purpose. Basically we as the customers of those auto manufacturers are purchasing the vehicle and then modifying it using at least some of their intellectual property. We are looking at the data, tables, engineering...everything. How is that not stealing their intellectual property, so if that is ok why is it wrong for a customer of a tuner to look at, modify, or share the tune they purchased? Just my opinion, and in my life and career as a tuner I've only ever locked 1 tune, and even that was on a standalone PCM about 15 years ago, that I had come up with some very interesting tables to make adjustments for a lot of varying environmental conditions. I felt so wrong about doing it I ended up getting the car back and unlocking it a few weeks later. I can't say that I enjoy when people copy my work, especially if they are trying to sell it, but I have no control over that stuff and focus my time and my employee's time on furthering our capability in tuning. My opinion is if we are constantly improving our tune those that want to copy and sell will always be using our "old" tunes. So they should never have our latest greatest capability. On the other hand if someone takes our tune and learns it and improves it, they basically did the same thing we did to an OEM tune and I respect them putting in the time and effort to build their own thing. If they do this and then build themselves a business from it, they probably will be an asset to the industry in time and hopefully the returns from that help myself or my business at some point in the future.

  15. #35
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    813
    There are definitely more tables that are yet undefined and often tables that are defined....creatively.
    The good thing is you don't necessarily need (or even want) all of those tables.
    If in doubt, multiply everything by 1.1.

  16. #36
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    813
    Take a look at this tune. Run it as a compare file to your file and then look at the tables - electronic throttle and WOT spark are good ones to start with.

    2013_Challenger_whipple_HCcam.hpt
    If in doubt, multiply everything by 1.1.

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by spoolboy View Post
    Take a look at this tune. Run it as a compare file to your file and then look at the tables - electronic throttle and WOT spark are good ones to start with.

    2013_Challenger_whipple_HCcam.hpt
    This tune is getting worse the more it runs through the adaptive process. Now I have RPMs hanging and getting into the cruise control affect. Running the 274 cam makes it hard to find a good camparison tune... Thanks for the tune!
    Last edited by McCloud; 08-03-2020 at 03:15 PM.

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by McCloud View Post
    I Found a tune for a car that has multiple modes. I assume these tie into the different driving modes i.e.. sport mode vs. standard. Take a look at the power percent request tables, I assume this is what makes the pedal more responsive? I don't see multiple tables for the TB small/large to coincide with these. So maybe dropping the air in the tables has a similar affect to adjusting these tables. I assume these tables need to be kept in synch for how you want the throttle to feel i.e exaggerate the settings in one or adjust the settings in both. This also leads me to believe the decel is tied into the TQ request and how that ties into the TB Tables.. All guess work at this point however!!!
    I made this change (to the higher numbers)... It did improve throttle response.

  19. #39
    I solved the throttle hang/slow deceleration by adding air below 1v. and synching that change into the TB tables Small and Large Range. I was able to bring the throttle response backup by increasing the Power % Request numbers modeling the sport mode settings. I now have a very nice feel to the throttle, no light switch affect with the SC, no surging, and no flutter, just a nice smooth acceleration and deceleration.

  20. #40
    Updated original post