Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: PE table Excessive?

  1. #1
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    12

    PE table Excessive?

    Very new to tuning, but bought HP tuners pro and have been ingesting as much info as I can via here, ls1tech, and few YouTube channels.

    Starting to wrap my head around PE table and its functions and as I look at my tune, it seems to be excessively on the rich side. see below:

    1.4853515625 1.4853515625 1.4853515625 1.4853515625 1.4853515625 1.4853515625 1.4853515625 1.4853515625 1.4853515625 1.443359375 1.416015625 1.375 1.375 1.375 1.375 1.333984375 1.333984375 1.333984375 1.333984375

    The story behind the car is that it was dyne tuned by Hawk's performance in 2009 as an A4 stalled car. Dyno tune happened at the same time heads and cam went in. I switched to an M6 and the car hasn't been driven much due to various reasons, but I'm back in it now. My work in progress tune is copied below.

    I have a Wideband installed now so I can go log some data, but I have a Racetronix pump/hotwire kit and 36lb injectors ready to go in first. I know I'm at or beyond the limit of stock fuel, just haven't had a chance to put them in yet. I suspect that any logging I do will be skewed by fuel system not being able to keep up. Even so, when I compare my PE table to the files available in the repository, they seem really rich. 14.72/1.485=9.9AFR.

    Am I missing something? im getting started with MAF then VE tuning once the new fuel system is in, but I think my PE table has a lot left to give before I even get moving.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  2. #2
    Senior Tuner Lakegoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,459
    I would set the PE to 1.17 across the chart. You could start out at 1.25 up to 2500rpm and then go to 1.17 if you want. Looks like you have the 36# injectors loaded already. The Offset--VAC looks a little wonky in places. Maybe recheck the data for those injectors.
    2000 Camaro SS 2015 L83 port injected, Whipple 3.0, 4L80E, 8.8 Ford
    2013 Silverado 5.3, 6L80k 8.8

  3. #3
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    12
    good catch, yes ive already loaded the injector data, but that tune hasnt been loaded onto the car yet. I was hoping to get the pump and injectors installed today, so i made the changes last night. I pulled that data from this spreadsheet on Ls1 tech.

    GTP 36lbs Injector Data.xls

  4. #4
    Tuning Addict 5FDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Rogers, MN
    Posts
    13,564
    I don't have a stock tune to compare with but that MAF and VE look stock to me.

    Fueling was for sure not right if they had to slap the PE with so much fuel just to get their desired outcome. Lean out the PE and tune the MAF and VE tables to get the commanded fueling to match the actual fueling with your wideband.
    2016 Silverado CCSB 5.3/6L80e, not as slow but still heavy.

    If you don't post your tune and logs when you have questions you aren't helping yourself.

  5. #5
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by 5FDP View Post
    I don't have a stock tune to compare with but that MAF and VE look stock to me.

    Fueling was for sure not right if they had to slap the PE with so much fuel just to get their desired outcome. Lean out the PE and tune the MAF and VE tables to get the commanded fueling to match the actual fueling with your wideband.
    MAF table is stock, VE is stock except idle area of the table. looks like he took some out to allow for the cam. Sounds like I'm safe to move PE down to 1.25-1.17 and then tune from there.