@SlowNStock
Very much appreciated!
@SlowNStock
Very much appreciated!
Last edited by Wynnded; 09-12-2023 at 06:31 AM.
TRD Tune from 2008 Tundra
Tundra Stock TRD 3YWF3400.hpt
Hmm...never seen that before. Is that the WB logged with VCM Scanner?Originally Posted by snivilous
Yes sir.
Add Channel, Innovate SP (either AFR or EQ for what you want):
5ggvA8Z.jpg
Once it's added to your channels, right click the channel and at the top of the list is "Transform" which will pop up this window. You want to click Parameter and search Innovate and it will pop up a bunch of gauges and select the one you have, and then you need to adjust the function to 68.085 and +7.35.
rfZOgi2.jpg
And I believe the AEM is similar since people send me datalogs with AEM readings, including AEM boost. Though the Innovate can't output boost based on what they told me talking to them. In the case of the Innovate you need a RS232 serial to USB cord, where as the AEM (some, maybe not all) plugs into the OBD2 as a pass through that the MPVI then connects to. The Innovate setup is finnicky at best, majority of the time it doesn't show up and I know I'm not the only one. Requires some plugging and unplugging, and in my case restarting the computer with it plugged in to identify it.
I'll have to root around in my magical bin of mysterious miscellaneous cables to see if I have one. Thanks!
hello im new here, i have a 2016 tundra 5.7 with only a cold air intake. any recommendations on how to tune it. im going to attach my stock map
I sure hope this thread keeps going. I have a 2014 tundra 5.7 non flex, I just bought a MPVI3. My goals are to maximize towing performance with smoother shifting.
Does anyone have a tune for a Magnuson Supercharged 2008-2013 Land Cruiser?
Send an email to [email protected] They have calibrations available for that setup.
Thank you. They wouldn't sell me a calibration without a tuner as well. I ended up building my own off of a TRD Tundra calibration
Got a 2021 Tundra TRD Pro bone stock and looking to spice up the tune a bit (pedal map is crap, shifting, torque management). Anyone has a tune/hints how to dial in some of these changes. Thanks in advance.
2012 CTS-V BDT, Auto, Every Option | Lingefelter 2.55" UP | DW65 Injectors | C&R HX | Pierburg CWA100 | 90mm TB | Airaid CF Intake with Green Filter | Lingefelter 160deg T-Stat | 534whp/503tq
2002 C5 Z06 Quick Silver, AR Headers, Borla Axle Back, A&A Kit
I have a 2008 Tundra 5.7 with the TRD blower. I see files here for a 2015 and 2008 TRD base tune. Is there a reason not to use the 2015 one? when i do a compare, there are some differences. Seems like i should use the 2015 as it may have better calibrations? but dont want to load something if there was a change on the 2015 that would hurt the 2008. Thoughts?
Functionally, there's no significant difference between the two other than throttle mapping (more aggressive in the 2008) and spark strategy (ref High Octane table values) - neither is really "better", and you're going to copy from whichever you use as a base into the file read from your PCM.
The main thing you'll need to watch out for are differences in definitions. A (mostly) benign example is the incorrect header definition in the 2015 file (and many other, non-TRD files), which results in Accelerator Pedal Position being doubled in the axis ('08 on top, '15 on bottom):
TCC Definition Difference.PNG
There are some other, small quirks, that can be addressed regardless of which you use as the base (Startup Airflow spike in the 2015, High Load Throttle Limit and Power Enrich Delay in the 2008, etc.).
Pedal Mapping
You can pull pedal mapping from a '07-13 for something more aggressive; you can blend it down toward the '14-21 values if you find that's too aggressive (Paste Special - Average). Keep in mind, in higher gears (5th, 6th), you can get by with more aggressive throttle mapping without the pedal feeling overly sensitive - that can be nice for drivability, since the driver can use less pedal for a given speed (which is also a psychological trick to make the truck seem more powerful than it is). Those changes can be complemented with the Load Limit tables, but that's more involved.
Shift Scheduling
Most common change made to shifting is to increase WOT Upshift RPM, especially for 1-2. You simply take the actual Upshift RPM from your log and compare it to your target to determine the correction factor. If, for example, you had a WOT shift occur at 5,600 RPM and wanted it to occur at 6,200 RPM, you would calculate:
So we would multiply our corresponding WOT Upshift Output Shaft RPM by 1.10. Be sure to increase the rev limit (Engine -> Fuel -> Cutoff, DFCO -> RPM Limits -> Maximium) to ensure you have some buffer to not hit the limiter on Upshift (say 200 RPM).Correction Factor = Target RPM / Actual RPM = 6,200 RPM / 5,600 RPM = ~1.10
Changing the full Up/Downshift and TCC schedules would take several pages to really explain - high level, holding a gear longer prior to Upshift (increasing Output Shaft RPM or decreasing Pedal Position) and holding a gear less prior to Downshift (decreasing Output Shaft RPM or increasing Pedal Position) makes the truck feel more lively, at the expense of being more prone to hunting (rapid up/downshifting) and NVH (e.g., "hanging" at higher RPM in a gear vs Upshifting).
You can use "livelier" Up/Downshift settings for lower gears (1-3), stockish values for 4-6 Upshifts and 4th Downshift, while holding 5th and 6th longer prior to Downshift (to prevent hunting on the highway and around town), then move TCC to match. You can split up those approaches between Normal and Tow/Haul, too (e.g., hold 5th & 6th longer in Tow/Haul only to compensate for additional load).
Torque Management
Torque Management is also a long-winded change - the "easy" way is to smooth the factory table to remove the larger "lumps and bumps", then do A-B-C testing, where "A" is the baseline, "B" is increased from baseline by a nominal amount across the board, and "C" is decreased from baseline by the same nominal amount (so "A" could be stock, "B" could be +5%, and "C" could be -5%).
Generally, more Upshift Torque Management is smoother and achieves quicker shifts, while less increases harshness and achieves quicker acceleration - excessively high Upshift Torque Management can also increase harshness, though, because you "crash" into the torque reduction, as the PCM can only recover torque so quickly. Downshift Torque Management is a little different animal because we're trying to speed the engine up to complete the shift, so some engine torque can be beneficial.
When you make changes to Shift/TCC Schedule and Torque Management, move in small increments (say 5%) so you can sneak up on what you find is the sweet spot for your driving style. It takes more iterations, but it usually winds up faster in the end because you're moving in the right direction between iterations more often. Be sure to keep some sort of notes as you drive, because you'll need to track where your changes do/don't work with some specificity (e.g., "5% torque reduction good at 2000 RPM and light throttle, but harsh at 3000 RPM and medium throttle").
Last edited by SlowNStock; 02-23-2025 at 01:50 AM.
07-10 Shift Schedule Correction
Hello folks,
I sat down and made up a little Transmission shift point tune, that I would like to share. Just the shift schedule was changed, not pressures.
This tune should cut down the shift hunting. Changes:
6th gear up-shift is locked out until 60mph , and min downshift is at 40mph
5th gear up-40mph, down 30mph
This allows truck to run in 4th gear when going through town (25-30mph), 5th gear (40-60mph)
6th gear will kick in at 60+mph (mostly highway running)
I also had a Issue with my 08 Tundra, that when hauling a 3000-4000lb trailer on highway with cruise, the truck would drop to 4th on every medium hill, roaring and killing gas mileage. So- I locked out 5th to 4th downshift over 60mph in the tow/haul table. This will make the truck more cruise friendly, when towing smaller to medium loads. You can add a higher throttle angle downshift, if desired, or use select to run 4th gear on higher loads.
I also added a 10% increase to desired throttle angle for the Tow/Haul Mode. Engine Tables are stock. Enjoy!
07-10_Tundra_Trans Remap_57_NA.hpt
This particular issue isn't entirely due to shift schedule, it's due to throttle limits and switching between the Low and High Load Limit tables (Engine -> Airflow -> Electronic Throttle -> Limits -> Torque Based -> Low Load/High Load).
Here's a very basic rundown of how/why this occurs:
- For a given Accelerator Pedal Position, a corresponding Commanded Throttle Angle is calculated based on current gear and Tow/Haul setting.
- A Requested Torque value is looked up from the Optimum Torque Trans table, based on Transmission Input RPM and Commanded Throttle Angle.
- From Requested Torque, a target Air Load value from the Desired Air Load table is calculated.
- If current Absolute Load is above the Desired Air Load value, the engine is able to meet or exceed the Desired Air Load at the current actual Throttle Angle, so the Low Load throttle limit table is selected.
- If current Absolute Load is below the Desired Air Load value, the engine is unable to meet the Desired Air Load at the current actual Throttle Angle, so the High Load throttle limit table is selected.
- If the actual Throttle Angle is greater than the limit from the selected table for the current Requested Torque and Engine Speed, it's reduced to the value from the table.
There's a lot of things going on in the background, but the underlying concept behind this strategy is to have a smoother map (Low Load) for drivability and a more aggressive map (High Load) for greater demand, as well as to provide a degree of compensation for reduced output (high IATs, low baro, etc.).
Generally, it works well, but there are three notable issues:
- There are only two tables, so there's not much flexibility in ramping up in response to demand, which means there can be a dramatic difference between the two when switching.
- The factory Low Load table is set low and not particularly smooth. If the Optimum Torque Trans table is a reasonable model for actual torque (it is), we'd expect the Low Load table to be the inverse of Optimum Torque Trans so the PCM is always targeting the "ideal" throttle angle for a given Torque Request. Toyota made some tradeoffs for drivability (per above), resulting in the lower values.
- The factory High Load table is fairly aggressive. Like the Low Load table, it should also be the inverse of the Optimum Torque Trans table - again, the values in the table are the result of that drivability/aggressiveness tradeoff.
The case you described (which is very common for Tundras) is a direct result of the above: the relatively low limits from the Low Load table cause Absolute Load to fall below Desired Air Load as cruise tries to command more throttle angle, causing it to switch to the High Load table, where it immediately downshifts due to the aggressive High Load throttle limit. It's very noticeable in cruise because the logic results in larger throttle swings than most drivers would naturally command.
We can approach the problem through tuning in 4 different ways, which I've ranked in ascending order from least to most preferred options, with explanation:
- Move the shift point.
While this is the easiest, we don't really want to move our shift points just to fix cruise control. We want to pick the shift points based on how we want the truck to perform, regardless of if we are pressing the pedal or the truck is doing it for us.
- Decrease the Desired Air Load value. This will keep the PCM referencing the Low Load table longer, making it less likely to switch and downshift.
For simplicity, we want our Desired Air Load to be the inverse of the Optimum Torque table, which it pretty much is from the factory (they do raise the limits at higher torque requests to ensure switchover to the High Load table).
- Increase the Low Load limits. This will allow the PCM to command more throttle for a given torque request and prevent it from switching to the High Load table as often.
Decreasing High Load is viable, but we have to be mindful to not set it below the Low Load value, or the truck won't be able to accelerate when switching - we also have to just be mindful of that in general, because we can set the limit too low.
- Decrease the High Load limits. This will make the switch less aggressive and possibly prevent a downshift.
Increasing the Low Load table is my preferred first choice for a few reasons: we know the values in this table are low, we have a factory calibration with higher limits we can borrow (from an LC200), and it makes the switch into the High Load table a bit less dramatic.
In that vein, here's a revised version of your file with the increased Low Load table from an LC200 to give an example of how the factory approached this differently, which works well for most trucks: 07-10_Tundra_Trans Remap_57_NA - LC200 Load Limit.hpt
You can modify it further to smooth out some of the coarseness and increase the limits further, but be mindful it can negatively impact drivability. Here's an example of how you might approach that: 07-10_Tundra_Trans Remap_57_NA - LC200 Load Limit - Smoothed.hpt
Here's a tool you can use to look up the inverse values referenced above, do interpolation, etc.: Tundra Torque Limit Calculator
One thing to be aware of is the tables can appear flipped in some definitions (Low Load shows up as High Load and vice versa), so be sure of which table you're working on.
There are some clever things you can do with where you set each of the limits and Desired Air Load - compare the peaks and valleys in the Low Load table to the shift schedule and you should get an idea.
Thanks SlowNStock, I will load it up, play around with it and get back to you.
Reply With Quote