Gen 2 Coyote not going into Power Enrichment

[Advobeast]

Log torque source channels.. but I'm telling you.. it's that transmission torque truncation. Make sure to set all the tables in the engine torque management tab to the same number. even if you think they arent used.

I'll do it Thursday and will be sure to post my results. Fingers crossed!

[B E N]

I thought you were using a control pack write on a mustang PCM, what happened with that?

[Advobeast]

I thought you were using a control pack write on a mustang PCM, what happened with that?

That was another PCM that I have. I tried loading a control pack strategy on it. Even though I had PATS deleted on the PCM before I loaded it, it seems that PATS was enabled. I am now using a PCM that I purchased from MARS.

[Advobeast]

Well.....I tried increasing Transmision Torque Truncation. It still will not go into PE. Attached are two different pulls. 11 is in 3rd gear and 12 is a short 2nd gear pull. I'm afraid to run it out any longer while staying stoich. I am willing to pay someone to help me troubleshoot this issue. I wish there was a dyno somewhere close to Little Rock AR, but I can't seem to find one. I am willing to tow it somewhere to get this sorted out.

[engineermike]

I've run across this and what I've found is:

1. Sometimes ECM 44422 can cause that.
2. Sometimes pedal oscillation right before WOP will cause a PE delay. I haven't found a tuning solution for this, just to make sure to make a clean hit.
3. Sometimes raising 44780 to some very high number can fix this problem.
4. Log both pedal position sensors to make sure they agree and both exceed the threshold.

Also, this is an NA coyote. It can run stoich all day long safely as long as the tune is set up right. ECM 44585 appears to have been gutted in your tune and you turned off all the exhaust temp protections, so your tune isn't set up for it but the stock ones are.

[Advobeast]

I've run across this and what I've found is:

1. Sometimes ECM 44422 can cause that.
2. Sometimes pedal oscillation right before WOP will cause a PE delay. I haven't found a tuning solution for this, just to make sure to make a clean hit.
3. Sometimes raising 44780 to some very high number can fix this problem.
4. Log both pedal position sensors to make sure they agree and both exceed the threshold.

Also, this is an NA coyote. It can run stoich all day long safely as long as the tune is set up right. ECM 44585 appears to have been gutted in your tune and you turned off all the exhaust temp protections, so your tune isn't set up for it but the stock ones are.

Thanks so much! I will look at all of this. I modified 44585 based on The Tuning School recommendations. Same as all the temp protections. Do you recommend that I set that all back?

Do you suggest trying to enable 44422? This is supposed to prevent it from going OP if PE doesn't occur?

As long as the AF is safe, I will try and run it out a little further. I'll go ahead and a add a few percent to the MAF so that the STFT are subtracting at WOT just to be safe.

[engineermike]

Thanks so much! I will look at all of this. I modified 44585 based on The Tuning School recommendations. Same as all the temp protections. Do you recommend that I set that all back?

Do you suggest trying to enable 44422? This is supposed to prevent it from going OP if PE doesn't occur?

Read those books with a critical eye. There is lots of bad advice in there. Why wouldn't you want it to pull timing when it inadvertently commands lean at WOT? I actually do the opposite and amplify the effect and it's saved my engine once or twice in situations similar to yours.

For 44422, you can try it either way and see if it helps any. It just takes a minute to rule out.

[Advobeast]

Read those books with a critical eye. There is lots of bad advice in there. Why wouldn't you want it to pull timing when it inadvertently commands lean at WOT? I actually do the opposite and amplify the effect and it's saved my engine once or twice in situations similar to yours.

For 44422, you can try it either way and see if it helps any. It just takes a minute to rule out.

Well....44422 does exactly what it says! Would not go into OP or PE. I am configuring another PCM and will give that a try tomorrow. BTW, I set 44585 back to factory. I noticed that it was pulling timing when at WOT. Good thing!

[Advobeast]

Tried another PCM. Did not go into PE. Turned Torque Module Switch off for grins. Idled horrible and did not go into PE. Only thing I can think of is that tuning off IMRC and modifying Distance Tables has some effect on this?

[JLawson240]

This may be left field but I can't help but notice the MAF vs. Voltage table has been modified and the curve a bit wonky. MAF calibration should not involve that table, and I'm wondering if the PCM is hating life because of that table being modified and just won't go into PE. I could be wrong, but all I know is these computers go bonkers if things that shouldn't be changed are off...

[engineermike]

Did you ever log both pedal position sensors?

Did you ever try raising 44870?

[Rob@HPTuners]

Advobeast, you still have is set for only at 6500 to go into WOT, rescale the column from 1000-8000 or something in table 32732 right now it's only going to go in at 60% and 6500 rpm

Maybe not helpful to the situation, but I wanted to clarify that this is not how table lookups work. When your primary axis is set like this, it basically turns the table into a 1D scalar, meaning the return value will always be 60%.

[Advobeast]

Did you ever log both pedal position sensors?

Did you ever try raising 44870?

I did look at both in past scans. I removed a few PIDS on the latter scans because I had so many on there. I did raise 44870 to like 15000. I also tried lowering the pedal to 60% for PE (again).

[Advobeast]

This may be left field but I can't help but notice the MAF vs. Voltage table has been modified and the curve a bit wonky. MAF calibration should not involve that table, and I'm wondering if the PCM is hating life because of that table being modified and just won't go into PE. I could be wrong, but all I know is these computers go bonkers if things that shouldn't be changed are off...

I will look at this again tonight. I have compared this file to a couple of other factory calibrations. Sometimes the "show differences" don't show all the tables because of the different OS or strategy. I couild have missed this. I have a stock 15, 16, and 17 that I am using. What were you using to compare?

Thanks!

[Advobeast]

Maybe not helpful to the situation, but I wanted to clarify that this is not how table lookups work. When your primary axis is set like this, it basically turns the table into a 1D scalar, meaning the return value will always be 60%.

Thank you for explaining this!

[JLawson240]

Stock 17 GT

[Advobeast]

I don't know if this is right, but turning off CLIP/ADD (3334) allowed it to finally go into PE.

[engineermike]

That’s bizarre but thanks for posting the resolution.

[smithspeed]

interesting, because the tuning class I took said to change it on a f150 and works perfectly now on my truck.

[smithspeed]

Maybe not helpful to the situation, but I wanted to clarify that this is not how table lookups work. When your primary axis is set like this, it basically turns the table into a 1D scalar, meaning the return value will always be 60%.

interesting because the tuning class I took said to change it, and it works perfectly on my f150 since the changes were made. Truck makes 1200whp on a twin turbo setup.