FTC boundaries wtf?
06-23-2004, 12:45 PM
#1
FTC boundaries wtf? So I am trying to get my ltft's to zero out so i can go tune wot on the dyno, and most of the time they are close to zero but at wot they go to like 6% and 9%. So i look and i am transitioning to wot in fuel trim cell 12 even though i am at like 3000 rpm so it should be FTC 15. So I look at my FTC boundaries and it says:
Low 2500
Mid 6502
High 6503
Now this doesn't make sense to me after looking at the FTC matrix picture. What does everybody else have for their boundaries? Is this a result of a botched predator tune or something (I bought the car used)?
Low 2500
Mid 6502
High 6503
Now this doesn't make sense to me after looking at the FTC matrix picture. What does everybody else have for their boundaries? Is this a result of a botched predator tune or something (I bought the car used)?
06-23-2004, 01:02 PM
#2
TECH Resident
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just because the RPMs is at 3,000 does not mean it would be cell 15,
for it also depends on what MAP is at.
as to stock values :
low 900 370
med 1400 570
high 2200 770 as seen via LS1edit
for it also depends on what MAP is at.
as to stock values :
low 900 370
med 1400 570
high 2200 770 as seen via LS1edit
06-23-2004, 01:17 PM
#4
Moderator
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 12,605
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
The late F-bodies have the kooky values as described.
It seems to be unique to those models. Nobody knows
why, who's talking. Have yet to hear from anyone who
has made them more sane (like the 'Vette boundaries)
about plusses or minuses from doing so.
It seems to be unique to those models. Nobody knows
why, who's talking. Have yet to hear from anyone who
has made them more sane (like the 'Vette boundaries)
about plusses or minuses from doing so.
06-23-2004, 02:16 PM
#5
TECH Resident
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well if his car is a 2000 the stock values is what I posted.
Starting in 02 th F body had those different values where even a 04 Z06 still uses the same values as all older model years.
Starting in 02 th F body had those different values where even a 04 Z06 still uses the same values as all older model years.
06-23-2004, 03:09 PM
#6
Moderator
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 12,605
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Originally Posted by Team ZR-1
Well if his car is a 2000 the stock values is what I posted.
Starting in 02 th F body had those different values where even a 04 Z06 still uses the same values as all older model years.
Starting in 02 th F body had those different values where even a 04 Z06 still uses the same values as all older model years.
F-body guys reporting the same (jacked up) RPM
boundaries. Perhaps there was an OS transition
or a cal data revision somewhere in '00?
Trending Topics
06-23-2004, 03:47 PM
#8
TECH Resident
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I checked about 20 Y body of all MY and all have the lower values
I checked 20 F body and only 4 had the higher values.
What was common is those with the higher values have a newer GM flash (updates) starting with a "D" broadcast code and those starting with a "C" use the same values as all Y body models.
I checked 20 F body and only 4 had the higher values.
What was common is those with the higher values have a newer GM flash (updates) starting with a "D" broadcast code and those starting with a "C" use the same values as all Y body models.
06-23-2004, 03:48 PM
#9
TECH Addict
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wish we knew more about what they did. I am toying with mine a little. I am going to raise my low-end from 900 to 1000. Whatever they do, I can't imagine having the boundary for fuel trims directly on my idle speed is any good...
06-23-2004, 06:35 PM
#10
My updated GM flash ('01 F-Body) had the whacky values, I copied the values from an '02 Vette bin and no problems. Plenty of FTCs in play while driving now, LTFT values are more stable, car's a happy camper.
06-23-2004, 07:15 PM
#11
TECH Addict
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by crainholio
My updated GM flash ('01 F-Body) had the whacky values, I copied the values from an '02 Vette bin and no problems. Plenty of FTCs in play while driving now, LTFT values are more stable, car's a happy camper.
06-26-2004, 04:11 AM
#13
On The Tree
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Team ZR-1
Well if his car is a 2000 the stock values is what I posted.
Starting in 02 th F body had those different values where even a 04 Z06 still uses the same values as all older model years.
Starting in 02 th F body had those different values where even a 04 Z06 still uses the same values as all older model years.
Low - 2500
Med - 6502
High - 6503
2001 Camaro - O.S# 12212156(DJZS), Engine Seg# 9358576
Low - 2500
Med - 6502
High - 6503
Can you confirm for everyone if the 2000 CYCB Camaro cal was the silly one?.
06-26-2004, 06:42 AM
#14
TECH Regular
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there any correlation between fuel trim cell boundaries and the type of transmission in the car? Would it make sense to arrange the trim cells differently for auto vs. manual trans?
06-26-2004, 09:32 AM
#15
TECH Addict
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would love to know what they do. I wouldn't be surprised if it was not some way for GM to detune the Camaro. Has anybody got the table from a stock regular Corvette (non-Z06)? That would be interesting to compare.
06-26-2004, 09:56 AM
#16
TECH Resident
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by deezel
Is there any correlation between fuel trim cell boundaries and the type of transmission in the car? Would it make sense to arrange the trim cells differently for auto vs. manual trans?
It did not make any difference if it is a Camaro or Firebird, if the broadcast starts with a "D" then it has the funky values.
06-26-2004, 10:03 AM
#17
TECH Resident
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fetumpsh
2000 Camaro - O.S# 9381344(DANW), Engine Seg# 9357638
Low - 2500
Med - 6502
High - 6503
2001 Camaro - O.S# 12212156(DJZS), Engine Seg# 9358576
Low - 2500
Med - 6502
High - 6503
Can you confirm for everyone if the 2000 CYCB Camaro cal was the silly one?.
Low - 2500
Med - 6502
High - 6503
2001 Camaro - O.S# 12212156(DJZS), Engine Seg# 9358576
Low - 2500
Med - 6502
High - 6503
Can you confirm for everyone if the 2000 CYCB Camaro cal was the silly one?.
Corvette Broadcast Code ID = CYUA
Year = 2000
Engine = LS1 5.7 Liter
Vin = 1G1YY22G9Y51057
Segment 1 = 9381344
Segment 2 = 16263726
Segment 3 = 9357961
Segment 4 = 16264197
Segment 5 = 16264351
Segment 6 = 16264569
Segment 7 = 16264757
Segment 8 = 9359158
Transmission = M6
Trans Type = 56
TCC Lock during SHift = 0
--------------------------------- HAS :
L - 900 370
M - 1400 570
H - 2200 770
