Logging VE's
Logging VE's I set up a calculated pid in EFI by using EFI's formula times 30. It works correctly but is it correct? Is it correct to use 30?
When I compare the logged values to the Edit chart, at low RPM's Edit is higher,
at mid RPM's the values match and at high RPM's Edit is low.
I would think the programmed values should match the scanned values.
Any ideas?
When I compare the logged values to the Edit chart, at low RPM's Edit is higher,
at mid RPM's the values match and at high RPM's Edit is low.
I would think the programmed values should match the scanned values.
Any ideas?
The programmed values are my adjusted numbers.
If what you say about actual vs programmed values is right, then, no matter what I input nothing would change. That's what I'm not getting.
If what you say about actual vs programmed values is right, then, no matter what I input nothing would change. That's what I'm not getting.
TECH Addict
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by gojo
The programmed values are my adjusted numbers.
If what you say about actual vs programmed values is right, then, no matter what I input nothing would change. That's what I'm not getting.
If what you say about actual vs programmed values is right, then, no matter what I input nothing would change. That's what I'm not getting.
"EFILive VE values" = Scanned Values you recorded
How do the "Stock VE Values" compare to the "EFILive VE values"?
joel
Joel,
This is what the logs showed with EFI vs Edit file.
"When I compare the logged values to the Edit chart, at low RPM's Edit is higher,
at mid RPM's the values match and at high RPM's Edit is low.
I would think the programmed values should match the scanned values."
Decided to play around. I changed the values in Edit by the % difference from programmed vs scanned.
I realize it's too soon and I didn't have time for much scanning, but up to
6000 rpm's the values got pretty close to what is now programmed(did not scan over 6000).
The LTrims got closer to 0(now at 0 to -4). At WOT the AFR is leaner by 5%. I had changed the upper rpm VE's by 10%.
SOP at part throttle is more peppy.
Does this make sense?
Joe
This is what the logs showed with EFI vs Edit file.
"When I compare the logged values to the Edit chart, at low RPM's Edit is higher,
at mid RPM's the values match and at high RPM's Edit is low.
I would think the programmed values should match the scanned values."
Decided to play around. I changed the values in Edit by the % difference from programmed vs scanned.
I realize it's too soon and I didn't have time for much scanning, but up to
6000 rpm's the values got pretty close to what is now programmed(did not scan over 6000).
The LTrims got closer to 0(now at 0 to -4). At WOT the AFR is leaner by 5%. I had changed the upper rpm VE's by 10%.
SOP at part throttle is more peppy.
Does this make sense?
Joe
Last edited by gojo; Nov 22, 2003 at 09:47 PM.
TECH Addict
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by gojo
Joel,
This is what the logs showed with EFI vs Edit file.
"When I compare the logged values to the Edit chart, at low RPM's Edit is higher,
at mid RPM's the values match and at high RPM's Edit is low.
I would think the programmed values should match the scanned values."
Decided to play around. I changed the values in Edit by the % difference from programmed vs scanned.
I realize it's too soon and I didn't have time for much scanning, but up to
6000 rpm's the values got pretty close to what is now programmed(did not scan over 6000).
The LTrims got closer to 0(now at 0 to -4). At WOT the AFR is leaner by 5%. I had changed the upper rpm VE's by 10%.
SOP at part throttle is more peppy.
Does this make sense?
Joe
This is what the logs showed with EFI vs Edit file.
"When I compare the logged values to the Edit chart, at low RPM's Edit is higher,
at mid RPM's the values match and at high RPM's Edit is low.
I would think the programmed values should match the scanned values."
Decided to play around. I changed the values in Edit by the % difference from programmed vs scanned.
I realize it's too soon and I didn't have time for much scanning, but up to
6000 rpm's the values got pretty close to what is now programmed(did not scan over 6000).
The LTrims got closer to 0(now at 0 to -4). At WOT the AFR is leaner by 5%. I had changed the upper rpm VE's by 10%.
SOP at part throttle is more peppy.
Does this make sense?
Joe
Either way...it worked!!!!! You would expect EFILive VE logged value to be lower than your Stock VE Values due to your cam's narrower LSA (Than stock LSA). Z06 heads are more efficient so you would expect greater Efficiency in upper RPM ranges. The cam also increases the efficiency in upper RPM range.
NoGo said VE Tuning ( i.e correct values via EFILive VE) would help with part throttle fueling and WOT.
Seems like it all makes sense. Congrats!!
Thanks for the update. Keep us posted.
joel
Originally Posted by binksz06
I'm not sure why you used a percent? Did you multiply VE by 30?
Either way...it worked!!!!! You would expect EFILive VE logged value to be lower than your Stock VE Values due to your cam's narrower LSA (Than stock LSA). Z06 heads are more efficient so you would expect greater Efficiency in upper RPM ranges. The cam also increases the efficiency in upper RPM range.
NoGo said VE Tuning ( i.e correct values via EFILive VE) would help with part throttle fueling and WOT.
Seems like it all makes sense. Congrats!!
Thanks for the update. Keep us posted.
joel
Either way...it worked!!!!! You would expect EFILive VE logged value to be lower than your Stock VE Values due to your cam's narrower LSA (Than stock LSA). Z06 heads are more efficient so you would expect greater Efficiency in upper RPM ranges. The cam also increases the efficiency in upper RPM range.
NoGo said VE Tuning ( i.e correct values via EFILive VE) would help with part throttle fueling and WOT.
Seems like it all makes sense. Congrats!!
Thanks for the update. Keep us posted.
joel
I took the % difference between logged values and Edit values. I used those %'s, as the multiplier, by rpm line. They worked pretty well.
I need a lot more scanning to hit all or many more map/rpm's cells to determine the effect across the board.
