SD tuning for elevation (question)
sensor, and not matter (provided that the airflow
is properly / sensibly calibrated past the highest
air pressure you will see). So tuning at sea level
should cover things (provided the tuner tunes airflow
and doesn't just slap more fuel on it to get the "right
answer" on the dyno).
Last edited by The Fugitive; Nov 4, 2009 at 11:44 PM. Reason: spelling
Trending Topics
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
If you run SD exclusively, it is true that the MAP changes due to elevation will normally handle altitude changes. The primary issue is that your airflow table (VE) needs to be highly accurate. I think it is the interplay between the MAP change with elevation and how frequently the PCM does its BARO update. In other words I have done a 6000' climb..MAP falls as anticipated with elevation..pull over..turn off car..watch how the new BARO update affects the new MAP. MAP usually falls even more..which affects fueling.
I have had better luck running closed-loop on big elevation climbs. My Trims definitely fluctuate more on those runs. I may not be doing the best job explaining what is happening, other than saying I have seen it now about a dozen times.
I have settled just using a MAF/SD hybrid closed-loop. But the point is that the VE Table needs to be 100% accurate, or one would anticipate that the Trims would show little to no variance.
Can you tolerate running a closed-loop SD tune for a while until you see what effect the elevation change has?
Hope that helps. Just sharing my high-altitude experience. Yours or others may be totally different.
Good luck..
..WeathermanShawn..
If you run SD exclusively, it is true that the MAP changes due to elevation will normally handle altitude changes. The primary issue is that your airflow table (VE) needs to be highly accurate. I think it is the interplay between the MAP change with elevation and how frequently the PCM does its BARO update. In other words I have done a 6000' climb..MAP falls as anticipated with elevation..pull over..turn off car..watch how the new BARO update affects the new MAP. MAP usually falls even more..which affects fueling.
I have had better luck running closed-loop on big elevation climbs. My Trims definitely fluctuate more on those runs. I may not be doing the best job explaining what is happening, other than saying I have seen it now about a dozen times.
I have settled just using a MAF/SD hybrid closed-loop. But the point is that the VE Table needs to be 100% accurate, or one would anticipate that the Trims would show little to no variance.
Can you tolerate running a closed-loop SD tune for a while until you see what effect the elevation change has?
Hope that helps. Just sharing my high-altitude experience. Yours or others may be totally different.
Good luck..
..WeathermanShawn..
I have done a few higher elevation logs where I lowered the 'RPM Threshold for Airflow Calculation' to 2000 RPM's. I kept it in closed-loop. As I recall trying to do primarily MAF during rapid elevation changes suffered from the same peculiarities as did 'SD' only. 3rd or 4th gear at times would produce identical MAf frequencies..but would result in widely differing Trim Values.
Let me be clear. In no way was I indicating trying to do MAF only was superior to running SD. I think it has to do with the nature of the PCM's BARO update parameters and the BARO offset (assumes linear drop of pressure with altitude). Nothing is perfect.
I am just sharing that I have had better luck keeping it closed-loop with elevation changes. My O2's are healthy enough (with headers) to properly Trim to ~14.7 AFR..which I have logged with a wideband.
Since the OP was concerned about an initial tune at Elevation A, then driving to Elevation B..my only suggestion was to keep Trims active. It would then be easy for him/her to go open-loop at any time. Trims are just a sanity check.
Ultimately Macca, my greater point is that the 'Ideal Gas Law' is just that..Ideal. Both MAF or SD have peculiarities with elevation changes in my experiences. But it still remain opinion. It would take some serious engineering work to prove it.
Hope that clarifies.
Good luck to the OP.
..WeathermanShawn..
I have done a few higher elevation logs where I lowered the 'RPM Threshold for Airflow Calculation' to 2000 RPM's. I kept it in closed-loop. As I recall trying to do primarily MAF during rapid elevation changes suffered from the same peculiarities as did 'SD' only. 3rd or 4th gear at times would produce identical MAf frequencies..but would result in widely differing Trim Values.
Let me be clear. In no way was I indicating trying to do MAF only was superior to running SD. I think it has to do with the nature of the PCM's BARO update parameters and the BARO offset (assumes linear drop of pressure with altitude). Nothing is perfect.
I am just sharing that I have had better luck keeping it closed-loop with elevation changes. My O2's are healthy enough (with headers) to properly Trim to ~14.7 AFR..which I have logged with a wideband.
Since the OP was concerned about an initial tune at Elevation A, then driving to Elevation B..my only suggestion was to keep Trims active. It would then be easy for him/her to go open-loop at any time. Trims are just a sanity check.
Ultimately Macca, my greater point is that the 'Ideal Gas Law' is just that..Ideal. Both MAF or SD have peculiarities with elevation changes in my experiences. But it still remain opinion. It would take some serious engineering work to prove it.
Hope that clarifies.
Good luck to the OP.
..WeathermanShawn..
It all depends on how much reversion your cam has. Some people with a lot of cam reversion prefer open-loop (bypass O2's). But since many, many cars successfully run SD, and if that is your preference..I think it would make sense to keep the car in closed-loop using the feedback from the O2 sensors.
If in the future you have some tuning software it would be very easy to check your Trims..and if you prefer open-loop..would be very easy to do.
Yes, my suggestion is to keep it closed-loop (with O2's).
Let us know how it goes.
..WeathermanShawn..
Ricks tuned plenty of cars that make good power with a MAF on them. I vote use a MAF but that's where my experience has led me.
Ricks tuned plenty of cars that make good power with a MAF on them. I vote use a MAF but that's where my experience has led me.




