Segment swap for timing under boost. Possible?
Segment swap for timing under boost. Possible? I posted this in the GTO forum too... but maybe I'll have better luck here....
P59 ecm, 2004 cable drive GTO
I'm sick and tired of having to deal with a 50% scaled tune to be able to (sort of) control timing under boost. I lose all my resolution in my timing table and the timing under boost is not consistent. If course I have a Custom operating system for a 3 bar map, but it only controls fueling under boost, which I'm not using that anyways...I just used the VE table. Are there any options for timing control/retard under boost? Segment swapping? (which I've never done)
Heck I'd rather have the drive by wire setup too..
P59 ecm, 2004 cable drive GTO
I'm sick and tired of having to deal with a 50% scaled tune to be able to (sort of) control timing under boost. I lose all my resolution in my timing table and the timing under boost is not consistent. If course I have a Custom operating system for a 3 bar map, but it only controls fueling under boost, which I'm not using that anyways...I just used the VE table. Are there any options for timing control/retard under boost? Segment swapping? (which I've never done)
Heck I'd rather have the drive by wire setup too..
There is something you can try. You can put a slightly different PE value under your boost enrichment tables than your normal PE tables. IF this table always works properly under boost (I would suggest some serious logging to make sure), then you can use the AFR spark modifier table to pull spark from your main table when it hits that amount of PE. The only reason I hesitate to do this is that there have been some reports on the HPT forums of the boost enrich table lagging behind what the car is actually doing on some operating systems. This could be a particular problem if you had to pedal in and out of boost and your PE did not immediately change, therefore not triggering your spark to drop. If logging shows that the table works properly, then it is the perfect solution. I just never bothered to try it.
I've never had a problem with cars making 1200+ rwhp and controlling timing appropriately, with and without scaled tunes. Timing under boost should not be affected or be inconsistent. The lost resolution certainly isn't the end of the world since it interpolates and I'm usually cutting timing down well before peak/max airflow in the tables anyways. You do not want DBW especially with a Gen3 PCM, TAC modules and everything are starting to fail on a lot of these vehicles and it's just something to complicate it with no benefit what so ever.
EFI Live has a custom OS that has a Boost Spark Modifier table that allowed you to pull timing vs MAP, but without an RPM axis it's limited in use and I wouldn't use it anyways as its kind of redundant. OS ID 4110003, HP Tuners will let you edit it and work with it but you will have to relicense the computer with it. If you really want it I can email it to you, but I wouldn't recommend using it anyways.
Otherwise if you really want more granular control it's probably time to put a standalone on the vehicle like a Haltech, their new Rebel LS is really nice for the price.
EFI Live has a custom OS that has a Boost Spark Modifier table that allowed you to pull timing vs MAP, but without an RPM axis it's limited in use and I wouldn't use it anyways as its kind of redundant. OS ID 4110003, HP Tuners will let you edit it and work with it but you will have to relicense the computer with it. If you really want it I can email it to you, but I wouldn't recommend using it anyways.
Otherwise if you really want more granular control it's probably time to put a standalone on the vehicle like a Haltech, their new Rebel LS is really nice for the price.
There is something you can try. You can put a slightly different PE value under your boost enrichment tables than your normal PE tables. IF this table always works properly under boost (I would suggest some serious logging to make sure), then you can use the AFR spark modifier table to pull spark from your main table when it hits that amount of PE. The only reason I hesitate to do this is that there have been some reports on the HPT forums of the boost enrich table lagging behind what the car is actually doing on some operating systems. This could be a particular problem if you had to pedal in and out of boost and your PE did not immediately change, therefore not triggering your spark to drop. If logging shows that the table works properly, then it is the perfect solution. I just never bothered to try it.
There is something you can try. You can put a slightly different PE value under your boost enrichment tables than your normal PE tables. IF this table always works properly under boost (I would suggest some serious logging to make sure), then you can use the AFR spark modifier table to pull spark from your main table when it hits that amount of PE. The only reason I hesitate to do this is that there have been some reports on the HPT forums of the boost enrich table lagging behind what the car is actually doing on some operating systems. This could be a particular problem if you had to pedal in and out of boost and your PE did not immediately change, therefore not triggering your spark to drop. If logging shows that the table works properly, then it is the perfect solution. I just never bothered to try it.
I've never had a problem with cars making 1200+ rwhp and controlling timing appropriately, with and without scaled tunes. Timing under boost should not be affected or be inconsistent. The lost resolution certainly isn't the end of the world since it interpolates and I'm usually cutting timing down well before peak/max airflow in the tables anyways. You do not want DBW especially with a Gen3 PCM, TAC modules and everything are starting to fail on a lot of these vehicles and it's just something to complicate it with no benefit what so ever.
EFI Live has a custom OS that has a Boost Spark Modifier table that allowed you to pull timing vs MAP, but without an RPM axis it's limited in use and I wouldn't use it anyways as its kind of redundant. OS ID 4110003, HP Tuners will let you edit it and work with it but you will have to relicense the computer with it. If you really want it I can email it to you, but I wouldn't recommend using it anyways.
Otherwise if you really want more granular control it's probably time to put a standalone on the vehicle like a Haltech, their new Rebel LS is really nice for the price.
EFI Live has a custom OS that has a Boost Spark Modifier table that allowed you to pull timing vs MAP, but without an RPM axis it's limited in use and I wouldn't use it anyways as its kind of redundant. OS ID 4110003, HP Tuners will let you edit it and work with it but you will have to relicense the computer with it. If you really want it I can email it to you, but I wouldn't recommend using it anyways.
Otherwise if you really want more granular control it's probably time to put a standalone on the vehicle like a Haltech, their new Rebel LS is really nice for the price.
im kinda interested, but without rpm, hmmm…seems like it wouldn’t be very great. BUT, in my timing table, I don’t vary the timing very much in rpm anyways. I just kinda go up a tad bit after about 5500 rpm.
I wasn’t aware of the unreliability of the dbw, so I’ll skip that. I just know my sons 2004 Silverado with dbw was really easy to tune compared to my cable drive with crappy iac motor. And have you seen the price nowadays for the iac motors? Omg. They used to be under 50 bucks. Now they are $150 for a factory one.
I wasn’t aware of the unreliability of the dbw, so I’ll skip that. I just know my sons 2004 Silverado with dbw was really easy to tune compared to my cable drive with crappy iac motor. And have you seen the price nowadays for the iac motors? Omg. They used to be under 50 bucks. Now they are $150 for a factory one.
Trending Topics
If that's the case then what's the problem with running out of airflow in the timing table? In most tunes I'm already at my WOT timing by the time the table runs out anyways and I'm not making degree changes per psi of boost at that point regardless. Just kind of not necessary in most cases...
DBW is great and much faster than the old IAC motors, but there are downsides with the Gen3 electronics for sure.
DBW is great and much faster than the old IAC motors, but there are downsides with the Gen3 electronics for sure.
However, if I were to unscale it, then I lose a bunch of power in the midrange and when I have a different boost map enabled. This isn't a drag car with the sole intention of going fast as possible on every wot pull. I make more rips on 14 psi than I do on 24psi, I want full amount of timing and power at both boost levels. I don't like stressing things to the max on every rip. I really would like a proper boost-timing retard. I have a lingenfelter lnc-2000 installed that is capable of boost timing retard, but the true timing I'm getting will not show up in my logs so I wont know if **** went wrong until its too late. Plus I'd like to know where the timing actually is.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo However, if I were to unscale it, then I lose a bunch of power in the midrange and when I have a different boost map enabled. This isn't a drag car with the sole intention of going fast as possible on every wot pull. I make more rips on 14 psi than I do on 24psi, I want full amount of timing and power at both boost levels. I don't like stressing things to the max on every rip.
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Jul 2022
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 389
From: Alaska
.
I wondered about that.
BE is especially inconsistent.. Is your recommendation to SIMPLY massage VE table to desired AFR vs Manifold pressure curve, ignoring PE and BE modifiers ?
yuck!