Pass the marshmellows yo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

 

Humpin, how do you blow motors and burn pistons with a ve table like mine and averages such as these???? This is with a commanded AFR of 13.0. Seems my spikey graph does the trick. The KR table and Timing table are shown with max values.

 

Yup, a few times. VE tables are nothing lumpy anywhere, its just not how an engine operates period. My grandmother drove her 02 around for 3 weeks, never had a MAF on it, she never noticed. Done it right is an arbitrary word. Im not sure anyone here has done it "right" Magnus car is fast with an SD tune, not just dyno numbers, but under actual operating conditions it performs.

Id really like to see some of the guys saying there is a right and wrong this or that and see what they have actually accomplished besides "getting their ltrims right" or "nailing their VE table" I commend you guys on taking a deeper look at things, but if you want to get very precise, VE tables just dont work like that. I was under the assumption that you guys didnt want to let your O2s correct for your part throttle fuel mixture you want to dial everything in to a T so the PCM doesnt have any corrections to do, trims are 0 etc. Well if your leaving the VE table to be interpolated by the PCM then your doing the same thing.

in this same respect in the beginning of the professional tuner BS post... people said oh the injector constants arent stock, thats horrible! No, its not ACTUALLY whats in the car, but apparently it was used to richen up the car everywhere. Your unstable VE table, is NOT WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE CAR, period. You can ask magnus that, and he will tell you no motor on earth has an operating VE like that, at least not one that functions.

The fact that GM set up everything to interpolate between cells, probably is helping you guys out with the peaks/valleys. But in the other post the end result wasnt of concern the data "had" to be correctly reflecting exactly what was in the motor (stock inj should have stock inj flow rates, stock mafs stock maf tables etc)

Your wideband will report in much the same way with a bit of interpolation. Car might momentarily command a much shorter puslewidth but youll never pick it up on your wideband, it will be diluted with the spent exhaust gases combusted before and after

Uhh 11 degree of overlap isnt much at all?

 

Luckily NA motors at low compression ratios are very forgiving. Takes a long time to get EGTs up or to spike cylinder pressures wheres its dangerous, hence why I said FI cars Hey why dont we talk about something relevant to what was said?

Blakc02SS, what is your fuel mileage with what cam, gears, compression and transmission?

 

Those are some bold comments when there are step by step tuning guides to dialing in the ve table in SD mode that are stickied at the HPTuners website. I guess since your Grandmas car ran fine (just like everyone elses in here) you know what you are doing . Did you see the stock GTS tune i posted quite lumpy if you ask me. You think GM would do that from the factory knowing they wouldve had to fix a cooked piston, or did you just skip past that whole post? You will start a riot in here if you keep telling all these guys that their tables arent real and THEY are the ones extracting the data and making changes from data aquired from the SCANNING TOOLS they have been provided with. Most of the guy here tuning these cars ARE CAMMED CARS (not that it makes too much of a difference) Mangus's car IIRC is a stock internal bolt on car who doesnt have to deal with a lot of the reversion and a few other contributing factors with his tune. He doesnt have to worry about idle and all the stuff because it is pretty much allready dialed in. All he cares about is WOT and at 2900 lbs he WILL be fast. Hats off to him.....


I can speak for me and Black02SS since we have been talking about this for a long time now. Our cars are dialed in Open loop operation. There isnt any trim to account for. The people that are concenred about the TRIMS are the guy that dont have a WB and are still running NBO2. IF what they want to do is get their trims in line and do it right (ve) instead of IFR and MAF then so be it. The IFR table makes gross changes to ALL the fueling tables so it has been abandoned so to speak. These guys are dialing in their ve tables so when they SAY 1.13 in the PE table they actually get 12.96:1 not let me just put 1.38 and hope that is 13:1 because if i dont have a WB then i wont know. They are doing it right according to how the pcm uses that table and the information provided in it. I dont see anything wrong with that and if you argue with a know constant as opposed to some arbitrary number used for fueling I feel sorry for ya.

Everyone understands why it was done most just disagree with this method as there are cleaner more efficient ways to richen up the car. Aside from the fact the tuner has now skewed every fueling table in the PCM. There have been plenty posts stating if your injectors havent been changed leave that table alone and richen the car up in a cleaner, more effiicient fashion.

IT is IF THOSE CELLS HAVENT BEEN TOUCHED through driving and logging the car. Like I said in previous posts (you mustve missed it) the graph is smooth for the data points that were touched, all the surrounding areas either werent hit while driving or were decel. Question if i have a dip/peak at 6000@15-40 kpa is my car gonna blow up when it idles at 50kpa and better. I dont think so. After 4k most of the cells hit will be in the 80-105 KPA range all the other cells above that wont be touched hence the spikes and the dips. Its a no brainer.....

You are right we are dealing with averages of the data. The minute change is small enough that it wont matter....

Its more than the 226 cam and supposedly get worse gas mileage...

 

The whole point of all this SD tuning via the ve table and the maf table is so anyone that TUNES their own car knows at all time that commanded =actual. That is it. If 14.7/1.13=12.96 (my method 2+2=4) dammit i want to see that on my wideband. Not 14.7/1.38=10.6:1 and hope and pray i am somwhere close to 13:1 (your method 2+2=5).

As a coder you dont want to code ANYTHING that the next person wont understand. That is a good way to lose your job. It has to be clear, concise and right or else you will have a hard time explaining to upper mamagement your method to the maddness. Your team may have to go behind your work to correct somethign you did and if they dont understand what is going on because it is unclear you are costing your company man hours and in the end $$$$. First for having to deciphering the mess and then actually fixing it...

 

Highway I average about 29mpg. 10.8:1, 93 oct, 4.11's through my 12 bolt. If this is not what my car is wanting, then why does tuners histogram say it is???

When you tune a car for open loop, do you adjust the IFR table and such to make the table nice and smooth?

Would you mind sending me a tune that you have done in Open loop with a nice smooth VE table and a log that I can compare to?

 

After hand smoothing my table is made blanket like, very very smooth and as far as commanded AFR, I'm right on with what theroy suggests... when i command 1.13 I get my ~13.0. BTW my table was a bit more rough when i started tuning, and my driveability on the cam sucked ***. After smoothing things out down low, where fueling can be very sensitive it cleaned up 75% of my driving problems.

Maybe it's just me but it feels like I'm getting some very negative responses from you and Humpin... My intention was not to start any drama here, but simply to just to add to discussion. So you're saying that your table runs fine with all the peaks and dips in it and also that the AFR production is clean too. Something I've found out on other setups is that the wideband can't just be totally trusted due to large cam overlap and such. I would say to smooth around what generally looks like the shape your VE is forming to. Perhaps all the peaks and whatnot won't kill your fueling, but just seems odd that your EFI system would be stabbing around at different extremes like that. If it works for you, and your happy then cool, I know you were quoting Granny, but like said before, just trying to contribute to discussion.

 

No offense was intended. I like you, am just trying to get a better idea and understanding. My drivability on my car is wonderful. No delays or dead spots. If we can't rely on a wideband to give us accurate data, then what do we do??

If you look at the historgram and such, I am not receiving any KR and my AFR is almost spot on.

 

Does anyone have a bin/log file that they would mind sharing in Open Loop that I can ponder over that has a nice smooth VE table??

 

I did see that... Like I said, it's a mystery to me how that's works for you. I do know at least for me though, when my VE wasn't smooth I had hesitations and lots of surging/bucking down low. "Another User" and I were discussing once upon a time that either just do the absolute best you can with a wideband, or if you really had patience you could use a CO analyzer. There will be large general areas of the VE that produce correct AFR data (we know this since it's fairly consistent in a large range of data) and I always try to smooth the table into those, since the "general area" likes that reference, it only makes sense to push it that direction. Like if you have a flat area with a gigantic peak in the middle of the VE, I doubt the PCM really references that exact peak, as the surrounding flat will sort of "pull" and anchor the reference towards the generality... who knows?

 

what's yer e-mail?

 

I might have already asked this, but did you alter your ifr table to achieve the smoothed ve??

 

Black02ss@ls2.com
Also send it to black02ss@gmail.com if you don't mind.

 

no siree, all VE tuning here, stock IFRs for 26#ers on the 2000

 

need to switch to laptop BRB, if you have IM: TXHorns281

 

unfortunately I am trying to do this here at work.. So I will have to hit you up on AIM when I get home. I knew your name looked fimilar. You are already on my buddy list.

 

I have to run guys. I'll check back in after 3pm EST

 

No one was ragging on you these posts were in rebuttal to Granny and questions for Keith. If you go back and re-read what has been typed tyou will see we are asking questions and backing up our claims. We defiantely arent baggin on anyone that has a smooth or spikey ve table and I damn sure didnt discredit anyones table for looking smooth or not looking like mine. Granny stated that "there isnt a ve table in the thread that looks real" because they arent smooth. I just want to get to the bottom of the benifits of smoothing for the cells I wont use. As stated previously the spikes and dips you see are cells that arent used anyway, I am pretty sure if my drving habits changed and they were touched the table would prolly look a lot like the smoother tables out there. Black02SS's table is smooth where he has collected good data points. When my car ran (broken rear) my table was smooth for the cells i collected data for the other cells well you know the rest of the story...... Carry on....

 

thanks for your response, sometimes it's hard to tell what people's intentions are just by reading text. In any case, I tried to cover my whole histogram while tuning for a "just in case" approach. I know that smoothing the curve out on top end, low MAP seems silly since you NEVER do any driving there, and i was thinkng about when i drop gears to get ready for a quick race or something, I know that it 2nd gear I can be at 4-5K sometimes and only at moderate TPS. I'd be willing to share me BIN and LOG file with you too to give you an example of the way I ended up tuning, it actually worked out quite well according to theory as well!