I have attached a file of three PE tables. One is the factory setting for my Z06, one is from a tune done by LG, and the other is one that I came up with after reading some posts by various people on this site.

There is not one similarity between them. Is everyone doing this based off different theories, or is there a standard that I am missing? Don't get caught up in the numbers, as different engines like different numbers, but the trends should be the same. Shouldn't they?

Current
EQ ratio 1.17383 1.17383 1.17383 1.17383 1.17383 1.17383 1.17383 1.17383 1.17383 1.17383 1.17383 1.17188 1.16699 1.15625 1.14844 1.14648 1.14844 1.15723 1.17383
A/F ratio 12.50606987 12.50606987 12.50606987 12.50606987 12.50606987 12.50606987 12.50606987 12.50606987 12.50606987 12.50606987 12.50606987 12.52687989 12.57937086 12.69621622 12.78255721 12.80441002 12.78255721 12.68546443 12.50606987

OEM Z06
EQ ratio 1.20313 1.20313 1.20313 1.19727 1.19238 1.16699 1.16699 1.16309 1.16309 1.18945 1.21289 1.23535 1.23926 1.2373 1.21484 1.21191 1.21191 1.21191 1.21191
A/F ratio 12.20150773 12.20150773 12.20150773 12.26122763 12.31151143 12.57937086 12.57937086 12.62155121 12.62155121 12.34183866 12.10332347 11.88327195 11.84577893 11.86454376 12.08389582 12.11311071 12.11311071 12.11311071 12.11311071

LG Tune
EQ ratio 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871 1.17871
A/F ratio 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325 12.45429325




Please discuss...

Jeremy

EDIT: sorry, It's hard to read the table.

 

The LG tune has a little security cushion in there in case you're running a little lean one day, and it its set at an AFR that should produce good power.

The OEM PE is set ridiculously rich, as most OEM settings.

Your PE tune is more optimized for best power, but if your VE and/or MAF aren't calibrated right, you're running the chance of being leaner than what you're commanding. If you haven't verified your AFR's with a wideband, you're playing with fire.

 

I run a full time WB and gauge.

 

the pe table only tells part of the wot story...he could be running an actual of 11.0:1 or 14.0:1 again pe is only wishful thinking unless the other tables are accurate.

 

I have all my tables set as accurately as possible, no "trickery". On the last scan I did, my AFR error %'s were all less than 3.

 

good, then i would say yours is probably the best option of the three

 

I concur on the above.

If you get a chance at a few pulls on a dyno, make a couple spare tunes where you raise or lower your AFR by a couple tenths to see if you gain power by either fattening it up or leaning it out. Make your changes uniformly so you can see where you gain or lose power, or gain more or less power.

 

So you think I should just shift the whole curve up or down to find max power, but the shape is correct?

 

I think you should export the data from the dynograph so you can see what HP/TQ you make at each 400RPM interval. If its going up all the way across the board, change the numbers a little more in the same direction. Pay attention if you see one range of RPM not increasing, but another still increasing. Also pay attention to knock retard.

If you start seeing knock retard, back timing off in that range a little and see how the numbers go. Its just a cat and mouse game with dialing in the fine details like that, but there's more power to be had by doing it.

 

I used a wideband and a dyno to record where I made the best power and torque. For me it was not a flat line. Best torue was made at an AFR of 12.8:1 and best power at 12.3:1.

Maybe LG is using the B3605 MAP to set open loop AFR.

This is what my PE table looks like.