New thread for Speed Density tuning?...
#151
iTrader: (10)
^I had a setup like that on my 1G, its a bit much IMHO since I have a BBK w/stock size inlet. Cool as hell setup though, too bad I JUST sold my 4"-2.25" coupler FP sells with it
So, on the jitter thing, async TPS table doesn't seem to make a lick of difference for me, so I changed it back to stock. EGR Timing advance tables are now stock as well, and I also tried full-time open loop, as someone mentioned to me that getting the cruise AFR in the low 14's high 13's had helped for them. I tried afrs from 15.5 down to 12.9 w/o any difference (other than it smelled like gas a lot more LOL!).
Bump for anyone knowing if the MAF Scaling tables actually doing anything on this speed density patch.
So, on the jitter thing, async TPS table doesn't seem to make a lick of difference for me, so I changed it back to stock. EGR Timing advance tables are now stock as well, and I also tried full-time open loop, as someone mentioned to me that getting the cruise AFR in the low 14's high 13's had helped for them. I tried afrs from 15.5 down to 12.9 w/o any difference (other than it smelled like gas a lot more LOL!).
Bump for anyone knowing if the MAF Scaling tables actually doing anything on this speed density patch.
#153
^I had a setup like that on my 1G, its a bit much IMHO since I have a BBK w/stock size inlet. Cool as hell setup though, too bad I JUST sold my 4"-2.25" coupler FP sells with it
So, on the jitter thing, async TPS table doesn't seem to make a lick of difference for me, so I changed it back to stock. EGR Timing advance tables are now stock as well, and I also tried full-time open loop, as someone mentioned to me that getting the cruise AFR in the low 14's high 13's had helped for them. I tried afrs from 15.5 down to 12.9 w/o any difference (other than it smelled like gas a lot more LOL!).
Bump for anyone knowing if the MAF Scaling tables actually doing anything on this speed density patch.
So, on the jitter thing, async TPS table doesn't seem to make a lick of difference for me, so I changed it back to stock. EGR Timing advance tables are now stock as well, and I also tried full-time open loop, as someone mentioned to me that getting the cruise AFR in the low 14's high 13's had helped for them. I tried afrs from 15.5 down to 12.9 w/o any difference (other than it smelled like gas a lot more LOL!).
Bump for anyone knowing if the MAF Scaling tables actually doing anything on this speed density patch.
#162
So how exactly does the MAF smoothing table effect the IPW? I understand how the MAF compensation table works, but what exactly is the other one smoothing? I tried scaling the smoothing table once to see if it would run smoother with better trims, and the trims seemed to stay in check within the +/-5% range, but it also seemed to effect the stutter i.e. make it more prominent the more I changed the MAF curve.
#163
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (50)
So how exactly does the MAF smoothing table effect the IPW? I understand how the MAF compensation table works, but what exactly is the other one smoothing? I tried scaling the smoothing table once to see if it would run smoother with better trims, and the trims seemed to stay in check within the +/-5% range, but it also seemed to effect the stutter i.e. make it more prominent the more I changed the MAF curve.
IPW = MAFComp*MAFsmoothing*other_stuff
So, both tables will have the same effect on IPW. Why two tables? I think the MAF compensation table sets the ideal relationship between MAF Hz and airflow while the "MAF smoothing" table is meant to be trim adjustment, and is not a smoothing table at all.
Last edited by mrfred; Nov 24, 2009 at 11:17 PM.
#164
iTrader: (10)
I've been thinking for a while about how to make sense of these tables. The code says that both tables do a lookup vs MAF Hz, and the lookups are both scaling factors for the IPW calculation, i.e.,
IPW = MAFComp*MAFsmoothing*other_stuff
So, both tables will have the same effect on IPW. Why two tables? I think the MAF compensation table sets the ideal relationship between MAF Hz and airflow while the "MAF smoothing" table is meant to be trim adjustment, and is not a smoothing table at all.
IPW = MAFComp*MAFsmoothing*other_stuff
So, both tables will have the same effect on IPW. Why two tables? I think the MAF compensation table sets the ideal relationship between MAF Hz and airflow while the "MAF smoothing" table is meant to be trim adjustment, and is not a smoothing table at all.
So I loaded up alky/alt-map stuff last night and tested it this morning. Fuel is spot on, high 11's just perfect. Timing however, is pretty far off, 4-5°. Thankfully they were LOW, otherwise I might be crying right now Going to have to adjust the scaling a little to bring it up to where it should be.
I'm taking baby steps, and it is just amazing to me how much power 2° of timing adds on alky, the car just feels like it is waking up! 2-3° left to go. I'm working out what I want to do for a new intake, and still contemplating a new COP ignition setup before I throw it on the dyno for shane@DB Performance to dial it in.
I have a question: let's say I get everything nice and dialed in on my current setup. Then I upgrade turbos. Assuming I keep a similar boost profile, I assume AFRs at WOT will go lean and I will just need to adjust the VE tables for either high rpm, high load, or both? BBK XL wut? :P
#165
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (50)
Very intriguing. I agree mrfred, if your calculation is right it would have to be sort of a trim and not 'smoothing' at all. It would be nice to get this figured out fully, I'd think both the MAF and SD guys could benefit.
So I loaded up alky/alt-map stuff last night and tested it this morning. Fuel is spot on, high 11's just perfect. Timing however, is pretty far off, 4-5°. Thankfully they were LOW, otherwise I might be crying right now Going to have to adjust the scaling a little to bring it up to where it should be.
I'm taking baby steps, and it is just amazing to me how much power 2° of timing adds on alky, the car just feels like it is waking up! 2-3° left to go. I'm working out what I want to do for a new intake, and still contemplating a new COP ignition setup before I throw it on the dyno for shane@DB Performance to dial it in.
I have a question: let's say I get everything nice and dialed in on my current setup. Then I upgrade turbos. Assuming I keep a similar boost profile, I assume AFRs at WOT will go lean and I will just need to adjust the VE tables for either high rpm, high load, or both? BBK XL wut? :P
So I loaded up alky/alt-map stuff last night and tested it this morning. Fuel is spot on, high 11's just perfect. Timing however, is pretty far off, 4-5°. Thankfully they were LOW, otherwise I might be crying right now Going to have to adjust the scaling a little to bring it up to where it should be.
I'm taking baby steps, and it is just amazing to me how much power 2° of timing adds on alky, the car just feels like it is waking up! 2-3° left to go. I'm working out what I want to do for a new intake, and still contemplating a new COP ignition setup before I throw it on the dyno for shane@DB Performance to dial it in.
I have a question: let's say I get everything nice and dialed in on my current setup. Then I upgrade turbos. Assuming I keep a similar boost profile, I assume AFRs at WOT will go lean and I will just need to adjust the VE tables for either high rpm, high load, or both? BBK XL wut? :P
The turbo upgrade scenario is interesting. The XL should be more efficient than the standard BBK, so it would make sense to first try tweaking the MAP VE values to bring AFR back into line.