my first crack at this tuning thing check it out.
The little spike at the end is what raises it to 340, looks like max hp is about 330ish from the normal curve.
I don't think he was trying to knock your pull, just saying that if you had a huge spike at the end that said you hit 370, doesn't mean you should use that number. If you have other graphs without the bump at the end that say you hit 340, then you probably are hitting around there.
I don't think he was trying to knock your pull, just saying that if you had a huge spike at the end that said you hit 370, doesn't mean you should use that number. If you have other graphs without the bump at the end that say you hit 340, then you probably are hitting around there.
The timing seems very low and the AFRs are on the rich side on the top end. What happens if you raise the timing and lean it out? I bet you'd make more power and you'd also be running safer (lower EGTs). If you want to get rid of that lift off knock at 7500, try reducing the timing at that RPM range in the low load cell. The big jump in timing is probably causing the knock.
yeah i do have other logs that say 340 and 330. im still working on this tune thats my first tune after the new cams and there is a ways to go i can see. i initially richened up my old tune which was pretty much on point.i did that so i could have a safe log and go from there. this was the first tune after . so ill be doing another one soon
Interesting none the less... I will be working on mine this week, and some good pointers in your thread. I will share any input I have after working on mine later this week. Curves do not look hateful either.
update
ive gotten rid of my old rom 96940013 which i couldnt log 2byte load on thanks to heideki now running 9417 rom lol.
anyway i also ditched my greddy and got a hallman ive turned up the boost a bit and redid my maps here they are,hoping for around 330-350 whp
anyway i also ditched my greddy and got a hallman ive turned up the boost a bit and redid my maps here they are,hoping for around 330-350 whp
No, I gave you the addresses for 0013.
Remember I asked you what was at 1c in the 0013 mut table. And I gave you addresses based on that variable.
Here is the thread where I gave you the info.
Remember I asked you what was at 1c in the 0013 mut table. And I gave you addresses based on that variable.
Here is the thread where I gave you the info.
Last edited by l2r99gst; Aug 20, 2010 at 07:46 PM.
OK...I see why it didn't work. You gave me the wrong value for MUT 1c. For 0013 it is 8999. I saw a thread where you put a screenshot, but the MUT table was defined wrong.
So, your load variables are what I said, but based off of 8999.
2-byte LOAD_Raw (no temp compensation)
0x899 + 0x09 = 0x89A2
0x899 + 0x0A = 0x89A3
2-byte LOAD_Temp_Compensated
0x899 + 0x0B = 0x89A4
0x899 + 0x0C = 0x89A5
2-byte LOAD_Baro_Compensated
0x899 + 0x0D = 0x89A6
0x899 + 0x0E = 0x89A7
2-byte LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated
0x899 + 0x0F = 0x89A8
0x899 + 0x10 = 0x89A9
So, your load variables are what I said, but based off of 8999.
2-byte LOAD_Raw (no temp compensation)
0x899 + 0x09 = 0x89A2
0x899 + 0x0A = 0x89A3
2-byte LOAD_Temp_Compensated
0x899 + 0x0B = 0x89A4
0x899 + 0x0C = 0x89A5
2-byte LOAD_Baro_Compensated
0x899 + 0x0D = 0x89A6
0x899 + 0x0E = 0x89A7
2-byte LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated
0x899 + 0x0F = 0x89A8
0x899 + 0x10 = 0x89A9
Last edited by l2r99gst; Aug 20, 2010 at 07:58 PM.






