Screen Shot Comparisons J4J1 & My Tune

[zenboy99]

Chad, his spark_altitude_table, spark_bdln_table, spark_MBT_table, all 3 of those were deleted (all values set to 55). He (and myself as well) is only using his spark_base_table, which looks like it's set to fairly stock values.

REally? with the dizzy at 10 degrees or advanced? The dyno tuners I've talked to said timing is more important than air/fuel ratio for most NA 5L's they've seen. My last couple of dyno pulls I had the af from 12.5-14 and power didn't change more than 1.5rwhp. I added 2 deg timing and gained 5 rwhp.

 

[final5-0]

Grady, thanks alot for that info.

What do your spark tables look like? I didn't see those posted on there.

Glad you like the info Chad

If you looked at the pics Dennis provided ....................

The tables like fuel, spark and the like were not on his site.
I saw 15 files there and the total amount was 23.

The activity will die down in a day or two and you can get the full package of files then
unless
you know of another way ...... which I don't

Also what is trans_min_TP_for_torque_mod settings at 1020 near the bottom.

Don't remember doing anything with that so I will have to look into it and get back to you

Grady

 

[final5-0]

REally? with the dizzy at 10 degrees or advanced? The dyno tuners I've talked to said timing is more important than air/fuel ratio for most NA 5L's they've seen. My last couple of dyno pulls I had the af from 12.5-14 and power didn't change more than 1.5rwhp. I added 2 deg timing and gained 5 rwhp.

Couple of thoughts here Chad

1) When you get access to the tables, you will see there is a good bit of difference in how I've got my spark curve set up

2) When I was at the dyno for the baseline pulls you see in the sig, I moved the af ratio down from about high 13's to 12.5 and picked up about 10 rwhp with no other changes.

I have always suspected I could have gained more but the little stock maf had its tongue hanging out and could give no more

btw ...... I keep my dizzy at 10

Grady

 

[blksn955.o]

You are correct Sir!



Greg, I guess I don't quite understand what me having or not having EEC Analyzer (I do have it btw) has to do with me using Open Loop idle

Help me to understand here if you will

I though I read in another post how you moved away from OL tuning after you got EA, or that after you ran a few DL threw it the adaptive "drift" didnt effect you anymore... maybe I am thinking of something else?

My O2's were cooling off at idle but ...... only by an ever so slightly amount.
I noticed over a good bit of time the KAMRF's would drift.

My Stang is only a week end toy so we are talking about a long amount of time here ...... like months before I noticed the idle would start to become a bit unstable.

I tried the forced OL idle thing which made things much better so it has stayed in place

Grady

forgot you have LT's, I think I am in a kinda sim. boat though...I dont drive the car but every once and awhile and it takes a long time for the idle to get to any point of drift, was/had been thinking only running OL at idle might help and in the spring or next mid winter warm up after I get the car back up and running want to give it a try along with another tune using EA and see what one I like more.

 

[zenboy99]

Couple of thoughts here Chad

1) When you get access to the tables, you will see there is a good bit of difference in how I've got my spark curve set up

2) When I was at the dyno for the baseline pulls you see in the sig, I moved the af ratio down from about high 13's to 12.5 and picked up about 10 rwhp with no other changes.

I have always suspected I could have gained more but the little stock maf had its tongue hanging out and could give no more

btw ...... I keep my dizzy at 10

Grady

Its crazy how similar combo's can react different. Maybe the timing difference is in our different cylinder heads?

I've been playing with my Tweecer all day. I absolutely love it. I was reluctant to buy it at the begining after reading a few threads on here, but I figured I had all winter to learn it. Its really not that bad.

I had a horrible hanging idle problem, it was the only driveability problem I was having. Changed my manifold volume scalar to 3.25 and bam, no more hanging idle, rpms come right down after pressing in the clutch.

I'm having two problems though:
1) The car is idling at 980-1020, I have all the values set at 850. However JMS had my chip set at 850 idle and the car still idled at ~1000rpm

2) This problem is a little different. When I start my car up in temps below 40 deg F, the idle surges to 1500 then dies down to 800, it does that for 45 seconds until it hits Closed loop. Lambse readings are around 9.8 and gradually rise, I have a datalog of it.

One other problem I'm having is that when I read the datalogs, I'm not sure what a stock car should be doing. Looks like my O2 sensor values jump around alot at idle, but I'm not sure what other cars do.

I have PLX-300 wideband. Just have to figure out a time to install it.

 

[final5-0]

Its crazy how similar combo's can react different. Maybe the timing difference is in our different cylinder heads?

I've been playing with my Tweecer all day. I absolutely love it. I was reluctant to buy it at the begining after reading a few threads on here, but I figured I had all winter to learn it. Its really not that bad.

I had a horrible hanging idle problem, it was the only driveability problem I was having. Changed my manifold volume scalar to 3.25 and bam, no more hanging idle, rpms come right down after pressing in the clutch.

You'll be a Tuning Guru in no time

I'm having two problems though:
1) The car is idling at 980-1020, I have all the values set at 850. However JMS had my chip set at 850 idle and the car still idled at ~1000rpm

Two sources of info for you that may help

Dennis has listed in his various posts, several times, the procedures for obtaining throttle body and neutral idle air flow values. It is an excellent write up so check it out.

EEC Analyzer has the same info in the help files.

2) This problem is a little different. When I start my car up in temps below 40 deg F, the idle surges to 1500 then dies down to 800, it does that for 45 seconds until it hits Closed loop. Lambse readings are around 9.8 and gradually rise, I have a datalog of it.

Get the values I talked about above in line first and see if that helps here.

One other problem I'm having is that when I read the datalogs, I'm not sure what a stock car should be doing. Looks like my O2 sensor values jump around alot at idle, but I'm not sure what other cars do.

I have PLX-300 wideband. Just have to figure out a time to install it.

Sounds normal to me!

During closed loop conditions, the O2's should be switching very rapidly.

Might see if some of the V1.30 guys will send you some dlogs to compare.

I could send you a dlog or two but you would have to view it with EA or LA (even Excell would work for you) as I use the older 1.20 version software.

Grady

 

[a50sn95]

Glad you like the info Chad

If you looked at the pics Dennis provided ....................

The tables like fuel, spark and the like were not on his site.
I saw 15 files there and the total amount was 23.


Grady

Hmm wonder what happened. I thought I had them all (23)
I'll double check....

 

[final5-0]

Hmm wonder what happened. I thought I had them all (23)
I'll double check....

All of the shots of the tables ............

Their file names begin with a ...... t

Grady

 

[CManT1914]

REally? with the dizzy at 10 degrees or advanced? The dyno tuners I've talked to said timing is more important than air/fuel ratio for most NA 5L's they've seen. My last couple of dyno pulls I had the af from 12.5-14 and power didn't change more than 1.5rwhp. I added 2 deg timing and gained 5 rwhp.

I leave my dizzy at 10* advanced. If I want to add more global spark (no reason to though with the versatility the twEECer gives you) I can do it with the tune. Timing is very important on our motors (on all motors actually). A lot of driveability issues (like the infamous low-speed, low-rpm bucking caused by larger cams) can be helped by fiddling with the timing. But the base table is really the only table that is needed. The others can be deleted by setting all the values to 55 with no consequences. (knock on wood, lol)

 

[a50sn95]

All of the shots of the tables ............

Their file names begin with a ...... t

Grady

Should be better now. Still not how I like it, but I'll clean it up tomorrow...
Long day...
Dennis

 

[zenboy99]

Dennis has listed in his various posts, several times, the procedures for obtaining throttle body and neutral idle air flow values. It is an excellent write up so check it out.

Dennis who? you have a link?

 

[a50sn95]

Dennis who? you have a link?

My name is Dennis. I think he means this thread, post #5:
Here
And this thread on the Tweecer Forums...
Here
Oh, and these are Clint's methods. I just explained how I used them....
It's all described in EEC Analyzer...

 

[zenboy99]

Awesome, thanks Dennis. I'll go over this tonight. I just bought an EEC analyzer.

 

[final5-0]

Grady, thanks alot for that info.

What do your spark tables look like? I didn't see those posted on there.

Also what is trans_min_TP_for_torque_mod settings at 1020 near the bottom.

OK Chad

I did a bit of checking on the scalar trans_min_TP_for_torque_mod for you.

From what I could find, it seems to be as I suspected ...................
a setting of some kind for an aode auto trans.

The fact that it has a value of zero in the original unmodified J4J1 file lends even more credence to my belief about the scalar.

Sorry for the confusion

My file comes from a time when the Tweecer was just barely in existence and back in those days ................................

Maybe half of the stuff we thought we were doing correct .................
WAS correct

Some of the stuff in that file came from the founder of the Tweecer, Mike Glover and others like Daren Woodall who wrote the excellent software program for analyzing data logs ...... Log Analyst.

Over time, as more things in our pcm's were learned to not work as first suspected, even folks who had access to lots of resources like Mike and Daren had back track and change things a bit due to new found knowledge of how things really worked.

It was tough times back then and you really had to dig for the knowledge and even though you found something that seemed to make sense ...................
you had to put it in place and then get some hard data from your dlogs to see if ...........................

It did in fact work like you or others suspected!

Back then, it was nothing uncommon for peeps to try different things and discuss a single scalar, table, or function for months before we all found out what it was and how it worked

I thought I had most of that old stuff cleaned out but it looks like you discovered a remnant from the old days.

The 1020 value most likely has no effect but I will correct it anyway

Thanks for the good eye and the catch of my mistake

Grady