New thread for Speed Density tuning?...
Oct 31, 2009 | 04:04 PM
#16
Ditto my car does not like 96530006 at all. It didnt idle well, had throttle hang issues and just seemed sluggish with the exact same maps. My car was an 96420008 originally if makes any difference or not. The only feature I want right not is the big map feature, and thats it!
Nov 1, 2009 | 11:04 AM
#17
Guys, I need some serious help or input here...I've got an issue with this v7 SD that I can't figure out.
I set my Omni 4 bar scaling to match kPa to load 1:1. I left the VE tables alone for now and figured I'd adjust the maf scaling to match what needed to be changed. Before I changed the maf, I took the car for a drive. It drove so much better with no breakup at the 17-20% throttle range like previously did. Throttle tip in was perfect, but I have one major issue now. My LTFT Low is back to -12% (which I figured I could scale around) and I have a point around the 50-137hz range during closed loop cruising that drops between 10.9-11.9afr and stays there until you push further in on the throttle. Once you go past that throttle/Hz point it stays at the normal 14.7 range. I figured those Hz ranges needed to be rescaled, so I rescaled them accordingly. AFR's came back to where they should be, but the misfiring came back as well.
I even tried rescaling my injector size up to 552 to try and bring up the LTFT Low, didn't make a difference, just changed the throttle range that the rich spot occurred at.
I'm getting so disgusted with this patch and how well it doesn't work that I'm probably going to put my MAF back on the car and swap back to my old 94170015 rom.
I set my Omni 4 bar scaling to match kPa to load 1:1. I left the VE tables alone for now and figured I'd adjust the maf scaling to match what needed to be changed. Before I changed the maf, I took the car for a drive. It drove so much better with no breakup at the 17-20% throttle range like previously did. Throttle tip in was perfect, but I have one major issue now. My LTFT Low is back to -12% (which I figured I could scale around) and I have a point around the 50-137hz range during closed loop cruising that drops between 10.9-11.9afr and stays there until you push further in on the throttle. Once you go past that throttle/Hz point it stays at the normal 14.7 range. I figured those Hz ranges needed to be rescaled, so I rescaled them accordingly. AFR's came back to where they should be, but the misfiring came back as well.
I even tried rescaling my injector size up to 552 to try and bring up the LTFT Low, didn't make a difference, just changed the throttle range that the rich spot occurred at.
I'm getting so disgusted with this patch and how well it doesn't work that I'm probably going to put my MAF back on the car and swap back to my old 94170015 rom.
Nov 1, 2009 | 11:16 AM
#18
This would be great!
I made the switch to SD and used the value's in the patch. The car does run and drive nice but I am getting PO172 over rich condition codes and the small changes I made didn't seem to help.
I don't want to change anything to much because I lack the confidence to take that jump, I really don't want to **** up my car.
I made the switch to SD and used the value's in the patch. The car does run and drive nice but I am getting PO172 over rich condition codes and the small changes I made didn't seem to help.
I don't want to change anything to much because I lack the confidence to take that jump, I really don't want to **** up my car.
Nov 1, 2009 | 11:58 AM
#19
As far as your latency values go, how does your o2 feedback look when you're at a stop? Is it trying to take away a ton of fuel and overcompensate, or try adding a ton in? You could probably scale the maf frequency in that low Hz area to add in or subtract what needs to be cleaned up if slight changes to the lower voltage latency doesn't help it at all.
On a slightly separate note, I decided to redo my entire kPa->Load and RPM vs VE tables to see if they would make a noticeable difference with my stumbling issue. I set my MAP sensor to evenly match kPa to load%, and set the 500rpm VE table to 90%, the 1000rpm to 95%, all the rest to 100%, reset my fuel trims and started logging. Interesting enough, the stumble seems to have disappeared, and with a slight bit of rescaling on the first 2 Hz ranges I managed to keep the idle afr in check, although now I'm stuck with a LTFT Low of -12 and LTFT Mid of -12. I also tried scaling the MAF for those frequency ranges as well, and as soon as I did the stumble came back. Also, I now have a range where the stumble did occur at 17% throttle that doesn't follow the open loop standard 14.7afr, it drops to anywhere between 12.5 and 11.4 afr and will stay steady there until you push through it with more throttle (which then returns to 14.7 cruise afr like normal). There is no lean spike at all, and other than that throttle point where it loads up with fuel, it runs incredibly smooth for having such bad fuel trims. I'm actually at the point where I think I'm going to leave them so far out (unless I can adjust the injector size or latency to compensate) just to keep the smoothness and drivability, since every time I attempt a rescale it hates me lol.
On a slightly separate note, I decided to redo my entire kPa->Load and RPM vs VE tables to see if they would make a noticeable difference with my stumbling issue. I set my MAP sensor to evenly match kPa to load%, and set the 500rpm VE table to 90%, the 1000rpm to 95%, all the rest to 100%, reset my fuel trims and started logging. Interesting enough, the stumble seems to have disappeared, and with a slight bit of rescaling on the first 2 Hz ranges I managed to keep the idle afr in check, although now I'm stuck with a LTFT Low of -12 and LTFT Mid of -12. I also tried scaling the MAF for those frequency ranges as well, and as soon as I did the stumble came back. Also, I now have a range where the stumble did occur at 17% throttle that doesn't follow the open loop standard 14.7afr, it drops to anywhere between 12.5 and 11.4 afr and will stay steady there until you push through it with more throttle (which then returns to 14.7 cruise afr like normal). There is no lean spike at all, and other than that throttle point where it loads up with fuel, it runs incredibly smooth for having such bad fuel trims. I'm actually at the point where I think I'm going to leave them so far out (unless I can adjust the injector size or latency to compensate) just to keep the smoothness and drivability, since every time I attempt a rescale it hates me lol.
Nov 1, 2009 | 01:10 PM
#21
Ok, nevermind that top post...I got the issue figured out, turns out the 4 bar does not like to do an exact 1:1 ratio, even with the 4 bar scaling used as a base. I opened up my old 94170015 rom that has the voltage input changes for the Omni sensor, added the SD data to the xml, and copied the kPa vs Load% as it sat through there. It actually runs perfect now, exactly as it did with the MAF with the same trims and all. For anyone having issues with the Omni 4 bar, try these scalings as they made a world of difference:
kPa_____Load%
10.9--------7
21----------15
31.1--------27
41.3--------36
60.7--------55
101.1------91
120.9------119
340.2------340
If nothing else it should be a really close base to get you where you need to go. Using those numbers my LTFT Low/Mid are sitting at no more than +2%, and the o2 feedback wavers from -1.3% to +1.1% so far, stock injector scaling and latencies.
kPa_____Load%
10.9--------7
21----------15
31.1--------27
41.3--------36
60.7--------55
101.1------91
120.9------119
340.2------340
If nothing else it should be a really close base to get you where you need to go. Using those numbers my LTFT Low/Mid are sitting at no more than +2%, and the o2 feedback wavers from -1.3% to +1.1% so far, stock injector scaling and latencies.
Last edited by Slo_crx1; Nov 1, 2009 at 01:17 PM.
Nov 1, 2009 | 01:16 PM
#22
Don't be...it's just like hunting for a needle in a haystack at first trying to get the MAP sensor dialed in. Unfortunately since the rom used never originally had any provision for a map sensor from the factory, there is no "set" voltage scaling to adjust to. That's what kept throwing me off.
Nov 1, 2009 | 02:11 PM
#23
Evolving Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
From: Moscow, Russia
I have several problem with this conversion:
1) Problem with MAT sensor, it shows incorrect temperature. At 0 celsius it shows -11 or so. I verified impendance of GM sensor and it is correct for 0 celsius. It is logged in evoscan with 3A request (air temperature request)
2) When the car sits in traffic jam it refuses to iddle, at all. AFR swings from 10 to 19.
3) Trims were adjusted within 1%
1) Problem with MAT sensor, it shows incorrect temperature. At 0 celsius it shows -11 or so. I verified impendance of GM sensor and it is correct for 0 celsius. It is logged in evoscan with 3A request (air temperature request)
2) When the car sits in traffic jam it refuses to iddle, at all. AFR swings from 10 to 19.
3) Trims were adjusted within 1%
Nov 1, 2009 | 05:16 PM
#24
I have several problem with this conversion:
1) Problem with MAT sensor, it shows incorrect temperature. At 0 celsius it shows -11 or so. I verified impendance of GM sensor and it is correct for 0 celsius. It is logged in evoscan with 3A request (air temperature request)
2) When the car sits in traffic jam it refuses to iddle, at all. AFR swings from 10 to 19.
3) Trims were adjusted within 1%
1) Problem with MAT sensor, it shows incorrect temperature. At 0 celsius it shows -11 or so. I verified impendance of GM sensor and it is correct for 0 celsius. It is logged in evoscan with 3A request (air temperature request)
2) When the car sits in traffic jam it refuses to iddle, at all. AFR swings from 10 to 19.
3) Trims were adjusted within 1%
As to #2 and #3, how did you adjust your trims? What map sensor, injectors, scaling, did you scale the maf hz adjustments or just the VE table, etc...
Nov 1, 2009 | 05:30 PM
#25
I have been finding the ratio is definitely off from 1:1 like I had posted originally. The ratio is non-linear but I have it here for those that want to try it out:
MAPVE-
41-40
61-63.5
101-103
121-124
340-430
Kpa to load will be pretty close to spot on with the 4 bar, your fuel map will look pretty close as well.
These numbers work for me on my 3586, stock turbos, stock appearing turbos, 3582s, Evo3 16Gs, etc.
MAPVE-
41-40
61-63.5
101-103
121-124
340-430
Kpa to load will be pretty close to spot on with the 4 bar, your fuel map will look pretty close as well.
These numbers work for me on my 3586, stock turbos, stock appearing turbos, 3582s, Evo3 16Gs, etc.
Nov 1, 2009 | 06:08 PM
#26
I have been finding the ratio is definitely off from 1:1 like I had posted originally. The ratio is non-linear but I have it here for those that want to try it out:
MAPVE-
41-40
61-63.5
101-103
121-124
340-430
Kpa to load will be pretty close to spot on with the 4 bar, your fuel map will look pretty close as well.
These numbers work for me on my 3586, stock turbos, stock appearing turbos, 3582s, Evo3 16Gs, etc.
MAPVE-
41-40
61-63.5
101-103
121-124
340-430
Kpa to load will be pretty close to spot on with the 4 bar, your fuel map will look pretty close as well.
These numbers work for me on my 3586, stock turbos, stock appearing turbos, 3582s, Evo3 16Gs, etc.
I know you've setup and tuned a number of SD conversions so far, great to hear any kind of insight you have! 
Last edited by Slo_crx1; Nov 1, 2009 at 06:12 PM.
Nov 1, 2009 | 08:39 PM
#28
That I do. Before the advent of the "V7 bigmaps" this is how I was keeping 40psi and a 4 bar working nicely on the resolution we had. I spose I should have mentioned that about those values, but I forgotted.
Recap-those values only work if you do things backwards like me.
Recap-those values only work if you do things backwards like me.
Nov 1, 2009 | 10:55 PM
#29
Evolving Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
From: Moscow, Russia
I don't think the scaling is put into the new patch, or isn't in correctly. From what I can tell the old MAF IAT sensor took the reading and the ecu added a value on top of it to make it's compensation. For now I left my GM sensor in my intake pipe to see if I can find the differences, although through Evoscan I can log both IAT and corrected intake temps and the car seems to run correctly even though it's not the most desired location.
As to #2 and #3, how did you adjust your trims? What map sensor, injectors, scaling, did you scale the maf hz adjustments or just the VE table, etc...
As to #2 and #3, how did you adjust your trims? What map sensor, injectors, scaling, did you scale the maf hz adjustments or just the VE table, etc...
Nov 2, 2009 | 06:44 PM
#30
If someone can get me the scaling voltages for the Kavlico 5 bar that would normally be used for logging on say 94170015, I can input that into my old rom and see where it points the load% and MAP kPa at.