Well I am on revision 5 with Torrie and things seem to be progressing nicely. I say that not really knowing what I am looking at haha. I get the very basics but I was hoping the veterans could chime in and let me know if I am interpreting them correctly. In reality Torrie will do all the work and likely needs no feedback from me, whatever I read and interpret in the logs will be no different then what he sees.
These two logs are an out an back, 0-110ish. It seems any knock is being caused by hard shifts as they all come right at the point the RPM's drop from the shift, is that the likely cause? Unfortunately that pulls timing and power along with it. One thing I have been noticing is right in the middle of the 3rd gear to 4th gear pull, with knock going down and the car starting to advance timing I get a spot where timing is pulled and I don't know why that happens. All other spots where timing is retarded corresponds with knock. For example in the second long at 9.4 and 10.5 seconds knock is falling and all the sudden it pulls timing, 9.4 is associated with a small dip in fuel pressure as well. I may be reading into this too much, I'm just trying to get an idea of what you guys look for as you work through the revisions. I think it was FoMoCo that posted a very clean log from many more revisions with Torrie. I'm curious how you personally gauge the performance increase over the revisions? Thanks for any assistance!
I also wanted to share what I feel was the cleanest log, this was from revision 3. Here the spark advance is not retarded through the 3-4 pull like the other logs. Its a nice smooth advance, just a slight leveling off with a knock event and then it continues to add timing. This run gave me my best 60-90mph and 60-100mph time and I can only assume it is that nice spark advance curve and no knock.
How are you gauging your times?
I do see the dropout in fuel pressure on shift to 3rd gear. BTW, why are the data timings sometimes 1/100th apart, and sometimes 2/100th? Shouldn't it be pretty consistent at 1/100th?
Quote from: FoMoCoSHO on March 28, 2016, 10:56:40 PM
How are you gauging your times?
Times are just pulling from the CSV file in Excel, the first hit on 60, mark the time, then the first hit on 90 and 100, subtract one from the other. I'm sure its far from perfect, I was just hoping it was repeatable so at the very least it was a way to see improvements. I moved to doing 60-90 to take out the 3-4 shift from 90-100. Seeing that nice smooth spark advance curve in rev3 compared to the pulled timing in the same area on rev5 is likely the reason I had a better 60-90/100 on rev3?
I see now that timing is pulled after the shift and then if there is no knock it starts adding timing as the rpms climb only to take it back on the shift. I assume that is normal. Just can't figure out why the timing was pulled in rev5 during the 3-4 gear pull.
Have you loaded into livelink to view the graphs?
Quote from: FoMoCoSHO on March 28, 2016, 11:12:12 PM
Have you loaded into livelink to view the graphs?
Yes, that's how I see the timing being pulled, knock, etc. For times no, I was just using the method mentioned above.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Battery (possibly alternator) and HPFP would be on my list of suspects.
I'm not thinking there is an issue, the runs where hours apart, I'm sure if I loaded the other tune it would be fine. We will see, he already has rev6 to me and I will load it today.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Cool id like to checkem out later...often knock sensors show activity at the shift not because of mechanical noise from the actual shift but load(boost) will spike and if the spark isnt retarded enough you can knock a little.....if your load spikes above 1.8 briefly the spark tables arent normalized meaning anything above 1.8 load the spark will be what it is for 1.8 but should be lower.....like if 1.8 load at 5k should be 13 degrees 1.85 load you would want maybe 11 degrees but the spark tables only go up to 1.8 so u get that spark
And the increased load spike at the upshift is usually the culprit for fuel pressure drop
And a hot 3 bar tune u may be in the 1.6-1.7 load range with spikes near 1.8 or more....so u are right there i bet with torrie
And if he is using torque reductions for the upshifts..the ecu will pull spark to limit output...thats 1 way it controls tq on the shift so that could make u see spark being pulled with no knock
I highly doubt its mechanical noise from tranny causing knock...knock has a very specific sound frequency thats why i dont buy the wire mod for the knock sensor fixing anything...vibration from a rubbing wire wont do anything unless is worn bare then that's different
There's a near full-second dropout of fuel pressure starting at the 2-3 shift point. I have seen FP drop at a shift point, just not so much. Load was def > 1.8 during that time though.
Quote from: SHOdded on March 29, 2016, 11:49:36 AM
There's a near full-second dropout of fuel pressure starting at the 2-3 shift point. I have seen FP drop at a shift point, just not so much. Load was def > 1.8 during that time though.
Thats a healthy load...depending on rpm 1.85 load could be near 20 psi so yeah expect a drop in fuel pressure even at high rpm where the pump is strong..lot of boost...when my load is over 1.80 at the shift my fuel pressure will go down to about 1100 psi....i dont want it to go below 1000...thats a 50% reduction in fuel pressure from what is probably being commanded...ive gone below 1000 psi but thats like my own self imposed limit
Drop in fuel pressure with increaed load is optimal conditions for knock lol....so even if you arent running lean you can see you have maxed out the fuel system....you wont see the drop in pressure with an adequate fuel system
FP was at 750 psi, so below the "optimal" threshhold of 1,000. Granted I have only looked at log 3 so far ...
Well when we run out of fuel I will just add meth LOL ;) Thanks for looking guys. Like I said I have rev6 now and once loaded and tested I will get some logs from that. AJ, I appreciate the insight into how load affects fuel pressure, knock and timing. It was not something I was looking at or knew anything about.
Scott
Quote from: SHOdded on March 29, 2016, 12:09:31 PM
FP was at 750 psi, so below the "optimal" threshhold of 1,000. Granted I have only looked at log 3 so far ...
Thats getting low....so he is pushing big boost or fuel pump is weak....i suspect his load was over 1.9 if pressure was that low....without seeing it yet....id say every bit of 20 psi
Quote from: AJP turbo on March 29, 2016, 12:01:34 PM
Quote from: SHOdded on March 29, 2016, 11:49:36 AM
There's a near full-second dropout of fuel pressure starting at the 2-3 shift point. I have seen FP drop at a shift point, just not so much. Load was def > 1.8 during that time though.
Drop in fuel pressure with increaed load is optimal conditions for knock lol....so even if you arent running lean you can see you have maxed out the fuel system....you wont see the drop in pressure with an adequate fuel system
Even if you aren't "running lean" lower fuel pressure causes fuel droplets to become larger, which kills atomization and can cause wall wetting creating the perfect environment for knock to occur.
From all the stuff I've researched and watching how my car behaves I'd rather lower enrichment where possible keeping rail pressure higher. IMHO leaner with stout FRP is safer than pig rich with low pressure.
Yeah, load was almost 2.1 at it's peak during this period.
Quote from: SHOdded on March 29, 2016, 02:25:47 PM
Yeah, load was almost 2.1 at it's peak during this period.
Thats hardcore...thats well over 20 psi...what was spark? what was kpa? 250?.... Ecu would be commanding the same spark as if it was running 1.8 load...so expect to see knock retard there...big difference in load from 1.8 to 2.1
If i was running about 12 degrees at 1.8 load i would have load 2.1 at 2 degrees as a starting point lol
My load tables only go to 1.8 for spark...so if i get a slight spike i rely on the knock sensor to pull spark....and you can set a specific cam table to use a spark table that is really retarded also as a safety net
1.8 is the load limit for the stock spark tables so u less you "renormalize " the spark tables 1.8 is it
Hope this is the info you are looking for
Wow 260 kpa!...damn scott...looking at that screen shot you can tell the knock sensors were doing their job...spark went from 15 to 9 then 5.5 ...see how retarded spark is as load increases....2.08 load ....id have to check my calculator but that like 22-24 psi i think...just a spike but that alot of boost..
Id be willing to bet scott that rev 6 isnt as hot....im sure ur car is a beast though
Im not home yet but from that screen shot...i dont think the knock retard is from the trans at all....when u upshift load spikes...higher load requires more spark retard or lower ignition advance...torrie most likely hasnt touched the load scaling for the spark table, normally dont have to unless you sustained over 1.8 load.....so u spiked briefly and for a short time ecu was commanding the same spark of 1.8 load when in reality you were at 2.0 so the base tables were giving too much spark...then the knock sensors pulled out enough to keep things happy
Well it sure feels strong, other than the infamous butt dyno and the logs I have nothing else to go on. I can tell you my MS3 ran strong and per the logs this 4500 pound monster is out ahead of it in every way, not to mention from a dig. I have not been to the track and have not ran any other vehicles worth mentioning so thats all I can say about that.
I did my first launch from 2k on one of those logs, I was shocked at the acceleration out of the hole. Unfortunately I also got the delicious smell of the PTU puking and my next launch was all FWD. After giving the car some time between the next launch I was in AWD mode again. I think Torrie is getting closer to getting it dialed in and the summer gas should be out soon. Once we get it all ironed out and running right I will move on to another tune. Still have not decided if I want to go right on to meth or if I want to start on an E20-30 mix. Going off these logs it sounds like I wont have much fuel headroom and may have to go the meth route.
That log you posted from rev. 3 you said was the cleanest...I'd agree because the boost was the lowest and spark was smooth...Wastegate duty was smoothest. ..Looked like more consistent boost throughout the pull....Load never went above 1.82
Quote from: AJP turbo on March 29, 2016, 11:38:37 PM
That log you posted from rev. 3 you said was the cleanest...I'd agree because the boost was the lowest and spark was smooth...Wastegate duty was smoothest. ..Looked like more consistent boost throughout the pull....Load never went above 1.82
So i would assume Torrie is trying to build on that. I have Rev6 loaded, I will see if I can get some logs this evening. I also had some killer DA on that Rev3 log, -900 or so. Thanks again for taking a look.
Hey scott how is the logging and car doing on rev 6?
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 01, 2016, 09:49:30 PM
Hey scott how is the logging and car doing on rev 6?
Feels good but have not logged any runs yet, should be able to get some in today or tomorrow and will post them up!
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Here are a couple pulls on Rev6
Nice looking logs scott...Does it pull well? I'm curious to see if Torrie is satisfied or he wants to tweak....I don't think he will add anymore, it looks like a pretty hot tune. I like that boost level...See how smooth 3rd and 4th gear are? 1st and 2nd gear are hard to get even boost...Things are happening so fast and the revs are building so quickly the Wastegates and ECU aren't reacting fast enough and there aren't really any provisions in the tune to adjust the gates based on gear
You have some knock sensor activity but they were doing their job
Did you have meth? And you should log Iat2...That's the temp at the map sensor...It will be the hottest and what the spark modifiers are based on...and change the unit to Fahrenheit lol
It does feel good, but he is obviously not done yet as he has sent me another revision already! At this point it is fine tuning and its hard for the butt dyno to tell the difference with all these runs I have been doing. The real deal is taking it to the track which I don't do often. I am anxious to get this tune finished up and start on the next which I think will be a meth tune. Appreciate the input. It would be awesome if you put together a "how to" on reading logs. There is so much out there but not much on how to get started with just the basics of knowing what you are looking at.
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 06, 2016, 10:11:44 PM
Did you have meth? And you should log Iat2...That's the temp at the map sensor...It will be the hottest and what the spark modifiers are based on...and change the unit to Fahrenheit lol
I do not have meth, though that tune will likely be next. I use the config that Torrie sent me, i guess it does not log Iat2, I guess I could add that if I don't have too many perimeters already. I do notice the boost is nice and smooth but doing a conversion from kpa to psi shows its very high, clearly I am not at 30psi so I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong there.
While you have that config open you can go to select items and just eliminate the IAT and swap in IAT2 and that where you switch all the units...Are you using a laptop? or just the device with the config loaded?...Not sure how that works, I always use laptop
30 psi would be absolute I guess....You need to subtract the atmosphere....In general I guess you can use 14.7 but it could vary slightly but I don't know how much...200kpa is about 15 psi.
I think 210-220kpa is a good place to be without meth....Watch your IAT2 when it gets hot in the months to come...18 psi heats things up nicely lol....When you log iat and iat2 you can see the air heat up even after going through the intercooler as it travels to the inside of the intake manifold...Spark gets super retarded at temps above 150
Your baro pid was at 99kpa which is 14.35 PSI.
Peak tip was 241.
241-99=142 kpa or 20.59 PSI
I didnt look but i would look at map for peak boost...if you are reading tip while the throttle is fluctuating the pressure will be higher because when the throttle blade is closing pressure hits a restriction....so basically the throttle closing causes tip to rise....and there were some throttle fluctuations.....usually thats when tip is highest
Even when the throttle blade is open fully tip will be 4 to 7 kpa higher so u will get like .25 to .5 psi pressure drop across throttle
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 07, 2016, 12:20:17 AM
I didnt look but i would look at map for peak boost...if you are reading tip while the throttle is fluctuating the pressure will be higher because when the throttle blade is closing pressure hits a restriction....so basically the throttle closing causes tip to rise....and there were some throttle fluctuations.....usually thats when tip is highest
Even when the throttle blade is open fully tip will be 4 to 7 kpa higher so u will get like .25 to .5 psi pressure drop across throttle
Using MAP he's at 19.87
Just a spike after an upshift id say...his desired top was about 217kpa if I remember..thought thats about 16-17psi ?..dont have my handy dandy calculator
Hey AJ! Wanted to say thanks for the work on this issue, I was able to use this information to help someone over on SHOforum, all straightened out now :) Thanks also to scott for bringing this topic to light, and FoMoCo for assisting with the analysis/asking the right questions. :thumb:
Awsome...not sure i like being the good guy tho....keep this quite please..i have a reputation to uphold
Hahaha....don't worry you haven't convinced anyone yet ;). Rev7 is feeling amazing. Maybe its just the cool morning air but it seems to pull hard! Hope to get some logs this week, weather looks good just need to find the time!
Nice!
Well here are a couple pulls on Rev7. I'm curious about spark advance, in all logs not just this. Why does it appear to fluctuate so rapidly? I can see boost and load fluctuates with it, nearly mirroring it. I suppose boost increases as timing is added. I am guessing those fluctuations are normal and the engine is trying to maintain a commanded boost level or load? I don't have any smoothing of the data turned on when I am viewing it in live link. I seem to always get a 4+ knock after the 3-4 shift in all the logs and load has smoothed out and seems to hold steady at about 1.75.
Im out of town til friday night with no laptop....boost does not increase as timing is added!
Spark is dependant on load...when load is high less spark is commanded...when load is low more spark is commanded
The ecu is commanding desired tip (turbo inlet pressure)
Load will vary throughout the rpm at a given Tip or boost due to the engines varying volumetric efficiency theoughout the rpms
Quote from: SHOdded on April 11, 2016, 06:59:25 PM
Hey AJ! Wanted to say thanks for the work on this issue, I was able to use this information to help someone over on SHOforum, all straightened out now :) Thanks also to scott for bringing this topic to light, and FoMoCo for assisting with the analysis/asking the right questions. :thumb:
LOL, that would be me over that SHOforum. Although, unfortunately I am still having an issue. I talked to Torrie and he said that I am having fuel pressures issues. However, looking at Scott's logs, mine are almost identical. I am going to go ahead and attach the two logs I have if you want to compare or have any thoughts...
My first tune based on MAP sensor I was pushing 20psi.. load was over 2.0... ambient air was around 50F. Torrie has dropped the boost a bit since then as the revisions are progressing...
Rolling-WOT-93B1-Modified - This is the problematic run, its gotten a bit better with each revision. I get knock and then fuel pressure drops, and the TB closes up a bit. This was a run from around 60mph to 80mph. I can duplicate this every time I do it.
WOT-from-Stop-93B1-Modified - This the cleanest WOT from a stop that I have. No knock, no TB closing, no MAJOR fuel drop.
What bothers me is that Torrie thinks I need to look at troubleshooting my fuel system... either fuel pump, module, or HPFP... but looking at Scotts logs seems to be similar, did Scott replace any of those parts?
Pretty mild knock, as knock readings go. I did see the load again exceed 1.8 (to nearly 2.0) during the WOT-from-Rolling log when it dumped fuel pressure. Stayed under 1.8 for the WOT-from-Stop run.
I have not replaced any parts. I believe that fuel drop out is caused by a spike in load but feel free to mention my logs to Torrie, maybe he can explain in more detail why he thinks its an issue with the fuel system on your car but not mine. Maybe when AJ gets in front of a PC he can look at them side by side and tell you what the difference if any is.
And yes, I see now that boost and spark are the inverse of one another.
Thanks Scott! I might have already mentioned it based on SHOdded's comments on the SHOforum.com :-) I am not sure why Torrie is worried about my fuel pressure versus not being worried about yours. The graphs look VERY similar.
SHOdded I thought that was a little weird too that WOT from a roll produced quite a bit more load than from a stop...
Torrie did send me another tune file based on those datalogs that I loaded but have not datalogged yet. Going to datalog those as well and see what, if any difference there is.
Seems like the trend is that most people are running 14-16psi for boost but any higher and they were going either ethanol mixtures or WM to assist the fuel delivery. But I could be reading that wrong.. maybe Torrie just tunes aggressive (which I asked for) and then backs it down until he finds that sweet spot... again.. I dunno..
Quote from: StealBlueSho on April 14, 2016, 04:07:51 PM
SHOdded I thought that was a little weird too that WOT from a roll produced quite a bit more load than from a stop...
Is it both with the grannies on and with them off... If traction control is off then the ECU may be closing you down a bit from standing start to keep wheel spin controlled.... Leading to more TQ from a roll.
Quote from: BiGMaC on April 14, 2016, 06:59:21 PM
Is it both with the grannies on and with them off... If traction control is off then the ECU may be closing you down a bit from standing start to keep wheel spin controlled.... Leading to more TQ from a roll.
Agreed, BiGMaC :thumb: , hoping AJ can shed some light on how this would look on datalogs ...
If you guys had a choice between 93 e0 and 93 e10 which one would you pick to tune for best performance?
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Edit: from what I was told ethanol allowes more timing which would mean 93e10 would make for a stronger car?
Quote from: SHOdded on April 14, 2016, 07:03:39 PM
Quote from: BiGMaC on April 14, 2016, 06:59:21 PM
Is it both with the grannies on and with them off... If traction control is off then the ECU may be closing you down a bit from standing start to keep wheel spin controlled.... Leading to more TQ from a roll.
Agreed, BiGMaC :thumb: , hoping AJ can shed some light on how this would look on datalogs ...
So, there is a PID for source TQ which I believe lets you know if the traction control kicks in or at least is an indicator it did. Torrie had me log that too just to make sure and it doesn't. I have a non-pp so I can only disable it so much.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Quote from: StealBlueSho on April 14, 2016, 04:07:51 PM
Seems like the trend is that most people are running 14-16psi for boost but any higher and they were going either ethanol mixtures or WM to assist the fuel delivery. But I could be reading that wrong.. maybe Torrie just tunes aggressive (which I asked for) and then backs it down until he finds that sweet spot... again.. I dunno..
That may be accurate for Meth as it will add fuel outside of the HPFP, but if fuel pressure is keeping you from pushing the car further on a tune then I don't think E will help much as you need more fuel with an E mix. It seems that 13 plus cars have some room for an E mix. I think if Torrie sent you another tune he is still feeling it out so there may not be an issue. Have you considered loading the stock tune and logging, then comparing to your tune logs or another stock log? Just a thought.
I thought about loading the stock tune and datalogging which is what I should have done before tuning so I had a baseline. I just don't want to switch out all the spark plugs again... I probably should though if I still have fuel issues...
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
I wouldn't worry about the plugs. Go back to the 2 bar if you have installed a 3bar of course.
Quote from: Scott4957 on April 14, 2016, 10:47:01 PM
I wouldn't worry about the plugs. Go back to the 2 bar if you have installed a 3bar of course.
Awesome, I was just checking to see if the .030 gap would cause a problem. Apparently it does not between you and everyone else. :-) Thank you for the input.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Had a chance this morning to revert to stock and do some datalogging to get a baseline.. My fuel pressure stays above 14.2 MPA during the entire WOT-From-Roll-Stock.CSV and load jumps to 1.54 during the downshift but evens out to 1.3-1.4 during the run.
Not sure if this adds anything to whats going on during the runs with the tune. But at least I have baseline at stock..no fuel pressure issues at stock...
I dont think not having a fuel pressure problem while stock helps anything...there is not enough load oe boost at stock levels to tax the fuel system
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 15, 2016, 08:58:14 AM
I dont think not having a fuel pressure problem while stock helps anything...there is not enough load oe boost at stock levels to tax the fuel system
I agree, just more curious if there was an issue before the tune that I didn't know about.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Quote from: AJP turbo on March 29, 2016, 11:39:14 AM
Cool id like to checkem out later...often knock sensors show activity at the shift not because of mechanical noise from the actual shift but load(boost) will spike and if the spark isnt retarded enough you can knock a little.....if your load spikes above 1.8 briefly the spark tables arent normalized meaning anything above 1.8 load the spark will be what it is for 1.8 but should be lower.....like if 1.8 load at 5k should be 13 degrees 1.85 load you would want maybe 11 degrees but the spark tables only go up to 1.8 so u get that spark
And the increased load spike at the upshift is usually the culprit for fuel pressure drop
And a hot 3 bar tune u may be in the 1.6-1.7 load range with spikes near 1.8 or more....so u are right there i bet with torrie
And if he is using torque reductions for the upshifts..the ecu will pull spark to limit output...thats 1 way it controls tq on the shift so that could make u see spark being pulled with no knock
I highly doubt its mechanical noise from tranny causing knock...knock has a very specific sound frequency thats why i dont buy the wire mod for the knock sensor fixing anything...vibration from a rubbing wire wont do anything unless is worn bare then that's different
I had no idea our advance tables only go to 1.8 load, that's weak sauce. What do the big power guys do?
Also, can anyone give a kpa to psi conversion? supposedly 1 kilopascal is .145 psi. So if you converted his peak of 240ish in that one log that's an absurd 34.8 psi. Why aren't our kpa numbers accurate or whats our kpa conversion formula? This type crap frustrates me to no end. Thanks in advance.
That is total absolute pressure inside the manifold... Subtract 14.7psi from the conversion.
At sea level atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi or 1Bar... Generally speaking the sensors are not going to calculate that out. So it just gives you the total pressure including the atmospheric pressure... That's a rough explanation... Google 1Bar if you want to know more.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Quote from: StealBlueSho on April 15, 2016, 01:19:16 PM
That is total absolute pressure inside the manifold... Subtract 14.7psi from the conversion.
At sea level atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi or 1Bar... Generally speaking the sensors are not going to calculate that out. So it just gives you the total pressure including the atmospheric pressure... That's a rough explanation... Google 1Bar if you want to know more.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
That's good to know. I had no idea kpa factored in bar.
1.8 load is pretty good...especially if you are maintaining it near redline it would be over 20psi
1.7 is around 16ish psi below 4k i think
I think this is it, Torrie got this nailed down after 8 revisions. Here are 3 pulls on Rev08. He replied that they were the best curve yet and didn't send a revision. I did ask why the fuel pressure looks so good compared to the others, you will notice that big dip we have been talking about is gone in all three of these logs, and it feels amazing. I will share his reply when i get it.
Those are much better runs but I think the reason the rail pressure doesn't drop out its ass it because the load/timing/boost is not as high. Curious though, I did see the throttle closing up in fourth at 14.5 seconds in the first run and second run. The third run has it closing up in third.
I have seen similar stuff in mine. I was seeing fuel pressure down to 1100 PSI in third gear under a load of 2.03 and boost of 20psi+ and having the ecu close down the throttle. But that only happens when I go WOT from a roll around 45mph-50mph. My 0mph-80mpg or so doesn't have the problem but I am seeing loads around 1.8 and not 2.03+. Every tune revision I have received the load is being dropped slightly.
However, after countless hours researching what other people are doing, it APPEARS that our HPFP just have a hard time keeping pressure when the load exceeds 1.8 and supplementing with WM seems to assist. And there is a variance to how well the HPFP keeps pressure per car and that is also a known issue.
SO I would think from a SCT standpoint there is going to be varying tunes to accommodate the tolerances in our cars which is expected. That is the reason I went with Torrie. I would be VERY curious as everyone else is as to what LMS datalogs look like to see if they exhibit a similar behavior. Since they send the same tune to everyone I would image the ECU does some correcting on some of the cars out there.
I will caveat this by saying I am not expert in these things, just attempting to put 1+1 together lol
I am very curious as to what Torrie says, please keep us updated?
Did you ever reset the KAM on yours? SCT X4 apparently does not do that when re-flashing a new tune from what I am reading... I could be wronng
Man i have 16 revisions and still not done ughhh
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Quote from: StealBlueSho on April 16, 2016, 12:27:09 PM
Those are much better runs but I think the reason the rail pressure doesn't drop out its ass it because the load/timing/boost is not as high. Curious though, I did see the throttle closing up in fourth at 14.5 seconds in the first run and second run. The third run has it closing up in third.
I have seen similar stuff in mine. I was seeing fuel pressure down to 1100 PSI in third gear under a load of 2.03 and boost of 20psi+ and having the ecu close down the throttle. But that only happens when I go WOT from a roll around 45mph-50mph. My 0mph-80mpg or so doesn't have the problem but I am seeing loads around 1.8 and not 2.03+. Every tune revision I have received the load is being dropped slightly.
However, after countless hours researching what other people are doing, it APPEARS that our HPFP just have a hard time keeping pressure when the load exceeds 1.8 and supplementing with WM seems to assist. And there is a variance to how well the HPFP keeps pressure per car and that is also a known issue.
SO I would think from a SCT standpoint there is going to be varying tunes to accommodate the tolerances in our cars which is expected. That is the reason I went with Torrie. I would be VERY curious as everyone else is as to what LMS datalogs look like to see if they exhibit a similar behavior. Since they send the same tune to everyone I would image the ECU does some correcting on some of the cars out there.
I will caveat this by saying I am not expert in these things, just attempting to put 1+1 together lol
I am very curious as to what Torrie says, please keep us updated?
Did you ever reset the KAM on yours? SCT X4 apparently does not do that when re-flashing a new tune from what I am reading... I could be wronng
There is a setting in options on the handheld to clear your KAM.
Here are some of my logs...5,6,7 and 8,9,10 are different revisions 8-10 being my current.
5 is weird because I left TC on.
On your stop log I noticed your pressure tanks about 4K rpm in 1st, that is something I've never seen before and my drops are always after upshifts.
Quote from: ElvenSho on April 16, 2016, 12:33:15 PM
Man i have 16 revisions and still not done ughhh
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Ask AJP how many tune revisions he's done, lol.
Torrie says he was just commanding too much boost early on in the revisions and was testing to see how the car/tune would react. I think that was the conclusion we came to by looking at load. Yes, to the statement on meth, its more fuel for an engine/fuel system that can't keep up. Its always going to be this way, either you run out of fuel or boost, so too small on the fueling side or the turbo side. On Mazda's DISI it was the turbo, you could get another 50+ HP out of the fuel system with a larger turbo, then you resorted to 5th and 6th port which is essentially the same as using Meth for fuel on the EB. I suppose if I had to pick one it would be running out of fuel as it cost less to supplement the fuel system than to upgrade the turbos but their are advantages to both.
I'm now trying to get is opinion on E mixes vs Meth. I would do both if I went with an E tune but I am considering skipping over it and moving to Meth.
Quote from: FoMoCoSHO on April 16, 2016, 01:30:02 PM
Quote from: StealBlueSho on April 16, 2016, 12:27:09 PM
Those are much better runs but I think the reason the rail pressure doesn't drop out its ass it because the load/timing/boost is not as high. Curious though, I did see the throttle closing up in fourth at 14.5 seconds in the first run and second run. The third run has it closing up in third.
I have seen similar stuff in mine. I was seeing fuel pressure down to 1100 PSI in third gear under a load of 2.03 and boost of 20psi+ and having the ecu close down the throttle. But that only happens when I go WOT from a roll around 45mph-50mph. My 0mph-80mpg or so doesn't have the problem but I am seeing loads around 1.8 and not 2.03+. Every tune revision I have received the load is being dropped slightly.
However, after countless hours researching what other people are doing, it APPEARS that our HPFP just have a hard time keeping pressure when the load exceeds 1.8 and supplementing with WM seems to assist. And there is a variance to how well the HPFP keeps pressure per car and that is also a known issue.
SO I would think from a SCT standpoint there is going to be varying tunes to accommodate the tolerances in our cars which is expected. That is the reason I went with Torrie. I would be VERY curious as everyone else is as to what LMS datalogs look like to see if they exhibit a similar behavior. Since they send the same tune to everyone I would image the ECU does some correcting on some of the cars out there.
I will caveat this by saying I am not expert in these things, just attempting to put 1+1 together lol
I am very curious as to what Torrie says, please keep us updated?
Did you ever reset the KAM on yours? SCT X4 apparently does not do that when re-flashing a new tune from what I am reading... I could be wronng
There is a setting in options on the handheld to clear your KAM.
Here are some of my logs...5,6,7 and 8,9,10 are different revisions 8-10 being my current.
5 is weird because I left TC on.
On your stop log I noticed your pressure tanks about 4K rpm in 1st, that is something I've never seen before and my drops are always after upshifts.
Thank you for sharing your datalogs. Interesting, your datalogs also have a drop around 4800RPMs in second and again in third. Dropping sometimes down to 9.12 Mpa with a load of 1.82. I have some datalogs that are similar but my throttle starts to close.. there is something funky going on with mine I think... just trying to nail down what it is... here is another one of my logs that shows similar load/rail pressure but my ecu starts to close the throttle...
I took the car to my local ford dealership to see if they had away to test to the HFPF, LPFP. etc.. they said it wouldn't make any difference what its doing if the car is tuned since they don't know what to look for. The FORD RDS system might provide some insight they said but they want $200 or so just to run it on the RDS...
Now, my buddy who used to be a mechanic for Ford said I should replace the fuel control module behind the right rear passenger seat and see if that doesn't help. He seems to think that with only 47K miles it would be strange to have a HPFP or LPFP issue..
Im going to try and catch up on some of these logs tonight.....i doubt there is anything wrong..load/boost spikes on upshifts...when load gets up over 1.8ish you will lose fuel pressure because the pump wasnt designed for that...its simple...stock load will cap around 1.5 ish...1.8 is starting to get high...you are tapping the rail out of fuel because injector duty cycle increases....and it doesnt matter if you get bigger injectors...alll that means is they deliver the same fuel at a lower pulse width...you need what you need fuel wise....and you mean IDS not rds
Throttle is closing because you are exceeding one of the various torque limiters.....look at desired tip vs map
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 16, 2016, 03:10:20 PM
Im going to try and catch up on some of these logs tonight.....i doubt there is anything wrong..load/boost spikes on upshifts...when load gets up over 1.8ish you will lose fuel pressure because the pump wasnt designed for that...its simple...stock load will cap around 1.5 ish...1.8 is starting to get high...you are tapping the rail out of fuel because injector duty cycle increases....and it doesnt matter if you get bigger injectors...alll that means is they deliver the same fuel at a lower pulse width...you need what you need fuel wise....and you mean IDS not rds
Throttle is closing because you are exceeding one of the various torque limiters.....look at desired tip vs map
Thank you for your help! I have terrible hearing so the Ford tech said IDS and I hear RDS... Wife complains about the same thing...
Yea, I am just not convinced there is a hardware issue since my datalogs don't appear to be too off from what the others are. Torrie thinks there is an issue somewhere in the fuel system... Either that or I am doing something wrong on my end...
Well maybe there is something wrong with ur fuel pressure but if you are running an aggressive 3 bar tune the pump is maxxed at 15 psi low rpm and 18 psi midrange and 22 ish top end
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 16, 2016, 03:39:33 PM
Well maybe there is something wrong with ur fuel pressure but if you are running an aggressive 3 bar tune the pump is maxxed at 15 psi low rpm and 18 psi midrange and 22 ish top end
I will post a datalog for you to look at and tell me what you see if you dont mind. I just sent it to Torrie to see if he can give me more power, this is the 16th revision tune.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
If you guys want, I can move this to his section and maybe have an actual dialogue...
Here is my datalog, can someone take a look at it and tell me what they see... Is there more room for performance? Am I at the limit already? Whats going on lol, btw the car drives fine I am just curious.
Quote from: FoMoCoSHO on April 16, 2016, 04:33:34 PM
If you guys want, I can move this to his section and maybe have an actual dialogue...
I was hoping not to bother Torrie. Really.. I was hoping someone more familiar than myself with reading datalogs would look at mine and have an "Ah Ha!!" moment. Especially since Scott was having a similar problem. I hate snowflakes....
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
I didnt think scott was having any problems...just a 3 bar tune pushing the stock fuel system
Looking at the logs it seemed similar I guess. I had not looked but mine was as stated, on the shift, the load went up and fuel pressure dropped. He is seeing it drop in the 4k rpm range if I remember correctly.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Quote from: Scott4957 on April 16, 2016, 06:23:18 PM
Looking at the logs it seemed similar I guess. I had not looked but mine was as stated, on the shift, the load went up and fuel pressure dropped. He is seeing it drop in the 4k rpm range if I remember correctly.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
I apologize, poor choice of words. Not a similar problem but similar characteristics. However, looking at all the datalogs that have been posted, everyone sees a dip in fuel pressure around 4700-5000 rpms when the load is highest. The snowflake I am seeing in mine is the drop in first gear as someone mentioned earlier.
Any idea on what it could be? One of the in tank pumps is the first thought that came to my mind. Fuel filter?
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Quote from: StealBlueSho on April 16, 2016, 05:42:20 PM
Quote from: FoMoCoSHO on April 16, 2016, 04:33:34 PM
If you guys want, I can move this to his section and maybe have an actual dialogue...
I was hoping not to bother Torrie. Really.. I was hoping someone more familiar with reading datalogs would look at mine and have an "Ah Ha!!" moment. Especially since Scott was having a similar problem. I hate snowflakes....
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
There are some members that have had over 20+Revisions from Torrie and IMO would not hesitate to contact him especially if you think its a fuel system related issue because thats where customer service comes to play. Z :)
Just got my revision #17 and the car feels beasty like it gained a lot of hp or something for sure! The weird thing is there isent much noise from the turbos like before so that probably means boost was turned down but the car pulls harder!
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Steal blue sho your WOT from a stop is kinda interesting.....Your throttle is closing Id say because you are overboosting and load must be exceeding a torque limit....I'm not sure why you are going so much over your desired boost...You are targeting about 202 kpa but your were boosting to 225 and even 250kpa
Your throttle closings are weird tho, the timing is weird...Your throttle closed before you hit 2nd...Usually your boost spike won't happen til after the shift and then your throttle would close a bit
Some things are hard to deduce because only torrie knows what he is doing in the tune.
And you are leaning out a little more than I would like to see...Surprisingly though, there wasn't much knock sensor acivity....Your fuel pressure isn't terrible for the load you were spiking to. You drop to around 1300 psi fuel pressure which should be enough to maintain AFR but you went to .88 and .90 lambda which I wouldn't like....I've had fuel pressure as low as 700 psi and maintained AFR. You don't and your STFT's spike. So I don't know why you went lean. You were commanding .80 lambda....That is LAMBSE. So if you have fuel pressure, and you do, you should be pretty close to what's commanded and you aren't.
ElevenSHO,
Torrie is commanding boost completely different than steel blue sho....Look at your desired TIP...It is high right after the upshift then it tapers down when you get to redline...I don't know why the difference...You are maxed out on spark for your fuel.....You have knock sensor readings the whole run...I could live with that. The ambient temps were warm so your IATs were also I'm sure which contributes to the knock retard.
Your fuel pressure dips on the big load surge but your STFT's don't spike and you hold afr fine during the pull unlike steal blue sho's.....You guys can also log FUEL REAR PRESSURE DESIRED. That way you can see the pressure the ECU is commanding and what's being delivered
ElevenSHO you aren't actually hitting the targeted boost which is kind of a good thing because you are commanding 230 KPA after the 1-2 and 2-3 shift.....200 kpa is about 15 psi....A lot of other unleashed guys' logs I've seen seem to be targeting about 205 kpa...That's all I got for ya
Scott, boost is pretty low in 1st and 2nd gear and really tapers off at redline. down to almost 150kpa and really short shifted 1-2 and 2-3......5600 rpm?
Id say you are done with spark....Knock retard the whole run...Not bad just on the edge
3rd and 4th gear have nice boost curves though..Nice and flat. Your fuel pressure was fine...But I wouldn't expect to see otherwise, your load never exceeded 1.77.
But scott I would say that your logs are the most uneventful lol
If anyone thinks their fuel pressure is low and think there is a problem look at your load. If it exceeds 1.8 or so expect to see it at 9ish MPA or 1300 psi. And also look to see what is being desired. But High load will always lower fuel pressure when pushing a fuel system to the max.
I'd be curious what you guys are getting for desired fuel rear pressure when you are dipping down to 9 MPA because I bet you are commanding 13ish...Just goes to show that the fuel pump is trying but can't supply it.....In the case of my tune, you wouldn't know there is a pump deficiency because I lowered my desired fuel pressure to match what is being delivered. It keeps the ECU happy because actual mactches commanded instead of the big discrepancy...So it just looks like I'm commanding less because I am
Quote from: ZSHO on April 16, 2016, 10:02:31 PM
Quote from: StealBlueSho on April 16, 2016, 05:42:20 PM
Quote from: FoMoCoSHO on April 16, 2016, 04:33:34 PM
If you guys want, I can move this to his section and maybe have an actual dialogue...
I was hoping not to bother Torrie. Really.. I was hoping someone more familiar with reading datalogs would look at mine and have an "Ah Ha!!" moment. Especially since Scott was having a similar problem. I hate snowflakes....
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
There are some members that have had over 20+Revisions from Torrie and IMO would not hesitate to contact him especially if you think its a fuel system related issue because thats where customer service comes to play. Z :)
I asked Torrie, and he seemed unsure as to why my car is acting the way it is. He mentioned looking at HPFP, LPFP, and Fuel Filter. His customer service is outstanding and I have been happy with what he has provided. When I asked for info it was more along the lines of I am not sure what I am looking at, Torrie mentioned several possible issues, and before I started throwing hundreds of dollars at the car I thought it might be worth asking the community if anyone has seen or experienced the same problem.
I think I have found my answer which is that no one has a similar issue and I have learned a lot along the way.
Torrie is awesome, and I hope no one takes my seeking for an answer to what appears to be a complicated problem as a slight towards Unleashed.
Knowing that sticking/broken wastegates do occur on these EB's, would that explain any of the abnormalities in StealBlue's logs, AJ?
Quote from: StealBlueSho on April 17, 2016, 01:48:28 AM
Quote from: ZSHO on April 16, 2016, 10:02:31 PM
Quote from: StealBlueSho on April 16, 2016, 05:42:20 PM
Quote from: FoMoCoSHO on April 16, 2016, 04:33:34 PM
If you guys want, I can move this to his section and maybe have an actual dialogue...
I was hoping not to bother Torrie. Really.. I was hoping someone more familiar with reading datalogs would look at mine and have an "Ah Ha!!" moment. Especially since Scott was having a similar problem. I hate snowflakes....
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
There are some members that have had over 20+Revisions from Torrie and IMO would not hesitate to contact him especially if you think its a fuel system related issue because thats where customer service comes to play. Z :)
I asked Torrie, and he seemed unsure as to why my car is acting the way it is. He mentioned looking at HPFP, LPFP, and Fuel Filter. His customer service is outstanding and I have been happy with what he has provided. When I asked for info it was more along the lines of I am not sure what I am looking at, Torrie mentioned several possible issues, and before I started throwing hundreds of dollars at the car I thought it might be worth asking the community if anyone has seen or experienced the same problem.
I think I have found my answer which is that no one has a similar issue and I have learned a lot along the way.
Torrie is awesome, and I hope no one takes my seeking for an answer to what appears to be a complicated problem as a slight towards Unleashed.
This new tune I got back from Torrie last night and it made a big difference in the feel of the car. Can you take a look at it and give me some details? Torrie said to leave it where it is and to keep an eye on KR and also always use the best fuel possible. Apparently this is a pretty hot tune as he is not able to do more to it. He said towards the end there is a lot of KR, what exactly does that mean? How can I combat this KR, would adding a gallon of e85 to a full tank help? Should I buy some additive from auto parts that boosts the octane? He does not give too much info and I need everything spelled out otherwise I will mess up and blow the thing.
ElevenSHO, You should be pretty happy with that...Should feel beastly. Torrie really changed the boost you were commanding...Not sure why your tunes were so different....You were targeting about 15.6 psi the entire pull through the gears. You are maxxed out on the spark. You had knock sensor activity the entire time but I would live with it...You are getting the most power for the fuel you have....The knock sensor will do the work. Fuel pressure looked good
You never droped below about 15 psi at redline so that's pretty good I think...Big boost spikes at upshifts but that's the nature of this beast unless you want to use the throttle to regulate it, but that's not Torrie's approach. You didn't knock excessively or have fuel pressure drops so I wouldn't worry
I'll be curious to see how well that tune runs at the track.
Fomoco would advocate you calling up Brian at BND and getting some ACES love for your SHO, Elven ;)
Quote from: SHOdded on April 18, 2016, 05:41:21 AM
Fomoco would advocate you calling up Brian at BND and getting some ACES love for your SHO, Elven ;)
I would like to see if it drops his KR....
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 18, 2016, 12:06:03 AM
ElevenSHO, You should be pretty happy with that...Should feel beastly. Torrie really changed the boost you were commanding...Not sure why your tunes were so different....You were targeting about 15.6 psi the entire pull through the gears. You are maxxed out on the spark. You had knock sensor activity the entire time but I would live with it...You are getting the most power for the fuel you have....The knock sensor will do the work. Fuel pressure looked good
You never droped below about 15 psi at redline so that's pretty good I think...Big boost spikes at upshifts but that's the nature of this beast unless you want to use the throttle to regulate it, but that's not Torrie's approach. You didn't knock excessively or have fuel pressure drops so I wouldn't worry
I'll be curious to see how well that tune runs at the track.
Good to hear! I will be at the track on the 23rd and will let you know how it does compared to the previous tune that had me run 12.8@108. Torrie is having me try a gallong of e85 with the full tank to see if it helps with the KR, will actually do a log with that today and send to him. I can post it on here also if you are interested?
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Quote from: FoMoCoSHO on April 18, 2016, 10:50:20 AM
Quote from: SHOdded on April 18, 2016, 05:41:21 AM
Fomoco would advocate you calling up Brian at BND and getting some ACES love for your SHO, Elven ;)
I would like to see if it drops his KR....
E85 should also help according to Torrie so we will try a gallon mixed in a full tank and go from there.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Quote from: ElvenSho on April 18, 2016, 12:43:10 PM
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 18, 2016, 12:06:03 AM
ElevenSHO, You should be pretty happy with that...Should feel beastly. Torrie really changed the boost you were commanding...Not sure why your tunes were so different....You were targeting about 15.6 psi the entire pull through the gears. You are maxxed out on the spark. You had knock sensor activity the entire time but I would live with it...You are getting the most power for the fuel you have....The knock sensor will do the work. Fuel pressure looked good
You never droped below about 15 psi at redline so that's pretty good I think...Big boost spikes at upshifts but that's the nature of this beast unless you want to use the throttle to regulate it, but that's not Torrie's approach. You didn't knock excessively or have fuel pressure drops so I wouldn't worry
I'll be curious to see how well that tune runs at the track.
Good to hear! I will be at the track on the 23rd and will let you know how it does compared to the previous tune that had me run 12.8@108. Torrie is having me try a gallong of e85 with the full tank to see if it helps with the KR, will actually do a log with that today and send to him. I can post it on here also if you are interested?
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Hell yeah, post away...the nerd in me actually enjoys looking at them
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 18, 2016, 01:02:17 PM
Quote from: ElvenSho on April 18, 2016, 12:43:10 PM
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 18, 2016, 12:06:03 AM
ElevenSHO, You should be pretty happy with that...Should feel beastly. Torrie really changed the boost you were commanding...Not sure why your tunes were so different....You were targeting about 15.6 psi the entire pull through the gears. You are maxxed out on the spark. You had knock sensor activity the entire time but I would live with it...You are getting the most power for the fuel you have....The knock sensor will do the work. Fuel pressure looked good
You never droped below about 15 psi at redline so that's pretty good I think...Big boost spikes at upshifts but that's the nature of this beast unless you want to use the throttle to regulate it, but that's not Torrie's approach. You didn't knock excessively or have fuel pressure drops so I wouldn't worry
I'll be curious to see how well that tune runs at the track.
Good to hear! I will be at the track on the 23rd and will let you know how it does compared to the previous tune that had me run 12.8@108. Torrie is having me try a gallong of e85 with the full tank to see if it helps with the KR, will actually do a log with that today and send to him. I can post it on here also if you are interested?
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Hell yeah, post away...the nerd in me actually enjoys looking at them
Here you go, enjoy lol!
Torrie said that its a bit better but wants me to bump it up to 2 gallons of e85 with rest 93e0.
Quote from: ElvenSho on April 18, 2016, 03:21:27 PM
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 18, 2016, 01:02:17 PM
Quote from: ElvenSho on April 18, 2016, 12:43:10 PM
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 18, 2016, 12:06:03 AM
ElevenSHO, You should be pretty happy with that...Should feel beastly. Torrie really changed the boost you were commanding...Not sure why your tunes were so different....You were targeting about 15.6 psi the entire pull through the gears. You are maxxed out on the spark. You had knock sensor activity the entire time but I would live with it...You are getting the most power for the fuel you have....The knock sensor will do the work. Fuel pressure looked good
You never droped below about 15 psi at redline so that's pretty good I think...Big boost spikes at upshifts but that's the nature of this beast unless you want to use the throttle to regulate it, but that's not Torrie's approach. You didn't knock excessively or have fuel pressure drops so I wouldn't worry
I'll be curious to see how well that tune runs at the track.
Good to hear! I will be at the track on the 23rd and will let you know how it does compared to the previous tune that had me run 12.8@108. Torrie is having me try a gallong of e85 with the full tank to see if it helps with the KR, will actually do a log with that today and send to him. I can post it on here also if you are interested?
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Hell yeah, post away...the nerd in me actually enjoys looking at them
Here you go, enjoy lol!
Torrie said that its a bit better but wants me to bump it up to 2 gallons of e85 with rest 93e0.
Make sure you verify that it is E-0 because that will definitely change your blend percentage and perceived results.
This is great for us to see the effects adding some corn has on your KR with a baseline.
Looked to me that peak and overall KR activity decreased.
1-2 and 2-3 took a bit of an FRP hit but third stayed strong.
Still >1450 PSI the entire run
I'm very curious what % you have to hit to suppress knock.
Quote from: FoMoCoSHO on April 18, 2016, 03:24:31 PM
Quote from: ElvenSho on April 18, 2016, 03:21:27 PM
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 18, 2016, 01:02:17 PM
Quote from: ElvenSho on April 18, 2016, 12:43:10 PM
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 18, 2016, 12:06:03 AM
ElevenSHO, You should be pretty happy with that...Should feel beastly. Torrie really changed the boost you were commanding...Not sure why your tunes were so different....You were targeting about 15.6 psi the entire pull through the gears. You are maxxed out on the spark. You had knock sensor activity the entire time but I would live with it...You are getting the most power for the fuel you have....The knock sensor will do the work. Fuel pressure looked good
You never droped below about 15 psi at redline so that's pretty good I think...Big boost spikes at upshifts but that's the nature of this beast unless you want to use the throttle to regulate it, but that's not Torrie's approach. You didn't knock excessively or have fuel pressure drops so I wouldn't worry
I'll be curious to see how well that tune runs at the track.
Good to hear! I will be at the track on the 23rd and will let you know how it does compared to the previous tune that had me run 12.8@108. Torrie is having me try a gallong of e85 with the full tank to see if it helps with the KR, will actually do a log with that today and send to him. I can post it on here also if you are interested?
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Hell yeah, post away...the nerd in me actually enjoys looking at them
Here you go, enjoy lol!
Torrie said that its a bit better but wants me to bump it up to 2 gallons of e85 with rest 93e0.
Make sure you verify that it is E-0 because that will definitely change your blend percentage.
The owner of the gas station stated it is pure gas, its 3.89 per gallon for that reason I guess.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 16, 2016, 11:18:40 PM
Steal blue sho your WOT from a stop is kinda interesting.....Your throttle is closing Id say because you are overboosting and load must be exceeding a torque limit....I'm not sure why you are going so much over your desired boost...You are targeting about 202 kpa but your were boosting to 225 and even 250kpa
Your throttle closings are weird tho, the timing is weird...Your throttle closed before you hit 2nd...Usually your boost spike won't happen til after the shift and then your throttle would close a bit
Some things are hard to deduce because only torrie knows what he is doing in the tune.
And you are leaning out a little more than I would like to see...Surprisingly though, there wasn't much knock sensor acivity....Your fuel pressure isn't terrible for the load you were spiking to. You drop to around 1300 psi fuel pressure which should be enough to maintain AFR but you went to .88 and .90 lambda which I wouldn't like....I've had fuel pressure as low as 700 psi and maintained AFR. You don't and your STFT's spike. So I don't know why you went lean. You were commanding .80 lambda....That is LAMBSE. So if you have fuel pressure, and you do, you should be pretty close to what's commanded and you aren't.
Thanks for the in-depth analysis. I ended up sending Torrie a couple sets of datalogs after I return the car to stock, he said they would be useful. After which he sent me a new tune that was pretty conservative. Working back and forth a bit he seems to be bringing the load up slowly with each revision. I can't speak highly enough of this guy, he has the patience of a Saint.
My data logs are looking cleaner, AFR is being maintained better at around .80 with a slight jump to .85 for less than a second in first gear, STFT are not spiking as high around 1.08, and fuel pressure is keeping up better. Of course all that said he is keeping my loads around 1.70 with peaks around 1.76... So a bit more conservative. Seems every revision at this point adds more load but keeps my AFR under better control.
Although there at two trends I am noticing and I think you hit it on the head and Torrie is working through them...
One is I keep boosting way over desired. Each tune at this point seems to bringing those in line with each other slowly, but I am still seeing some big deltas.
Two is bank 1 keeps running considerably leaner than bank 2. I would doubt this is normal? The PCV sits on top of bank one, not sure if it is leaking or maybe a clogged injector? Vac leak? I am not throwing codes though.
In short, Torrie seems to be feeling it out and being very patient with me.. Sent him a set of logs last night at 1030, had a response by 1045 with an adjusted tune.. Talk about turn around times...
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
E20 mix for the win... 12.4@111 torrie tuned.. K&n filter only
Sent from my iPhone
After triple checking the spark plugs and I decided to reseat the PCV assembly since I just kinda moved it out of the way when I put the plugs in. Turns out when I moved it back into place there is a rubber gasket that helps seal it to the valve cover, well it had gotten rolled/bunched. Fixed it, tightened it back down. Started running through the tune Torrie sent me and my AFR was looking much better, which maybe contributed to the incorrectly seated PCV assembly... as a faulty one can cause you to run lean. Anyway... very happy with the tune, here are some data logs that look pretty clean I would think...
Steal blue walk me through the logic of a seal on pcv contributing to bad afr readings?
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 22, 2016, 09:03:16 PM
Steal blue walk me through the logic of a seal on pcv contributing to bad afr readings?
Good question, and I am not sure, since we use MAP and not MAF. However, after fixing the seal, the afrs are better... I can't explain it.. But across ALL the tunes the afrs are better.. No doubt someone smarter than me can explain or its fluke? I really don't know...
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Placebo effect I was only asking because I wanted you to bang yourself
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 22, 2016, 09:30:53 PM
Placebo effect I was only asking because I wanted you to bang yourself
The AJ we know and love LOL
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Quote from: AJP turbo on April 22, 2016, 09:30:53 PM
Placebo effect I was only asking because I wanted you to bang yourself
I appreciate the effort good Sir, it did not go unnoticed. :D
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Quote from: StealBlueSho on April 22, 2016, 07:21:27 PM
After triple checking the spark plugs and I decided to reseat the PCV assembly since I just kinda moved it out of the way when I put the plugs in. Turns out when I moved it back into place there is a rubber gasket that helps seal it to the valve cover, well it had gotten rolled/bunched. Fixed it, tightened it back down. Started running through the tune Torrie sent me and my AFR was looking much better, which maybe contributed to the incorrectly seated PCV assembly... as a faulty one can cause you to run lean. Anyway... very happy with the tune, here are some data logs that look pretty clean I would think...
SBSHO would you be kind enough to add your signature,thanks. Z :) Btw the 15's do have a different pcv system which use a (crank pressure sensor). Z
I said MAYBE because I wasn't sure and I do not know if that contributed to the leaner AFR. I know on some of my older cars an improperly sealed pcv valve can cause excess air to get into the system that is not accounted for by the MAF. Since the Ecoboost motors do not use a MAF but MAP of which I am not as familiar with troubleshooting I can only speculate. The PVC assembly/valve does happen to be after both MAP sensors on our valve cover but the line that runs to the intake is in-between the manifold map and the map before the throttle body. Again, I am speculating that if not sealed correctly would could cause excess air to be brought in. Again, speculating.
http://www.freeasestudyguides.com/pcv-system-problems.html (http://www.freeasestudyguides.com/pcv-system-problems.html) was one of the sources I was pulling from.
I had an older Ford which had a PCV valve get stuck open, it caused the car to run like crap.
Tough crowd...
The explanation for this "PCV effect" could have mechanical, electrical, or logic components, we just haven't figured it out yet. Many a time I have run across situations that have not been able to be explained by experts, yet they occur, and can be produced on-demand with the right set of inputs. This is apparently one such situation. There is a black box here that needs to be figured out, just hasn't been yet.
Main thing is that you are happy with the way your SHO is running, and we would like to continue receiving updates in the future to see if the fix is truly in place.
Z, any idea what the tieup is with the crank pressure sensor on the 2015s? First I've heard of it.
Quote from: SHOdded on April 23, 2016, 05:38:47 AM
The explanation for this "PCV effect" could have mechanical, electrical, or logic components, we just haven't figured it out yet. Many a time I have run across situations that have not been able to be explained by experts, yet they occur, and can be produced on-demand with the right set of inputs. This is apparently one such situation. There is a black box here that needs to be figured out, just hasn't been yet.
Main thing is that you are happy with the way your SHO is running, and we would like to continue receiving updates in the future to see if the fix is truly in place.
Z, any idea what the tieup is with the crank pressure sensor on the 2015s? First I've heard of it.
Here it goes Starting in the 2015 MY, Ford will be using a Crankcase Pressure Sensor (CKCP) to detect a disconnection of the
fresh air hose. A disconnection of the fresh air hose would allow the discharge of crankcase vapor into the
atmosphere while the engine was under boost. The diagram below shows a schematic of the PCV system. The
CKCP sensor is installed in the fresh air hose. The fresh air hose has two connection points. The connection at the
AIS system is called the "Clean side" connection while the connection at the rocker cover/engine is called the "dirty
side" connection. The fresh air hose connects the Air Induction System (AIS) to the rocker cover to provide fresh, filtered clean air
into the crankcase as the crankcase vapors are evacuated. The PCV valve has a spring loaded, tapered pintle and
orifice that limits the amount of crankcase vapors that are inducted into the engine. The least amount of flow occurs
during idle when manifold vacuum is high. As engine load increases, manifold vacuum decreases which allow
more flow. Under boosted conditions, there is no flow through the PCV valve. As crankcase pressure increases,
blow by vapors get pushed through the fresh air tube into the Air Induction System (AIS) where they will be
inducted into the engine.
So nothing should be contributed to the PCV, good to know. I was having a hard time drawing correlation but it was the only obvious thing I saw when reseating everything. Now I also reseated all the plugs as well and double checked all the connections to the maps, pcv, diverter valves, HPFP...
Here are the datalogs before and I after I reseated everything... before I was consistently hitting .86 AFR in first gear with some good spikes on the STFT.. afterwards I am able to keep LAMBSE of .80 through the entire run consistently.
I had run several different tunes some of which have a heavier load that show similar results of before not keeping a steady .80 AFR and then being able to..
Here's additional info from the OBD manual, hope this clarifies some things ...
Will look at your datalogs later today, StealBlueSHO.