3.0 cals

[ShelGame]

I just posted the stock '90/91 3.0 cal (A465 binary) with a fairly complete table file and I also posted an updated '89 3.0 table file (A107 binary) in the repository. I've done a couple of these cals now and would be happy to give pointers to anyone wanting to roll their own.

MP Tuner source code and templates are coming. I won't say soon, though.

Unfortunately, I still don't see a simple way to build a turbo cal from the stock V6 code.

[Ondonti]

Well even ghetto tune setups could use an improved VE table. That was my biggest problem on a stock cal. I had to run rich down low to have safe fuel above 5000 rpms.
One step at a time.
I think one of the problems with the 3.0 is that most people building them are SBECII and the work involved in rewiring to older electronics might make megasquirt = $ and time spent.
There are people with the older stuff though!

[ShelGame]

Here's a question for you Brent - Does the stock 3.0 go lean or rich at high RPM? I've been told it goes lean, but that's from guys without a WB, so I don't know how they know for sure what's going on. Looking at the cals, it looks to me that it would go rich - the pumping efficiency table goes flat above 5500rpm. Usually, the mfg will make sure a cal goes rich at high rpm to reduce power and increase headgasket life (by reducing cylinder pressure).

Also, there's a big dip in the timing vs. rpm table from 3k or so up to 5k. I think it will be pretty easy to make a nicer NA cal for these, I just need a little direction since I don't own one myself.

[Aries_Turbo]

i think that dip in timing is because there is no knock sensor setup on the 3.0L stuff. take out timing to keep it alive when towing stuff with a caravan and running cheap gas.

with good gas and a good ear, it would be a nice bump in power to add that timing back in.

brian

[bakes]

Rob how much different would a 94 3.0l sbec II cal be to alter ? i only need it to be 2 bar.

[Aries_Turbo]

hey rob, most of the 3.0 stuff makes sense except for that goofy other peftbl. what is that for?

[turbovanman²]

Here's a question for you Brent - Does the stock 3.0 go lean or rich at high RPM? I've been told it goes lean, but that's from guys without a WB, so I don't know how they know for sure what's going on. Looking at the cals, it looks to me that it would go rich - the pumping efficiency table goes flat above 5500rpm. Usually, the mfg will make sure a cal goes rich at high rpm to reduce power and increase headgasket life (by reducing cylinder pressure).

Also, there's a big dip in the timing vs. rpm table from 3k or so up to 5k. I think it will be pretty easy to make a nicer NA cal for these, I just need a little direction since I don't own one myself.

No wideband but looking at the ox sensor, they go pig rich for me, not to mention the smell, ick.

[ShelGame]

Rob how much different would a 94 3.0l sbec II cal be to alter ? i only need it to be 2 bar.

2-bar would be extremely difficult, the '92+ cals are already tough due to the 3D. I'm going to say I don't think I'll ever have the time to convert a 3.0 cal to turbo...

---------- Post added at 10:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:21 PM ----------


hey rob, most of the 3.0 stuff makes sense except for that goofy other peftbl. what is that for?

I beleive it's used at part throttle. It kind of makes sense to have a P/T peftbl, though the shape is very strange if you ask me...

---------- Post added at 10:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:22 PM ----------


No wideband but looking at the ox sensor, they go pig rich for me, not to mention the smell, ick.

I've had other people tell me about the 'lean' smell after running it at high RPM. That was my other clue - cats don't smell when they run lean, they smell when they're too rich. Plus, from what I can see in the cal, it is definitely setup to be rich above 5500 rpm...

[turbovanman²]

I've had other people tell me about the 'lean' smell after running it at high RPM. That was my other clue - cats don't smell when they run lean, they smell when they're too rich. Plus, from what I can see in the cal, it is definitely setup to be rich above 5500 rpm...

I think people are confused with rich and lean smell, :p

They stink of sulphur, which is rich, and you and I both know OEM's set it up rich on WOT, just stick behind any car up a hill, phew. Lean does smell too, but its a different smell of course, its rancid.

[Aries_Turbo]

I beleive it's used at part throttle. It kind of makes sense to have a P/T peftbl, though the shape is very strange if you ask me...

does the code indicate that is a total separate PFTBL with the same amount of authority or could it be a fine tuning deal that scales the main PEFTBL?

it looks so wonky that its hard to wrap my mind around how the mix could be so different with the throttle opened partway. i know that its going to make the air turbulent and therefore change how the plenum/divider/runners interact with airflow but it looks so wierd.

Brian

[ShelGame]

does the code indicate that is a total separate PFTBL with the same amount of authority or could it be a fine tuning deal that scales the main PEFTBL?

it looks so wonky that its hard to wrap my mind around how the mix could be so different with the throttle opened partway. i know that its going to make the air turbulent and therefore change how the plenum/divider/runners interact with airflow but it looks so wierd.

Brian

Nope, it's strictly a switch. I have not deciphered the flag it's checking yet, but I think it's the part throttle flag. If the flag is set, then the 2nd (odd looking) pump eff table is used (it's listed 1st below). Actually, this means that it's only used at idle. Which makes a little more sense.


B9D4 964d LB9D4: ldaa EngineRpm_HB ; load a with memory contents
B9D6 ce81ed ldx #PEFTBL_PumpingEfficiency2 ; load index with value
B9D9 13b90103 brclr *BitFlagsB9, #$%00000001, LB9E0 ; branch if bit(s) clear
B9DD ce821c ldx #PEFTBL_PumpingEfficiency ; load index with value
B9E0 bddb07 LB9E0: jsr Lookup4ByteTable ; call subroutine
B9E3 d77f stab Pulsewidth_Modifier_PumpEff ; store b into memory

[Aries_Turbo]

so idle then, not part throttle?

Brian

[ShelGame]

Yeah, the 'main' peftbl is for P/T and WOT, with the 2nd peftbl for idle only. I need to confirm the purpose of the flag, but in the turbo cals, the 0 bit is the P/T flag, and bit 7 is the WOT flag. I can't see them changing the flag meaning (scan tools can read those flags) so my guess is it's an idle-only peftbl.

[Aries_Turbo]

it does make more sense to be a idle/no throttle table though it still looks a bit wierd. :)

Brian

[ShelGame]

it does make more sense to be a idle/no throttle table though it still looks a bit wierd. :)

Brian

It does, but if you consider that idle won't be set very high, you can see that it's really only controlling fuel in the 500-3k rpm range. After that, it ramps up to a very rich condition.

It's probably a very useful table for getting a 3.0 to idle right when you change cams or do some porting...

[Aries_Turbo]

i was thinking that myself. :)

[ShelGame]

You know, that's such a detailled peftbl, that it makes me wonder if they didn't get rid of the spark scatter for the 3.0? I'll have to go look...

[Kreel]

Nope, it's strictly a switch. I have not deciphered the flag it's checking yet, but I think it's the part throttle flag. If the flag is set, then the 2nd (odd looking) pump eff table is used (it's listed 1st below). Actually, this means that it's only used at idle. Which makes a little more sense.


B9D4 964d LB9D4: ldaa EngineRpm_HB ; load a with memory contents
B9D6 ce81ed ldx #PEFTBL_PumpingEfficiency2 ; load index with value
B9D9 13b90103 brclr *BitFlagsB9, #$%00000001, LB9E0 ; branch if bit(s) clear
B9DD ce821c ldx #PEFTBL_PumpingEfficiency ; load index with value
B9E0 bddb07 LB9E0: jsr Lookup4ByteTable ; call subroutine
B9E3 d77f stab Pulsewidth_Modifier_PumpEff ; store b into memory


That code brings back memories of assembly language courses from years ago, lol. Call me a stickler but I'll stay with OO languages :amen:

[RoadWarrior222]

It's probably a very useful table for getting a 3.0 to idle right when you change cams or do some porting...

Takin' notes.

Should be something more to find for N/A in there somewhere, since hyundai and mitsu apps got about 15hp more with basically the same hardware.

Just when I think it's safe to start digging into mine for serious mods, something else goes wrong and I am chasing that in available wrenching time.

Not thinking my future porting plans will have trouble with idle at the moment though, the methods I'm thinking of are kind of pressure and velocity specific, so it should behave nice in vacuum and low throttle opening.

[ShadowFromHell]

I am very confused as to why it is so hard to convert a NA cal to a boosted cal. Cant you just figure out the crossover point (if say a 2 bar map was installed) and start adding fuel at that point? Same with timing? Rob, you know WAY more stuff then I do about this, I am just curious. From what I have seen for other cars, that's all they seem to do (but I could be wrong). I do agree with Odonti too, be able to mod the tables would be a aid to the turbo guys even if you cant make a full blown turbo cal.

[Aries_Turbo]

it would be a hack. ALOT of code, not just tables would have to be completely rewritten to make it work properly.

i dont know what would be easier.... making a 3.0L cal work for 2 or 3 bar or rewriting the turbo code to work with a v6.

Brian

[ShadowFromHell]

But IF you hacked it to work like that, wouldnt it still be better then a RRR?

[ShelGame]

I am very confused as to why it is so hard to convert a NA cal to a boosted cal. Cant you just figure out the crossover point (if say a 2 bar map was installed) and start adding fuel at that point? Same with timing? Rob, you know WAY more stuff then I do about this, I am just curious. From what I have seen for other cars, that's all they seem to do (but I could be wrong). I do agree with Odonti too, be able to mod the tables would be a aid to the turbo guys even if you cant make a full blown turbo cal.

The problem is, some of the code is hard-wired to assume that MAP is only ever negative, and less than baro. Those portions of code have to be completely re-written so that a MAP value above baro doesn't cause an overflow. It's not impossible, just time consuming. And I have other priorities right now. Maybe one of these days I'll at least sit down and map out the scope of what needs to change. Maybe it's not as big a job as I think...

---------- Post added at 08:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:06 PM ----------


it would be a hack. ALOT of code, not just tables would have to be completely rewritten to make it work properly.

i dont know what would be easier.... making a 3.0L cal work for 2 or 3 bar or rewriting the turbo code to work with a v6.

Brian

Yeah, I don't know either...

[ShadowFromHell]

Okay, that makes sense. It would be well worth it for a company to re-write the code for a honda (what I was referring too) because there is so many people out there that would use/buy it. I doubt you would sell more then a handful of 3.0 turbo cals, no matter how good they were.

[ShelGame]

Okay, that makes sense. It would be well worth it for a company to re-write the code for a honda (what I was referring too) because there is so many people out there that would use/buy it. I doubt you would sell more then a handful of 3.0 turbo cals, no matter how good they were.

Exactly. It's still an interesting challenge. Part of the problem, also, is that I have a hard enough time finding bugs in my turbo code, and it's largely stock-based. Myself, I only have a SMEC based turbo 4 cylinder. So, I would have to rely on a tester to help get the code worked out. It's really hard to do over the internet. There are only a couple of guys with turbo 3.0's, and most of them have already converted to MS, I think.

[RoadWarrior222]

So, what kind of things would need to be done for making a 3.0 turbo cal out of a 4 cyl cal, delete one injector and batch fire them in pairs (Which the older V6 cals do anyway) change timing events to 120* instead of 90* ...
2: ???
3: Profit.

[ShelGame]

So, what kind of things would need to be done for making a 3.0 turbo cal out of a 4 cyl cal, delete one injector and batch fire them in pairs (Which the older V6 cals do anyway) change timing events to 120* instead of 90* ...
2: ???
3: Profit.

It's actually really complicated becuase the fuel calculations are done in the interrupt routine for the distributor. Basically, that means that the injector timing and pulsewidth are calculated in the same routine. So, adding a 3rd injector and changing the timing isn't so easy.

Honestly, it will be easier to make a 2-bar 3.0 cal than converting the turbo cal to 6 cylinder.

[Ondonti]

The wideband swings 0.5 points high on a bolton n/a 3.0 from 5200 to 6200 on a manual SBEC II 3.0 cal. I can't speak for the older cals. That is with 3" exhaust.
The manual computer also runs a little richer WOT with no learning.
I spent a lot of time with the wideband before I finished my original turbo project in 2005. OEM cal actually runs great with 30# injectors and lower base pressure (30mpg no problem).


The timing thing is probably good for turbo guys.

[ShelGame]

The wideband swings 0.5 points high on a bolton n/a 3.0 from 5200 to 6200 on a manual SBEC II 3.0 cal. I can't speak for the older cals. That is with 3" exhaust.

0.5 points 'high'? Is that 0.5 points lean?

The '92+ cals really are completely different from the '89 and 90/91 cals. I'll have to take a look, but I think I know why they go lean. The 3D tables are typically setup to a lower RPM than the computers max reading to improve resolution. However, this means that you could run off the MAP and end up with a near constant PW above xx rpm. That might be what's happening. It would be a fairly easy fix in those cals.

[Ondonti]

0.5 point lean swing (high). The more mods you do for up top, the worse it gets. HP tends to fall off on the dyno while its busy going lean. When you run heads and cams or an intake manifold it just gets worse but I can't give AFR numbers. When I tested my intake manifold n/a I didn't have a wideband in the test car.
Extending the table to 7500rpms would probably be a cool thing for people sticking OEM.

[black86glhs]

Would it be possible to get the tables from a 3000 GT and work them into the 3.0 N/A tune? Maybe just use them to get an idea?

[Ondonti]

I don't think Rob has a problem getting a decent tune going, but more like a problem with the tables the 3.0 comes with from OEM. No turbo = less stuff going on.

[black86glhs]

I was thinking a Stealth or 3000 GT turbo would give him ideas on how to set up for a turbo 3.0 since the NA version is done the way it is. Especially how the map is set up.

[ShelGame]

3000gt is a completely different computer. It's a Mitsubishi computer. Not a SBEC...

[turbovanman²]

What did Dodge use when they had their prototypes running?

[black86glhs]

3000gt is a completely different computer. It's a Mitsubishi computer. Not a SBEC...

I know, but is the language the similar or could it be translated?

[shelbymonster]

What did Dodge use when they had their prototypes running?

yeah we need to find what they used and find one

[Aries_Turbo]

they probably just used the SBEC and that huge eeprom emulator box thing that they had back then.

the ECU's were in development a bit before they were released

Brian

[turbovanman²]

they probably just used the SBEC and that huge eeprom emulator box thing that they had back then.

the ECU's were in development a bit before they were released

Brian

Wonder if any are floating around or if 5 digits knows of any?

[Aries_Turbo]

why would you want one. the ostrich does the same thing and its ALOT easier to use.

are you wanting a 3.0L turbo development computer? its probably the same as the regular SBEC or SMEC but it has some kind of 3.0L turbo code on it.

Brian

[turbovanman²]

why would you want one. the ostrich does the same thing and its ALOT easier to use.

are you wanting a 3.0L turbo development computer? its probably the same as the regular SBEC or SMEC but it has some kind of 3.0L turbo code on it.

Brian

What a silly question, I thought this thread was about a 3.0L cal and turbo cal, so I threw out some idea's? If you can use an Ostrich, why is this thread started then? :confused:

You never know, I might go 3.0L turbo in the future if something happens to the van, :(

[bakes]

they probably just used the SBEC and that huge eeprom emulator box thing that they had back then.

the ECU's were in development a bit before they were released

Brian

Ya but does anyone one have bin file is more the question?

[ShadowFromHell]

Ya but does anyone one have bin file is more the question?

Well, the prototype motors DID get out didnt they? If they got out, I wonder if any ECU's escaped with them? I think it would be well worth tracking down the owners of the prototype turbo 3.0's and see what they have. IF they had the factory ECU's it would be a godsend to the turbo 3.0 community!

[turbovanman²]

^^^^^^^That's why I suggested 5 digits might have something or know where to get it?

[Aries_Turbo]

i thought you meant you wanted the old school eeprom emulator.

yeah a bin would be awesome but i have no idea where to get one. :)

Brian

[RoadWarrior222]

Well, the prototype motors DID get out didnt they? If they got out, I wonder if any ECU's escaped with them? I think it would be well worth tracking down the owners of the prototype turbo 3.0's and see what they have. IF they had the factory ECU's it would be a godsend to the turbo 3.0 community!
If the ECUs got out, it would be a plug and play deally and we'd hear about them running them. I don't think they got them. Not that they might have taken a different escape route, I just don't think any made it with the motors.

BTW the mitsu/stealth ECUs I had the idea they are using some MAF type setup? Metered airflow anyway, if so any tables they have would be kinda whacked for MAP.

[Reaper1]

I don't think the ECU's got out. I seem to recall Rob having to do the same old fueling mods as Brent to get his prototype engine running. 1 blew up and the other is presumably still in his Shadow.

[Juggy]

i have a SBEC socketed computer from a 90/91 v6

[turbovanman²]

i have a SBEC socketed computer from a 90/91 v6

That's great if its a turbo 3.0L cal, if not, :confused:

[Ondonti]

they probably just used the SBEC and that huge eeprom emulator box thing that they had back then.

the ECU's were in development a bit before they were released

Brian
Going to vote this. When they only have 10-20 motors, they wouldn't have a cal yet.

[Juggy]

i have a SBEC socketed computer from a 90/91 v6

its n/a and im sure any 3.0 guy could use this with an ostrich or chip burner.....just throwing it out there, as im sure there arent too many sockected 3.0L comps out there yet....

[RoadWarrior222]

I could use it with a chip burner, but couldn't necessarily use it with my vehicle, would be the issue for me.

[Aries_Turbo]

That's great if its a turbo 3.0L cal, if not, :confused:

why would it be a turbo cal? the likelyhood of anyone posting up a 3.0L-T cal is like you running 11's tomorrow in your van.

even if it isnt a turbo v6 sbec, its still useful for those wanting to play a little with what they have.

brian

[Ondonti]

Lot of guys want to run cams...which will expand the air fuel gap at high rpms, and create a powerband that you can't use because of the rev limiter.
Before, even with my cams advanced 4 degrees I didn't manage to hit peak hp.

[ShelGame]

Lot of guys want to run cams...which will expand the air fuel gap at high rpms, and create a powerband that you can't use because of the rev limiter.
Before, even with my cams advanced 4 degrees I didn't manage to hit peak hp.

The rev limiter is no problem at all...

[turbovanman²]

why would it be a turbo cal? the likelyhood of anyone posting up a 3.0L-T cal is like you running 11's tomorrow in your van.

even if it isnt a turbo v6 sbec, its still useful for those wanting to play a little with what they have.

brian

Anyone can get a socketed SBEC so I didn't see the relevance of it, :p

You'll be eating crow soon, :nod:

[Juggy]

Anyone can get a socketed SBEC so I didn't see the relevance of it, :p

lol.....so what your saying is i might as well throw it in the trash since socketed SBEC's r dime a dozen, especially V6 ones.............

[turbovanman²]

lol.....so what your saying is i might as well throw it in the trash since socketed SBEC's r dime a dozen, especially V6 ones.............

No, just give it to me, :p

Aren't there a few prototype turbo 3.0L's floating around on the street???

[RoadWarrior222]

I think it's more accurate to say they are floating around in barns, garages and sheds.

[Juggy]

No, just give it to me, :p

Aren't there a few prototype turbo 3.0L's floating around on the street???

lol, the only person that i could possibly recall having 3.0L turbo calibration data would be a man by the name of robert hassler (if i remember correctly from the 3.0L yahoo board)


I think it's more accurate to say they are floating around in barns, garages and sheds.

:lol: +1

[Ondonti]

No, nobody has a cal. Robert Hassler has a RRR and then runs a SAAB knock/boost control system. Chief also has a prototype motor, and RRR.

[Juggy]

No, nobody has a cal. Robert Hassler has a RRR and then runs a SAAB knock/boost control system. Chief also has a prototype motor, and RRR.

ah yes that sounds more familiar. chief huh, almost forgot about that guy....he was the one who worked with nitetrain correct? i thought kelly was working with them too b4 him and mike started KMP ???

[Ondonti]

Chief is on his own. he started his own mailing list and thats about it. Posts sometimes on TD. I never see him on AIM anymore. At one point he thought his turbo blew a seal but I guess it didnt. I can't imagine trying to repair one. I don't know how he got a prototype motor, I suspect he bought it from Robert but he might have had another source. I don't think anyone was ever specific about where the originals came from.
The custom intake manifold they have is also quite interesting.

[Reaper1]

I forgot how he got that engine. I know Robert bought 2. One blew up, so he tore it down and posted pics gallor of it. He then put the other one in his Shadow. I know when they first surfaced in the late 90's there were 3 or 4 of them for sale. One ended up in Kentuky IIRC and was put in a Daytona and never heard from again to my knowledge. Wasn't Cliff Ramsdell where they came from? Or maybe it was Cliff Sebring...damn...can't remember now!

[Ondonti]

Vigo has me interested in a sbecII cal that just has a raised limiter and revised fueling up top.

[Aries_Turbo]

does the 3.0L sbecII have 3d tables like the other vehicles with that ecu?

Brian

[Juggy]

man its beeen soooooo long since i played with the 3.0!!!
when i got this lancer bakes almost had me convinced on doing up a 3.0L turbo lancer :evil:

maybe one day ill head back to my roots!!! i keep an eye on things once in a while......i wish my old duster could have had a custom cal!! thing had crazy low end up was a dog up top especially after i sent it in to try to get fixed to pass the e test....i never made it and i was having clutch probs like crazy so i just scrapped the whole thing minus the 543/568 trans i built for it....

15.4 @ 91 2.5 60 footers 9.9 1/8th's at 74-75 lol......slicks would have helped too hehe....

[ShelGame]

does the 3.0L sbecII have 3d tables like the other vehicles with that ecu?

Brian

Yes it does...

[Aries_Turbo]

stupid 3d tables. :)

actually stupid transfer function making things difficult. :)

Brian

[RoadWarrior222]

was a dog up top especially after i sent it in to try to get fixed to pass the e test....

I get mine through pretty easy just by making sure sensors are all working, PCV system is clean, functioning and that damn top hose isn't sucking flat again, filling it with Pennzoil High Milage oil with a week to run in, and running some isopropyl alky through it.

[Ondonti]

All you really need to do is put timing back to stock or retarded a bit. 3.0 pukes emissions when advanced.

Went from 200+ ppm HC to about zero with a few less degrees of timing. That was some Simon advice. If you still don't pass, your car probably is not sitting at 14.7:1 so I would assume your o2 sensor is on the way out.

[RoadWarrior222]

Never had trouble with 15* base here, well not when everything else was working... lowest of about 15ppm at 1500-2000rpm, 80 at idle. (Allowed about 85 and 200 IIRC)

Edit: Though trouble is, e-tests aren't very scientific, in that they run it a couple of minutes until it drops under the thresholds, so your "bare pass" might mean they were in a hurry that day and it was still dropping.

[Ondonti]

Never had trouble with 15* base here, well not when everything else was working... lowest of about 15ppm at 1500-2000rpm, 80 at idle. (Allowed about 85 and 200 IIRC)

Edit: Though trouble is, e-tests aren't very scientific, in that they run it a couple of minutes until it drops under the thresholds, so your "bare pass" might mean they were in a hurry that day and it was still dropping.


80 is a lot. My 3.0 always got almost nothing when set right. Trouble vs emissions friendly.
If a no cat 30 year old carbed 440 can do 100 then 80 is a lot.

I ran 17-18 degrees at high altitude.

[RoadWarrior222]

It's a balance with the NOx though, if HC is all that's tested, then yup, you can fiddle any carb to read real low, just lean it out.

[Ondonti]

I never had to pass Nox or mess with AFR. SBECII in proper working order will always hover around 14.7.
If you have to mess with it, your car is not running right.

[shayne]

shelgame i was wondering, will anything convince you to make up a turbo cal for a sbecII, is it a time thing, or is it a money thing? id bet they're would be a bunch of guys like me that would gladly jump on a turbo build if it meant that we could do a nice clean and simple burned chip to make it all work. i was chatting with bakes and simon yesterday and the whole turbo thing is starting to sound better and better every time i talk with someone about it, but i honestly dont feel like hacking up my wiring or going through the hassle of converting it to and older system if i can avoid doing it, call me lazy, but i am not too electrical savvy, and not nearly ambitious enough.

[zin]

Nope, it's strictly a switch. I have not deciphered the flag it's checking yet, but I think it's the part throttle flag. If the flag is set, then the 2nd (odd looking) pump eff table is used (it's listed 1st below). Actually, this means that it's only used at idle. Which makes a little more sense.

Sorry to give everyone whip-lash, but if my partial understanding of how the ECU works is correct, couldn't you use something like this to trim emissions under certain circumstances? This is what I think the factory was using it for, that or to improve idle quality...

Anyway, if you can control when it is used (the flag?), you could initiate it at your whim, say above a certain RPM or where another table ends?

It seems like you could do the same trick the Caddy engineers at GM got caught doing... They had programed the ECU to pass emissions, even though the mileage sucked, idle was erratic, etc. The cars would pass EPA cert, but the funny thing was no one complained about how crappy they ran, because none of the buyers ran the car without the climate control active, which activated a different table and made the car run great, get good gas mileage (for a Caddy), and not quite meet EPA specs... They got away with it until a tech at the test center, on a whim, turned on the climate controls...

Anyway, enough of the history lesson! Could we do something like this to allow one tune to have multiple effective tunes? I can imagine a single cal with "modifiers" to allow 87 octane, race gas, E85, econno mode, whatever...

Mike

[Sundance 6g72]

Here's a question for you Brent - Does the stock 3.0 go lean or rich at high RPM? I've been told it goes lean, but that's from guys without a WB, so I don't know how they know for sure what's going on. Looking at the cals, it looks to me that it would go rich - the pumping efficiency table goes flat above 5500rpm. Usually, the mfg will make sure a cal goes rich at high rpm to reduce power and increase headgasket life (by reducing cylinder pressure).

Also, there's a big dip in the timing vs. rpm table from 3k or so up to 5k. I think it will be pretty easy to make a nicer NA cal for these, I just need a little direction since I don't own one myself.

that was probebly me

now i have a wideband and this is is what happens

when cruising on highway im at 14.6 and when full throttle on the highway (rpms above 3500) i get a 13.2 all the way to redline.

one time it went to 12.5 around 4800rpms but that happend once

if i go 80% throttle (almost full throttle but still in closed loop) it will do like 12.0- 12.5 but it does not pull as hard --- full throttle at 13.2

so we dont go lean.. everyone always told me that we go lean

i know i was going lean when i first had my exhaust installed but it must have tuned its self to acount for the open exhaust.

my engine has the following

air intake
ported upper intake
half inch spacers
52mm throttle body
3inch exhast from cat back (cat deleted and replaced by a magnaflow straight through muffleR)

im sure the timing pull is what hurts us.. as far as im concerned, we need to go a little richer but its not that bad. i would like to see a 12.5 at full throttle in the upper rpms but all i get is a 13.1 - 13.2

[shelbymonster]

i was thinking (yes it happens sometimes) why dont use those 3.0 smec and rework the cal for turbo ??? possible ? even if we need to use a resistor box

[RoadWarrior222]

Par ce que, le SMEC c'est un cochon.

[shelbymonster]

Par ce que, le SMEC c'est un cochon.

what for ? i supose you think im french ... ok i am lol

[RoadWarrior222]

Well it's more of a pig to figure out than the earlier ECUs, so it's presumed that if we start getting to grips with the older ones, the newer ones will make more sense with some experience.

[Ondonti]

that was probebly me

now i have a wideband and this is is what happens

when cruising on highway im at 14.6 and when full throttle on the highway (rpms above 3500) i get a 13.2 all the way to redline.

one time it went to 12.5 around 4800rpms but that happend once

if i go 80% throttle (almost full throttle but still in closed loop) it will do like 12.0- 12.5 but it does not pull as hard --- full throttle at 13.2

so we dont go lean.. everyone always told me that we go lean

i know i was going lean when i first had my exhaust installed but it must have tuned its self to acount for the open exhaust.

my engine has the following

air intake
ported upper intake
half inch spacers
52mm throttle body
3inch exhast from cat back (cat deleted and replaced by a magnaflow straight through muffleR)

im sure the timing pull is what hurts us.. as far as im concerned, we need to go a little richer but its not that bad. i would like to see a 12.5 at full throttle in the upper rpms but all i get is a 13.1 - 13.2

YOU is not equal to WE or ME

[Sundance 6g72]

YOU is not equal to WE or ME

huh?


im just posting whats happening with my car is all.