2.0 turbo baby!!
10-22-2007, 07:29 PM
#451
Banned
Join Date: 08-09-07
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
he never mentioned the twinscrew, that is a completely different issue.
i ran 60's on my car when i was running meth injection, 2.6 a huge tune 24 degrees etc etc, and it idled fine, noremorse sent me a 30% reduction on my adaptive spark and bam it was perfect. My tuner had no issues controlling the 60's either, he said hpt didnt support them, then pulled out a calculater and refactored for the extra size. not sure what he did, but with 23 years experience and the busiest shop in the richest part of north america, i had no ill faith. Both mine and my friends cars ran and still do amazingly... i remember my duty cycle being like 75ish% on the 60's.
to continue, ive heard nothing but good things about tune time, and im sure they will figure out the issues, but if missmatched or whatever wants to go to a bigger turbo and up the boost, hes gonna need more the 50's there is no doubt.
Dan just likes to talk, and alot of his info is great info, but sometimes i think he needs to learn he will and can be wrong.
i ran 60's on my car when i was running meth injection, 2.6 a huge tune 24 degrees etc etc, and it idled fine, noremorse sent me a 30% reduction on my adaptive spark and bam it was perfect. My tuner had no issues controlling the 60's either, he said hpt didnt support them, then pulled out a calculater and refactored for the extra size. not sure what he did, but with 23 years experience and the busiest shop in the richest part of north america, i had no ill faith. Both mine and my friends cars ran and still do amazingly... i remember my duty cycle being like 75ish% on the 60's.
to continue, ive heard nothing but good things about tune time, and im sure they will figure out the issues, but if missmatched or whatever wants to go to a bigger turbo and up the boost, hes gonna need more the 50's there is no doubt.
Dan just likes to talk, and alot of his info is great info, but sometimes i think he needs to learn he will and can be wrong.
Last edited by splitimage; 10-22-2007 at 07:29 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
10-22-2007, 08:06 PM
#452
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-19-05
Location: Horseheads, NY
Posts: 3,018
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ill accept I'm wrong...when proven wrong
60s are done for a safety margin so you are not running 85-95% idcs all the time. Plus it eliminates the need to go up in size later if you do more extensive mods.
I have 101% IDCs on my 60lbers at 21psi fyi. Big turbo and cams will do that.
If an air fliter is restricting flow itll be showin in the maf freq values because there is a direct correlation to flow (dont remember if its linear or otherwise tho). Flow goes up maf freq goes up. So if the filter chokes flow your maf frequency will stay low due to amount of air going by at filter max flow rate. If you cant flow anymore the maf freq wont climb
You can still tune this (as in have ur commanded match ur actual) but it will cause problems as it stays at a sustained freq and engine ve changes. Your afr would then go whacky as ve changed and fueling cell stayed the same.
IMO this pcm isnt worth a damn over 15-16psi. I wish a company would develop a standalone already.
60s are done for a safety margin so you are not running 85-95% idcs all the time. Plus it eliminates the need to go up in size later if you do more extensive mods.
I have 101% IDCs on my 60lbers at 21psi fyi. Big turbo and cams will do that.
If an air fliter is restricting flow itll be showin in the maf freq values because there is a direct correlation to flow (dont remember if its linear or otherwise tho). Flow goes up maf freq goes up. So if the filter chokes flow your maf frequency will stay low due to amount of air going by at filter max flow rate. If you cant flow anymore the maf freq wont climb
You can still tune this (as in have ur commanded match ur actual) but it will cause problems as it stays at a sustained freq and engine ve changes. Your afr would then go whacky as ve changed and fueling cell stayed the same.
IMO this pcm isnt worth a damn over 15-16psi. I wish a company would develop a standalone already.
10-22-2007, 08:22 PM
#453
Senior Member
dan at least we got off better then the j-bods.
i agree with you 100% in the injectors, when are we gonna start the re-build????
i'm hoping to run into you soon, i wish to show you the most baller manifold of all time.
i agree with you 100% in the injectors, when are we gonna start the re-build????
i'm hoping to run into you soon, i wish to show you the most baller manifold of all time.
10-22-2007, 08:52 PM
#454
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 4,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right if you have them Ofcorse I will tune it but if you don't nor are ever going to need them then why buy them ? The point of me responding is we are maxing out the VE table over 215KPA and relying on MAF and PE and this is ok for the most part but NOT that great IMO .
Any type of top-end work done on the car will require larger than 525cc injectors as most work is to achieve a higher than stock redline in which you would lower your max available pulse width to 15ms.
10-22-2007, 09:11 PM
#455
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-19-05
Location: Horseheads, NY
Posts: 3,018
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Umm, you do know that VE is never used in fueling at any time on an LSJ except for MAF failure. The car uses 100% MAF under normal conditions including idle and PE. Log dynamic airflow, VE airflow and MAF airflow to see this. VE is nothing more than a backup system on these PCMs.
Any type of top-end work done on the car will require larger than 525cc injectors as most work is to achieve a higher than stock redline in which you would lower your max available pulse width to 15ms.
Any type of top-end work done on the car will require larger than 525cc injectors as most work is to achieve a higher than stock redline in which you would lower your max available pulse width to 15ms.
10-23-2007, 01:24 AM
#456
Senior Member
Umm, you do know that VE is never used in fueling at any time on an LSJ except for MAF failure. The car uses 100% MAF under normal conditions including idle and PE. Log dynamic airflow, VE airflow and MAF airflow to see this. VE is nothing more than a backup system on these PCMs.
Any type of top-end work done on the car will require larger than 525cc injectors as most work is to achieve a higher than stock redline in which you would lower your max available pulse width to 15ms.
Any type of top-end work done on the car will require larger than 525cc injectors as most work is to achieve a higher than stock redline in which you would lower your max available pulse width to 15ms.
dident believe it untill i loged the car myself...and bam, guess who was rite?
10-23-2007, 08:26 AM
#457
Member
Join Date: 03-10-06
Location: central nj
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Umm, you do know that VE is never used in fueling at any time on an LSJ except for MAF failure. The car uses 100% MAF under normal conditions including idle and PE. Log dynamic airflow, VE airflow and MAF airflow to see this. VE is nothing more than a backup system on these PCMs.
Any type of top-end work done on the car will require larger than 525cc injectors as most work is to achieve a higher than stock redline in which you would lower your max available pulse width to 15ms.
Any type of top-end work done on the car will require larger than 525cc injectors as most work is to achieve a higher than stock redline in which you would lower your max available pulse width to 15ms.
Your reference to MS based on rpm may be true but the need to take these 2.0 motors over 7500 is far and few so how would it change the ms of an Injector ? And BTW the turbo car on every pull once past 215kpa boom in the 9's so I guess the VE is more relevant then you think. and let me add the tune TAG sent with the kit was way OFF .
Ill accept I'm wrong...when proven wrong
60s are done for a safety margin so you are not running 85-95% idcs all the time. Plus it eliminates the need to go up in size later if you do more extensive mods.
I have 101% IDCs on my 60lbers at 21psi fyi. Big turbo and cams will do that.
If an air fliter is restricting flow itll be showin in the maf freq values because there is a direct correlation to flow (dont remember if its linear or otherwise tho). Flow goes up maf freq goes up. So if the filter chokes flow your maf frequency will stay low due to amount of air going by at filter max flow rate. If you cant flow anymore the maf freq wont climb
You can still tune this (as in have ur commanded match ur actual) but it will cause problems as it stays at a sustained freq and engine ve changes. Your afr would then go whacky as ve changed and fueling cell stayed the same.
IMO this pcm isnt worth a damn over 15-16psi. I wish a company would develop a standalone already.
60s are done for a safety margin so you are not running 85-95% idcs all the time. Plus it eliminates the need to go up in size later if you do more extensive mods.
I have 101% IDCs on my 60lbers at 21psi fyi. Big turbo and cams will do that.
If an air fliter is restricting flow itll be showin in the maf freq values because there is a direct correlation to flow (dont remember if its linear or otherwise tho). Flow goes up maf freq goes up. So if the filter chokes flow your maf frequency will stay low due to amount of air going by at filter max flow rate. If you cant flow anymore the maf freq wont climb
You can still tune this (as in have ur commanded match ur actual) but it will cause problems as it stays at a sustained freq and engine ve changes. Your afr would then go whacky as ve changed and fueling cell stayed the same.
IMO this pcm isnt worth a damn over 15-16psi. I wish a company would develop a standalone already.
Last edited by ludicristSS; 10-23-2007 at 08:27 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
10-23-2007, 10:40 AM
#458
Rent me! per hour
Join Date: 03-22-07
Location: Still fixing others mistakes.
Posts: 24,185
Likes: 0
Received 20 Likes
on
14 Posts
for me to achieve a idc lower than 100% i had to run 12.3 afr.
only above 7200 it went over 100. the ms was pushing 17.8 or so.
my problem, and why i went to 60's. the 42's would just flat loose control at 6400, and the afr skyrocketed. i tried to compensate for it. nope. just made it worse. i had this problem for a while actually. i just made the car live as long as i could, untill i was not happy with the numbers and the irratic nature of the injectors to do a bunch of stupid crap at random points.
only above 7200 it went over 100. the ms was pushing 17.8 or so.
my problem, and why i went to 60's. the 42's would just flat loose control at 6400, and the afr skyrocketed. i tried to compensate for it. nope. just made it worse. i had this problem for a while actually. i just made the car live as long as i could, untill i was not happy with the numbers and the irratic nature of the injectors to do a bunch of stupid crap at random points.
10-23-2007, 10:44 AM
#459
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-18-05
Location: Canada eh!
Posts: 2,130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had the same problem with my 42s and a 2.8" pulley. I could not keep control of the injectors above 6000rpm. Everything else was great and commanded afr matched actual afr except above 6000rpm. So now I have 60s and no problems.
10-23-2007, 11:22 AM
#460
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 4,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True but the MAF still refers to VE ? .
Your reference to MS based on rpm may be true but the need to take these 2.0 motors over 7500 is far and few so how would it change the ms of an Injector ? And BTW the turbo car on every pull once past 215kpa boom in the 9's so I guess the VE is more relevant then you think. and let me add the tune TAG sent with the kit was way OFF .
Your reference to MS based on rpm may be true but the need to take these 2.0 motors over 7500 is far and few so how would it change the ms of an Injector ? And BTW the turbo car on every pull once past 215kpa boom in the 9's so I guess the VE is more relevant then you think. and let me add the tune TAG sent with the kit was way OFF .
VE is not used in fueling, ever. It never has been in any version of any LSJ OS. This is the reason there are no dynamic airflow parameters available. If VE was used without dynamic parameters to change the MAF would essentially be untunable as you couldn't filter out the VE component. If the PCM used the last known value on the VE chart for pressures above 215 kpa dynamic airflow would cause a lean spike, not a rich one.
Heres a screenshot I took a while ago comparing VE airflow to MAF airflow to Dynamic Airflow. Note this is a throttle transient condition, the time most claim VE is referenced, which clearly isn't the case on an LSJ.
http://tinyurl.com/3c52rw
10-23-2007, 12:47 PM
#462
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-19-05
Location: Horseheads, NY
Posts: 3,018
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True but the MAF still refers to VE ? .
Your reference to MS based on rpm may be true but the need to take these 2.0 motors over 7500 is far and few so how would it change the ms of an Injector ? And BTW the turbo car on every pull once past 215kpa boom in the 9's so I guess the VE is more relevant then you think. and let me add the tune TAG sent with the kit was way OFF .
So your making over 480 at the crank ? and we need a custom OS for them from HPT or EFI live trust me I use them all of the time on twin turbo Vettes and gto's + my T76 403 trailblazer works great .BTW whats the MS when you see 101 IDC ? and whats your A/F ? when you see 101 IDC ?
Your reference to MS based on rpm may be true but the need to take these 2.0 motors over 7500 is far and few so how would it change the ms of an Injector ? And BTW the turbo car on every pull once past 215kpa boom in the 9's so I guess the VE is more relevant then you think. and let me add the tune TAG sent with the kit was way OFF .
So your making over 480 at the crank ? and we need a custom OS for them from HPT or EFI live trust me I use them all of the time on twin turbo Vettes and gto's + my T76 403 trailblazer works great .BTW whats the MS when you see 101 IDC ? and whats your A/F ? when you see 101 IDC ?
No dynos on this run...motor was only together a week. But for the old 305 whp on a mustang style dyno i can find any logs but i think it was around 85-88%
15.4 MS @7781 rpm 100% idc 11.90 afr
10-23-2007, 05:26 PM
#464
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-08-05
Location: Niceville, FL
Posts: 6,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is a log of my TS on the dyno in August. I know it's not turbo, but bare with me for a moment. If you look at the IDC's it clearly shows the need for the 60lb injectors. I'm at 24-25psi on a 1.2L blower here without methanol, and I don't have a problem controlling the car within the given HPTuners parameters.
10-23-2007, 05:32 PM
#467
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-19-05
Location: Horseheads, NY
Posts: 3,018
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-23-2007, 05:36 PM
#468
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 4,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the stage 2 redline (7000rpm) you have exceeded 80% duty cycle with pulse width equal to 14ms or greater. At 15.5ms you have lost control of the injector (greater than 90% duty cycle). Greater than 17ms and you are commanding more fuel than is possible (100% duty cycle).
Countered useless post with an almost equal useless post.
Last edited by Witt; 10-23-2007 at 05:38 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
10-23-2007, 05:41 PM
#469
Rent me! per hour
Join Date: 03-22-07
Location: Still fixing others mistakes.
Posts: 24,185
Likes: 0
Received 20 Likes
on
14 Posts
Almost anyone who wants to be at or below the usual targetted 80% duty cycle will switch to 650cc injectors (60lb/hr) with almost anything smaller than a GM stage 2 pulley.
With the stage 2 redline (7000rpm) you have exceeded 80% duty cycle with pulse width equal to 14ms or greater. At 15.5ms you have lost control of the injector (greater than 90% duty cycle). Greater than 17ms and you are commanding more fuel than is possible (100% duty cycle).
Countered useless post with an almost equal useless post.
With the stage 2 redline (7000rpm) you have exceeded 80% duty cycle with pulse width equal to 14ms or greater. At 15.5ms you have lost control of the injector (greater than 90% duty cycle). Greater than 17ms and you are commanding more fuel than is possible (100% duty cycle).
Countered useless post with an almost equal useless post.
10-23-2007, 05:52 PM
#470
Senior Member
Join Date: 05-20-06
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 5,450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-23-2007, 05:56 PM
#471
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 4,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10-23-2007, 06:03 PM
#473
Senior Member
Join Date: 05-20-06
Location: Jacksonville, Florida
Posts: 5,450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was trying to help people out so Tune time would stop getting blamed for **** they did not do. But hey your an ******* and that is the way it will always be.
10-23-2007, 06:07 PM
#474
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-03-06
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 4,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Link Paul, its not on my subscribed threads for some reason. PM if you wish.
Last edited by Witt; 10-23-2007 at 06:07 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost