Need a tester

[5_Liter_Eater]

Will do on the way home.

[Bill@HPTuners]

Aight E38/E67 pcm'd V8 application configs are up...E67's are also used in I4 & I6 applications if im not mistaken so things will have to be different for them as well

BTW Bill, I put new ones up for the E40 a second ago...they have the corrected redline for ya. Also since the E38/E67 have no VE table I've added MAF high/low histograms for LTFT's, STFT's & afr error. AFR error unfortunatly will not work without a custom PID which hopefully Keith will get added for us as well for the next public release...we know the calculation...just needs to be added, but thats also going to take away from the current slots for custom pid's which im sure some people have filled up which means more work lol.

Anyways any E38/E67 guys test out the two new configs if you get a chance...they should work. I'd prefer semi decent logs meaning at least a few minutes of your time.

Thanks for your help guys.

Bill

[5_Liter_Eater]

Here are two short logs from my '05 C6 using both configs. (original ones)

[Bill@HPTuners]

Thanks Bill...I think the E40 configs are done.

[5_Liter_Eater]

No problem, glad to help. First dumb question which goes back to one of my earlier posts; Now that you've put ETC% in place of TPS%, what editor fields are actually using ETC rather than TPS? So my ETC% averages ~9% at idle, TPS (from older logs) seems to be ~19%, what would I set my DFCO TPS Enable to? How about PE TPS Threshold? Basically can we verify that anything in the editor that is TPS dependent is actually basing it's state on either TPS or ETC?

[jim2092]

Bill,

Would be happy to help as you have helped me in the past and I have a 2005 C6, but I am so new to the equipment that it would probably be more work for you than its worth. If not email me at [email protected].

Jim

[flea]

Good questions. I would like to know as well ...........

[Bill@HPTuners]

chris talks about pe enable in this thread http://www.hptuners.com/forum/showpo...91&postcount=7 not sure if dfco enable would be the same or not but its a good possibility.

[flea]

"the enable TPS tables uses an oddball TPS value, something like relative TPS minus Idle offset or something weird that its not exactly TPS as reported by the scanner. The values are correct in the editor however. I dunno why GM did this...

You'll see (like most other LS2 owners) you need to set this table down to 5-10% to have it enter PE at say 30% TPS on the scanner."

Chris...
__________________
HP Tuners Owner and the guy who looks inside PCM's...

This is a new one for me ...........

So which value is correct? I have to change the value so it's reported correctly in the scanner?

Maybe I'm more dense than usual tonight. Can someone expand on this one a little more?