Why aren?t my VE adjustments having any effect?

[SiriusC1024]

Normal Corrected values are the final result.

Blindsquirrel's converted data is correct.

High RPM disable stays at stock 4000rpm. All you have to do for the SD part is fail the MAF. When you go to tune the MAF set it to 200rpm.
https://forum.hptuners.com/showthrea...ynamic+airflow

Awesome cars, man. You're right about the Fbody experience. Very unrefined lol. I've had mine since 2016, and it never gets boring. 87 GN is legendary status.

[horsepowerguru427]

Normal Corrected values are the final result.

Blindsquirrel's converted data is correct.

High RPM disable stays at stock 4000rpm. All you have to do for the SD part is fail the MAF. When you go to tune the MAF set it to 200rpm.
https://forum.hptuners.com/showthrea...ynamic+airflow

Awesome cars, man. You're right about the Fbody experience. Very unrefined lol. I've had mine since 2016, and it never gets boring. 87 GN is legendary status.

Youre saying theres no need change High RPM disable, based on "MAF is already failed, so it shouldnt be giving data anyways?"

[SiriusC1024]

That's right. If the MAF is failed it's failed.

[horsepowerguru427]

That's right. If the MAF is failed it's failed.

That makes sense. When i first learned to tune it was just one of the first steps you did, so ive just always done it lol It would make sense that you dont have to. Never tried it that way, but after i thought about it for a second, i figured thats probly what you meant. Right on, Ill have to try it. You threw such a fit about OL tuning for so long that i finally started trying LTFT+STFT and usually get a much more crisp response. Also i just finished catching up on Cringers gen4 dual tuning the other day, i kept up the first couple weeks and hadnt went back to the thread in a while, but i didnt know you helped with the math formulas for it. Pretty cool, my dude!

[SiriusC1024]

Thank you, but I helped on the filters is all. The simultaneous method is all him. What's nice is you can use those filters in conjunction with either SD or MAF normal style. It's nice having another point of reference that says what is stable airflow.

[JakeRobb]

Average, however, you can use the "C" button above the histo, you will see the numbers change. This tells you how many hits you had in each cell. The low numbers need to go away. Thats not accurate data.

Yes, I'm familiar with the C button -- you'll note that I mentioned it in the post you're replying to; I plan to filter out anything with C<100.

Here's the thing which I was asking and which you didn't address: the PCM spends all of its time adjusting fuel trims, and in general they get better all the time. It's something resembling a rolling average, where the newest value it has is always the best value it has. There's an argument that this is only true of LTFT and not of STFT (and therefore also not of LTFT+STFT), but that's not the point. The point is to determine whether Last is preferable over Average.

Using Scanner's Average means you're taking the evolving "rolling average" values from the PCM over time, and then averaging those. But that's silly, because the oldest values are definitely worse than the newest, and you're muddying all of the PCM's hard work establishing good trims.

At least, that's what makes sense to me right now. You guys are the experienced ones; if I have this wrong, I'd love an explanation.

Normal Corrected values are the final result.

Just to confirm: they go in Fuel -> General -> Injection Timing -> Normal Injection Target vs ECT (table 13342)?

[SiriusC1024]

Just to confirm: they go in Fuel -> General -> Injection Timing -> Normal Injection Target vs ECT (table 13342)?

Correct.

[SiriusC1024]

I log 4 fuel tables:
- LTFT
- STFT
- LTFT+STFT
- Wideband AFR or EQ

Depending on what the VE table is doing in various spots I'll lean towards one or the other. Try it out and see. You seem pretty bright, and I bet you'll pick it up quick. If you'd like to do a few exercises post a log with the referenced tune used in the filename and your modified tune based on the log. We'll compare. Plus, any problems can be noted with more people looking at the results.

[horsepowerguru427]

Yes, I'm familiar with the C button -- you'll note that I mentioned it in the post you're replying to; I plan to filter out anything with C<100.

Here's the thing which I was asking and which you didn't address: the PCM spends all of its time adjusting fuel trims, and in general they get better all the time. It's something resembling a rolling average, where the newest value it has is always the best value it has. There's an argument that this is only true of LTFT and not of STFT (and therefore also not of LTFT+STFT), but that's not the point. The point is to determine whether Last is preferable over Average.

Using Scanner's Average means you're taking the evolving "rolling average" values from the PCM over time, and then averaging those. But that's silly, because the oldest values are definitely worse than the newest, and you're muddying all of the PCM's hard work establishing good trims.

At least, that's what makes sense to me right now. You guys are the experienced ones; if I have this wrong, I'd love an explanation.

I understand what youre saying and the logic behind it. I dont feel like it will work as well, but there is only one way to find out! lol its like everything else in the tuning world, trial and error. Im always willing to try new things to see if its a better result or a faster process. Collect a log and save each set of data from the same log. Apply one set and log the changes. Do the same with the other set and in seperate data logs and see which one get more accurate fuel trims.

This is the only real "answer" i could find by just Googling https://forum.hptuners.com/showthrea...652#post165652