Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 47

Thread: Optimum Power Load at WOT - Coyote

  1. #21
    HPT Employee Eric@HPTuners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Crawfordville, FL
    Posts
    2,409
    Regarding this parameter, I have not fully gone through the code to determine exactly how it is used. The reason I put it in the software is because I noticed that Roush and FRPP supercharged files have the values raised up. (Although the blown Raptor files do not).
    Eric Brooks
    HP Tuners, LLC

  2. #22
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    232
    Good to know...for possible future reference.
    "I didn't fail, I just found 100 ways to do it wrong." - Benjamin Franklin

  3. #23
    Senior Tuner Higgs Boson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Texas Hill Country
    Posts
    3,299
    update?

  4. #24
    Advanced Tuner
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    222
    The load at WOT table is only used in a failed MAF situation as a predictor to the expected load so that the airflow can be predicted via the speed density functions. In some of the older years, this table was used in the calculation of the scaled load (a load calculation logic available up through about MY98) if the perload variable triggered a scaled load calculation versus an actual calculated load. But in these later years it is the safety net for WOT airflow (and hence) fuel calculations under the failed MAF conditions. I normally reshape this table to reflect the expected load vs RPM curve to provide adequate protection in the event of a failed MAF. From studying different strategies and raw logic, it doesn't appear that its used in all strategies. For example in the 2011+ GT500 calibrations the table is all unity. My assumption here is that the failed MAF situation defaults directly to the SD calculation based on RPM at some other load condition, possibly at the max load seen by engine condition. I can't say for sure since I haven't seen enough of the raw logic to know for sure (another reason to be sure that the max load seen by engine properly reflects the expected max load). I hate to start rumors, but this is my understanding of the topic and I'm always open to being schooled otherwise.
    Jeff Chambers, Owner
    CRT Performance, LLC
    349 Cleveland Road
    Norwalk, OH 44857
    Ph: 419-668-4151
    Fx: 419-668-4643

    Performance Parts, Service and Dyno Tuning Specialists

  5. #25
    Senior Tuner
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Baltimore, Md
    Posts
    1,204
    Has this been proven to be true or? basically table isnt doing anything UNLESS MAF is failed in Coyote?
    Factory Stock 97 SS M6 13.51 @ 104.3 mph
    Stock Longblock LS1 w/ 233/238 P.S.I. Cam
    10.81 @ 126.9 Full interior, six speed on 275 radials, a decade ago

    '99 TA trunk mounted 76mm 6 Liter
    9.0s in '09 @ 153 MPH

    Turbo 5.3 Volvo 740 Wagon
    32psi and still winding out 5th on the highway somewhere

  6. #26
    Advanced Tuner bbrooks98's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Gainesville, VA
    Posts
    301
    Not to start anything thing as fact, but I could have sworn in some of my testing I couldn't keep the car in OP Mode and it'd default to lower map points giving me real low timing values when i was attempting originally to try and make it follow the load curve in boost. It wasn't till i went and lowered the values to 1.05 that it stayed consistent in OP Mode
    Last edited by bbrooks98; 01-25-2018 at 04:17 PM.

  7. #27
    Senior Tuner
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Baltimore, Md
    Posts
    1,204
    I think we both know there are no facts here as of yet LOL
    Factory Stock 97 SS M6 13.51 @ 104.3 mph
    Stock Longblock LS1 w/ 233/238 P.S.I. Cam
    10.81 @ 126.9 Full interior, six speed on 275 radials, a decade ago

    '99 TA trunk mounted 76mm 6 Liter
    9.0s in '09 @ 153 MPH

    Turbo 5.3 Volvo 740 Wagon
    32psi and still winding out 5th on the highway somewhere

  8. #28
    Senior Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    2,101
    Is this the table, the description says it doesn't have to do with load, but with aircharge and correcting the VE equations?

    Calculated load is/should be 100% at wot in all conditions boosted or NA. It is directly related to and what determines the requested torque percentage of the driver demand, and can effect PE schedualing. Current Air charge/ maximum air charge is what is used to determine this. Remember air load is cylinder airmass/ cylinder displacement airmass. The maximum air charge is subject to the ect v iat correction table.

  9. #29
    Advanced Tuner bbrooks98's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Gainesville, VA
    Posts
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by murfie View Post
    is this the table, the description says it doesn't have to do with load, but with aircharge and correcting the ve equations?

    Calculated load is/should be 100% at wot in all conditions boosted or na. It is directly related to and what determines the requested torque percentage of the driver demand, and can effect pe schedualing. Current air charge/ maximum air charge is what is used to determine this. Remember air load is cylinder airmass/ cylinder displacement airmass. The maximum air charge is subject to the ect v iat correction table.


    ecm 44353

  10. #30
    Senior Tuner CCS86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    1,089
    I'm interested to nail down how this table is used too.

    The Roush 575 file has values pretty close to what you would expect absolute load vs RPM to look like on a PD car:

    Roush-OP-Load-at-WOT.png


    While the FPDX0A8 strategy I am using, has values matching my stock GT:


    Stock-OP-Load-at-WOT.png

  11. #31
    I'm curious on this as well, also using FRPP strategy

  12. #32
    Senior Tuner CCS86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    1,089
    Bump!

  13. #33
    Advanced Tuner small tuner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    271
    dose any body figure out how to solve the issue for vct not entering OP mode with power shifting in (MT82) at high RPM. it is away for almost 1 second before it is go again OP mode when shifting . is it spark / vct op sitting issue.

  14. #34
    Senior Tuner veeefour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,712
    To my knowledge it only works when MAF is considered failed - when the SD takes the job it has to know what to do at WOT.

    It's not used under normal working conditions.

  15. #35
    Advanced Tuner small tuner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    271
    Quote Originally Posted by veeefour View Post
    To my knowledge it only works when MAF is considered failed - when the SD takes the job it has to know what to do at WOT.

    It's not used under normal working conditions.
    agree on that but my concern is why cam off during shifting at high rpm ?

  16. #36
    Senior Tuner veeefour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by small tuner View Post
    agree on that but my concern is why cam off during shifting at high rpm ?
    got a log?

  17. #37
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Lewisville Texas
    Posts
    38
    i thought if the vehicle never uses OP mode during WOT you wouldn't mess with it. just all the other mapped points it does use.

  18. #38
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Lewisville Texas
    Posts
    38
    If it doesn't say it uses this table than you shouldn't worry about it? am i right? just making sure i haven't been doing it wrong lol
    Attached Images Attached Images

  19. #39
    Advanced Tuner small tuner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    271
    Quote Originally Posted by veeefour View Post
    got a log?
    attached livelink format for 2011 mustang GT M6
    Attached Files Attached Files

  20. #40
    Senior Tuner veeefour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,712
    Not enough data using nGauge - need to log it with a VCM scanner.