C6 Vette LS9, LS7 and LS3 guys... You're gonna want to see this

[Jabbott]

You are coming out a little snotty, all I was saying is what I see and I work on allot of Corvettes. I am not the one attacking someone else's product either. The LS3 has surge for allot of reasons, one being slow airflow through the cylinder head at low speeds(RPM). Any issues with a MAF will magnify this. Usually when we see a car come in with issues worse then the normal I find where someone else has been messing with the tune. If you go in a smooth the timing tables in this area if helps the issue tremendously. You don't see this issue on LS7's or LS2's, it is an LS3/LS9 issue or even a LSA. I have run all those filters and not one is worse than the other, with the exception that when you are having an issue the Donaldson is somewhat less noticeable but it is still present. The surge you are feeling is torque loss torque gain and it can be attributed to several conditions. The majority of the time if high speed air is raised it is not as bad and the timing table is what is affected and not fueling so you can smooth the timing table and it becomes a happy LS3. Nobody was trying to bash you for what you posted so you can come down off your pedestal a couple of steps now. I only commented on what I have seen and what fixed the issues.

[Jabbott]

OOOHH Wait I recognize your name now. You are the one who likes to argue with the OEM calibrator, how quickly I forgot. First off your post was showing idle, now you come back to tell me I am wrong and I "don't want to acknowledge a problem" and you show a cruise where there is no data in there to see what RPM you are at. Ok you are right, have a Merry Christmas. Hey how is Roger Penske doing these days, I forgot you were working on these fuel injection systems in 1980. How dare I question you my apologies.

[gmtech16450yz]

OOOHH Wait I recognize your name now. You are the one who likes to argue with the OEM calibrator, how quickly I forgot. First off your post was showing idle, now you come back to tell me I am wrong and I "don't want to acknowledge a problem" and you show a cruise where there is no data in there to see what RPM you are at. Ok you are right, have a Merry Christmas. Hey how is Roger Penske doing these days, I forgot you were working on these fuel injection systems in 1980. How dare I question you my apologies.

No problem, no need to apologize. I post things like this so others can learn. I know I'm not going to get through to everyone, and I know not everyone is going to understand or believe what I'm trying to say. There ARE guys that get what I've said here though, and have learned from it. That's why I post, to share what I've learned.

You wanna know something? The person you're talking about is the one that came into MY thread years ago about the E69 Optimum Spark Timing table. He didn't want to contribute ANYTHING to the thread, he just wanted to say I was an idiot and I didn't know what I was talking about. His, and one of his buddy's destruction of that thread is actually why I went away from this forum for a year or two. So if you REALLY want to know something about me, go read through some of the recent threads and posts about the Optimum Spark table on the GM 4 cylinder forum section here. I'll summarize what people have said about that original thread I created that was destroyed by that person and his buddy... "So what gmtech was trying to say years ago that nobody understood turned out to be true." (If you want exact quotes, just read some of the posts on there, you'll find them.) Guess what, they ALL use that table when tuning LNF's now. Until I created that thread to teach guys about that table, NOBODY was touching that table and NO ONE understood what it actually did in that E69 Bosch ECM. My point here is to keep an open mind. Sometimes things that sound retarded, ridiculous or untrue MAY actually has some merit and learning value for you or others.

So yeah, you can say whatever you want about me, it doesn't phase me a bit anymore. I know what I post has value and is appreciated by many. Is it appreciated and understood by all? Of course not. There's nothing I can do about that but try to explain things more clearly. What I DO have a problem with is when someone just wants to argue and fight with me just because they don't understand or believe what I'm trying to say. You brought up something that happened in the past that was destructive, and I said my peace. I will not compromise this thread anymore with anything having to do with your interpretation of what I was trying to say in this thread. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion of what I'm saying here. Let's just try to keep that opinion from destroying the possibility for others to learn.

Thanks and have a Merry Christmas too!
John

[Pekka_Perkeles]

For those who want to see MAF behavior in unstable condition, just check the logs I've posted in the other thread.

It'll look pretty smooth, until you'll change the scaling (MAF and RPM). And then it's pretty ugly. Just like I posted the pics in that thread.

If you stick with normal 0...512 g/s or 0....7000 rpm scaling, you probably won't notice anything unusual.

Merry Christmas for everyone!

[Jabbott]

No problem, no need to apologize. I post things like this so others can learn. I know I'm not going to get through to everyone, and I know not everyone is going to understand or believe what I'm trying to say. There ARE guys that get what I've said here though, and have learned from it. That's why I post, to share what I've learned.

You wanna know something? The person you're talking about is the one that came into MY thread years ago about the E69 Optimum Spark Timing table. He didn't want to contribute ANYTHING to the thread, he just wanted to say I was an idiot and I didn't know what I was talking about. His, and one of his buddy's destruction of that thread is actually why I went away from this forum for a year or two. So if you REALLY want to know something about me, go read through some of the recent threads and posts about the Optimum Spark table on the GM 4 cylinder forum section here. I'll summarize what people have said about that original thread I created that was destroyed by that person and his buddy... "So what gmtech was trying to say years ago that nobody understood turned out to be true." (If you want exact quotes, just read some of the posts on there, you'll find them.) Guess what, they ALL use that table when tuning LNF's now. Until I created that thread to teach guys about that table, NOBODY was touching that table and NO ONE understood what it actually did in that E69 Bosch ECM. My point here is to keep an open mind. Sometimes things that sound retarded, ridiculous or untrue MAY actually has some merit and learning value for you or others.

So yeah, you can say whatever you want about me, it doesn't phase me a bit anymore. I know what I post has value and is appreciated by many. Is it appreciated and understood by all? Of course not. There's nothing I can do about that but try to explain things more clearly. What I DO have a problem with is when someone just wants to argue and fight with me just because they don't understand or believe what I'm trying to say. You brought up something that happened in the past that was destructive, and I said my peace. I will not compromise this thread anymore with anything having to do with your interpretation of what I was trying to say in this thread. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion of what I'm saying here. Let's just try to keep that opinion from destroying the possibility for others to learn.

Thanks and have a Merry Christmas too!
John

The point is that you missed what I was saying because you think that someone was saying your wrong. You also missed the same point that was given to you in that previous thread, maybe you could have learned something from him, since he was the one programming them to begin with and you can't see what he could in Inca.

So back to this topic, look the MAF sucks down low, that is no secret and it is why GM does not use but in a blended mode down under a certain RPM. Honestly I wish that the ECU would not even look at it under what ever RPM I give it in the cal. You took one example in your data log to compare two air filters and in that part of the log the ECU is not applying much weight to the MAF. The problem is not with the fact the maf is unstable, but it is more of an issue with a timing table that is very erratic in that area of the cal. The maf doesn't help the situation, and then you combine it with a airbox that is very turbulent and low speed as well. I am merely pointing out that you are taking allot and condensing into one item causing this and it is your airfilter. You should re-read what you posted and maybe take some of your own advice.