whipple tune with 1050x with -20 ltft

[superman07]

Hey guys, I'm a novice to be sure.

I read out the stock whipple cal. only changed the fuel injector data to that of the ID spread sheet for stock fuel system, then reflashed.

car is stock with stainless works long tubes, with cats and a UPR oil separator. dealer also did OPG and CS. I cannot log in hptuners but both tomahawk and nguage (lund) shows the o2s reading too much fuel.

throttle body was off but I did my best to get tb2 volts to read .42

runs better but its still not right at all.

whipple tune runs 64ish psi on the fuel rail, stock calibration na ran 55. I assume this is for differential pressure at boost but could this be part of the issue? should I use the data for a return system?

[LastPlace]

Why can't you log with HPtuners?

[superman07]

As it is a custom OS the definitions have not been added yet. Hopefully they will at some point. I sent the file to Eric.

[superman07]

Whipple replied with some different TB info. My TB is off just a bit I'm going to clean that up tonight. I still have no idea what I will need to do with O2 transport delay in order to get the trims in order. According to Whipple its a known problem with stainless works, according to stainless works they have no idea what Whipple is talking about. I should have went Kooks.

[LastPlace]

Ford Racing OS's are officially supported for your year model.

Submit a support ticket and they will add your definition to 4.1 beta...

[superman07]

Added data capture from Whipple Tomahawk.

[LastPlace]

I looked at both of your tune files, the compare shows zero difference in the injector data. Are they both the same file with different names?

O2 transport delay will not cause your issue.

Attached is your tune with O2 Transport delay set for the SW long tubes.
gt350whipple1050x e10-O2Trans delay.hpt

[superman07]

Sorry yes both files have 1050x characterization. I will upload stock in a few minutes.

Thank you!

[superman07]

uploaded stock calibration. Calibration now is scan-able / log-able. As soon as it cools Im going to finalize the TB adjustment and fire up a proper log.

I also built a tune using the 1050x return style fuel system values. That calibration was only 14 percent rich at idle versus 20ish using the stock fuel system characterization data.

[caged]

Use returnless data if retunless. You can't just swap between data.

[superman07]

doesn't matter, neither data results in anything but a ton of negative fuel trims. now that I can log Ill try the vanilla file with stock fuel system injector data again.

For giggles I went back and compared the published values for the injectors that come with the kit and the Whipple cal uses much higher high and low flow values and break point.

[murfie]

Did you take into account the multiplier tables, Id data is normalized at a low psi? Just look for where the multiplier is 1 to see what psi they use as a base pressure. Most ford injectors data are 39psi. ID uses 25 psi. the stock tunes are calibrated with a 65 psi base multiplier. It should not make a big difference only a slight one, but shouldn't be to hard to convert the flow rates and get more resolution from 50-70 psi seeing as they give you 20 to 70 you can get a plot from. 50-70 psi is where your rail pressure will be so that where you want your multiplier resolution. ECU may be happier and return less error not having to use the large values in the multiplier tables to get the flow rate at the actual rail psi. Converting from 25 psi to 55 is a big jump. Renormalizing the resolution makes it so 70-50 its using a multiplier of 1.03-.91 instead of 1.7-1.5 (roughly) and gives the multiplier values a slight curve as the data sheet indicates instead of being just linear interpolating one cell to the next.

Hopefully you can follow along what I did in the sheet from the screen shot. This only shows what to do for the hi slopes, not the low, breakpoint, or offset.

Hi slope and multiplier renormalized.PNG

[LastPlace]

Can't you just call Injector Dynamics and get the values for your application?

[superman07]

Thanks Murfie, I had originally went under the assumption the base data would be fine as both the tune and Injector characterization had modifiers for pressure. It does make some sense to me that the modifiers would lack resolution with the pressure being so different. I assume then I would want to do the same process with low, breakpoint, and offset?

[superman07]

In all honesty I wanted to be sure I wasn't being a complete moron before I called them.

Can't you just call Injector Dynamics and get the values for your application?

[superman07]

I did call ID and they only have the current data published in Paul's spreadsheet.

[superman07]

So Whipple sent a new calibration. not much was changed. Ill end up copying the changes back into the first cal as the new cal doesn't scan and I doubt Ill send it to support. Car still runs fat. -trims are 25 percent. Interestingly enough the data Whipple uses for their standard calibration with DW 72's data different than what DW published, but, the modifier tables are all still set at 1 for 39.5 psi. I would think one would need to change both to be correct but Whipple did not. Starting to think the GT350 cal is just a piece of shit.

Cars going in to get the leaking oil pan fixed. After that I might just spring for a custom calibration. Out of the 5 or so folks I know from Facebook with 350s none of them had much luck with the Whipple Cal.

Maybe its something simple but damned if I can figure it out.

[murfie]

Well here's the spread sheet to re normalize the data around 65 PSI. I added points for the new multipliers so you can visually see its part of the same slope, just more resolution(points around 50-70) to help the multipliers fit the curve of the slope.

I don't think its your 1050X injector data, but good luck finding whats causing it.

ID1050X renormalized to 65PSI.xlsx

[superman07]

Thanks, I think its something in the OS and how it references rail pressure but who knows.

[HextallS550]

Did you take into account the multiplier tables, Id data is normalized at a low psi? Just look for where the multiplier is 1 to see what psi they use as a base pressure. Most ford injectors data are 39psi. ID uses 25 psi. the stock tunes are calibrated with a 65 psi base multiplier. It should not make a big difference only a slight one, but shouldn't be to hard to convert the flow rates and get more resolution from 50-70 psi seeing as they give you 20 to 70 you can get a plot from. 50-70 psi is where your rail pressure will be so that where you want your multiplier resolution. ECU may be happier and return less error not having to use the large values in the multiplier tables to get the flow rate at the actual rail psi. Converting from 25 psi to 55 is a big jump. Renormalizing the resolution makes it so 70-50 its using a multiplier of 1.03-.91 instead of 1.7-1.5 (roughly) and gives the multiplier values a slight curve as the data sheet indicates instead of being just linear interpolating one cell to the next.

Hopefully you can follow along what I did in the sheet from the screen shot. This only shows what to do for the hi slopes, not the low, breakpoint, or offset.

Hi slope and multiplier renormalized.PNG

Yaw disagrees with this.

superman07's issue is that it appears he wasn't given his ID 1050x injectors when the kit was installed..

Starting to think the GT350 cal is just a piece of shit.

Maybe its something simple but damned if I can figure it out.

I told you what to do with it.

What I find interesting is how much of the "new" cal is just a re-hash of the original Mustang GT calibration that Whipple revised 2-3 times.