Coyote TB tuning

[caniggia]

I believe it would depend on how much you have increased power and therefore skewed the DD and torque/inverse tables. With bolt ons or just adding spark and fuel, I don't believe it is necessary. Adding FI would require tuning both DD and torque/inverse.

Correct. Its not necessary, but you can change car feel there and if you have lot of power they need to be adjusted, but not when tb is changed, maybe only last row increase by 5 percent.

[txcharlie]

OK, that makes sense. I would just be looking at a CJ intake manifold and a monoblade 65mm, so that shouldn't be required. One interesting thing I found was that was that the control pack tune(what I'm gonna be working with) had different Predicted throttle angle and effective area tables even though the tune is meant for the normal 80mm(or whatever the stock throttle body diameter is) throttle body. Who knows why, I think ford racing's goal with the control pack tune was to touch as many tables as possible. A lot of the load axes are jacked up on a lot of the tables too if I remember correctly.

I would guess the difference is emissions related, IMHO.

[caniggia]

I would guess the difference is emissions related, IMHO.

I think predicted throttle should be adjusted whenever intake or anything flow related is changed.
If you copy throttle data from car that had 0 tq errors to car for eg with supercharger, you will start get tq errors, but they may not be noticable. I had some cars with only jlt added that I adjusted predicted throttle.

[txcharlie]

I think predicted throttle should be adjusted whenever intake or anything flow related is changed.
If you copy throttle data from car that had 0 tq errors to car for eg with supercharger, you will start get tq errors, but they may not be noticable. I had some cars with only jlt added that I adjusted predicted throttle.

I agree. I noticed when I increased boost, with the same TB, I had increased Throttle Angle errors.

[dbb2797]

i had the best luck starting with stock data and tables on the GT350 TB (with regard to Pred and Eff). I changed all the other stuff.

Interestingly I was noticing that the GT350 tune has the exact same Pred and Eff values and axis as the SCJ tune. I wonder if it's really the same TB in both the SCJ and GT350?

[AKDMB]

The Cobra Jet cars use the monoblade 65mm

[dbb2797]

The Cobra Jet cars use the monoblade 65mm

Right, I wasn't sure which TB the GT350 has though.

I'm assuming this is the stock TB for the GT350 then?

http://www.modularmotorsportsracing....roducts_id=838
2016 GT350 5.2 87mm Factory Throttle Body


And assuming this is the stock GT350 tune, doesn't it seem strange that the SCJ stock tune has the exact same tables for both pred and eff when the TB's appear to be quite different?
http://www.hptuners.com/forum/showth...ighlight=gt350

[thegraystang]

OP, what issues were you feeling that caused you to do this? I'm wondering if its the same as I'm having and this is all i need to fix it.

[Jn2]

What do you guys think on this. Did I make the changes right. I am installing my Cobra Jet manifold this weekend and just finished up my base tune. I changed the following to match the stock settings I found on a GT500 from repository.

- Predicted throttle angle
- Effective Area
- Throttle Angle Max
- Throttle Angle Minimum
- Pedal Position WOT start
- Pedal Position WOT End

The thing I'm wanting to make sure of is whether I needed to change the Throttle Angle Max/Minimum and Pedal Positio WOT start/end as well. Or should I only change the Predicted throttle angle and effective area?

The first screenshot is comparing it to my stock file to show what I changed over to GT500 settings. The second is comparing to Stock GT500. I did change the columns to match the gt500 as well since the stock GT has different labels for each column.

[Jn2]

So I ran it with the changes noted above and the car ran great, throttle reacted as good as stock. No issue so far.

[AKDMB]

Good to hear, I guess you didn't do any further tuning using the above process? You just used the GT500 settings and all was good right? Well crap, looks like there's two methods to tune throttle now that's been worked out by people on the forum. I guess now we need to figure out the differences between the two approaches. I might go back over the coyote cookbook for my own personal understanding and see if I missed anything on this.

[ghostofnyc]

some good info in here

[Jn2]

Good to hear, I guess you didn't do any further tuning using the above process? You just used the GT500 settings and all was good right? Well crap, looks like there's two methods to tune throttle now that's been worked out by people on the forum. I guess now we need to figure out the differences between the two approaches. I might go back over the coyote cookbook for my own personal understanding and see if I missed anything on this.

Yeah I didn't do any additional tuning. The stock gt500 settings works, just have to be sure to copy the Y axis labels as well. If you copy and past the cells with out changing the labels it will not run right

[thegraystang]

I subtracted Wheel Torque Error from Driver Demand table and it seems to be working the best of any method I have tried....No perceived lack of power since the Error is positive, the bigger TB/manifold is taking more air so lowering the DD table is compensating and it feels the same as it did before. I will keep playing with it but at this point, I think this is the right way to do it.

What did your tables in the scanner look like doing this?

[Higgs Boson]

What did your tables in the scanner look like doing this?

Don't alter the TB data. This should be "fixed/no-correction" info like injector data.

The Driver Demand table is the start of the torque model. I ended up not doing the above method to DD and instead found altering the Torque and Inverse torque tables to be the best correction. I have however made other changes to DD to make it more "linear" feeling.

To fix torque error, fix the torque model, simple as that.
To fix airflow error, fix the MAF/VE/SD.

Everything else is either commanded targets (AFR, Spark, PE, etc) serving as walls and fences in the calibration OR fixed data (injector data, TB data, displacement data, etc) serving as a foundation for the calibration.
Airflow model and torque model are really your main editable variables.

[AKDMB]

Don't alter the TB data. This should be "fixed/no-correction" info like injector data.

The Driver Demand table is the start of the torque model. I ended up not doing the above method to DD and instead found altering the Torque and Inverse torque tables to be the best correction. I have however made other changes to DD to make it more "linear" feeling.

To fix torque error, fix the torque model, simple as that.
To fix airflow error, fix the MAF/VE/SD.

Everything else is either commanded targets (AFR, Spark, PE, etc) serving as walls and fences in the calibration OR fixed data (injector data, TB data, displacement data, etc) serving as a foundation for the calibration.
Airflow model and torque model are really your main editable variables.

Awesome, just what I wanted to know, thanks for all the info on the torque/torque inverse tuning!

[thegraystang]

Don't alter the TB data. This should be "fixed/no-correction" info like injector data.

The Driver Demand table is the start of the torque model. I ended up not doing the above method to DD and instead found altering the Torque and Inverse torque tables to be the best correction. I have however made other changes to DD to make it more "linear" feeling.

To fix torque error, fix the torque model, simple as that.
To fix airflow error, fix the MAF/VE/SD.

Everything else is either commanded targets (AFR, Spark, PE, etc) serving as walls and fences in the calibration OR fixed data (injector data, TB data, displacement data, etc) serving as a foundation for the calibration.
Airflow model and torque model are really your main editable variables.

Im at a stand still with my throttle oscillation issue. I did the torque table thing you did, log the points against tq refrence, copy paste values, use spreadsheet to adjust inverse, that didnt fix any of the throttle issue and then during shifting the throttle would still apply for split second after. a buddy of mine had me test something out with the DD tables and it didnt do jack. Everytime i find a thread with someone with the same issue they dont post any of the fixes to it.

[Higgs Boson]

Im at a stand still with my throttle oscillation issue. I did the torque table thing you did, log the points against tq refrence, copy paste values, use spreadsheet to adjust inverse, that didnt fix any of the throttle issue and then during shifting the throttle would still apply for split second after. a buddy of mine had me test something out with the DD tables and it didnt do jack. Everytime i find a thread with someone with the same issue they dont post any of the fixes to it.

have you checked for a mechanical issue, vacuum leak, etc? sometimes it's not in the tune....

[thegraystang]

have you checked for a mechanical issue, vacuum leak, etc? sometimes it's not in the tune....

thats what i was hoping for. Let me give you a quick catch up of my life story. Bought blower, used Tuner A. drove good, stalled. Went to Tuner B, no stall, had this very same issue of throttle ossciliation(this is the file i read off my ecu as a base but flashing my stock stragety). Tuner C dyno tunes, drove fine, stalled as well. so im either stalling at lights or getting whip lash.