The stock GT350 Map-14 torque table has that value so I left it.
Here is Map 25 showing an increase as well:
Map-25-Stock.jpgMap-25-After.jpg
The stock GT350 Map-14 torque table has that value so I left it.
Here is Map 25 showing an increase as well:
Map-25-Stock.jpgMap-25-After.jpg
Last edited by R8Bill; 08-12-2017 at 08:37 AM.
I need to see the log you used and the tune to see what you copied from the GT350 and what you didn't.
The GT350 DD table has a large spike in it at partial throttle that you need to make sure translates over to the TQ-load tables and doesnt get smoothed out. Or you can smooth it out in the DD table more like the stock GT table. You also need to watch you pedal position and make sure you are getting into open loop at WOT. Other wise you will be tuning this torque spike at WOT.
DD- TQ,load.PNG
MP25.PNG
Then the way your Axis values are setup, exactly like the GT350's, you have a large gap when your ETC/DD values would be. That doesnt make for an accurate histogram between .65 load and .95.
ETC TQ.PNG
Use axis that will represent your DD table better.
Axis.PNG
Last edited by murfie; 08-12-2017 at 04:00 PM.
I've been using this method to build my tables. I now have a horrible dead spot in my pedal. I'm assuming my problem lies in my DD table, but I've also been playing with the distance tables. As I add throttle while part throttle cruising it does nothing. Then all of the sudden it will jump from 8% to 23%. Mapped points are staying the same, but it's briefly going into "Best Fuel Economy" right before the throttle snaps to 2x%. Having a little bit of IPC errors, but nothing crazy. I ASSume they will work out in time as I get my torque tables closer.
08.11.17 log 2.hpl
08.08.17 Distance Table Testing and other Updates.hpt
Your MP 15 is the reason for the dead spot. Its getting stuck in it. Making it used for a wide range of torque request that you have made very low load. The main reason for it is the transition between fuel economy and driveability mode.
Make sure the transition points match or else the ECU will go backwards. Its goal is smooth and consistent so it may not even go forward if it knows its going to go backwards.
VCT mode transitions.PNG
When you see a torque valley you know somethings wrong. Make sure to check your of MPs.
MP15.PNG
I didn't even look at the torque in a 3d model after calculating the inverse. I must be making an error on the histograms, then. It's causing all of my torque tables to have that bump.
No. Etc torque is going up, but load isn't because it's not opening the TB. Because the torque/ load tables are saying it doesn't have to, to make the desired torque. You went too far with it and the graphs are taking you further down the wrong way. The goal is to get ETC torque and engine brake torque closer together with out it causing throttle closures or rev hang. You can replace ETC torque with engine brake torque in the graph to go the other way. You can also use the ETC / engine brake TQ ratio to multiply your load value.
Last edited by murfie; 08-13-2017 at 07:05 PM.
Okay, I follow what you're saying (for a nice change lol). The tune I had posted had the torque tables updated from the log with the throttle not opening. I made the changes not thinking about how it would be off from the throttle not opening. I will go back to my torque tables from before that faulty log, and keep the changes to the distance tables that I found were incorrect, causing my throttle to not open.
Has anyone tried this method on a supercharged car as of yet? Does the same logic apply?
LSX AM 444
Runner up in points 2011
3rd in points 2012
8.14@166 all motor
Driver/ Tuner car 414 Texas mile 263.2mph
also would like to know if this is the same for boosted applications that go over 100 percent load
Last edited by hotrod1122; 09-30-2017 at 08:48 PM.
these numbers are really high, I'm unable to paste these values due to being to high for the perimeters. What could be the issue?
Screenshot (1).png
Axis values in graph for torque should be from the values in your tune. I hope you are not trying to put those in your tune. Its like that in the spreadsheet just for inverse purposes.
ETC torque request doesnt put you quite in the right place in the table. in certain areas when you are at MBT spark, stoich fuel, and STP ambient conditions it may be close, but other times it could be way off. Using the desired indicated torque will. Calculated load is the % of indicated torque maximum. I think there is a desired indicated PID you might be able to use and not have to make a math. Keep in mind these inverse tables are trying to describe the relationship between calculated load(pedal control) and absolute load(engine control), both use them as a reference, just at different values.
Can anyone explain how to setup the filtering by mapped point or the function they are using?
Another question I would have here is how do remote tuners overcome the issue of having to tune the torque and torque inverse tables. Are they just turning this all off or taking a best guess at the values? I would imagine it would be pretty difficult without having the car in person.
The answer is that most don't "tune" the torque tables. They just pull values from another tune with similar power output.
For the filtering, you can insert a statement that "MPX weight > 0.5", or whatever value you want.
You filter it out by going to the Graphs Layout and clicking New Variable. Then you click on the mapped point you want to filter.
A bolt on car won't need to touch torque/inverse in a remote tune to get good drivability.
A remote tuner can simply raise the values in higher loaded areas as long as they can complete the inverse side of the equation.
A remote tuner can also use values they have already figured on a dyno, or use values that they have found are known to work, either by dyno, or raising the values.
A lot of the time, people look at their torque/inverse table when it's their Predicted Throttle Angle and ETC Area tables that need some attention.
I tuned mine, it's not too hard, but I have only one torque & inverse, as it's a GT500. I would imagine the new ones with multiple torque & inverse tables would need to be tuned too, but would take a lot more time.
I have heard of people reverting them back to one torque & inverse table as GT500 is, with no adverse effects.
Are you guys using murfie's method turning off all MP except the one you are concentrating on? How safe is this? Multiple cam angles and spark tables run and various engine speeds... curious if that is actually safe, especially on a PD blower car.
WTB: Greg Banish Ford DVD, please PM if you are selling