Lund tune bugging me

[engineermike]

Then by closing off one intake valve you drastically increase swirl going in to the cylinder and fuel atomization = cleaner burn, mpg increase.

The gen3 imrc actually closes off the entire port minus about a 1/4in square hole. You can imagine the velocity is quite high passing through it. The interesting thing is that at 1.1 load, ford is predicting significantly more torque with imrc closed vs open. You’d just never get even close to that though.

The more I learn about it, the more I'm leaning towards having a go at the tune myself.
I could go back to 3.8 pulley so I didn't break anything. But I'd like to have a play around with all this and see what I can find.

The community needs more self-tuners so we can steepen the learning curve.

Mike, the data from the roush blow through logic, could this be extrapolated per psi of boost and used on a centrif setup?

The ford speed density calculation is a series of calcs and low or high-selects and the resulting curve uses flow as an input and returns map as an output (or vice versa for speed-density systems). It’s basically just a pressure vs flow relationship albeit a super-complicated one. Blowthrough is just one of several curves that are then evaluated and combined into a final curve. All that to say that there is no extrapolation needed because the blowthrough slope is the curve and flow is it the input. Speed density is one of those things that’s defined by a quadratic equation rather than a table of data. You tune the quadratic coefficients but for blowthrough only slope is used. That said, the Roush blowthrough tuning is most likely tuned for the stock exhaust and high backpressure that would appear to prevent most blowthrough, so may not do us much good.

Sponsored

 

[WildHorse]

You can snoop around in the factory calibration and figure this out.

Too much math for a Sunday. Well, Monday now.

In town I get 15.7 But I am easy on the gas and coast whenever possible to stops.

15.18 mpg before, 16.68mpg after. Same type of driving.
This is based on fuel percentage in the tank.

 

[K4fxd]

15.18 mpg before, 16.68mpg after.

Winnipeg looks pretty flat. I'm in hill country

 

[Pistol_91]

Really ? That's pretty darn good !

I was surprised to say the least.

 

[Pistol_91]

Forestlump if you have good SD data in the tune already, you can simply just enable the blow through logic and copy and paste each mapped point in the calculator, and it will calculate the blow through mapped points while having everything else still the same. Should work.

 

[WildHorse]

I was surprised to say the least.

I guess it's true the LUND hasn't moved on from the 3-valve world.

 

[Pistol_91]

I guess it's true the LUND hasn't moved on from the 3-valve world.

Yeah.. idk. Probably. I've looked at one of their tunes. Just doesn't seem like the utilize everything the coyote has to offer. There's more to tuning than just WOT performance. Which is easy to do. Probably why everyone who complains doesn't complain about WOT performance but complains about everything else in between.

 

[2019GT]

I could compare MPG between Lund and Wengerd since I have both of their tunes, but I don't know what would be sufficient for accuracy purposes.

PS The only WOT complaint I'd make about Lund is performance is not consistent when roll racing, and after extensive datalogging this *seems* to be related to false burst knock, but more generally speaking the issue is sometimes fast knock advance is not triggered and it takes *forever* to ramp spark timing up, to the point you may not even see max timing by the top of 5th gear even. Haven't had this issue with Wengerd, knock advance usually looks great.

 

[Wolfys11]

Yeah.. idk. Probably. I've looked at one of their tunes. Just doesn't seem like the utilize everything the coyote has to offer. There's more to tuning than just WOT performance. Which is easy to do. Probably why everyone who complains doesn't complain about WOT performance but complains about everything else in between.

This is the difference between a tuner and the tuner for a platform, a tuner can get generics down, the tuner can get everything right. That was the difference i saw with wengerd on coyote centri and my old ecoboost’s tuner

 

[WildHorse]

but I don't know what would be sufficient for accuracy purposes.

You have to know the % left in the tank. Some devices show it, some don't.
LUND doesn't want you looking at anything.

You could use the onboard trip/milage display, just note the difference.

 

[2019GT]

You have to know the % left in the tank. Some devices show it, some don't.
LUND doesn't want you looking at anything.

You could use the onboard trip/milage display, just note the difference.

I have the nGauge, still use it for datalogging actually I also have the RTD+ but don't really want to lug a laptop around.

Anyway, the nGauge does give Fuel Percent readout so I could use that. But things like weather, roads, driving manners, can influence the results.

If being anal about it doesn't matter, then I could just use up a few % of my tank, note the mileage, then repeat on the other tune.

 

[CrackedHorn]

So here's a question:

How much is being left on the table at part throttle with these tunes that lock the cams?

Meaning, with a better tune will it feel like going from 3.31 to 3.73 or will the main benefit be mostly just smoothing out the stumbles.

 

[engineermike]

So here's a question:

How much is being left on the table at part throttle with these tunes that lock the cams?

Meaning, with a better tune will it feel like going from 3.31 to 3.73 or will the main benefit be mostly just smoothing out the stumbles.

It’s a torque based system, meaning the logic attempts to achieve driver demanded torque regardless of cam position. If the tune is well calibrated, you can’t feel the difference at different cam timings at part throttle. However, the efficiency will suffer and potentially the transitions to the different cam schedule modes could be affected.

 

[Forestlump]

I could compare MPG between Lund and Wengerd since I have both of their tunes, but I don't know what would be sufficient for accuracy purposes.

PS The only WOT complaint I'd make about Lund is performance is not consistent when roll racing, and after extensive datalogging this *seems* to be related to false burst knock, but more generally speaking the issue is sometimes fast knock advance is not triggered and it takes *forever* to ramp spark timing up, to the point you may not even see max timing by the top of 5th gear even. Haven't had this issue with Wengerd, knock advance usually looks great.

Yes, I thought it was me but you can actually feel this through the gear changes and see it in the logs. (Maf reading drops compared to the previous gear).

Sometimes it depends how quickly you tip in to throttle. You never really know if it's going to go like a scolded cat or just make loads of noise.

Sometimes I have to completely let off the throttle and give it another boot full to get it to advance again. I presumed it was picking up some false knock or something but nothing indicates that.

So I totally get what you were talking about when you said about the unreliable times and throttle feel. It changes and isn't consistent. You wouldn't see this on a Dyno in a single gear pull.

 

[Basspro302]

Are you guys saying lund doesn’t use the vct on part throttle/low load?

Sponsored