Tuner Can't Tune Car

[GregO]

Basically, but at least 100x more complicated. Roush cars and all trucks use speed density to determine airflow and fueling needs. It uses manifold pressure to calculate airflow, but it does so using a quadratic equation. Er, quadratic equationS because the tunable quadratic coefficients change as a function of rpm and cam timing. So it’s something like 1000-2000 quadratic coefficients to tune if you do all rpm’s and all cam timing combinations.

Now that's getting into how the Sausage is made !
I'll assume EcoBoost as well ?

Sponsored

 

[engineermike]

Now that's getting into how the Sausage is made !
I'll assume EcoBoost as well ?

Yes, all ecoboost cals I’ve seen are speed density. The gt500 is SD as well. I would love to know how ford and Roush determine which to use. What Roush did in the cars converting from maf to sd was not the easiest way to go.

 

[GregO]

Yes, all ecoboost cals I’ve seen are speed density. The gt500 is SD as well. I would love to know how ford and Roush determine which to use. What Roush did in the cars converting from maf to sd was not the easiest way to go.

It does take an army of specialists.
What I do know is the few out there that do performance ECU tuning well are totally consumed by keeping on top of their game.

 

[shogun32]

That sounds REALLY fun, Mike.

Can't we just go back to carbs? It's simple, you don't need sensors and it all happens by magic, because it harnesses the power of Nature.aka physics. Sensors and computers are evil. It's math trying to assert supremacy over physics. Math is evil. It's seductive, it wears a short dress. It promises perfection. But it's still soulless and thus evil.

 

[HKusp]

Can't we just go back to carbs? It's simple, you don't need sensors and it all happens by magic, because it harnesses the power of Nature.aka physics. Sensors and computers are evil. It's math trying to assert supremacy over physics. Math is evil.

I'm sure the EPA would be ALL for it.

 

[tdstuart]

Got my base tune from Juggernaut and its seems pretty good as far as fuel trims go. They are pretty slow to respond though. Hopefully in the next few days I can put it to the test to see if will at least match my old Lund tune.

 

[tdstuart]

Little update car is running slow. 12.7 60-130 compared to 10.5 60-130 on Lund. Messaged Juggernaut and will see what they say. For those that don’t know this is a huge time difference and probably like 40-50+hp. I think stock gen 2 6r80 cars are high 12s low 13s.

I knew the car was way slower before I timed it but i was hoping after a few revisions they would say okay we turned the power way up go test haha

 

[Whitedevil95]

Little update car is running slow. 12.7 60-130 compared to 10.5 60-130 on Lund. Messaged Juggernaut and will see what they say. For those that don’t know this is a huge time difference and probably like 40-50+hp. I think stock gen 2 6r80 cars are high 12s low 13s.

I new the car was way slower before I timed it but i was hoping after a few revisions they would say okay we turned the power way up go test haha

So this isnt your final tune? Still working on revisions?

 

[mejohn50]

Little update car is running slow. 12.7 60-130 compared to 10.5 60-130 on Lund. Messaged Juggernaut and will see what they say. For those that don’t know this is a huge time difference and probably like 40-50+hp. I think stock gen 2 6r80 cars are high 12s low 13s.

I new the car was way slower before I timed it but i was hoping after a few revisions they would say okay we turned the power way up go test haha

Are the ambient conditions similar enough between the 12.7 and 10.5 runs?

 

[tdstuart]

Are the ambient conditions similar enough between the 12.7 and 10.5 runs?

Same day, like 15 min apart, same place, same shift points, tc off. Started at the same speed same gear. Lund tune was spinning and had a little knock for some reason so it could have gone even faster. Even ran the juggernaut tune first so the car hadn’t sat and heat soaked like the Lund tune.

 

[tdstuart]

So this isnt your final tune? Still working on revisions?

Ya still working on revisions but the way the email makes it sound like this is all it has

 

[Torinate]

You rebuilt your motor prior to this, correct?

What were your times on the old motor?

Yea, 2 seconds difference in times is huge!

 

[robvas]

2.2 seconds is like 100hp not 50!

 

[tdstuart]

You rebuilt your motor prior to this, correct?

What were your times on the old motor?

Yea, 2 seconds difference in times is huge!

Old motor was running low 9s 60-130. Still don’t know why it started running slower after rebuild. Same tune same d/an old motor was running 9.2-9.3 and now 9.9-10 flat. It’s like the car doesn’t want to go any faster. It barely picks up any when switching from 91 to e85 and I’ve noticed it will run a 10.0 even when the d/a is way worse.

But that’s a topic for another thread.

 

[shogun32]

For those that don’t know this is a huge time difference and probably like 40-50+h

put it on a eddy-current dyno already and instrument the hell out of it during various throttle profile runs. You have ZERO actionable data. Before I question the tune I would highly suspect your engine build first of all, and your transmission second.

Sponsored