MadCow
Full Member
Karma: +3/-1
 Offline
Posts: 108
|
 |
« Reply #315 on: December 01, 2014, 01:57:10 PM »
|
|
|
Awesome, I'll try to get some logs tonight when the traffic dies down. Here's the LAMFA map for reference:  I'm loving the tune, my only complaint (and it's barely even a complaint) is that it feels a bit too touchy between 3k and 4k rpm. It's harder to modulate the throttle and keep a steady speed than stock. The torque in first is amazing, seriously caught me off guard the first time I stepped on it. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #316 on: December 01, 2014, 02:00:53 PM »
|
|
|
BTW that last 1.0 in the bottom right hand corner is problematic  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
ME7.1 tuning guideECUx PlotME7Sum checksumTrim heatmap toolPlease do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own. Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your ex
|
|
|
MadCow
Full Member
Karma: +3/-1
Offline
Posts: 108
|
|
« Reply #317 on: December 01, 2014, 02:37:20 PM »
|
|
|
Whoops, good catch. Must've missed it when copying the values over. Good thing I posted that.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ddillenger
|
|
« Reply #318 on: December 01, 2014, 02:41:39 PM »
|
|
|
Whoops, good catch. Must've missed it when copying the values over. Good thing I posted that.
I would also enrich at the 90 percent column. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your experience!
Email/Google chat:
DDillenger84(at)gmail(dot)com
Email>PM
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #319 on: December 01, 2014, 03:09:49 PM »
|
|
|
I would also enrich at the 90 percent column.
I agree, especially now that I have seen plenty of logs with mrfa<90%, even wot  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
ME7.1 tuning guideECUx PlotME7Sum checksumTrim heatmap toolPlease do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own. Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your ex
|
|
|
|
ddillenger
|
|
« Reply #320 on: December 01, 2014, 03:12:56 PM »
|
|
|
I agree, especially now that I have seen plenty of logs with mrfa<90%, even wot Yep. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your experience!
Email/Google chat:
DDillenger84(at)gmail(dot)com
Email>PM
|
|
|
|
thelastleroy
|
|
« Reply #321 on: December 01, 2014, 03:59:38 PM »
|
|
|
I agree, especially now that I have seen plenty of logs with mrfa<90%, even wot Going to get this done tonight for the AK file. I've changed the KFZWOP maps and added the p1681 workaround. I've added a tiny bit more to LDRXN to the 2500-4500 range. Also took out .75* timing in a few places after reviewing a multi gear log at various load/speed driving. I'll post the updated file with all of the changes when I'm done fixing LAMFA tonight. Madcow: nyet is correct about why I chose to change the rpm axis for LAMFA. I wanted to have a smoother curve as the values changed. The feel of this tune IS aggressive, that's what I like. Ramp down LDRXN in the range thats bugging you if you like, but you might find that your foot will adjust. Mine did  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SB_GLI
|
|
« Reply #322 on: December 01, 2014, 05:38:52 PM »
|
|
|
I would also enrich at the 90 percent column.
I personally like to enrich down to the 80% column as well, but not as rich as the 90 and 100 columns so that some enrichment starts at 70. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
thelastleroy
|
|
« Reply #323 on: December 01, 2014, 07:10:26 PM »
|
|
|
Ok, here's what I came up with for the 90% column enrichment, as well as a peak at the extra LDRXN. The 97% LAMFA enrichment is slightly tweaked, and the 90% column is the same curve, but higher up in value (see pic). Does this look ok to you guys?
I'm going to flash and log this tomorrow morning, and post results. If it's good I'll post the bin Tunedv2.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 01, 2014, 07:21:01 PM by thelastleroy »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ddillenger
|
|
« Reply #324 on: December 01, 2014, 07:32:00 PM »
|
|
|
Try to envision where you'll hit peak load with 90 percent mrfa. This is where you want to hit peak enrichment.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your experience!
Email/Google chat:
DDillenger84(at)gmail(dot)com
Email>PM
|
|
|
|
thelastleroy
|
|
« Reply #325 on: December 01, 2014, 07:48:02 PM »
|
|
|
Try to envision where you'll hit peak load with 90 percent mrfa. This is where you want to hit peak enrichment.
Should the max enrichment for the 90% column be the same as max for 97.5? Is there a part of a log or another table I can consult to see what load is doing at 90% mrfa? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #326 on: December 01, 2014, 07:56:55 PM »
|
|
|
Should the max enrichment for the 90% column be the same as max for 97.5?
Is there a part of a log or another table I can consult to see what load is doing at 90% mrfa?
This is a tricky question, because the input to KFMIRL isn't actually mrfa... it is misopl1, which is from mrfa->mifa->milsol, which is back-corrected by timing retard efficiency (etazwbm) and .... drum roll... fueling efficiency (etalab) ... see MDFUE in the FR. That is to say, misopl1 might be quite a bit higher than mrfa post fueling correction... Since half of that stuff you can't log, check out rlsol, and from that you can tell what the input to KFMIRL is for a given RPM. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 01, 2014, 07:59:17 PM by nyet »
|
Logged
|
ME7.1 tuning guideECUx PlotME7Sum checksumTrim heatmap toolPlease do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own. Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your ex
|
|
|
|
thelastleroy
|
|
« Reply #327 on: December 01, 2014, 08:10:33 PM »
|
|
|
This is a tricky question, because the input to KFMIRL isn't actually mrfa... it is misopl1, which is from mrfa->mifa->milsol, which is back-corrected by timing retard efficiency (etazwbm) and .... drum roll... fueling efficiency (etalab) ... see MDFUE in the FR.
That is to say, misopl1 might be quite a bit higher than mrfa post fueling correction...
Since half of that stuff you can't log, check out rlsol, and from that you can tell what the input to KFMIRL is for a given RPM.
And now my brain just exploded. Seriously dude you know your shit. I'll look at some logs and see what I come up with. Do you suggest I go to .8438 (same as 97.5) in the 90% column or something less like stock and the graph I posted above? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
MadCow
Full Member
Karma: +3/-1
Offline
Posts: 108
|
|
« Reply #328 on: December 01, 2014, 09:15:01 PM »
|
|
|
Did some pulls, requested load is dropping off pretty sharply after 3500 rpm, especially in the 2nd pull. Something's screwy, but I can't figure out what.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nyet
|
|
« Reply #329 on: December 01, 2014, 09:20:32 PM »
|
|
|
Did some pulls, requested load is dropping off pretty sharply after 3500 rpm, especially in the 2nd pull. Something's screwy, but I can't figure out what.
I don't see anything obviously wrong with that log... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
ME7.1 tuning guideECUx PlotME7Sum checksumTrim heatmap toolPlease do not ask me for tunes. I'm here to help people make their own. Do not PM me technical questions! Please, ask all questions on the forums! Doing so will ensure the next person with the same issue gets the opportunity to learn from your ex
|
|
|
|
