No I haven't tried the quicksave feature. It's not something I use. But I'll try and get out sometime in the next few days to try it out. I use the manual save feature because I can name the file what "I" want. as an example if I made a WOT run today my file would be named 080513 WOT
SD2/Powerlogger Pro general discussion
- Thread starter TurboDave
- Start date
No I haven't tried the quicksave feature. It's not something I use. But I'll try and get out sometime in the next few days to try it out. I use the manual save feature because I can name the file what "I" want. as an example if I made a WOT run today my file would be named 080513 WOT
That's how I like to do it. I go out for a few miles and watch one particular load range on the data page, while glancing at the CF on the scanmaster, and making a mental note of where the CF spends a lot of it's time. I then make the appropriate adjustment to that load range cell on the data page, and then watch it some more to see how close I got. That way I get all four load ranges very very close without having to mess around trying to tweak cells in the VE table.
other than the top row of the VE table right there, thats a tough spot to tune.
1, is it perhaps residual alky on the walls of the plumbing?
2, is it perhaps an issue with the "lowest bidder" MAP sensors?
3, or is it just a tuning issue?
The answer is a combination of the above. Its easy enough to try editing the top row cells of the VE table in that area. Eric an I have talked about dfco and stuff like that.
But unless its causing issues, I would leave it for last.
Bob
do you think that maybe changing the cell that the tracer just went through before the correction to add fuel would do anything? possibly making is a little richer and then following the tracer down the line until it approaches the load where the a/f is on target?other than the top row of the VE table right there, thats a tough spot to tune.
1, is it perhaps residual alky on the walls of the plumbing?
2, is it perhaps an issue with the "lowest bidder" MAP sensors?
3, or is it just a tuning issue?
The answer is a combination of the above. Its easy enough to try editing the top row cells of the VE table in that area. Eric an I have talked about dfco and stuff like that.
But unless its causing issues, I would leave it for last.
Bob
this is my first experience with SD so im not to sure of the cause and effects of things yet.
what does changing the number lower do? subtract fuel?
well, with all this SD stuff, every number makes the engine richer as you make it bigger except for A/F ratio and injector size.
Most of the other numbers are all multiplied together, so changing any one of them by 10% will change the fuel delivered by 10%.
But the GM MAP sensors are not great when you get below 20 KPA, when you are decelerating in that run you are down at 11KPA according to the log. If your MAP is really something like 8 KPA, the system will deliver a lot more fuel than it should. But you can tune it out.
Since you never drive in the top row, but only decel, you can drop the number 20% in a couple cells and not have any driveability issues.
but, generally, decel richness is a common issue, and doesn't cause problems. So don't get too crazy about chasing it.
Bob
Most of the other numbers are all multiplied together, so changing any one of them by 10% will change the fuel delivered by 10%.
But the GM MAP sensors are not great when you get below 20 KPA, when you are decelerating in that run you are down at 11KPA according to the log. If your MAP is really something like 8 KPA, the system will deliver a lot more fuel than it should. But you can tune it out.
Since you never drive in the top row, but only decel, you can drop the number 20% in a couple cells and not have any driveability issues.
but, generally, decel richness is a common issue, and doesn't cause problems. So don't get too crazy about chasing it.
Bob
im sorry I wrote that stupid. I was trying to say that just after I go WOT it dips down.
im trying to make the a/f look like the geen line and eliminate the a/f correction in the yellow circle.
do you think that changing the cells just before the tracer(in the red line)will work? starting at frame 427
im trying to make the a/f look like the geen line and eliminate the a/f correction in the yellow circle.
do you think that changing the cells just before the tracer(in the red line)will work? starting at frame 427
Yeah, I see what you're saying. You can increase the numbers in the 2400 column and the 2800 column from 100 KPA "up" to 300 kpa (going downwards in the table).
if you car has a stock cam (or is small with little overlap), the NA torque peak is really low which is why the VE is higher at those RPM points. Since the AFR correction
is off during this part of spooling, its easier to see whats required.
are you running alky at the moment? It adds "flavor" to the tuning.
Bob
if you car has a stock cam (or is small with little overlap), the NA torque peak is really low which is why the VE is higher at those RPM points. Since the AFR correction
is off during this part of spooling, its easier to see whats required.
are you running alky at the moment? It adds "flavor" to the tuning.
Bob
Yes i am using the isac. I will try adjusting those numbers tomorrow.
I know this will be completely different at the track. I am using your 2step and spraying Alky just after i launch. I'm not sure how i should be doing that yet. If i spray on the 2 step and go close to wot it back fires and i lose psi, so i set it to turn on at 11 psi. Is this right or no.
Posted from the TurboBuick.Com mobile app
I know this will be completely different at the track. I am using your 2step and spraying Alky just after i launch. I'm not sure how i should be doing that yet. If i spray on the 2 step and go close to wot it back fires and i lose psi, so i set it to turn on at 11 psi. Is this right or no.
Posted from the TurboBuick.Com mobile app
Well, my quicksave isn't incramenting either so I have the same issue.
Here's what my INI file for quick save looks like, and I'm sure there's a mistake in it somewhere, but don't know what.
Of course while I was testing I had the AutosaveAfterRecording= set to 1
[QuickSave]
DefaultFilename=C:\PLC\QuickSave.dat
DefaultComment=Quick Save File
FileSerialNumber=8
AutosaveAfterRecording=0
huntsg
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2009
Just got Reaper's chip installed tonight. He's the first in our group that we've installed and after the install I have some questions since I'll be doing mine soon. When we got it installed it was idling really really rich. The PL was pulling out 10% but the AFR was pegged around 10 with a target of 13.5. I lowered parameter 1 to 100 and was able to get the correction factor to +/-0.5. My question is if this is the best way to approach getting it to idle correctly? Also, why is the idle target AFR so rich at 13.5 vice the 14.8 that the MAFed chips shot for? We haven't taken it for a drive yet as it got too late and we had just gotten it to the target idle AFR.
I forget the build details on his car.
also tell me the MAP reading in park and drive.
all open loop idle chips have targetted 13.5, these cars just idle better there (ok, there are a few that idle fine at 14.7..) with a wideband, we would still want to idle at 13.5, but now we can do it closed loop.
there are a couple things that can lead to a rich idle. MAP sensor error or offset (the stock GM 3bars are a bit inconsistent), high idle MAP from a big
cam, injector offset set too high, injector size set too low.
Bob
also tell me the MAP reading in park and drive.
all open loop idle chips have targetted 13.5, these cars just idle better there (ok, there are a few that idle fine at 14.7..) with a wideband, we would still want to idle at 13.5, but now we can do it closed loop.
there are a couple things that can lead to a rich idle. MAP sensor error or offset (the stock GM 3bars are a bit inconsistent), high idle MAP from a big
cam, injector offset set too high, injector size set too low.
Bob
huntsg
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2009
He's got a hefty cam from Don Cruz (not sure of the size, but big) and 60 lbs injectors that were recognized by the PL correctly. I don't remember what the MAP reading was at idle but its the 3 bar MAP that comes with Razor's alky kit. I believe the injector offset is 22.
well, most likely most of the idle richness is from the cam, you may find part throttle is rich also.
for now, tune it with the parameter cells, and get a feel for it. most likely it will run pretty well with just that tuning.
with a lot of cam, you may need to increase the VE in the mid to upper rpm ranges, so keep the boost low and make some test pulls to gather data.
we should be able to get a reasonable tune in just a few tries.
Bob
for now, tune it with the parameter cells, and get a feel for it. most likely it will run pretty well with just that tuning.
with a lot of cam, you may need to increase the VE in the mid to upper rpm ranges, so keep the boost low and make some test pulls to gather data.
we should be able to get a reasonable tune in just a few tries.
Bob
TurboTdr3.8
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2013
What 3bar works better than GM , I am having the same issues as huntsg being too rich and CF not coming in smooth as they should , When I get the correction of close to 0 it over shoots afr the other way what I do not want . They is never a happy setting , I have it running decent by the feel of the seat of your pants but not figure wise on the numbers and CF . Does that make any sense ?
haywire4130
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2010
The 13.5 idle target (as with all the other targets) is just a suggested starting point, you have to experiment with different targets and find out what your car likes. Mine idles like a champ at 12.5, theres no perfect number for every car, experiment and tune for best performance, thats what makes it fun (for me anyway)
huntsg
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2009
So Bob, I took Reaper's car out and collected some powerlogger files that I have attached. One is at idle, one is at cruise, and the third is at low boost WOT. First here are some observations/questions: For idle yesterday I had to set parameter 1 to 100 to get the AFR correction to approach 0, but today I had to put it at 110. During the first cruise, parameter 3 was set for 99, but the car ran rich (11ish with a target AFR of 14.5) and the correction factor never moved off of 0.0. Why didn't the CF do anything? I changed parameter 3 to 98, but it didn't have any impact as the car still ran rich and CF never changed. For the WOT run the resultant AFR was closer to the target, but it was more a matter of the target being close to the actual because again the CF never engaged. Am I missing something there? Besides that question how do the logs look?
Eric Stage I
TurboTweak Guy
- Joined
- May 25, 2001
If you look back at the instructions, you will find that setting parameter 2, 3, or 4 to 98 or 99, turns off closed loop correction. Use one of the settings that turns on closed loop correction.
Eric Stage I
TurboTweak Guy
- Joined
- May 25, 2001
For anyone having issues with offline viewing of a log, and/or the autosave feature, the PLC.exe program has been updated to address those issues. New version is 2.0.4
You can download it from my support forum in the SD2 section. Also here is a direct link: http://www.turbotweak.com/plpro.zip
You can download it from my support forum in the SD2 section. Also here is a direct link: http://www.turbotweak.com/plpro.zip
