[radz28]

I'm looking to add TooHighPSI's PI Plates and Reflex Controller to the whip, but have some lingering questions, as this would be the first time adding supplemental fueling to the OEM system. I can't really find answers I'm completely comfortable with, nor that I completely understand, so I'm hoping I might find insight from you smart people. What I'm most concerned about is the Virtual Torque Tuning (VTT) modeling and because the whip has an A10, this is particularly important. I have a T87A conversion, so I have no Torque Management (TM) issues I can't work around, nor have issues with. Can you help?

I've watched all Mike's videos on the Reflex multiple times, and believe I have an understanding on what he's doing, and why he's changing what he is in the E92. But - I also believe he mentions Greg's (laynlo15) tune already had some changes made to it, before Mike showed the changes he made in his video, and that's part of what I'm wondering about.

I've read many posts on tuning for methanol on our cars, and am getting a lot of similar information, which is a bit reassuring. I see some people:

• adjusting the MAF scaling and modifying Eng TQ Coefficient EQ Ratios (my guess is raising them slightly to extrapolate for higher TQ as EQ goes richer to bring extrapolated Eng TQ up)

• adjusting the MAF, increasing VVT, and lower Power Enrichment (PE) to get the DI to lower injector flow to compensate for PI fuel mass

• A method I haven't seen yet - a training video wherein they use [33355] FUEL INJECTOR FLOW RATE FUEL PRESSURE MODIFIER MULTIPLIER 3 and lower pressure, by the approximate amount the PI is adding, in the relative regions of the FUEL RAIL PRESSURE you want the PI to come in at. So - if using Mike's example of PI fueling coming in around 6000 hz (MAF), if I'm seeing FUEL RAIL PRESSURE in that region of about 14-16 mPa of pressure, the trainer is saying to pull around a similar amount of fuel percentage as the PI is adding in that area. I haven't seen ANYONE else post about using this method yet, though. Admittedly - the training video is less than a year old, so maybe this is a new method, but the trainer insists this is the best way to keep the VTT the happiest, which kinda' makes sense to me, but I don't know what I'm missing, or what could be missing from this method.

Anyhoo...

If anyone has the time or knowledge they're willing to spend, I'd be super-grateful. I just don't want to burn-up my tranny, nor am I suggesting any methods are wrong. I'm just thinking out loud, and while I have a basic understanding of trying to account for the addition of the fuel from a separate, non-OEM-controlled-system, I just want to make sure to account for the addition of TORQUE the engine's going to make, and that the ECM needs to report so the TCM applies the necessary pressure to the clutch packs. Perhaps it's not too necessary for me, because I already have higher pressures baked into my tune, but I want to do it the right way.

Thanks to everyone.
Chuck

[KingLT1]

I believe it's pretty straight forward.
Pull30% from the maf table around 7k hz, then go to the virtual torque tables and add torque in that range. If you don't do this then the trans will shift soft or even slip because the ECU thinks less power is being made. If you haven't added anything to the torque tables then I would add 30%, if you already have padded it some, then you might start with 10%.

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

I believe it's pretty straight forward.
Pull30% from the maf table around 7k hz, then go to the virtual torque tables and add torque in that range. If you don't do this then the trans will shift soft or even slip because the ECU thinks less power is being made. If you haven't added anything to the torque tables then I would add 30%, if you already have padded it some, then you might start with 10%.

This was my understanding as well…. Believe Nickey is on this board and they’ve been using the Reflex. Maybe they’ll chime in as to how they approach it.

Definitely thinking about giving that new Reflex controller a try too.

[radz28]

I think I was thinking along those lines, and that's how I think I interpreted a lot, of at least, with what Mike posted. Maybe I have unfounded worries with the Virtual Torque system and I wouldn't suggest I have mine optimized (mostly as close as I can get it anyways, lol), but I'm fully conscious that it needs to be as optimized as possible. I have it good enough I don't have throttle closure/weirdness or timing retard or anything.

I've been reading posts about methanol set-ups and seeing how that's done, and it seems like I can also massage PE lower, and then add the torque back in VTT, which I'm familiar enough with. I'm not necessarily interested in the easiest as much as most effective I guess. That's until I can't get anywhere with effective, then regress to easiest, because that's what I'm capable of, lol.

Thanks, gents', for your comments though!

CHEERS!!!

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by radz28

I think I was thinking along those lines, and that's how I think I interpreted a lot, of at least, with what Mike posted. Maybe I have unfounded worries with the Virtual Torque system and I wouldn't suggest I have mine optimized (mostly as close as I can get it anyways, lol), but I'm fully conscious that it needs to be as optimized as possible. I have it good enough I don't have throttle closure/weirdness or timing retard or anything.

I've been reading posts about methanol set-ups and seeing how that's done, and it seems like I can also massage PE lower, and then add the torque back in VTT, which I'm familiar enough with. I'm not necessarily interested in the easiest as much as most effective I guess. That's until I can't get anywhere with effective, then regress to easiest, because that's what I'm capable of, lol.

Thanks, gents', for your comments though!

CHEERS!!!

I was chatting with my local tuner who’s a pretty sharp dude (Josh Pearl of Performance Dyno, Louden NH) and he said it was pretty easy to square away on a dyno. You can adjust the MAF as needed and try tweaking the VT tables as a starting point, but the dyno would tell you how much torque the car was actually making. So he said it would be easy to correlate what the dyno said and what your ECU thought it was making. You could then adjust the VT to compensate. Sounded easy… famous last words lol!

[KingLT1]

The virtual torque doesn't need to match what the engine makes, you just don't want it to be lower then actual. I like to set it above what the engine makes. Dyno makes it nice, but you don't "need" one to do it...I have a Horsepower pid I created that basically plots the torque model out. I adjust the torque model until the curve looks right (smooth and linear like a dyno graph) and trans shifts crisp. If you go too far odd things will start to happen... mainly odd trans behavior.

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

The virtual torque doesn't need to match what the engine makes, you just don't want it to be lower then actual. I like to set it above what the engine makes. Dyno makes it nice, but you don't "need" one to do it...I have a Horsepower pid I created that basically plots the torque model out. I adjust the torque model until the curve looks right (smooth and linear like a dyno graph) and trans shifts crisp. If you go too far odd things will start to happen... mainly odd trans behavior.

Great stuff always King!

[radz28]

Yeah.
I have PEAK TQ above FINAL PEDAL REQ, above MAX TQ, above PREDICTED, above IMMEDIATE, above ENG TQ, etc., and all the DD PREDICTED/IMMEDIATE above ACTUAL AXLE and all of that. They aren't max'd but I took a lot of time to bump them all up to within about 5-10% (ish) of the lower PID.

Admittedly - I cheated, and took some OEM engine dyno' numbers, correlated RWTQ, and then took some other chassis dyno' numbers from combinations I'm similar to, and back-correlated to engine TQ, and added about 10% to that. I remember reading the OEM ENGINE TQ takes into account other frictions/losses (I forget the terms), and after smoothing OEM VTT tables, I modeled them from a dyno chart from the chassis dyno' I referenced above. Then played with the corresponding CAM ANGLES and MAP Tables. I feel like I have a grasp of what you guys are talking about.

Thanks a whole bunch. Hopefully there's not anything that I'm missing.