[cjperformance]

Originally Posted by wnta1ss

Is your boost gauge OBD? With the stock MAP sensor you cannot get proper manifold pressure readings for your supercharger, and with the BARO coming from the MAF you will have a bogus barometer reading too. Therefore 'boost' readings from these sources are bogus.

As part of your spark work, take a look at this: Engine>Spark>Retard>Static Retard>vs Cylinder (that is a button) table. This table causes false KR and some professional tuners do not fix it. IMO this table should be all zeroes.

Has the TCM been unlocked?

It's an AEM fuel/boost psi gauge that I've plugged into the procharger manifold breakout block. Unfortunately, I don't have it logging anywhere. So it just reads instant and peak on the gauge.

I have since ordered a DSX baro breakout harness and a 3 bar MAP. Waiting for it to get here.

On the boost PSI issue, going to take a look at the PCV valve today. I heard that some of the pre-2019 engines didn't have a check valve built into the PCV valve. That could be bleeding off some manifold pressure into the crankcase. The PC kit I ordered from Jegs was supposed to fit 2016+... ended up being a 2019+ kit. Talked to a few people and sounds like the biggest difference is the kits for 2016-2018 included a check valve for the PCV. Hoping that's my problem, would be an easy fix.

While on that subject, the 2019+ kits also just delete the driver side aux radiator instead of relocating it like the 2016-2018 kits do. Haven't seen any negative effects of removing that rad. I imagine it would make a difference if I were racing on a road course where it would be pushed harder for longer.

Thanks for the head's up on the static retard vs cyl. I don't hear any audible knock at the points where the scanner is saying I am getting it. It's also at the point where the PE goes away (see previous posts), so will fix the PE at high RPM first, then take a look there.

I do not have the TCM unlocked. I may do that over the winter when I wont be driving as much anyway. It's still my summer/fall toy and not wanting to wait a couple of weeks for the unlock. I'll need to have it unlocked eventually since I'm planning on doing a torque converter with a stall. Also wanting to increase slightly, and make consistent, the shift points.

Anything else with TCM tune I would want to change?

[cjperformance]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

You have to adjust the throttle pedal percent and enable torque percent to get the ECU into PE mode sooner. .85 is a bit too lean imo. Sounds like your heading the right direction. GL!

Are you thinking more like .825 + addl timing would be better than whatever timing that .850 provides?

I've seen people mention everything from .825 to .875.

[KingLT1]

No...The lambda AFR needs to be brought down to .82 regardless or you will be putting pistons in that thing before the first oil change on the Procharger.

Imho these Supercharger companies intentionally run on the lean side with canned tunes because of how close the stock fuel system is to it's limits. I assume their theory is that running on the lean side is better then running out of fuel even though neither is correct.

What these supercharger companies need to do is quit offering these base systems with a canned tune on stock fueling. They should be including LT4 fuel system and a "base" calibration file to get the setup running....followed by a disclaimer that the tune be finished or verified by a competent tuner.

The reason why they don't is because it would cost them sales. The idea of being able to install a supercharger in your garage in 5-6hrs, flash tune, and go flog your dolphin appeals to the masses. When the reality is that very seldom is it every that easy.

This isn't the platform to cut corners on with boost. Ideally we need more octane and cylinder cooling to run boost on this high compression engine with tight ring gaps. 93 octane can be done on low boost but I would error on the richer side .80 to help cool. I can't confirm 100% but I don't thing the stock fuel system can keep up at that Lambda. A lot will depending on temp, elevation, and boost the engine is making. I haven't tuned a stock fuel system boost car because I refuse too. lol

[cjperformance]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

No...The lambda AFR needs to be brought down to .82 regardless or you will be putting pistons in that thing before the first oil change on the Procharger.

Imho these Supercharger companies intentionally run on the lean side with canned tunes because of how close the stock fuel system is to it's limits. I assume their theory is that running on the lean side is better then running out of fuel even though neither is correct.

What these supercharger companies need to do is quit offering these base systems with a canned tune on stock fueling. They should be including LT4 fuel system and a "base" calibration file to get the setup running....followed by a disclaimer that the tune be finished or verified by a competent tuner.

The reason why they don't is because it would cost them sales. The idea of being able to install a supercharger in your garage in 5-6hrs, flash tune, and go flog your dolphin appeals to the masses. When the reality is that very seldom is it every that easy.

This isn't the platform to cut corners on with boost. Ideally we need more octane and cylinder cooling to run boost on this high compression engine with tight ring gaps. 93 octane can be done on low boost but I would error on the richer side .80 to help cool. I can't confirm 100% but I don't thing the stock fuel system can keep up at that Lambda. A lot will depending on temp, elevation, and boost the engine is making. I haven't tuned a stock fuel system boost car because I refuse too. lol

Got it. Good info for sure. I'll keep an eye on the fueling params, low-side and high-side, injector avg pulse width, etc... and see how close I am now to limits.

Yeah, the 5-6 hour thing is a borderline lie. That's probably the absolute fastest an experienced person who'd done it before could do it.

If things start to look questionable, I'll probably go with the LT4 fueling. Maybe a good winter project.

[Eldi Z]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

No...The lambda AFR needs to be brought down to .82 regardless or you will be putting pistons in that thing before the first oil change on the Procharger.

Imho these Supercharger companies intentionally run on the lean side with canned tunes because of how close the stock fuel system is to it's limits. I assume their theory is that running on the lean side is better then running out of fuel even though neither is correct.

What these supercharger companies need to do is quit offering these base systems with a canned tune on stock fueling. They should be including LT4 fuel system and a "base" calibration file to get the setup running....followed by a disclaimer that the tune be finished or verified by a competent tuner.

The reason why they don't is because it would cost them sales. The idea of being able to install a supercharger in your garage in 5-6hrs, flash tune, and go flog your dolphin appeals to the masses. When the reality is that very seldom is it every that easy.

This isn't the platform to cut corners on with boost. Ideally we need more octane and cylinder cooling to run boost on this high compression engine with tight ring gaps. 93 octane can be done on low boost but I would error on the richer side .80 to help cool. I can't confirm 100% but I don't thing the stock fuel system can keep up at that Lambda. A lot will depending on temp, elevation, and boost the engine is making. I haven't tuned a stock fuel system boost car because I refuse too. lol

Very rich and important information here!

So having the complete stock LT4 fueling, from the In-Tank LP pump - all the way though the HP unit (+Fuel hard-pipes) + LT4 ("high flow" spec Part#?) would be something you would accept tuning on the LT1 engine, on straight 93-Pump gas (no other "octane boosters" / "cooling mechanisms" I.E. Meth, Etc.)?
On the LT4 fueling setup as it comes from the factory in a ZL1/CTS-V/Z06 (without additional Low side Pressure enhancers, I.E. DSX units, BaPs, Etc.), what do you reckon is a "safe" (without going to lean...or too rich) RWHP figure on a P1X @ ~ 7-8 PSI Boost on the LT1 engines?

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by Eldi Z

Very rich and important information here!

So having the complete stock LT4 fueling, from the In-Tank LP pump - all the way though the HP unit (+Fuel hard-pipes) + LT4 ("high flow" spec Part#?) would be something you would accept tuning on the LT1 engine, on straight 93-Pump gas (no other "octane boosters" / "cooling mechanisms" I.E. Meth, Etc.)?
On the LT4 fueling setup as it comes from the factory in a ZL1/CTS-V/Z06 (without additional Low side Pressure enhancers, I.E. DSX units, BaPs, Etc.), what do you reckon is a "safe" (without going to lean...or too rich) RWHP figure on a P1X @ ~ 7-8 PSI Boost on the LT1 engines?

KingLT1 will know this right off the top of his head lol, but 93 octane on a SBE LT1 and 7-8 psi of boost is probably around 600 WHP. You’ll be close to needing more octane at much more boost than that...

[ZO6Ted]

If ONLY I would've been a member and had this knowledge when I did my Whipple it would've saved a lot of headache. Fueling should absolutely be an option with a charger or a hair dryer with projected hp with and without upgraded fueling. Armageddon does it.

[cjperformance]

Ok... big temperature change between Monday and today, so hard to compare seat of the pants feel. Obviously feels much more powerful today at 64 deg F instead of 88 degrees, so not quite an apples to apples comparison.

Updated the enable torque tables. PE is now occurring throughout the full RPM range at WOT... or 70% and higher...

Couple of things. Inj pulse width ms is around 5.8 AND there's still some knock retard in the upper rpm range.

Looking for input on how to approach.

Option #1 - Increase PE for that range... try to get closer to .82 lamda. With inj pw already at 5.8... not sure how much further I can push that.

Option #2 - Pull timing from the base table at those rpms/load.

My thoughts... since I'm a noob... start by pulling timing by 2 degrees at those rpms, may actually get more power if I'm already past the peak supportable ign timing? Pulling timing cant hurt at least. It's safe.

After the above, verify if KR goes away.

If yes, then maybe modify the PE tables to increase enrichment by a small amount... maybe .5%??? Not sure what the effective relationship is between a .5% or 1% increase to the PE tables will have on injector PW. My understanding is that above 5ms is "a lot", but could maybe push to 6.2 ms if the SOI is already adjusted (based on input I've received)

Procharger modified the SOI, but not sure if it was modified enough to support 6.2ms inj pulse width.

So... asking myself, what am I trying to get out of this right now???? I think I need to be happy with the power level, whatever it is at WOT until I upgrade fueling.

I want to change a few things so its safe, but effective. Feel like I'm close. With the Knock Retard showing its ugly head, I'm probably at the limit for timing at WOT. Earlier in the thread it was mentioned to zero out the static retard. This was done in the canned tune, so we are good there. I have to think its real knock, and dangerous.

Other than that, would like to "brighten up" the part throttle feel. Thinking I might be able to do that with some small timing experimentation in the part throttle ranges.

Attached a shot of a section of the log. LMK if anyone is interested in seeing/knowing more. My goal is to help others in the same situation.

[Joshinator99]

Try to keep injector PW to under 6.0 ms. Don't go by duty cycle. You should be shooting for .82 lambda anyway IMO.

What are you commanding for low pressure at WOT? 41 psi looks low IMO.

If you have access to Boostane or higher octane gas, put some in and take another log. If it goes away it's probably real. If not, most likely false knock if you're commanding 16 degrees.

[KingLT1]

Turn the timing back to 12 degrees, get the fueling sorted, then creep the timing back in.

I know on my buddies P1x car it will only tolerate 12-13degrees on 93. It has full LT4 fuel system and making 7psi average and 9.5psi peak at 6500rpm.

[cjperformance]

Originally Posted by Joshinator99

Try to keep injector PW to under 6.0 ms. Don't go by duty cycle. You should be shooting for .82 lambda anyway IMO.

What are you commanding for low pressure at WOT? 41 psi looks low IMO.

If you have access to Boostane or higher octane gas, put some in and take another log. If it goes away it's probably real. If not, most likely false knock if you're commanding 16 degrees.

I dont have the fuel module unlocked. Maybe I'll do that. High side looks okay though I think.

[cjperformance]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

Turn the timing back to 12 degrees, get the fueling sorted, then creep the timing back in.

I know on my buddies P1x car it will only tolerate 12-13degrees on 93. It has full LT4 fuel system and making 7psi average and 9.5psi peak at 6500rpm.

Ah, you are right. I did set the timing back by 5 degrees to do the MAF, and then once got the MAF correct, set it back to prior.

Then I tackled the PE issue.

It's been said so much that the canned tune is a safe tune! IT IS NOT! I was thinking that surely the canned settings for timing had to already be conservative, but in hindsight, they look rather aggressive. What a weird mix of settings for a supposedly safe tune.

Looking at when the KR comes on, it's right around 15 degrees. So I neglected one of the basics of tuning, which you have reminded me!

I am also getting around 7.2 psi of boost registering on the gauge now. I'm sure the cooler weather helps that, or maybe just engine getting healthier? Not sure boost scales with engine performance like that, or just RPM and temp.

So recap of changes to fix the canned tune so far:
- fixed the MAF scaling
- fixed the PE not applying correctly

Todo:
- Reduce the timing from 16-17 advance at WOT, and will probably end up around 14-15 from what I'm seeing. Manifold Air Temps def play a role in how likely the KR is. I think there is a scaling factor or table for that I can play with. Much worse KR when it was 88 ambient w/ 130-150 MAT. With 70 ambient and 110-120 MAT, much less KR.
- Try to get PE lambda down to .825 or even .800 without exceeding 6 ms inj pulse width.

[Eldi Z]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

I know on my buddies P1x car it will only tolerate 12-13degrees on 93. It has full LT4 fuel system and making 7psi average and 9.5psi peak at 6500rpm.

And what kind of R-WHP is he typically seeing with these settings?
What were the average ambient temps during the tests / dyno sessions ?

[KingLT1]

Originally Posted by Eldi Z

And what kind of R-WHP is he typically seeing with these settings?
What were the average ambient temps during the tests / dyno sessions ?

Don't think it has been on a Dyno.

90 degrees out street tuning.

Probably can run more timing(14-15) in cooler weather. But we're not going to play that game. It's going to get a flex sensor and run some Ethanol so it never has KR in any temp and have the ability to run 18-20 degrees.