[pavetim]

Is there a way to see if i am getting false knok or real knock retard? Stock 2017 camaro ss. Started tuning the maf and in the upper ranges i started getting alot of knock showing, i had to reduce by 10 in some blocks but the graph looks very peaky now. How can i tell if this is real knock or false?

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by pavetim

Is there a way to see if i am getting false knok or real knock retard? Stock 2017 camaro ss. Started tuning the maf and in the upper ranges i started getting alot of knock showing, i had to reduce by 10 in some blocks but the graph looks very peaky now. How can i tell if this is real knock or false?

How does the fueling look in those areas? What octane?

Also, if the fueling is legit (.82 lambda or so) you can dump some 100 octane in and see if it (KR) goes away (assuming you’re not looking for a silly amount of timing advance).

[pavetim]

Fueling should be good, if anything rich. Totally stock running off maf only i was getting 1.17 at PE that's super lean and not sure why stock would be thst lean but i made maf adjustmenys and its close or rich .93 octane e10

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by pavetim

Fueling should be good, if anything rich. Totally stock running off maf only i was getting 1.17 at PE that's super lean and not sure why stock would be thst lean but i made maf adjustmenys and its close or rich .93 octane e10

A power enrichment ratio of 1.17 is not lean...

[pavetim]

1.17 lambda is lean, should be about .87 lambda. Thats lambda from my wideband sensor. Juat did some logging and another question. My cruise timing in the highway going 89 was timing about 50 but my spark table commands 35, thats a big difference

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by pavetim

1.17 lambda is lean, should be about .87 lambda. Thats lambda from my wideband sensor. Juat did some logging and another question. My cruise timing in the highway going 89 was timing about 50 but my spark table commands 35, thats a big difference

A power enrichment ratio of 1.17 equals an AFR of 12.05:1 which is obviously not lean. If your wideband is reading 1.17 lambda at WOT, then yes, you are seriously lean. But we have no idea what your mods are. I would normally suggest you post your tune and datalogs for review, otherwise we’re just guessing.

[pavetim]

As said above its totally stock except for secondary cat removal

[BDPhoto519]

Not to make assumptions about your HP Tuners knowledge... but.

Sounds like you are confusing EQ Ratio and Lambda... The numbers you see in your PE table are NOT lambda values but in fact EQ ratio numbers which are the inverse if you were not aware.

You should be targeting roughly .85-.87 lambda under WOT on a NA setup on your calibrated lambda gauge.

Sorry if you already knew this, but might still help.

[radz28]

If you're running a stock tune (I have not seen one), if you're seeing EQ of 1.17, I wonder if it's because you AREN'T in PE yet...

Also - DI engines don't like running too rich, so be careful of that, too. You can't run a DI at the same EQ as PI.

[pavetim]

Thats what i thought but i made some changes and it does seem like its in PE although i did lower the rpm turn on a little. I think stock threshold is 5000, i lowered it to 4000