New Stage 2 UEL (91-93 and E85) OTS tune files

[FRSBRZGT86FAN]

Originally Posted by DocWalt

So after the luster of a shiny new toy has worn off a bit. How are people liking these tunes? I'm tempted to give it a whirl finally but don't want to waste my time if it's not noticeably faster

Noticeably better, however e85 is much faster as to be expected, so if you have e85 stick with it, but if you plan to go back to pump 93 or 91 use it.

[DocWalt]

Originally Posted by FRSBRZGT86FAN

Noticeably better, however e85 is much faster as to be expected, so if you have e85 stick with it, but if you plan to go back to pump 93 or 91 use it.

Nope, can't get E85 anywhere (the one local place NEVER has it, but every time I drive by they're advertising it... morons)

[FRSBRZGT86FAN]

Originally Posted by DocWalt

Nope, can't get E85 anywhere (the one local place NEVER has it, but every time I drive by they're advertising it... morons)

Then this new tune is worth it, the power band feels more punchy in the lower 2k-5k range, and then it comes alive after that. It's almost more linear.

[D_Thissen]

Originally Posted by tdotBRZ

be the first, tune the beast and then datalog so we can both pull some timings

Lol man I don't wanna be the guinea pig. Maybe I'll try the 91 tune on 94

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[tdotBRZ]

Originally Posted by D_Thissen

Lol man I don't wanna be the guinea pig. Maybe I'll try the 91 tune on 94

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

pshh i was the guinea pig and ran it on my tomei and it's doing very healthy, only some FLKC on high RPM 6.4k to redline and it only happens on the track when temps are high, on the street or even on first lap on the track doing 3rd gear pull was no knock at all

[solidONE]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

I noticed my IAT's have been high ever since I installed an oil cooler. On the highway my IAT's sit about 20-25 F above ambient. On track it's more like 15-20 F above. I think the oil lines running so close to the intake box seem to be heating the air up.

My oil temps for those pulls were around 200-205 F. My peak track oil temps hit 245 F. I'd love to log pulls with those kind of oil temps, but not sure how I'd get them that high on the street.

I dont want to sound like I'm condoning illegal activities, but do scout the area for police and other traffic before you do stuff like that. Safety first, you know. lol

I'm curious to see what kind of maf voltages you are hitting with the setup. It looks like with the UEL setup and cam timing you can still run a lot of ignition advance at the very top end past 6000rpm. From experience, I know that colder IAT's will register higher maf voltage compared to warmer IAT's. (typically higher maf v = more whp) Though I'm not sure if that just how the maf sensor reacts to different temps or if it's because of the denser air charge at lower temps and the maf sensor reading is accurately reflecting the increased air flow at lower temps.

[Kronos]

Completely "fixed" what I thought was wrong with the car. The car now has at least adequate power for the chassis it has.

And even better it has had adequate power all the through out the power band (no torque dip)

It's still no drag car but at least it doesn't feel like the car is dragging an anchor behind it anymore

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FRSBRZGT86FAN]

Originally Posted by Kronos

Completely "fixed" what I thought was wrong with the car. The car now has at least adequate power for the chassis it has.

And even better it has had adequate power all the through out the power band (no torque dip)

It's still no drag car but at least it doesn't feel like the car is dragging an anchor behind it anymore

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You should try e85

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by solidONE

I dont want to sound like I'm condoning illegal activities, but do scout the area for police and other traffic before you do stuff like that. Safety first, you know. lol

Yeah it was actually on my scout run that I discovered the cop cars - I hadn't done any brake bedding yet.

Originally Posted by solidONE

I'm curious to see what kind of maf voltages you are hitting with the setup. It looks like with the UEL setup and cam timing you can still run a lot of ignition advance at the very top end past 6000rpm. From experience, I know that colder IAT's will register higher maf voltage compared to warmer IAT's. (typically higher maf v = more whp) Though I'm not sure if that just how the maf sensor reacts to different temps or if it's because of the denser air charge at lower temps and the maf sensor reading is accurately reflecting the increased air flow at lower temps.

The weather has gotten much hotter (85-90 F now), but I'll log some MAF voltages tomorrow if you want to compare. Although if I understand correctly, MAF readings are the primary input into engine load, so you should be able to extrapolate some of this information from the engine load data in my logs.

Load = (MAF g/s)/rpm*60

Thus:

- At the track on v2.074 tune, my engine load peaked around 1.31 @ 6871 RPM. Doing a quick reverse calculation, peak MAF = 150.0 g/s. IAT was 61 F.

- With the OFH aggressive tune, my engine load peaked around 1.23 @ 7177 RPM. Peak MAF = 147.1 g/s. IAT was 95 F.
(I compared my average MAF numbers vs. those in the track log posted by @tdotBRZ and they were slightly lower, which makes sense given he also has a greddy intake. Ambient temps look to have been similar.)

- At the track with stage 1, my engine load peaked around 1.13 @ 6954 RPM. Peak MAF = 131.1 g/s. IAT was 81 F.

[phrosty]

MAFv is affected by temperature, that's why there's an IAT comp table. It just doesn't seem to do a very good job because fuel trims still change between hot and cold days.

[solidONE]

Originally Posted by phrosty

MAFv is affected by temperature, that's why there's an IAT comp table. It just doesn't seem to do a very good job because fuel trims still change between hot and cold days.

There is a tool in VGI's tool that was done by Kodename47 to help rescale the MAF temp compensation table. I've done some adjustments to the table and am happy with the results where fluctuating IAT doesnt have as much of an effect on fuel trims than the stock tables. Although, most just leave it alone an scale their MAF to average IATs.

[solidONE]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Yeah it was actually on my scout run that I discovered the cop cars - I hadn't done any brake bedding yet.



The weather has gotten much hotter (85-90 F now), but I'll log some MAF voltages tomorrow if you want to compare. Although if I understand correctly, MAF readings are the primary input into engine load, so you should be able to extrapolate some of this information from the engine load data in my logs.

Load = (MAF g/s)/rpm*60

Thus:

- At the track on v2.074 tune, my engine load peaked around 1.31 @ 6871 RPM. Doing a quick reverse calculation, peak MAF = 150.0 g/s. IAT was 61 F.

- With the OFH aggressive tune, my engine load peaked around 1.23 @ 7177 RPM. Peak MAF = 147.1 g/s. IAT was 95 F.
(I compared my average MAF numbers vs. those in the track log posted by @tdotBRZ and they were slightly lower, which makes sense given he also has a greddy intake. Ambient temps look to have been similar.)

- At the track with stage 1, my engine load peaked around 1.13 @ 6954 RPM. Peak MAF = 131.1 g/s. IAT was 81 F.

That is why I like to look at the MAF sensor voltage and not the MAF output converted with the MAF scale. Less variables just recording what the sensor is seeing. I'm sure humidity may have an effect, but I'm just going to pretend that it doesn't effect MAF voltages too keep things simpler.

[DarkSunrise]

Did some hot weather (85-95 F) testing today. 30 miles of highway. Then four 2nd gear pulls and a 3rd gear pull. FLKC gradually grows with each successive run, ultimately pulling 2.6 to 3.9 timing from 6800 RPM to redline on the 3rd gear pull. This tune is definitely a little aggressive on my car, probably not ideal for track.

http://datazap.me/u/darksunrise/ofh-...zoom=6206-8714

The rest of the hot weather logs looked ok. FLKC and KC stayed below -0.69, except two instances of KC of -1.41 @ 3300 RPM and -2.81 @ 3800 RPM. IAM stayed solid at 1.00 the whole time.

I'm thinking this tune might be ok to track on with 3-4 degrees less timing from 6700 RPM to redline. Or perhaps more timing compensation but not sure whether to adjust for coolant temps or IATs, as I didn't see a strong correlation in the logs.

@solidONE - I recorded MAFv on these logs. I think I remember seeing peak values around 4.01v on some runs. Interested to hear how that compares.

[FrostedFlakes]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Did some hot weather (85-95 F) testing today. 30 miles of highway. Then four 2nd gear pulls and a 3rd gear pull. FLKC gradually grows with each successive run, ultimately pulling 2.6 to 3.9 timing from 6800 RPM to redline on the 3rd gear pull. This tune is definitely a little aggressive on my car, probably not ideal for track.

http://datazap.me/u/darksunrise/ofh-...zoom=6206-8714

The rest of the hot weather logs looked ok. FLKC and KC stayed below -0.69, except two instances of KC of -1.41 @ 3300 RPM and -2.81 @ 3800 RPM. IAM stayed solid at 1.00 the whole time.

I'm thinking this tune might be ok to track on with 3-4 degrees less timing from 6700 RPM to redline. Or perhaps more timing compensation but not sure whether to adjust for coolant temps or IATs, as I didn't see a strong correlation in the logs.

@solidONE - I recorded MAFv on these logs. I think I remember seeing peak values around 4.01v on some runs. Interested to hear how that compares.

What octane are you using for this test? I believe the tune is good for regular driving, however it's good to find out how it holds up in hotter temperature. It would not be an issue if you drove regularly. Not sure how it will be driving hard in hot conditions as in your case. As some has mentioned it would be more ideal to use OTS tunes for track use on the safe side.