Project Super AUJP
01-20-2005, 12:22 PM
#201
Supreme Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: STL area
Posts: 1,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Project Super AUJP
Originally posted by TRAXION
What do you guys think about creating a better base image than the AUJP to start with? There are several things in the AUJP that can be changed to yield, IMHO, a better base image to start with from a performance perspective.
Some suggestions are...
1) Fix max Idle in Park to raise it from 800 to something around 1200 so that we automatically have the ability for higher idles. Guys with runner a bigger cam can't idle more than 800 in park without changing the actual backend code.
2) Fix the dependency of highway mode on CCP. This is annoying because if you disable CCP then you have ALSO disabled Highway Mode without even knowing that you disabled highway mode.
3) Change the IAC learn temperature to something more reasonable.
4) Increase the knock recovery rates for faster return from knock.
5) Fix for PE AFR being dependent on open loop vs. closed loop. If you go down the track in Open Loop vs. Closed Loop then the Base Pulse Width will be different. The ECM uses Open Loop AFR when in Open Loop and Stoich when in Closed Loop. This can be a reasonable difference and definitely cause inconsistent times.
6) Disable BLM corrections at WOT.
These are just a few. There's a ton that we could change. Just looking for input to see what you guys think .... and to also make this a group effort as opposed to just one person posting a bin.
Tim
What do you guys think about creating a better base image than the AUJP to start with? There are several things in the AUJP that can be changed to yield, IMHO, a better base image to start with from a performance perspective.
Some suggestions are...
1) Fix max Idle in Park to raise it from 800 to something around 1200 so that we automatically have the ability for higher idles. Guys with runner a bigger cam can't idle more than 800 in park without changing the actual backend code.
2) Fix the dependency of highway mode on CCP. This is annoying because if you disable CCP then you have ALSO disabled Highway Mode without even knowing that you disabled highway mode.
3) Change the IAC learn temperature to something more reasonable.
4) Increase the knock recovery rates for faster return from knock.
5) Fix for PE AFR being dependent on open loop vs. closed loop. If you go down the track in Open Loop vs. Closed Loop then the Base Pulse Width will be different. The ECM uses Open Loop AFR when in Open Loop and Stoich when in Closed Loop. This can be a reasonable difference and definitely cause inconsistent times.
6) Disable BLM corrections at WOT.
These are just a few. There's a ton that we could change. Just looking for input to see what you guys think .... and to also make this a group effort as opposed to just one person posting a bin.
Tim
thanks
-Tim
01-20-2005, 01:58 PM
#202
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Dallas, TX area
Posts: 3,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 91 Formula WS6 (Black, T-Tops)
Engine: 383 MiniRam (529 HP, 519 TQ - DD2K)
Transmission: Built '97 T56, Pro 5.0, CF-DF
Axle/Gears: 4.11 posi Ford 9"
Is S_AUJP_v2, which is dated 6/13/04, your latest version?
I'm going to try and develop a manual tranny version of it to use in my SuperRam 383 and want to make sure I'm starting with the latest version....
I'm going to try and develop a manual tranny version of it to use in my SuperRam 383 and want to make sure I'm starting with the latest version....
01-20-2005, 05:54 PM
#203
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: California
Posts: 1,162
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: Z28
Engine: L98
Transmission: T56
Originally posted by vernw
Is S_AUJP_v2, which is dated 6/13/04, your latest version?
I'm going to try and develop a manual tranny version of it to use in my SuperRam 383 and want to make sure I'm starting with the latest version....
Is S_AUJP_v2, which is dated 6/13/04, your latest version?
I'm going to try and develop a manual tranny version of it to use in my SuperRam 383 and want to make sure I'm starting with the latest version....
just my two cents, and it worked for me.
01-20-2005, 09:00 PM
#204
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Dallas, TX area
Posts: 3,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 91 Formula WS6 (Black, T-Tops)
Engine: 383 MiniRam (529 HP, 519 TQ - DD2K)
Transmission: Built '97 T56, Pro 5.0, CF-DF
Axle/Gears: 4.11 posi Ford 9"
That's exactly what I'm planning to do, except I'll be using AXYC as my base on my 383 SuperRam, which is also a manual tranny BIN....
Care to shed a little initial helper info on the changes you had to make (either via PM or e-mail if you prefer is fine with me)?
Care to shed a little initial helper info on the changes you had to make (either via PM or e-mail if you prefer is fine with me)?
01-21-2005, 09:32 AM
#205
Supreme Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,844
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 2005 Subaru STI
Engine: 153ci of Turbo Power!
Transmission: 6-Speed
Re: Re: Project Super AUJP
Originally posted by 11sORbust
Is that the total rundown of everything? If not then maybe you should update the original post. I have no idea what the S-aujp is eactly. I don't have time to go through this entire thread.
thanks
-Tim
Is that the total rundown of everything? If not then maybe you should update the original post. I have no idea what the S-aujp is eactly. I don't have time to go through this entire thread.
thanks
-Tim
)Tim
01-21-2005, 02:42 PM
#206
Supreme Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: STL area
Posts: 1,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: Re: Project Super AUJP
Originally posted by TRAXION
download the file and look in the readme.txt)
Tim
download the file and look in the readme.txt
)Tim
BTW, I NEVER told sombody to search for info I was capable of giving.....
Last edited by 11sORbust; 01-21-2005 at 02:45 PM.
01-21-2005, 11:28 PM
#208
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: California
Posts: 1,162
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: Z28
Engine: L98
Transmission: T56
I'm assuming this was directed at me --
I don't have any of my notes with me, but most of my tuning thus far has been centered around drivability.
For example - when I had the slushbox, I had found that I liked to make the idle speed error spark modifier tables really lazy - maybe only a degree or two of total correction. However, now I'm experimenting with a moderate amount of advance for under-RPM correction (only) and no retard for over idle RPM. It seems to help low-RPM launches (you know, stop sign to stop sign stuff in a neighborhood where everyone is standing on the porch with a cell phone in hand and 911 on speed-dial in case they hear a v8).
Low rpm timing overall is also more important than when running a slushbox, I've pretty heavily smoothed the SA tables in these areas and leveled off the changes. With a slushbox, you pretty much bypass all of the sub-1000rpm tuning areas as soon as you get on the gas. But with a stick and mild driving, you don't get to flash right up to 1500rpm, so the tuning down low is more critical (and you experience greater MAP swings than an auto, too).
I've also played with the AE quite a bit, and the IAC follower gain and delays to control how fast the IAC falls off on shifts. The chip I started with (AXXD) had the gain at 175%! which is pretty insane. I ended up dropping all the way back to 40%, and now I find I'm slowly creeping back up to around 70% or so - but I've also increased the IAC delay steps and limited the total allowable IAC steps for the throttle follower code. So I have less IAC follower but it takes longer to decay out. It seems to make light throttle drivability better for me.
A lot of my tuning is in vain - I'm running a t56 on only 3.23 gears, and I have a heavy z28 - with power everything and full options. I really need to go to 3.73's, and the low throttle drivability would be a lot better just because I woudln't be asking so much of the motor at sub-1000rpm speeds (and I would get above 1000 quicker).
On the other hand, it's giving me good experience doing subtle drivability tuning changes.
Yes, I know I make it sound like I'm driving the car like grandma. Sometimes ya gotta do that. once I dump the flowmaster muffler and get my SLP dual/dual muffler on it, that will quiet it down a bit and it won't attract so much unwanted attention in our friendly kalifornia neighborhoods.
I have no problem publically sharing anything I've learned. As I see it, I've taken way(!!) more from the DIY PROM community than I've contributed, so I have no problems contributing publically wherever I can.
I don't have any of my notes with me, but most of my tuning thus far has been centered around drivability.
For example - when I had the slushbox, I had found that I liked to make the idle speed error spark modifier tables really lazy - maybe only a degree or two of total correction. However, now I'm experimenting with a moderate amount of advance for under-RPM correction (only) and no retard for over idle RPM. It seems to help low-RPM launches (you know, stop sign to stop sign stuff in a neighborhood where everyone is standing on the porch with a cell phone in hand and 911 on speed-dial in case they hear a v8).
Low rpm timing overall is also more important than when running a slushbox, I've pretty heavily smoothed the SA tables in these areas and leveled off the changes. With a slushbox, you pretty much bypass all of the sub-1000rpm tuning areas as soon as you get on the gas. But with a stick and mild driving, you don't get to flash right up to 1500rpm, so the tuning down low is more critical (and you experience greater MAP swings than an auto, too).
I've also played with the AE quite a bit, and the IAC follower gain and delays to control how fast the IAC falls off on shifts. The chip I started with (AXXD) had the gain at 175%! which is pretty insane. I ended up dropping all the way back to 40%, and now I find I'm slowly creeping back up to around 70% or so - but I've also increased the IAC delay steps and limited the total allowable IAC steps for the throttle follower code. So I have less IAC follower but it takes longer to decay out. It seems to make light throttle drivability better for me.
A lot of my tuning is in vain - I'm running a t56 on only 3.23 gears, and I have a heavy z28 - with power everything and full options. I really need to go to 3.73's, and the low throttle drivability would be a lot better just because I woudln't be asking so much of the motor at sub-1000rpm speeds (and I would get above 1000 quicker).
On the other hand, it's giving me good experience doing subtle drivability tuning changes.
Yes, I know I make it sound like I'm driving the car like grandma. Sometimes ya gotta do that. once I dump the flowmaster muffler and get my SLP dual/dual muffler on it, that will quiet it down a bit and it won't attract so much unwanted attention in our friendly kalifornia neighborhoods.
I have no problem publically sharing anything I've learned. As I see it, I've taken way(!!) more from the DIY PROM community than I've contributed, so I have no problems contributing publically wherever I can.
Originally posted by vernw
That's exactly what I'm planning to do, except I'll be using AXYC as my base on my 383 SuperRam, which is also a manual tranny BIN....
Care to shed a little initial helper info on the changes you had to make (either via PM or e-mail if you prefer is fine with me)?
That's exactly what I'm planning to do, except I'll be using AXYC as my base on my 383 SuperRam, which is also a manual tranny BIN....
Care to shed a little initial helper info on the changes you had to make (either via PM or e-mail if you prefer is fine with me)?
Last edited by 91L98Z28; 01-21-2005 at 11:40 PM.
02-18-2005, 12:49 AM
#210
I think Traxions' original intent was to have a good base bin for a 350TPI. With the most common things for a stockish TPI already done. Well excluding that idle thing. If this was for an engine with a higher level of mods, then the extended VE2 patch would have been included.
edit: Actually I think that patch came out a little after the S_AUJP did.
The pw fix is needed for 400cid and larger engines.
A 355 does not need it. Unless you like to go WOT at 32f engine temp....
And this is a really easy mod to do anyways.
I suggest that a different name be used for a aujp used in a highly modded app.
This will probably occur "all by itself" as myself and a few others are in the process of using this bin.
May take a year, but there will probably be a few versions posted to further the 8D development.
As far as I can tell, there are only about 4 people posting about doing any kind of asm work on 8D. And only 2 of them appear willing to post what they find.
The stickies only have a few articles on individual sections of code. So if your like me, you have to figure out how a whole section works before you can change it. Not just read up on how it works, do a little verification and then see what needs to be changed to do what you want.
If more people would get into asm. This stuff would go a lot faster. As an example, the egr code goes unused on a lot of peoples cars. There is a good chunk of code and two output channels & at least one ram location that could be put to use. One use could be for dry nitrous. An egr variable is already used in the BPW calc....
Not saying that anyone should post their dry nitrous bin.
But if the deletion of the egr code was posted it would save a lot of time. And you could still try to figure out why it was deleted the way that it was. Note: adding code is a lot harder than deleting it.
I'd rather see what needs changed where posted than an actual bin anyways. That way more people would learn how to do this kind of stuff. Keep the DIY in it.
edit: Actually I think that patch came out a little after the S_AUJP did.
The pw fix is needed for 400cid and larger engines.
A 355 does not need it. Unless you like to go WOT at 32f engine temp....
And this is a really easy mod to do anyways.
I suggest that a different name be used for a aujp used in a highly modded app.
This will probably occur "all by itself" as myself and a few others are in the process of using this bin.
May take a year, but there will probably be a few versions posted to further the 8D development.
As far as I can tell, there are only about 4 people posting about doing any kind of asm work on 8D. And only 2 of them appear willing to post what they find.
The stickies only have a few articles on individual sections of code. So if your like me, you have to figure out how a whole section works before you can change it. Not just read up on how it works, do a little verification and then see what needs to be changed to do what you want.
If more people would get into asm. This stuff would go a lot faster. As an example, the egr code goes unused on a lot of peoples cars. There is a good chunk of code and two output channels & at least one ram location that could be put to use. One use could be for dry nitrous. An egr variable is already used in the BPW calc....
Not saying that anyone should post their dry nitrous bin.
But if the deletion of the egr code was posted it would save a lot of time. And you could still try to figure out why it was deleted the way that it was. Note: adding code is a lot harder than deleting it.
I'd rather see what needs changed where posted than an actual bin anyways. That way more people would learn how to do this kind of stuff. Keep the DIY in it.
Last edited by Z69; 02-18-2005 at 12:59 AM.
02-18-2005, 10:05 AM
#211
Supreme Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: STL area
Posts: 1,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Z69
I think Traxions' original intent was to have a good base bin for a 350TPI. With the most common things for a stockish TPI already done. Well excluding that idle thing. If this was for an engine with a higher level of mods, then the extended VE2 patch would have been included.
edit: Actually I think that patch came out a little after the S_AUJP did.
The pw fix is needed for 400cid and larger engines.
A 355 does not need it. Unless you like to go WOT at 32f engine temp....
And this is a really easy mod to do anyways.
I suggest that a different name be used for a aujp used in a highly modded app.
This will probably occur "all by itself" as myself and a few others are in the process of using this bin.
May take a year, but there will probably be a few versions posted to further the 8D development.
As far as I can tell, there are only about 4 people posting about doing any kind of asm work on 8D. And only 2 of them appear willing to post what they find.
The stickies only have a few articles on individual sections of code. So if your like me, you have to figure out how a whole section works before you can change it. Not just read up on how it works, do a little verification and then see what needs to be changed to do what you want.
If more people would get into asm. This stuff would go a lot faster. As an example, the egr code goes unused on a lot of peoples cars. There is a good chunk of code and two output channels & at least one ram location that could be put to use. One use could be for dry nitrous. An egr variable is already used in the BPW calc....
Not saying that anyone should post their dry nitrous bin.
But if the deletion of the egr code was posted it would save a lot of time. And you could still try to figure out why it was deleted the way that it was. Note: adding code is a lot harder than deleting it.
I'd rather see what needs changed where posted than an actual bin anyways. That way more people would learn how to do this kind of stuff. Keep the DIY in it.
I think Traxions' original intent was to have a good base bin for a 350TPI. With the most common things for a stockish TPI already done. Well excluding that idle thing. If this was for an engine with a higher level of mods, then the extended VE2 patch would have been included.
edit: Actually I think that patch came out a little after the S_AUJP did.
The pw fix is needed for 400cid and larger engines.
A 355 does not need it. Unless you like to go WOT at 32f engine temp....
And this is a really easy mod to do anyways.
I suggest that a different name be used for a aujp used in a highly modded app.
This will probably occur "all by itself" as myself and a few others are in the process of using this bin.
May take a year, but there will probably be a few versions posted to further the 8D development.
As far as I can tell, there are only about 4 people posting about doing any kind of asm work on 8D. And only 2 of them appear willing to post what they find.
The stickies only have a few articles on individual sections of code. So if your like me, you have to figure out how a whole section works before you can change it. Not just read up on how it works, do a little verification and then see what needs to be changed to do what you want.
If more people would get into asm. This stuff would go a lot faster. As an example, the egr code goes unused on a lot of peoples cars. There is a good chunk of code and two output channels & at least one ram location that could be put to use. One use could be for dry nitrous. An egr variable is already used in the BPW calc....
Not saying that anyone should post their dry nitrous bin.
But if the deletion of the egr code was posted it would save a lot of time. And you could still try to figure out why it was deleted the way that it was. Note: adding code is a lot harder than deleting it.
I'd rather see what needs changed where posted than an actual bin anyways. That way more people would learn how to do this kind of stuff. Keep the DIY in it.
I would like to wipe out all the useless code. I don't have an EGR, A.I.R, CCP, etc. Imaging all the spare ram!
Running a dry shot is in my near future. I'll program the existing tables to compensate(for now). Using a spare output to control it would be even better. I was thinking about it the other day. Maybe there will be a Nitrous AUJP someday
We are on the same page. Keep it DIY and post or host what you know
07-18-2005, 06:43 PM
#212
Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1991 Trans Am GTA
Engine: 350 TPI (L98)
Transmission: TH-700r4
Originally posted by TRAXION
Great question ... and a very appropriate one.
EGR was disabled because just about anybody and everybody I know disables the EGR when developing a performance chip. You can re-enable it if you want.
AIR was disabled for the same reason. Just about everybody I know that is going for max performance always installs headers. Eventually they get rid of the AIR system all together. Thus, AIR is disabled. You can reenable it if you want.
CCP is the only questionable one. Most people keep this ... unlike the EGR and AIR which most people get rid of. I removed CCP because I see no point in allowing a fresh intake charge to become contaminated with CCP. Again - this can be reenabled via just changing things back to stock.
Tim
Great question ... and a very appropriate one.
EGR was disabled because just about anybody and everybody I know disables the EGR when developing a performance chip. You can re-enable it if you want.
AIR was disabled for the same reason. Just about everybody I know that is going for max performance always installs headers. Eventually they get rid of the AIR system all together. Thus, AIR is disabled. You can reenable it if you want.
CCP is the only questionable one. Most people keep this ... unlike the EGR and AIR which most people get rid of. I removed CCP because I see no point in allowing a fresh intake charge to become contaminated with CCP. Again - this can be reenabled via just changing things back to stock.
Tim
As for EGR and CCP disabled would it matter if you kept the systems still installed, it wouldn't be harmfull or detrimental would it?
My car is as stock as it gets.
07-19-2005, 01:23 PM
#214
Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1991 Trans Am GTA
Engine: 350 TPI (L98)
Transmission: TH-700r4
Originally posted by Z69
You might want to try tuning on a stock bin then.
You might want to try tuning on a stock bin then.
07-20-2005, 11:58 AM
#215
TGO Supporter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: '86 T/A
Engine: 350/LT1 Intake
Transmission: 700R4 - Built
Axle/Gears: 4th gen 3.42
I am with 86BirdSE when he says he wants to use regular 87 octane. That is the biggest reason why I have not switched to this bin yet. However, yesterday I gave this bin a shot with the gallon of 87 I had left in the tank. I do like it, but it hasn't quite fixed all of my problems. My car runs absolutuly perfect in open loop, but when closed loop comes around, the idle starts getting erratic and hesitates. BLM's go from 128 to 96. .etc.. etc.
With the 87 octane, I was noticing a few knocks. I drove the car to the gas station and filled her up with some 92. It seems better, but chances are I will be switching back to the stock AUJP bin for that reason. I daily drive my car and put a ton of miles on it. I just can't use 92 all the time, espically with gas prices the way they are now.
I would like to implement the code into an 87 octane verson, that would be ideal for me.
With the 87 octane, I was noticing a few knocks. I drove the car to the gas station and filled her up with some 92. It seems better, but chances are I will be switching back to the stock AUJP bin for that reason. I daily drive my car and put a ton of miles on it. I just can't use 92 all the time, espically with gas prices the way they are now.
I would like to implement the code into an 87 octane verson, that would be ideal for me.
07-20-2005, 05:48 PM
#216
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Browns Town
Posts: 3,178
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Car: 86 Monte SS (730,$8D,G3,AP,4K,S_V4)
Engine: 406 Hyd Roller 236/242
Transmission: 700R4 HomeBrew, 2.4K stall
Axle/Gears: 3:73 Posi, 7.5 Soon to break
The octane routines were just values being changed (no hard code issues involved)
A quick review of them against the stock values would allow you to re-enable the function quickly. The problem with it seems to be that the spark advance that is removed by the routine just never comes back IIRC (or takes just short of forever).
I still like it as a good base file to play with.
A quick review of them against the stock values would allow you to re-enable the function quickly. The problem with it seems to be that the spark advance that is removed by the routine just never comes back IIRC (or takes just short of forever).
I still like it as a good base file to play with.
07-21-2005, 01:07 AM
#217
You could always cut and paste the stock SA tables into S_aujp. I wasn't aware that Tim did much if anything to the VE tables. I'll have to review the txt again.
I'm not concerned much with them since I don't have a LR intake.
I'm not concerned much with them since I don't have a LR intake.
07-21-2005, 10:20 AM
#218
Supreme Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,844
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
Car: 2005 Subaru STI
Engine: 153ci of Turbo Power!
Transmission: 6-Speed
Yea, VE tables should be untouched. Spark tables were bumped up for a 92+ octane tune.
Tim
Tim
07-21-2005, 06:44 PM
#219
Supreme Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: MN
Posts: 1,355
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 2009 Pontiac G8 GXP
Engine: LS3
Transmission: 6L80E
Axle/Gears: 3.27
Since I am running an LO3 with TPI on it in the Camaro, I decided to take a standard AUJP and make a lot of the S_AUJP changes that TRAXION so graciously documented earlier up in this thread.
Reason is that I can run 87 octane with the low compression truck engine, but I like a lot of the other changes that were put into effect in this S_AUJP bin...
Something to consider as the changes took me an hour at most to make in the bin.
HTH,
Reason is that I can run 87 octane with the low compression truck engine, but I like a lot of the other changes that were put into effect in this S_AUJP bin...
Something to consider as the changes took me an hour at most to make in the bin.
HTH,
12-20-2005, 12:12 PM
#220
Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Randleman,nc
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 87 BUICK GN
Engine: 3.8 TURBO
Transmission: 200R4
128 BLM @ WOT
does the AUJP code
have the ability to lock the BLM 128 cell when @ WOT
there is a patch for that in the buick GN's for the 7148 ecm
didn't know if someone has made a patch for that or not
have the ability to lock the BLM 128 cell when @ WOT
there is a patch for that in the buick GN's for the 7148 ecm
didn't know if someone has made a patch for that or not
12-20-2005, 12:46 PM
#221
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chasing Electrons
Posts: 18,432
Likes: 0
Received 225 Likes
on
211 Posts
Car: check
Engine: check
Transmission: check
Re: 128 BLM @ WOT
Originally posted by SC2camaro
does the AUJP code
have the ability to lock the BLM 128 cell when @ WOT
there is a patch for that in the buick GN's for the 7148 ecm
didn't know if someone has made a patch for that or not
does the AUJP code
have the ability to lock the BLM 128 cell when @ WOT
there is a patch for that in the buick GN's for the 7148 ecm
didn't know if someone has made a patch for that or not
RBob.
12-20-2005, 08:10 PM
#223
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Memphis, Tn
Posts: 972
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 92' RS
Engine: 357
Transmission: TH350
Axle/Gears: 4.10
Just took the S_AUJP.bin (No CCP) for a test drive on a 1991 GTA 305 A4 2:73.
With the "mods" below it was MUCH better than the Hypertech and Stock Eproms ive been using.
K&N
EGR! A.I.R.! Evap!
Air Foil
I did have a little surging problem "only in reverse" for 3-4 seconds before the ecm took control back over. But otherwise great job!
With the "mods" below it was MUCH better than the Hypertech and Stock Eproms ive been using.
K&N
EGR! A.I.R.! Evap!
Air Foil
I did have a little surging problem "only in reverse" for 3-4 seconds before the ecm took control back over. But otherwise great job!
08-18-2006, 06:07 PM
#224
TGO Supporter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
trax (or anyone with an opinion),
Has anyone used the s_aujp with a stealth ram and a larger cam, and if so, what were your results? With my aluminum head 406, I think v2 or v3 would be a great starting place, but wonder what problems I am going to run into running a 276/282 (224/230 @ .050), 502/510, 110 LSA hydraulic roller cam?
I was running 6E code with the old LTR intake before my swap and found that ARAP spark table was too much for the 406. I went back to APYN table and ran better in that case. Is the spark table in the s_aujp v2 or v3 similar to the ARAP?
Thanks
Has anyone used the s_aujp with a stealth ram and a larger cam, and if so, what were your results? With my aluminum head 406, I think v2 or v3 would be a great starting place, but wonder what problems I am going to run into running a 276/282 (224/230 @ .050), 502/510, 110 LSA hydraulic roller cam?
I was running 6E code with the old LTR intake before my swap and found that ARAP spark table was too much for the 406. I went back to APYN table and ran better in that case. Is the spark table in the s_aujp v2 or v3 similar to the ARAP?
Thanks
08-19-2006, 12:33 AM
#225
Supreme Member
Jerry
08-19-2006, 09:48 PM
#226
I have a 408 with a Stealth ram, 220cc aluminum heads, 259-264 at .050 soild roller cam and run s_aujp 3. The car runs good you will need to do a lot of work in the V.E. tables and other standard tuning work. I used it for the 6,400 rpm fuel table, I shift the car at 7,800 and the table is a big help.
Jerry
Jerry
09-06-2006, 10:29 AM
#227
TGO Supporter/Moderator
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: SALEM, NH
Posts: 11,773
Likes: 0
Received 93 Likes
on
78 Posts
Car: '88 Formula, '94 Corvette, '95 Bird
Engine: LC9, 355" LT1, LT1
Transmission: T5, Zf6, 4L60E
Axle/Gears: 3.42, Dana44 3.45, 3.23
closed TPS spark
Anyone know off hand, if the closed TPS spark table is disabled in this bin?
-- Joe
-- Joe
09-06-2006, 10:35 AM
#228
Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ventura, Ca
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 69 Camaro
Engine: LS1 converted to LS6
Transmission: 4L70
Axle/Gears: 12bolt 3:42
Scott -JP where are you guys at on the release of this? I am getting back into my car tune after a summer hiatus with my new daily driver....
09-06-2006, 08:51 PM
#229
Idle SA table is stock in V3
V4 has Idle SA table use bit selectable to bypass it.
JP and I are currently busy with our own stuff currently.
Once we finish up, we'll get back to if for the final look over and verification.
Then we'll release it. Not quite sure when that will be, but once it turns cold I'm sure we'll have time.
V4 has Idle SA table use bit selectable to bypass it.
JP and I are currently busy with our own stuff currently.
Once we finish up, we'll get back to if for the final look over and verification.
Then we'll release it. Not quite sure when that will be, but once it turns cold I'm sure we'll have time.
09-06-2006, 09:01 PM
#231
There are two idle sa terms- at least in my current foggy mind.
one is for idle error, the other is the idle sa table.
I was quite suprised at the diff in SA between the idle table and the regular table when I was testing V4 out on the bench- on a stock cal!
one is for idle error, the other is the idle sa table.
I was quite suprised at the diff in SA between the idle table and the regular table when I was testing V4 out on the bench- on a stock cal!
09-06-2006, 09:27 PM
#232
TGO Supporter/Moderator
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: SALEM, NH
Posts: 11,773
Likes: 0
Received 93 Likes
on
78 Posts
Car: '88 Formula, '94 Corvette, '95 Bird
Engine: LC9, 355" LT1, LT1
Transmission: T5, Zf6, 4L60E
Axle/Gears: 3.42, Dana44 3.45, 3.23
Car is stupid fast now. Once I finish this mess, I'll run it at the track:
Index of /~anesthes/projects/interior
-- Joe
09-07-2006, 01:43 AM
#233
Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Ventura, Ca
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 69 Camaro
Engine: LS1 converted to LS6
Transmission: 4L70
Axle/Gears: 12bolt 3:42
Actually there are 4 tables Idle Spark Advance Mult Vs MAP and Idle Spark Mult Vs RPM Error and 2 more for Spark Retard. If memory serves me right you were incorporating manual bin idle routine into the code? I did some idle work recently where I just said F@#K it and opened the blades. In the past if I did it the IAC counts would go right down. The do not now and it seems to help by resetting the ECU after blade adjustment even though the TPS voltage is still below .62. In the past I could adjust the blades and watch the IAC counts go down immediatley. The car is running better but my counts are still high and the IAC motor does not respond like it used to. I originally just assumed it was due to the IAC bleed port and sealing up the TB to get most of the idle air through the idle port as opposed to the blades. Anybody know how these tables are supposed to work????
09-07-2006, 05:08 PM
#234
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Browns Town
Posts: 3,178
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Car: 86 Monte SS (730,$8D,G3,AP,4K,S_V4)
Engine: 406 Hyd Roller 236/242
Transmission: 700R4 HomeBrew, 2.4K stall
Axle/Gears: 3:73 Posi, 7.5 Soon to break
Stock settings will add 8* or so up and down at idle.
By cutting the lower error table values in half my SA only moves 3* or so now. Helped my idle.
There is also a threshold value that should be raised to be more inline with a high idle speed.
There is a thread on $8d SA at idle that has some better explaination and results listed.take a search and if you can't find it I'll check later. Gotta run now.
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/diy-...k-advance.html
Take a look at the plot. This might be what you're seeing.
Jp
Last edited by JP86SS; 09-07-2006 at 05:37 PM. Reason: Added link
11-13-2006, 03:55 PM
#235
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I got AWFY software in my -91 305. Can I replace that with S_AUJP and copy current VE and spark tables to it? If it's not that easy, what else should I do? I have adjuted original tables with wideband lambda but I still have problems after I changed original cam. I'm not ready to give up yet 
Last edited by Teac; 11-13-2006 at 04:38 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
no green
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
11
01-09-2016 09:22 PM
LT1Formula
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
7
10-08-2015 08:34 PM
Dragonsys
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
2
09-25-2015 03:51 PM
