Matt's Tune Thread

It's in and readable/writeable. Yaaaaaayyyy.

Do not try to write your old OSID onto the replacement PCM. It will instabrick

turtleman wrote:

Do not try to write your old OSID onto the replacement PCM. It will instabrick

I didn't do anything more than write the my bin and update the VIN.

Abaddon - I didn't see the option to do a crank learn, so I haven't tried starting/cranking it yet. Can you guide me a little more to where it is?

The Crank Relearn should be under "Scan". Hook up to the PCM/DHP via "scanner"....the same place you go to start a Log. There should be an option for "Crankshaft Variation Relearn". At least I think I recall that's where it is. If you can't find it, post back (obviously) and I'll go hook up to my Riv and find it.

Yep that's it. It's under real time controls. Thanks everybody for helping me and not letting me freak out too much. Car started right up and is purring like usual.

Only problem is whenever I tried to do a learn it failed. I read somewhere saying that if it failed it could be that it doesn't need a learn. No CEL lit up either.

matt270avian wrote:

Only problem is whenever I tried to do a learn it failed. I read somewhere saying that if it failed it could be that it doesn't need a learn. No CEL lit up either.

You went WOT and bounced off the Fuel Cutoff?

You probably don't need to do it. You didn't load a "fresh" file. You loaded what was already there...

I wouldn't worry about it unless it actually sets a code for it.

Abaddon wrote:

matt270avian wrote:

Only problem is whenever I tried to do a learn it failed. I read somewhere saying that if it failed it could be that it doesn't need a learn. No CEL lit up either.

You went WOT and bounced off the Fuel Cutoff?

I wouldn't worry about it unless it actually sets a code for it.

I didn't. It didn't even make it to the stage to prompt me for it.

You should probably do a full read before another write if you are having trouble writing.

deekster_caddy wrote:

You should probably do a full read before another write if you are having trouble writing.

No no. It wouldn't let him do a Crankshaft Variation Relearn. It probably doesn't need it considering he loaded a full (old) tune, not a fresh cal which would require a relearn.

Abaddon wrote:

deekster_caddy wrote:

You should probably do a full read before another write if you are having trouble writing.

No no. It wouldn't let him do a Crankshaft Variation Relearn. It probably doesn't need it considering he loaded a full (old) tune, not a fresh cal which would require a relearn.

Oh, oh whoops - I read it too quickly. Yeah, okay. I've also seen somewhere that a CASE learn is only for '97 or '98 and newer, and not all 3800s require them.

Plus it was a '96 SC PCM that I got, sooooooo....

I've gotten the MAF tune pretty much dialed in to where the LTFT are at .781 at WOT (ideally you want 0 or slightly negative, want to avoid positive) and the STFT are locked at 0 under WOT. After a couple of days I can probably have the LTFT's slightly negative and can move on to messing with the timing. Still seeing ~4* of KR under WOT but I blame the slightly positive LTFT's for that. O2 is reading ~860 under WOT which is pretty low, but I'm willing to bet that once I get the LTFT's where they should be my O2 should be reading ~920 under WOT.

Alright, I'm pretty much set where I want to be for now. Fuel trims could use some very slight adjustments (which I will probably do), but I'm pretty happy with what I have so far. Here's a scan in case anyone is interested. Any knock above 4* only happened during shifting.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/f57f9lj5mtkxb1l/4815.csv?dl=0

you should add an RPM column to this but..
Rows 230-237 you are getting crap timing + KR. Why are you running a 3.4"?
2627-2633 same thing. you hit 8 degrees of KR @ WOT with crap timing.

you said ~4 * of KR @ WOT but your spreadsheet shows much more than 4, bro.
You have no WOT sections in this scan with decent timing.

Put a bigger pulley on and make more power. you are cheating yourself.

charlieRobinson wrote:

you should add an RPM column to this but..
Rows 230-237 you are getting crap timing + KR. Why are you running a 3.4"?
2627-2633 same thing. you hit 8 degrees of KR @ WOT with crap timing.

you said ~4 * of KR @ WOT but your spreadsheet shows much more than 4, bro.
You have no WOT sections in this scan with decent timing.

Put a bigger pulley on and make more power. you are cheating yourself.

I said anything above 4* was during a shift. I do kind of regret getting rid of the 3.5, but I've got some more stuff coming so I'll take care of that. This was my first test of a new timing table, here's a scan with the stock one.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/us5w5a5rakuyb1z/4615.csv?dl=0

i dont know man. didnt look like you were shifting at WOT ~80mph
Add an RPM column so we know where shifts are happening.

charlieRobinson wrote:

i dont know man. didnt look like you were shifting at WOT ~80mph
Add an RPM column so we know where shifts are happening.

+1. RPM should ALWAYS be included in a scan otherwise you'll get lost trying to figure out what happened where...

charlieRobinson wrote:

i dont know man. didnt look like you were shifting at WOT ~80mph
Add an RPM column so we know where shifts are happening.

Shift points are set ~84 IIRC. Will add RPM for future scans.

i want to see your WOT timing at 17-18 with 0 KR. LETS GO!

charlieRobinson wrote:

i want to see your WOT timing at 17-18 with 0 KR. LETS GO!

Kids and their Timing

Abaddon wrote:

charlieRobinson wrote:

i want to see your WOT timing at 17-18 with 0 KR. LETS GO!

Kids and their Timing

This is ZZP's Turbo Tim's recommendation for max power on the L67. I did not make up those #s.

More boost with less timing would be more beneficial in Matts case IMO. He needs all the lower end he can get running around a parking lot....there is more than one way to tune an engine, not just TIMING TIMING TIMING!!! Personal preference and scenario play a HUGE role. He isn't going to be WOT at 84mph running the courses he does. Just sayin....

It's up to Matt though, of course.

Abaddon wrote:

More boost with less timing would be more beneficial in Matts case IMO. He needs all the lower end he can get running around a parking lot....there is more than one way to tune an engine, not just TIMING TIMING TIMING!!! Personal preference and scenario play a HUGE role. He isn't going to be WOT at 84mph running the courses he does. Just sayin....

It's up to Matt though, of course.

For what I do, low end power is more important. It's really really rare that I ever get to the top of second. Most of the time I'm mid-bottom of second. If I stay in first the transmission slips (torque converter?) and the engine will just rev up.