Riv tune?

im kind of confused yesterday i started a ve tune on matts car and with the maf unplugged it runs super lean? where as the regals and gtp's run rich why is it that his riv runs soo lean? im talking i saw +35 ltft's??

is the IFR table right? What are his mods? What changes have been made to the PCM? Something isn't right. I did not have that super lean condition.

What scanner are you using? I've heard that some scanners (and some PCMs) switch the +/- and can actually appear lean when they're rich. 35 seems unrealistic, as 16.4 is the max value.

Injector fire rate? i havent looked yet. but i dont believe they have been skewed at all.

omg aaron i totally forgot about that, because he spark table shows up as negative. so i think that might be what it is. it shows positive, but it means really rich. i have a dhp.

my mods are:
HAI, LQ4, N*, 3.4" pulley, plog, 3"DP, no cat.

YT 1.9's are waiting to be ordered when i see a good deal on clubgp

I had pretty much no KR until the N* went on, and as expected it leans out up top and i'm seeing 3* KR at like 80mph.


thanks for the help guys, i cant wait to get this thing tuned!

Quote :

omg aaron i totally forgot about that, because he spark table shows up as negative. so i think that might be what it is. it shows positive, but it means really rich. i have a dhp.

Well, it's a possibility. You can't be absolutely sure until you reconnect the MAF sensor and make a definite change to the MAFF table causing a rich condition (increase a few values 1% to add fuel). Watch the fuel trims and see which way they go. If they move positive (up), then "+" means rich. If they go negative (down), then "-" means rich. That's how I'd figure it out, anyway.

Btw, +/- 35 LTFT seems nuts. -23 is supposed to be the max for rich, +16.4 is max for lean, if I remember correct.

i know, but when i was looking at it i was blown away. when i was first tuning my ve would jump to -30 ltfts... now its stays around
-3.1

L8-2BNGO wrote:

i know, but when i was looking at it i was blown away. when i was first tuning my ve would jump to -30 ltfts... now its stays around
-3.1

is -30 even possible? i thought LTFT's maxxed out at 16.41 for +/-

Ltft limits are +23 and -16.4, I think.

AA wrote:

Ltft limits are +23 and -16.4, I think.

hmm.. i'll look into this a bit more.

did anyone find out what the deal was with the fuel trims? im still tuning matts car but im confused. are the reading backwards on a 96 riv with dhp? is -13 kean and +13 rich or vs?

and i need a new mod to kill my boost and KR. i'm thinking 1.84 RR's or a P&P blower.

i think the 1.84's will help my car out more since the N* really added to my boost and i am seeing 4* knock at 80+

Mr.Riviera wrote:

and i need a new mod to kill my boost and KR. i'm thinking 1.84 RR's or a P&P blower.

i think the 1.84's will help my car out more since the N* really added to my boost and i am seeing 4* knock at 80+

I have some 1.9RR yella terra's i love them!

I couldn't run the 3.4 KR free until I put my 1.9RRs on. No surprise there. Headers will help too.

deekster_caddy wrote:

I couldn't run the 3.4 KR free until I put my 1.9RRs on. No surprise there. Headers will help too.

I have noticed this as well, but im pretty knock free. know that i finished tuning i found that any knock i get is a direct result of what my o2's look like. if they dip below 940 ill see some knock.

i was knock free until the N* went on, but i couldnt just sit around looking at it on and not install it

Yeah my stage 1 tb added a bit of knock too. But my 1.9s took care of it. And i see you have them on the way. Had to be the fastest 96 in the state again?

yea, i'm sure you wont be too far behind me
i havent ordered the 1.9's yet, i am trying make up my mind on 1.84RR's or 1.9RR w/LS6 springs. 1.84's are just so easy to install compared to 1.9's

Mr.Riviera wrote:

yea, i'm sure you wont be too far behind me
i havent ordered the 1.9's yet, i am trying make up my mind on 1.84RR's or 1.9RR w/LS6 springs. 1.84's are just so easy to install compared to 1.9's

how are they any different than 1.9s?

I beleive he thinks he can get away without installing new springs with 1.84 ratio RR's.
Hence, easier to do.

exactly. rockers are easy to swap out, springs add a whole new dimension when you add the risk of dropping a valve or having a spring not seat properly. i dont have an air compressor to monitor cylinder compression for TDC either.
i guess it will really just depend on which i can get cheaper on clubgp because i already have a set of LS6 springs sitting here.

Do you really think there is enough difference between 1.8 ratio and 1.9 ratio.
I personally would change the spring at 1.84. If it's recommended for 1.9.
Well you decide and let us know how it works. I'm only basing my opinion on what has been written and not from actual experience.
In hindsight It sure would have made my life a lot easier if I hadn't changed the springs, retainers and locks when installing the 1.9's

I thought the 1.84's were engineered at that ratio so you could keep the stock springs? Higher load springs are not needed for 1.9 mod'd rockers because they deflect to the point of a 1.84 rocker. i have only seen it recommended to change out the springs at 1.9 or higher to prevent valve float.
besides the possibility of the valve floating at really high rpm what are the other risks?

oh, and AA, would you mind cutting part of this over to the rocker debate thread? i'd like to keep the riv tuning on track, but more rocker info is always good