Bama tune 2011+ (moved)

[Laloosh]

Pm me your email and i will send you the logs. We can carry this discussio. Through pm or simply start a new tech thread and get users who opened these files to participate.

As far as msd81 i think you might be confused btwn a basic 14 psi flash and one that maxes out load tables past that. Tuners have ghetto rigged it to associated different boost pressure to loads which not the proper solution imo. However progress is being made. Load limits have been rewritten or simply removed ect ect.

I am the opposite you. I dont write or read hex/code. I need an end user interface that allows for changes. However untill that comes out you seem to know the differences btwn the popular tunes floating around, sharing is caring and at that poit let the end user decided what tune to get based on their views of the data provided.

 

[Seer]

Pm me your email and i will send you the logs. We can carry this discussio. Through pm or simply start a new tech thread and get users who opened these files to participate.

As far as msd81 i think you might be confused btwn a basic 14 psi flash and one that maxes out load tables past that. Tuners have ghetto rigged it to associated different boost pressure to loads which not the proper solution imo. However progress is being made. Load limits have been rewritten or simply removed ect ect.

I am the opposite you. I dont write or read hex/code. I need an end user interface that allows for changes. However untill that comes out you seem to know the differences btwn the popular tunes floating around, sharing is caring and at that poit let the end user decided what tune to get based on their views of the data provided.

There are UI's available for the copperhead, its just unfortunate they belong to a tuning suite that does not have access to all tables and are rather limited. Hence, why a lot of the out of the box calibrators need to go into the hex, which is something a lot of the bigger names do not do and just massage value files for a quick turn around on business.

As far as the tuners hitting a 14psi limitation, what are they doing? Overwriting the base table structure with one that has more resolution, i.e a larger map profile?

 

[Laloosh]

There are UI's available for the copperhead, its just unfortunate they belong to a tuning suite that does not have access to all tables and are rather limited. Hence, why a lot of the out of the box calibrators need to go into the hex, which is something a lot of the bigger names do not do and just massage value files for a quick turn around on business.

As far as the tuners hitting a 14psi limitation, what are they doing? Overwriting the base table structure with one that has more resolution, i.e a larger map profile?

No they just change the resoution. Say load is a value brwn 0-200 which is btwn 0 and lets say 14 psi which btw varies with rpm ect ect. They simply scale it to read 0 to the 2.5 bar map sensor max output of roughly 21.7 ish psi. And in some cases they alter the sensor feedback to force the ecu to run more boost by thinking it is undershooting. No ideal but it works ok.

 

[Seer]

No they just change the resoution. Say load is a value brwn 0-200 which is btwn 0 and lets say 14 psi which btw varies with rpm ect ect. They simply scale it to read 0 to the 2.5 bar map sensor max output of roughly 21.7 ish psi. And in some cases they alter the sensor feedback to force the to run more boost. No ideal but it works ok.

Not pretty but makes sense.

 

[Swarzkopf]

I'm tired of seeing the Mustang community just hand over their money blindly not knowing what they are getting then even worse, going on forums and falsely stating "Product X is better than Product Y, but I do not know why, I just think that way so I will post it."

the problem is the tools that are available to the general public. There currently is not an open source solution out there for this platform that is viable. The best platform out there is SCT Advantage III and even it has its limitations and requires dealer licensing. The less expensive version, Pro Racer is extremely limited.

Exactly! Well said.

 

[NickSezz]

Seer, you and Laloosh saw the same stock and Bama logs....my logs...

I volunteer my car to do real tuning provided by a good plan of action.

BTW....I have an engineering friend from college that worked a coop at a company that was analyzing failed cam phasers from "project coyote" well before the 5.0 was released. Yes, this was obviously a concern to Ford since they resourced an external firm to help them with this (unless that is the usual).

After recalling this, I contacted him about it since now that I own one, I am more interested. From what he remembers:

Causes:

Usual issues were in assembly quality control. If the housing plates were torqued down and they were cocked one way the phaser would bind (sounds similar to the flywheel bolt issue)...or a spool piece would stick or get a burr...or a solenoid would be bad.

Effects:

Timing can vary a good bit and run too rich or too lean...

These are his exact words... I didn't want to be a pain in the ass and keep asking him more about it since it was awhile ago. My reasoning for bringing this up is that it still may be an existing issue and may explain some "spikes" on stock tune logs. Could this be a reason for #8's? I have no idea because one would think a malfunction would affect the entire bank. Also, a phaser problem will or should throw a specific code..

 

[Seer]

Seer, you and Laloosh saw the same stock and Bama logs....my logs...

I volunteer my car to do real tuning provided by a good plan of action.

BTW....I have an engineering friend from college that worked a coop at a company that was analyzing failed cam phasers from "project coyote" well before the 5.0 was released. Yes, this was obviously a concern to Ford since they resourced an external firm to help them with this (unless that is the usual).

After recalling this, I contacted him about it since now that I own one, I am more interested. From what he remembers:

Causes:

Usual issues were in assembly quality control. If the housing plates were torqued down and they were cocked one way the phaser would bind (sounds similar to the flywheel bolt issue)...or a spool piece would stick or get a burr...or a solenoid would be bad.

Effects:

Timing can vary a good bit and run too rich or too lean...

These are his exact words... I didn't want to be a pain in the ass and keep asking him more about it since it was awhile ago. My reasoning for bringing this up is that it still may be an existing issue and may explain some "spikes" on stock tune logs. Could this be a reason for #8's? I have no idea because one would think a malfunction would affect the entire bank. Also, a phaser problem will or should throw a specific code..

It's quite normal for Ford to outsource issues to firms to investigate more thoroughly.

Edit:

I went through your logs, under WOT there are not any lean spikes.. You are slightly lean at the tip in point but that is less than .1 of a second.

 

[rojizostang]

thank goodness for (you) smart people. carry on.

 

[NickSezz]

Yeah, the spikes were on someone else's stock logs...by the way Bama tunes for E10...I talk to Mike about it.

 

[Seer]

Yeah, the spikes were on someone else's stock logs...by the way Bama tunes for E10...I talk to Mike about it.

if they tune for E10 then your average AF is around 11.8

 

[NickSezz]

WOT rich or partial throttle? How to fix? When I sat down with Mike he seemed confident with the logs and did not recommend any changes. I think he sticks with factory lambda settings.

 

[Seer]

WOT rich or partial throttle? How to fix? When I sat down with Mike he seemed confident with the logs and did not recommend any changes. I think he sticks with factory lambda settings.

WOT, your partial throttle fueling should always be your stoich value.

This is contradictory then. If he sticks with factory of 14.64 but says he tunes for E10 which is 14.06... this does not make sense.

A .85 lambda against Gasoline is a 12.44 A/F.
A .85 lambda against E10 is 11.951 A/F.

 

[NickSezz]

What does my tail pipe reading mean then from the dyno? (12.40) I know it is not the best way to sample air/fuel but I trust that it was calibrated accordingly.

 

[Seer]

What does my tail pipe reading mean then from the dyno? (12.40) I know it is not the best way to sample air/fuel but I trust that it was calibrated accordingly.

I'm telling you from the logs you had sent to me, your lambda values average about .85

You do realize wideband o2's from a dyno also are set to a basic stoich value right? So it depends what stoich was programmed into the wideband controller.

 

[NickSezz]

I'm telling you from the logs you had sent to me, your lambda values average about .85

You do realize wideband o2's from a dyno also are set to a basic stoich value right? So it depends what stoich was programmed into the wideband controller.

Yes I understand that. I trust my shop. He would have voiced concern if anything looked bad. Is it safe right now and just a tad rich?

Edit: Is it possible that some computer codes have different settings form the factory depending on location? Mine is zkd2..

 

[Seer]

Yes I understand that. I trust my shop. He would have voiced concern if anything looked bad. Is it safe right now and just a tad rich?

11.9 is safe, its just rich. 12.4 is also safe and actually optimal.

 

[NickSezz]

I appreciate all your feedback Seer. Thank you.

 

[Scotty07]

I always try to learn something new each day that I did not know the day before. Today is one of these days. Good read. Thanks.