Programming 101, NOT

[Roger Heflin]

The tuner I used claimed that it won't drop the BL below 128 at WOT,
ie if it is less than 128 it uses at 128, it sounds like something to
decrease the chances of going lean at wot problem.  Remember mine is a
93 so GM had several years to decide to do things differently.  

			Roger

On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Bruce Plecan wrote:

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger Heflin <rah at horizon.hit.net>
> To: DIY_EFI <diy_efi at efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu>
> Date: Wednesday, October 14, 1998 12:32 PM
> Subject: Re: Programming 101
> 
> 
> Personally, if I was to do anything with the BL INt numbers it would be
> tightening em up more that stock.
>   Remember, depending on your ecm/program, the BL may be
> applied to WOT.  Without a Wide Range O2, you may be flirtting
> with danger.
>   In the archives here there is lots spoken about the WOT + Learning
> Mode, and all of it makes sense, so my feelings are that this is an
> issue specific to program, about the WOT BL corrections.
>   On the GNTTYPE Mail they had a patch to lock it at 128 for WOT.
> Cheers
> Bruce
> 
> 
> >snipped+clipped
> > does anyone know why they pick certain values for the min and
> >max integrators, and for that matter min and max values for the
> >block learns?  Is it just to keep things within where GM expects a
> >stock vehicle to operate, and if so, on modified vehicles that need
> >things a bit wider, is there any reason not to enlarge the range to >allow
> things to work better?
> > Roger
> >
> >
> 
>