Test of ARAP.... was 165 MAF computer

[Programmer]

Don't put a whole lot of faith into "Dyno 2000"--I find it's usually way
high
as far as HP estimations. It put our engine at over 850 HP when in reality,
it's dyno'd at 711 HP (763 at sea level). The performance  trends software
was
within 10 HP.

Keep me posted.

Lyndon.
----- Original Message -----
From: Marteney, Steven J. <smarteney at xlvision.com>
To: <gmecm at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 10:31 AM
Subject: RE: Test of ARAP.... was 165 MAF computer


> First, I don't really know what the timing was since this chip had more
WOT
> timing but less main timing.  Upper rpm felt good but my butt-o-meter is
not
> a good reference.  I need to do a "dyno-run" to really compare.  I think I
> may start my tuning by setting the WOT spark table to 0 for 3200 and 4800
> rpm and see what happens.  But the 730 is fast approaching, once I get
this
> dang vacation out of the way!!!
>
> The motor happily pulls to 6k... just not very fast.  When using the
street
> dyno software the torque curve is virtually flat from 2000-ish to 4000-ish
> rpm then drops off.  For reference, below are some points from my last
"dyno
> run".  I edited the list to make it as short as possible.  They are rpm,
> torque in ft-lbs.  A stump-pulling, heart-stopping, axle-snapping peak
> torque of 250 ft-lbs!!!  I typically do NOT use the s/w's features for
> correcting for unknown frictioncal losses, and I leave the SAE correction
> parameters the same, factor now is 1.024.  Also note this (I believe was
> done in 1st gear, 2nd gear raises it 5-10ft-lbs, and I don't have 3rd gear
> data.)  Also, for reference, the Dyno2000 program reports flywheel torque
> well over 400ft-lbs.  As I said, I got some work to do.
>
> 1820,211
> 1910,226
> 2010,232
> 2110,235
> 2210,236
> 2310,237
> 2410,238
> 2510,239
> 2590,240
> 2650,240
> 2770,239
> 2790,240
> 3290,240
> 3410,246
> 3530,249
> 3650,250
> 3730,248
> 3810,245
> 3910,238
> 4010,229
> 4110,221
> 4210,219
> 4310,218
> 4410,216
> 4500,212
> 4600,206
> 4700,200
> 4800,193
> 4900,185
> 5000,177
> 5100,169
> 5200,161
> 5300,152
> 5400,138
> 5500,133
> 5600,128
> 5700,121
> 5800,114
> 5860,108
> 5900,100
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Programmer [mailto:nwester at eidnet.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 11:55 AM
> To: gmecm at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: Test of ARAP.... was 165 MAF computer
>
>
> Did you engine seem to like the timing ?? 5 more GPS...how did the upper
> end RPM feel ?
>
> Lyndon.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Marteney, Steven J. <smarteney at xlvision.com>
> To: <gmecm at diy-efi.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 7:50 AM
> Subject: Test of ARAP.... was 165 MAF computer
>
>
> > Okay I ran ARAP last night unmodified (cept for TCC stuff).  It behaved
as
> I
> > remembered the other stock cal behaving when I first fired the motor.
> (One
> > big exception it actually will start when it's warm.  To correct that in
> the
> > other chip I changed Base PW Correction vs. Battery Voltage for values
> below
> > 12V.)
> >
> > The big news is I shattered the 175gps barrier... got 180gps.  As with
my
> > other chip, the BLMs were always high 150's or locked at 160.  The BLI's
> > were typically low 130's, so it really wants fuel.  Went into closed
loop
> > mode very quickly, probably less than a minute.  Cold idle was severely
> > erratic, had to two foot drive it.  Once it got warm the idle settled
> down.
> > Off-idle stumble is bad.  Again, all things I experienced with the stock
> > chip.
> >
> > Wow.  Now I'm confused.  Just looked at ARAP compared directly to APYU
in
> > TunerCat (fair comparison???).  ARAP has WAY more advance in the main
> spark
> > advance table, typically 7-10 degrees more in the high rpm, high load
> areas.
> > But, ARAP's WOT Advance @4800rpm is 7 degrees less than APYU.  I guess
one
> > question I have... is the WOT Spark Advance vs. RPM table simply added
to
> > the main timing map value (less knock retard, etc.)?  I think I'm going
to
> > break the rest of my timing questions out into a seperate thread.
> >
> > Steve
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> To unsubscribe from gmecm, send "unsubscribe gmecm" (without the quotes)
> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org
>
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from gmecm, send "unsubscribe gmecm" (without the quotes)
in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org