Tips needed for rescaling MAF and TCV% Please

[Physiksgeek]

This is all personal...no money being made off of this. No friends being helped. The tip I am looking for is filling in empty cells using multiple log files? Below is my attempt to explain what I have done and maybe help to show where I am missing the "all you gotta do is" part. Thanks!

So I've been practicing rescaling MAF and turbo vane position for my 4WD LBZ. Reason is I installed as new 64mm RDS 10 blade. Since then, I can reliably set a P0299 at what I would call cruising rpm's (1400-1800'ish rpm's and the need to accelerate). I get black smoke out of the tail pipe of varying degrees related to the pedal push and if I hold it long enough the P0299 comes up. above or below that she tends to run like a Haint. I am running the same tune on my 2wd LBZ with factory turbo and get none of this. Boost leak checked multiple times and can reliably get to 20lbs with a what I would call normal leak down - Boost Leak Test

My intentions are to find a cold air intake I like so that's the reason for practicing. The practice has helped with the factory setup though....less black smoke and the P0299 happens less often. Fuel mileage has improved as well. Anyhow....my question is with EFI Live. I have a FlashScan v3 and been working off this rather helpful tutorial - MAF, TCV rescale

I am pretty sure a different version of EFI Live is being used but I have fumbled through that part and the discrepancies about what is stated and what I see. The big thing is that it is implied you can add log files and your map should fill in the gaps over time. I cannot get mine to do so unless I check the box that says to "interpolate empty cells" and then the map has several spikes to it in those "blank areas". I get I can smooth the spikes but I am not well versed in EFI Live enough to know if I'm helping or hurting. For now, I have been making a different map for every log file", comparing and doing my own "minimalist interpolation" for populated data points and leaving blank cells blank. Has anyone got a tip for this? Is it possible for this to happen? If not....is the work around to use excel and average the averages between log files then copy that to the map? Seems like it oughta be simple and I'm just missing a detail.

I am pretty sure the MAF rescale has been the biggest help for my issue. Below are screenshots from the TCV%. The first is the tune unmolested. The second is from a random log file. The circled part in the second screenshot is what I would like to verify. The empty whits cells are what I would like to fill in. One thing I am still pondering is the original makes more sense but where the P0299 was more apt to trip. The second is more like what I have in the tune now....vastly different to me....makes less sense to me and blows less black smoke and trips P0299 only if I am at the lower range running up through the higher range (so more slowly in the pedal). If I really get on it it at the lower rpm range it might puff smoke and then set you back.

I also attached a log file zip as well if it helps. I have others as well. Tires/wheels are Nitto 285/65/R18. If anything else is needed let me know.

Thanks again for any help with my questions and tips offered.

Original Tune



Logged Data

 

[gmduramax]

Are you still running a factory size intake?

 

[Physiksgeek]

Yes it is still the factory intake. Hi flow exhaust manifolds, cold and hot side all are new. I’m on the hunt for a new intake, still researching options. Once I settled on one I was going to remap MAF. I’m not a tuning guru by no means so I was researching that and practicing the process to familiarize myself with it. Thanks for the reply

 

[gmduramax]

Banks or S&B is what I would run. You won’t need to rescale the MAF.

If you did run a larger intake. What I like to do is log the truck at idle and see what the MAF is reading, figure out the % difference from stock. Add that % to the entire MAF table in the tune.

 

[gmduramax]

Someone correct me but your target tables do not need to match. Your truck is keeping boost by your desired tables. Your P0299 your truck is not hitting the desired boost numbers for some reason, mechanical maybe your desired airflow/ MAF tables are incorrect causing a discrepancy. You should be able to run a stock tune in that truck and not have any turbo/boost codes.

 

[Physiksgeek]

Someone correct me but your target tables do not need to match. Your truck is keeping boost by your desired tables. Your P0299 your truck is not hitting the desired boost numbers for some reason, mechanical maybe your desired airflow/ MAF tables are incorrect causing a discrepancy. You should be able to run a stock tune in that truck and not have any turbo/boost codes.

I can easily be sold they were incorrect after the changes/modifications were made. Mostly cause the logging and changes I have made from those logs certainly have improved the issue. It has made the window smaller to trip a P0299 is the best way I could explain it.

Using your percentage rule for MAF. Is that the same way you would suggest to populate empty cells for the TV% or for any other map/table I would try to make? The MAF table makes me less nervous....its a single row of numbers. I did not use your method but empty cells in my MAF logs I just used the "fit to curve" in EFI Live. I would have a single cell in the lower voltage range or even a cell or two in the upper. It depended on the log or terrain I drove that day. I can't figure out out to create an entirely populated table from the different logs I have? I have the luxury of driving up and down the state of Alabama so not only do I have logs....I can easily make logs after any changes. I just can't find the way to utilize them properly yet? Thanks!

 

[Physiksgeek]

Banks or S&B is what I would run. You won’t need to rescale the MAF.

If you did run a larger intake. What I like to do is log the truck at idle and see what the MAF is reading, figure out the % difference from stock. Add that % to the entire MAF table in the tune.

I'm still learning correlation and relationships between tables and then how they work together in the overall tune....so no disrespect intended at all.......but not needing to rescale MAF is something I would have thought would be mandatory and low hanging fruit.....not a lot of work but the results can be very beneficial?

Top two right now is S&B and Volant......I do not find a lot of info on Volant for a Duramax looking at threads and reviews. I like S&B cause it just works...tried and true, good price point. I like Volant because I can still use a Donaldson filter. Not tied to a "special" filter or a single supplier. Will post for input in a separate thread and see what comes up. Thanks again!

 

[Woody35]

Do you still get a code running the stock tune? If you do there is no sense in going forward until it is troubleshooted and fixed. It looks like your not making boost because your vanes are all the way open in the lower cruising range. You say this tune runs well on your other truck. I would double check and make sure there is no mistakes if you copied it over.

 

[Physiksgeek]

Do you still get a code running the stock tune? If you do there is no sense in going forward until it is troubleshooted and fixed. It looks like your not making boost because your vanes are all the way open in the lower cruising range. You say this tune runs well on your other truck. I would double check and make sure there is no mistakes if you copied it over.

Wooody35 I do not know that answer but, I will be testing/logging it tomorrow. This is my tow tune....since it is the largest HP tune I have, I wanted to do the trans relearn to it. The time between then and now I have left it on the truck while I do the shakedown trials (checking for leaks, loose bolts, lost 10mm sockets, etc.). I've only got about 1400 miles on the truck since I got it back up and running.

Copy and paste could certainly be an issue. Even though I have 2006 year model LBZ's.....the 4WD has/had a 2007 ECM OS so i did copy and paste. Now that being said I did re-check but listen....Ive done things wrong twice more than once in my life...lol

Thanks for the input.

 

[Physiksgeek]

So I put the stock tune back in the truck and did some logging today. The logs are attached.....hour plus each. Results were night and day. Like I said before the P0299 was very specific so therefore I could set it at will or prevent it just as easily. Never set once on the stock tune and could not get it to set. The only smoke I saw is what I would call the "go-pedal smoke" and it was a puff at best. Trying hard to get smoke would sometimes result in downshifting even. Throttle response was better. I could tell the turbo was sexier in tone up and down the rpm range. Man Imma say it was fun to drive all the way around on a stock tune. Soooooo....whats wrong with the tow tune?

Rather than compare what I had, I just started fresh. Grabbed the original tune and a copy of the stock tune and made all the necessary changes. Once I got that done, I then compared what I had been running to the tune I had just completed. There were differences in the "main timing" tables. Im not 100% sure how it got there but I can understand why I did not think it was wrong. Only thing I can think is I grabbed the wrong tune (which to me means my naming conventions suck) to begin with and when I went back to look at it I just looked at the wrong tune again and reaffirmed that it was "what I wanted". Now....someone with more experience will have to tell me if thats it or it was bad enough to cause a P0299.....all I know is I'll have to run it and do the "feels like" test. Either way it was wrong and bound to run different.

Comparison Results


From the smokey tune -


New Tune/What It Should Have Been -


Looking at it, probably explains why I could drive out of it at times


So thanks for that from those that replied. I got some errands tomorrow that I am looking forward to running.

 

[Physiksgeek]

Hey you guys fixed the easy one....lol.......I would still like some tips on creating/populating maps utilizing multiple run logs. I'm no computer guru but I'm not computer illiterate by no means and anyways, most software I have experience with can all do similar things you just gotta figure out what they call it or where they hide the button. I'm getting the impression it can't be done?!?

 

[2004LB7]

This guide should work for most any maps you want

Adjusting Vane Position | Fish Tuning

NOTE: This information is for learning purposes only. We do not take responsibility for anything that happens to your vehicle as a result. Please use at your own risk!Adjusting Vane Position on your DuramaxThanks to Tyler at Punisher PerformanceSo you’ve increased your desired boost pressure...

www.fishtuning.com

 

[Physiksgeek]

Thank you! I did find that in a thread about compounded turbos. If I'm not mistaken you posted it, not 100% sure. Either way I have read it and favorited the page. Please do not take anything I am about to say to heart...I'm not picking on the article because everything I read is very similar. They will tend to makes these leaps and it unfortunately leaves me trying to bridge the gaps. Well like anything once you've exceeded your competency level you gotta reach out and discuss it or bounce ideas off of others. It takes a village! If you look at the link I posted above it does the exact same thing. It even says that he does not smooth he just collects more data to fill in empty cells (I'm paraphrasing). But, I still collect and save all I can find while researching...at some point I'm gonna link two different statements together from two different articles or videos that will cause it to click eventually/hopefully.

Quotes like these from this article (and others) are the type of things I am running up against "Once you’ve got a few good logs made, open the Scan Tool, load one of those logs and open your map. Click on the blue star icon, Replot, and the map will populate with your ACTUAL new vane positions!"

I don't have a blue star but I figure I have something...maybe a fucia star or green clover or some equivalent? My equivalent is I do not have to click anything. I fumbled around long enough to find out that If I open the log within the map I have saved it automatically populates. Well thats a victory....so I move on!

Where I am losing right now is the article says "Now it’s time to record a bunch of data!" and goes on to tell you how more logs and data is helpful. But, it only says to open up a single log and update the map. It never goes on to discuss how having multiple logs is helpful or how opening subsequent logs, maps and importing new data is accomplished if its possible? It implies its possible. .

I can't understand that If you can only import one logs worth of data at a time and any new logs you import replaces all previous cells....then whats the use of having "lots of logs"? To me you really only need one but it should be a huge one. Like cross country non-stop huge. And listen....that may be all you can do and that's ok. I'll just work around it using excel or get better using the smoothing function(s) and testing smaller changes.

Thanks again and I do appreciate you taking the time.

 

[Woody35]

One log is only going to show data from the conditions present at that time. Mutiple logs in different controlled driving scenarios will give you a clearer picture of how the vanes act overall. You then can fine tune to your liking.

Drive the truck for awhile. Log and look at your gauges. If the truck is making too much boost during cruise, lower the vane position. Is it laggy in transitional periods, then up the vane position. Small changes are key. In the end it’s what feels the best for you.

 

[2004LB7]

With Excel you can merge multiple tables that you mapped out by using the average function. Or use the highest of each cell, etc

What I do is fill in the blanks with the stock values and then smooth then out or blend them in

 

[Physiksgeek]

Thanks Woody35…..so I work in the HVAC industry and with the EPA and DOE mandates today and in the future we are having to “tune” equipment using this exact same technique to maximize its efficiency. So it’s not foreign to me and I’m ok with it….now. You have to review hundreds of hours of recorded operation to get that “warm and fuzzy” about what you’re seeing. Does not make it any less frustrating. In todays 5G, intel celeron, windows 11 world we are still using software based on essentially DOS platforms. But, it’s only a problem if you don’t know the solution.

Thanks for the input.

 

[Physiksgeek]

What I do is fill in the blanks with the stock values and then smooth then out or blend them in

So simple it’s brilliant! Personally I lost a lot of confidence trying to smooth across three and four empty cells. Prolly a “tunnel vision” thing but I never once thought about giving them a starting number to smooth “from”.

Thanks for input!