Closed loop and e85, no flex
03-17-2024, 06:28 PM
#21
Safety Car
Do the stacked tables actually work and goes the car really jump from table to table in real time while winding out the motor? In the video, the guy said he couldn't actually get his car to run with the stacked tables.
If you look at it and videos on the topic, the p01 VE table is a lot better. It basically just expands the table running twice or three times the resolution when moving from one bar to a two or three bar map.
My understanding is that HPtuners isn't to be blamed for what happens on the p59 (where it just crams 3 bars on a 1 bar map, making fine tuning impossible). The issue is that the PCM just doesn't have the space for a larger VE table, so I'm not sure how the stacked tables can actually work in the real world. Honestly, everything I read suggests the p01 is a much better computer besides the fact that you can run flex fuel on a 3 bar map the p59. Apparently, there's actually a OS where you can run flex fuel on the p01 on a 2 bar map (just not on a 3 bar map).
I'm going to stick with my p01 without flex fuel; that p59 table would run like **** with 210lb injectors and boost. I don't really want to mess with the p59 multiple VE tables nonsense (on top of that to run spark correction for flex fuel, you need to create a whole new table and try to get it to work). In my situation, it just doesn't make sense, I'll eventually go to a standalone instead. I'm good with the narrow band o2's making adjustments to the VE table when not in boost and in closed loop. Realistically, the worst E down here is going to be maybe e68, which is like 6% rich from E85 while in PE or boost enrichment, so not really a big deal.
This video is really good for going over the differences in the PCMs as well (it's a lot more detailed):
https://youtu.be/XC_W7S-grNw?si=nbJDuOjfyhydDHl8
If you look at it and videos on the topic, the p01 VE table is a lot better. It basically just expands the table running twice or three times the resolution when moving from one bar to a two or three bar map.
My understanding is that HPtuners isn't to be blamed for what happens on the p59 (where it just crams 3 bars on a 1 bar map, making fine tuning impossible). The issue is that the PCM just doesn't have the space for a larger VE table, so I'm not sure how the stacked tables can actually work in the real world. Honestly, everything I read suggests the p01 is a much better computer besides the fact that you can run flex fuel on a 3 bar map the p59. Apparently, there's actually a OS where you can run flex fuel on the p01 on a 2 bar map (just not on a 3 bar map).
I'm going to stick with my p01 without flex fuel; that p59 table would run like **** with 210lb injectors and boost. I don't really want to mess with the p59 multiple VE tables nonsense (on top of that to run spark correction for flex fuel, you need to create a whole new table and try to get it to work). In my situation, it just doesn't make sense, I'll eventually go to a standalone instead. I'm good with the narrow band o2's making adjustments to the VE table when not in boost and in closed loop. Realistically, the worst E down here is going to be maybe e68, which is like 6% rich from E85 while in PE or boost enrichment, so not really a big deal.
This video is really good for going over the differences in the PCMs as well (it's a lot more detailed):
https://youtu.be/XC_W7S-grNw?si=nbJDuOjfyhydDHl8
The following users liked this post:
Corvette.rs (03-17-2024)
03-17-2024, 07:00 PM
#22
If you're using EFILive the stacked maps work seamlessly, you just copy/paste the 105kpa values into the boost map and go from there. The problem Sloppy was having was trying to run an EFILive COS on an HPT tune. I finally found my EFILive cable today and this thread has me wanting to plop a COS onto my C5 just to show what it looks like, but Sloppy kinda already did. It just works properly on EFILive is all.
03-17-2024, 07:56 PM
#23
Drifting
I think it's actually stock VE table + another one that goes from 105 kpa to 280 or 300 or whatever. Plenty of resolution. I guess the advantage of this technique is you don't need to find a single continuous block of memory for a massive VE table (HPT style) versus just an additional 16x16 table or whatever it is. I do find EFI Live COS to be better. Used both, but just my own car. HPT's lackluster 3 bar OS for P59 "feels" lazy to me, but I can't say for sure.
The free/donation only Boost OS on pcmhacking.net for P59 does 3 bar, spark ign cut, closed loop wideband at WOT and other stuff and seems to fit it all in just fine.
The free/donation only Boost OS on pcmhacking.net for P59 does 3 bar, spark ign cut, closed loop wideband at WOT and other stuff and seems to fit it all in just fine.
The following users liked this post:
Corvette.rs (03-17-2024)
03-17-2024, 08:12 PM
#24
I think it's actually stock VE table + another one that goes from 105 kpa to 280 or 300 or whatever. Plenty of resolution. I guess the advantage of this technique is you don't need to find a single continuous block of memory for a massive VE table (HPT style) versus just an additional 16x16 table or whatever it is. I do find EFI Live COS to be better. Used both, but just my own car. HPT's lackluster 3 bar OS for P59 "feels" lazy to me, but I can't say for sure.
The free/donation only Boost OS on pcmhacking.net for P59 does 3 bar, spark ign cut, closed loop wideband at WOT and other stuff and seems to fit it all in just fine.
The free/donation only Boost OS on pcmhacking.net for P59 does 3 bar, spark ign cut, closed loop wideband at WOT and other stuff and seems to fit it all in just fine.
03-17-2024, 08:27 PM
#25
Thanks for this info, I will be using this. I have never used pcm hammer but have done open source and xml files for other makes.
03-18-2024, 09:39 AM
#26
03-18-2024, 10:23 AM
#27
Cause useing open source tunning tools is a whole new level of figuring it out. The paid tools works out all the definitions and such in the background, tunes and flashes with same tool. It’s like everything else, once you figure it out it’s easy, but not as easy. Next level after that is winols, and digging out the address of the maps and such yourself, I never made ot that far, was going to untill I found a ROM and def that would work for me.
And the boostOS for me is more about flat shift, launch control and other goodies.
And the boostOS for me is more about flat shift, launch control and other goodies.
The following users liked this post:
Corvette.rs (03-18-2024)
03-18-2024, 08:52 PM
#28
Drifting
Basically what he said. I first licensed my car in 2014, way before any of that existed. I have the whole workflow of tuning the car figured out and configured, and I've already paid to license the pro tool(s).
At this exact point in time I believe the pro (hpt, efi) has quite a bit better logging definitions and interface... which is an important consideration as well. HPT and EFIlive both have the ability to log without logging around a laptop and use things like serial wideband input-- both a plus for me.
Definitions aside, both the VCM editor and EFI editor are way better than tuner pro too. You can definitely make it work with tunerpro but pretty much everything about it is inferior.
If I was going back to a boosted setup I would give the Boost OS / open source route a serious look and maybe retain HPT or EFI for logging (for now).
At this exact point in time I believe the pro (hpt, efi) has quite a bit better logging definitions and interface... which is an important consideration as well. HPT and EFIlive both have the ability to log without logging around a laptop and use things like serial wideband input-- both a plus for me.
Definitions aside, both the VCM editor and EFI editor are way better than tuner pro too. You can definitely make it work with tunerpro but pretty much everything about it is inferior.
If I was going back to a boosted setup I would give the Boost OS / open source route a serious look and maybe retain HPT or EFI for logging (for now).
The following users liked this post:
Corvette.rs (03-18-2024)