Requesting a review of some log files.

[RobertISaar]

if it were multiport, i would have a decent start on it, but i haven't gotten into the TBI calibrations yet.

[damanx]

I think I am getting there.......SLOWLY......

Today, I changed the startup spark advance and startup spark advance decay to match the 2.8 values.

[EagleMark]

Most of the time when starting with a new bin you should tune that bin and try not to make all items match from another bin and mask. No we now things like fuel VE and spark advance tables are going to be differant from a 5.7L to a 2.8L or 3.4L. Then if you change your spark advance table to a more performance oriented? Well have to take into account what did you do at 400 RPM 100 MAP? This is where startup spark starts and moves quickly to where you idle. SO a big cam engine at idle has say 6 degrees more timing to make it idle, so you should really take out 6* from "SA - Coolant Comp Spk Adv" or "SA - Startup Spk Added"

When getting into Decay, filters, coefficients or multipliers? I try and stay away from all of them and leave it up to the bin I'm using.

Spark Latency is supposed to be the lag of the EST module itself. There is a different latency between a Large Cap and Small Cap EFI distributor obviously because they have different EST-ICM modules. But why is there a difference between a 7.4L and a 5.7L? They use the same EST-ICM module! Even some 5.7L have differant latency, but they all use the same module!

Now they do anyway, look them all up at a parts store. Now I think when this all changed there were 2 GM EST/ICM modules "369" and "048". Now they are all "369" This all happened about the time they changed was when the 5.7L Cop Car Caprice came out. It may be when GM noticed their EST/ICM was the cause of gaining or loosing spark around 3000 RPM...

Damanx is between 2-4* out from his video and that is dam close! From all the times I have played with this to get correct and accurate timing I've adjusted the Spark Latency to be correct first, then adjust from there. I think GM used this as a timing adjustment because there is not other logical reason for the differant latencys.

Here's a good read with the math and research done in 2008 on the subject...

http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/di...ncy-table.html

[damanx]

First thing that I am still confused about is why my timing table seems so much lower than what is normally seen in the v6 60 engines. Regardless of base timing and bias, I am seeing tables that are running 35-40 degrees at around 2000 rpm, yet, I'm running low 20's around that area. I don't quite understand it because it would seem to me that regardless of what is controlling the timing, be it a mechanical/vacuum, or electronic, that GM engines typically run somwhere in the 30's around 2000 rpm.

(Another thread for that?)

The latency table in the current bin was for a v8, but has been changed to the v6 values due to the fact that I am using a v6 distributor, but that has not changed the difference in readings between the analyzer and TunerPro. There could be several reasons for this including things like cable length, inductor lag and even bad calibration on the analyzer. I will this weekend pull out the Innova adjustable advance timing light and run that in comparison to Tunerpro and the Alltest analyzer. Unfortunately, I have more faith in the analyzer being more accurate in the actual timing reading than TunerPro at this moment.

I've read through some of that thread you linked and there is some pretty interesting info there. Will reread several times and see if there is something that pops out that might make sense.

[damanx]

I don't know if i've pissed people off or maybe they are tired of hearing from me, which I can understand, but I'm going to go back to the v2a bin and run logs on that for a bit.

I'm confused and am obvisiously too ignorant to be messing with this stuff.

[RobertISaar]

i don't think it's that so much as you're running a really weird combo of stuff.... 3.4 block, with 2.8 induction, with a 7747.... you're basically making your own way and finding all of the pitfalls along the path.

[damanx]

i don't think it's that so much as you're running a really weird combo of stuff.... 3.4 block, with 2.8 induction, with a 7747.... you're basically making your own way and finding all of the pitfalls along the path.

Well, certainly for fact is that there are a couple things I NEED to do. One of which is take some time and read more,while posting less.

The other thing I NEED to do is keep a personally written log of changes I make along with observed results. I've started a text file to do this, but I think I need to just start over with the bin I've been running since last May and make minute changes at a time.

It's just pretty frustrating trying to take it all in and seeing things that I don't understand yet.

One thing for sure is that I am going to run new fuel line from the line on the frame to the TBI pod. There is essentially a 2 foot section of high pressure fuel hose there now, but I know that is something I can eliminate as a potential fueling issue as discussed in the fuel pressure thread.

Just too much to take in at once for this old brain......LOL

[damanx]

OK, so I decided to try something that I wasn't sure I wanted to try.

I took the bin that Mark had edited earlier in the thread called veadjusted2.bin.

I then set the base timing on the truck to 10* (was 0*).

I changed the initial timing in the bin to 10* (was 0*).

I changed the main spark bias to 0* (was 9.84).

I changed the spark latency table to match the ACHT bin for 2.8 since the distributor, esc, and est are from a 2.8 and the bin is written for a 60v6. (spark latency table was for a v8).

I took it for a quick spin, and it seems there are knocks, and a few for the short distance of 2-3 miles that I drove.

Overall, it seemed somewhat sluggish.

Here is the bin and the datalog for that drive.

On a side note, the spark timing table with the data trace enabled pretty much matched the timing analyzer meaning that value highlighted is pretty close to crank value.

Any thoughts as to whether I should stick with the original veadjusted2 bin or this one is greatly appreciated.

[EagleMark]

Now change your conversion in Spark Advance to match 10* Base timing, see how it matches up to timing light and let us know why it's got knock!

Only works if you have done the hack in xdf! Must add Initial Timing to conversion if your base timing is not set to 0 degrees with timing wire disconnected! Final spark adavnce from ECM. Use at your own risk and double check actual timing on engine and bin file.

Base timing 0* "(X * 0.3515625) + 0.000000"

Base timing 10* "(X * 0.3515625) + 10.000000"

[damanx]

Oh, forgot to mention that I did change that formula in the spark advance value of the adx, but the timing analyzer matched the reading in TunerPro.

[EagleMark]

It should with the conversion matching base timing change.