Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Tech Boards > DIY PROM
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?

DIY PROM Do It Yourself PROM chip burning help. No PROM begging. No PROMs for sale. No commercial exchange. Not a referral service.

Welcome to ThirdGen.org!
Welcome to ThirdGen.org.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, join the ThirdGen.org community today!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-24-2009, 05:53 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Calif
Posts: 515
Car: 75 Vette
Engine: 406 TPI
Transmission: 700 R-4

Classifieds Rating: (0)
S_AUJPV4

How many people use it and
what do you think
1tpi is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2009, 08:41 PM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 130
Car: 84 Monte Carlo SS
Engine: 408
Transmission: 700-r4

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

I first used 1024 and just last week I was using 1026 for a few days. While I like the fact that it has so many things defined in Tuner Pro I never can get it to work just right. For some reason my average KPA seems to be about 5-7 Kpa higher then S_AUJP V2 I usually use. Plus I added about 20% VE in the 1800-2400 RPM range at 20-45 kpa and I would still hit 130+ BLMS over my normal VE amounts in V2!!?? I had the extended VE table selected and pasted in my settings instead of doing a compare. I don't believe anyone else has said anything about that but it happened in 1024 and 1026.
84KYSS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2009, 10:07 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Calif
Posts: 515
Car: 75 Vette
Engine: 406 TPI
Transmission: 700 R-4

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

Anyone else, sure would like more input
1tpi is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2009, 10:48 PM   #4
Supreme Member
 
JP86SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Browns Town
Posts: 2,933
Car: 86 Monte SS (730,$8D,G3,AP,4K,S_V4)
Engine: 406 Hyd Roller
Transmission: 700R4 HomeBrew, 3.8K stall 3 diskLU
Axle/Gears: 3:73 Posi, 7.5 Soon to break

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

Quote:
Originally Posted by 84KYSS View Post
For some reason my average KPA seems to be about 5-7 Kpa higher then S_AUJP V2 I usually use. Plus I added about 20% VE in the 1800-2400 RPM range at 20-45 kpa and I would still hit 130+ BLMS over my normal VE amounts in V2!!?? ... but it happened in 1024 and 1026.
email me some bins and logs. Curious as to what you are seeing.
JP86SS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 12:42 PM   #5
Supreme Member
 
JP86SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Browns Town
Posts: 2,933
Car: 86 Monte SS (730,$8D,G3,AP,4K,S_V4)
Engine: 406 Hyd Roller
Transmission: 700R4 HomeBrew, 3.8K stall 3 diskLU
Axle/Gears: 3:73 Posi, 7.5 Soon to break

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

I stink I found the problem with your reading on the MAP.
Check you ADS to see if the KPA calculation has a 10.** adder in the offset box.
We had a few discussions on what the best value to use would be because certain items use different offsets when reading the MAP.
From what I see, the definition supplied with the V4 does NOT include the 10 Kpa offset.
I'm going to go back over some previous notes this weekend and see if that is the case.
Could be time to update the defs (both) because that extended table address error keeps popping up and people don't come here to find the fix for it.
JP86SS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 02:30 PM   #6
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Fort Myers, FL
Posts: 1,025
Car: 88 Camaro 'vert
Engine: 5.7
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.42

Classifieds Rating: (25)
Send a message via ICQ to Jaysz28 Send a message via AIM to Jaysz28
Re: S_AUJPV4

Ahhh, so its not just me thats seeing a higher kpa at idle...... specifically in tunerpro

If I datalog with datamaster, I get a consistent reading, despite the tune I load.

Otherwise, I like the functionality of it. There are a lot of features I am just discovering, but thats what happens when you take baby steps!

thanks for all the hardwork everyone put into this fine bin!

-jason
Jaysz28 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 03:43 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Calif
Posts: 515
Car: 75 Vette
Engine: 406 TPI
Transmission: 700 R-4

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

Quote:
Originally Posted by JP86SS View Post
I stink I found the problem with your reading on the MAP.
Check you ADS to see if the KPA calculation has a 10.** adder in the offset box.
We had a few discussions on what the best value to use would be because certain items use different offsets when reading the MAP.
From what I see, the definition supplied with the V4 does NOT include the 10 Kpa offset.
I'm going to go back over some previous notes this weekend and see if that is the case.
Could be time to update the defs (both) because that extended table address error keeps popping up and people don't come here to find the fix for it.
When you update will you post here?
1tpi is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 06:40 PM   #8
Z69
Senior Member
 
Z69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,391

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

Must have fell through the cracks. I distinctly remember finding that problem on the bench. It shows up as no change in PW when editing a specific cell. Drove me nuts trying to find an error in the code.
Z69 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2009, 10:23 PM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 130
Car: 84 Monte Carlo SS
Engine: 408
Transmission: 700-r4

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

I put in the same offset as the ADS for V2 which is 10.354000. I'll search around for the fix on the upper VE. Thanks for the heads up.

EDIT: Found the Upper VE table fix. After making the changes TP is telling me the XDF and ADS do not match?

Last edited by 84KYSS; 05-29-2009 at 11:33 PM.
84KYSS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 12:31 PM   #10
Supreme Member
 
JP86SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Browns Town
Posts: 2,933
Car: 86 Monte SS (730,$8D,G3,AP,4K,S_V4)
Engine: 406 Hyd Roller
Transmission: 700R4 HomeBrew, 3.8K stall 3 diskLU
Axle/Gears: 3:73 Posi, 7.5 Soon to break

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

Quote:
Originally Posted by 84KYSS View Post
EDIT: Found the Upper VE table fix. After making the changes TP is telling me the XDF and ADS do not match?
Edit the XDF header information (CTRL +F2) and on the association tab, select the ADS file you are using.
Save XDF and message will be gone.

For the VE address, Search "V4 released" and you should find it.
Basically, Open the XDF item for "VE Upper Table Extended to 6400 RPM (Z69)" and change the address to "09A0" and save it.

Last edited by JP86SS; 05-30-2009 at 12:43 PM.
JP86SS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 12:47 PM   #11
Supreme Member
 
JP86SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Browns Town
Posts: 2,933
Car: 86 Monte SS (730,$8D,G3,AP,4K,S_V4)
Engine: 406 Hyd Roller
Transmission: 700R4 HomeBrew, 3.8K stall 3 diskLU
Axle/Gears: 3:73 Posi, 7.5 Soon to break

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1tpi View Post
When you update will you post here?
Change your current defs and you'll be fine with the current version.
The update "may" have a couple new items like Hyway mode flags that can actually indicate when SA and fuel are active.
I'm going to take another look at the "Launch Mode SA" to see where I missed syntax or something causing it not to work.
JP86SS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 04:40 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Rochester,NY
Posts: 384
Car: 1993 Caprice wagon
Engine: tpi'd 406 w/PROMinator 730 ECM
Transmission: custom 4L65 swap

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

How about considering using this as the official S_AUJP_V4 update thread as to where you'll post changes or where they can be found, along with instuctions as to how to add them manually when required?


JP, my thanks for all your recent and past help and insite. Your knowledge and enthusiasm are incalculable and you are an inspiration to us all.
__________________
"Shammoo" 1993 Caprice wagon, ex "Kicker" demo car. Shaved roof rack, trim and badging delete, Filled gate, rear rollpan, Front spoiler, billet grill, BFG phatties on Tomahawk rims. TBI to TPI swap. 406 ci, 58mm body AFR 195 heads, Comp cams XFI 230/236@0.050, SLP siamesed runners, 1.6 roller rockers, shorty headers, sidepipes. 730ECM with prominator, Accel double strike ignition, Remote ignition module Nordskog digital dash. B&M rachet shifter, "'4L65" Transgo kit, 5 gear planetaries.
lakeffect2 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 11:54 PM   #13
Supreme Member
 
JP86SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Browns Town
Posts: 2,933
Car: 86 Monte SS (730,$8D,G3,AP,4K,S_V4)
Engine: 406 Hyd Roller
Transmission: 700R4 HomeBrew, 3.8K stall 3 diskLU
Axle/Gears: 3:73 Posi, 7.5 Soon to break

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

A new update IS needed, From the other thread.

Coolant table row lables are incorrectly not shown as negative.
The only ones I found are:

$03AF Crank PW vs coolant
$04F6 Loop Closed Param, o2 R/L Offset Vs. Coolant Temp

To correct the labels so the graph can be used to edit:
Select the item,
Press F2 to open the XDF editor
Goto the "rows" tab
select each value and enter the correct negative value. (look at the value before you type the - so you remember what it should be)

Please report any others you have come across as being incorrect.
The only way these get corrected is if someone questions it.
I will bring the original thread back to the top so all the info is in one place.
JP86SS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2009, 09:37 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Rochester,NY
Posts: 384
Car: 1993 Caprice wagon
Engine: tpi'd 406 w/PROMinator 730 ECM
Transmission: custom 4L65 swap

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

Quote:
Originally Posted by JP86SS View Post
A new update IS needed, From the other thread.

To correct the labels so the graph can be used to edit:
Select the item,
Make that " select the item WITH A RIGHT CLICK"

Using a left click causes oral emission of the phrase "WTF" to go into endless loop on a Sunday morning.

Last edited by lakeffect2; 05-31-2009 at 09:41 AM.
lakeffect2 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 07:23 AM   #15
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 130
Car: 84 Monte Carlo SS
Engine: 408
Transmission: 700-r4

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

Just an update I entered in the new offset and the MAP was still higher then my normal values. So looking at the other ADS I use which is for S_AUJPV2 the factor was .369 vs .3245 in V4. Once I changed that value my MAP values where exactly what I am use to seeing.
84KYSS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 12:57 PM   #16
Supreme Member
 
JP86SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Browns Town
Posts: 2,933
Car: 86 Monte SS (730,$8D,G3,AP,4K,S_V4)
Engine: 406 Hyd Roller
Transmission: 700R4 HomeBrew, 3.8K stall 3 diskLU
Axle/Gears: 3:73 Posi, 7.5 Soon to break

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

I see that now too that the older versions have 0.369 +10.354
I'm at a loss as to what it truely needs to be at this point.
Will do some digging later and see if I can find the "true" basis for this value.
JP86SS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 02:14 PM   #17
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chasing Electrons
Posts: 11,385
Car: check
Engine: check
Transmission: check

Classifieds Rating: (1)
Re: S_AUJPV4

The ADC 1-bar MAP conversion to KPa is either:

(ADC * 0.369) + 10.354

or

(ADC * 0.369) + 10.415

I have seen both used, but are so close that I don't think that it matters. It may be that one is for the 039 MAP sensor and the other for the 460 MAP sensor. Both of which are pretty much interchangeable.

RBob.
__________________

www.DynamicEFI.com

'92 Camaro in Dark Green Gray Metallic
RBob is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 02:16 PM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 130
Car: 84 Monte Carlo SS
Engine: 408
Transmission: 700-r4

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

After reviewing the datalog from driving into work today 6-3-09. I would say I am still having problems with the upper ve area. I am tuning with a locked BLM. I drove the SS on 5-29 with S_AUJPV2 and my own Extended VE Table values and was seeing 140 INT at about 2100 RPM and 50-60 kpa. So I raised the VE value in that area but have not drove on the S_AUJPV2 bin yet. However I copied my settings from V2 to V4 so that area should have been richer and therefore a lower INT value. Looking at the log I hit 150-160 INT (yikes) in that area. Also anything above 1600 rpm seem to raise the INT above 135. Which is not what I am use to seeing with my values in V2. Needless to say I tried to stay out of that area while driving.

JP, I probably should e-mail my bin to you just in case it is something I am doing.
84KYSS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 07:20 PM   #19
Supreme Member
 
pwdbychevy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 1,091
Car: 1992 Camaro RS
Engine: 383 Accel Superram 150 NOS
Transmission: World Class T5
Axle/Gears: Richmond 3.73

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

Quote:
Originally Posted by JP86SS View Post
I stink I found the problem with your reading on the MAP.
Check you ADS to see if the KPA calculation has a 10.** adder in the offset box.
We had a few discussions on what the best value to use would be because certain items use different offsets when reading the MAP.
From what I see, the definition supplied with the V4 does NOT include the 10 Kpa offset.
AHA!!! So I AM idling at 60kpa. This explains why Datamaster was reading my idle at 60kpa and TunerPro Rt was reading it at 50 kpa. So all that is needed is to enter 10.0 in the offset box of the ADS file?
__________________
1992 Camaro RS 383 Stroked SuperRam
Check it out here at CarDomain.com


Last edited by pwdbychevy; 06-03-2009 at 07:43 PM.
pwdbychevy is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2009, 07:52 PM   #20
Supreme Member
 
JP86SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Browns Town
Posts: 2,933
Car: 86 Monte SS (730,$8D,G3,AP,4K,S_V4)
Engine: 406 Hyd Roller
Transmission: 700R4 HomeBrew, 3.8K stall 3 diskLU
Axle/Gears: 3:73 Posi, 7.5 Soon to break

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

84KYSS, I think you just need to unlock your BLMs a bit until you can see that the correction in that cell is not needed (128 +/- 1)
An INT changing by 30 doesn't worry me because it "may" only move the BLM by a couple points.
I have the same issue at that point in the RPM due to my converter tightens up right there causing higher load when in higher gears but is very low load in low gears. Just something I've lived with and run +/-4 on the BLM in that area. Can't get the best of both worlds right there.
JP86SS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2009, 09:25 PM   #21
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 130
Car: 84 Monte Carlo SS
Engine: 408
Transmission: 700-r4

Classifieds Rating: (0)
Re: S_AUJPV4

You could be right on the locked BLM. I was doing that based on the advice in the VE tuning article. Which says the open BLM is like roughing in a tune and then locking the BLM and tuning via INT is like going over everything with a finer grit of sandpaper. Ever since I moved the MAT out of the intake and removed the K&N air filter from the throttlebody I practically had to start from scratch on the VE table. I just couldn't get the MAT inverse to cooperate with me. Since everything was tuned at 40* and now it's between 70-90* here. One thing that helped my situation is that I used a V6 IAT sensor which has a brass base and a plastic basket were the sensing wire is. Well even with my CAI setup I would still get fairly high air temps (about 30-40 over ambient). I found that insulating that brass part from the engine heat helped to stabilize the air temp reading which also has helped stabilize my BLMs. I also found that for my setup the stock open loop AFR vs temp was fairly rich. Once I took some fuel out my cold start has become so much better and I no longer have the problem of idling at about 114 BLMs warming up and 136 BLMs at normal temps.
84KYSS is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2009, 10:43 PM   #22
Supreme Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Fort Myers, FL
Posts: 1,025
Car: 88 Camaro 'vert
Engine: 5.7
Transmission: T56
Axle/Gears: 3.42

Classifieds Rating: (25)
Send a message via ICQ to Jaysz28 Send a message via AIM to Jaysz28
Re: S_AUJPV4

man, its sad that I am just now making these changes.....

at least the mechanical issues are finally fixed!

thanks again for all the hardwork guys!

-jason
Jaysz28 is offline vBGarage Page   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2009, 10:43 PM
ThirdGen
1992 Camaro




Paid Advertisement


Reply

Go Back   Third Generation F-Body Message Boards > Tech Boards > DIY PROM

Tags
fixes, saujpv4
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

 


1982 Camaro '82 || 1983 Camaro '83 || 1984 Camaro '84 || 1985 Camaro '85 || 1986 Camaro '86 || 1987 Camaro '87 || 1988 Camaro '88 || 1989 Camaro '89 || 1990 Camaro '90 || 1991 Camaro '91 || 1992 Camaro '92


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright © 1997 - 2012 ThirdGen.org. All rights reserved. No part of this website may be reproduced without the expressed, documented, and written consent of ThirdGen.org's Administrators.

Emails & Contact Details