I get no knock on lower RPM but once I get up into the higher RPM ranges I get some knock and retardation.

I know I can take away spark advance which I have done effictively to reduce no knock or eliminate it all together.

But I was wondering if there is any table in the 730 to add say some more fuel when you go over a certain RPM range or maybe after you go over a certain TPS value?

Something like adding 10% more fuel when I get above 3000rpm or more then 3.0v on the TPS for example.

 

Yeah, You can richen the VE table in those ranges. . Or make PE come on sooner.

 

Yeah I get the VE values but since my BLMs are very close to 128 already it probably would not make any difference if I raised the values?

 

Well it depends where you raise them, In the higher load and RPM ranges where you are having problems, you probably don't know where your BLM's are. It is hard to simulate those conditions long enough to allow ecm to establish a BLM unless you have a really long steep hill and/or car is very low on HP.
If its only while acceleration you could use AE tables also.
Otherwise use Power Enrichment to add the fuel and come in at 3.0 volts which is pretty high, it may already be in PE mode, at 3200 RPM mine is 60% which is 3 volts.
So chances are you are already in PE, So then you need to look at PE fueling, and PE spark advance... I use the VE tables for all of my PE fuel changes only because its easier for me to see how the Fuel curve looks.. Also I would never want tobe lean in those areas when not in PE. Not telling you that you should do that, just telling you my method.

 

IF PE is enabled, it generally will ignore BLM's below 128, and just use 128. If BLMs are above 128, it should use them. This was GM's fail safe, where it's safer to err on the rich side. This means that it's probably OK to add fuel in either place, BUT, I'd recommend setting the VE to 14.7 with BLMs at 128, and using PE to add any fuel. If in PE, AND it's lean, then the VE is at fault. PE should be set to about 18% to get from 14.7 to 12.5:1, and this should hold true at all RPMs. If it's not responding with 12.5:1, then your VE needs correction. If it's set to 10% and you are seeing 13.5:1, then PE needs correction to richen it. Of course, this requires that your displayed PE% fuel is correct. In $6E, there's a couple .ecu files that don't calculate the displayed value correctly, and show that it's double of what it is, so if you had reduced it to theoretical, then you'd only be getting half the PE. The commanded AFR should be close to actual, then you know the VE is close enough, and use PE to adjust commanded AFR when in PE.

 

When BLM is below 128 it will NOT use it. When above it will and its a pain sometime, there is a patch to disable it. I believe that one of the Super AUJPs have it disabled.
I prefer to use VE for most of my fueling like I said its easier to see your fuel map, and like I said - at 4500+ RPM, I really dont think I ever want to be at 14.7. Do you?

Also when trying to achieve 12.5 A/F using PE when set at 18% commanded AFR should be 14.7 when not in PE assuming Inj. constants and other constants are true to whats in car.
Also 18% is not a true statement because you have to factor in the PE F/A adder vs. coolant temp.

Like I said, Its just my method and tends to keep things on the safe side for me.
Sort like a DFI does not even have PE mode.


Here is how WOT afr is calculated


Sorry about changing subject a little, Either method is used and will work just fine to get you what you want.
Happy tuning.

In case you ever feel you need it here is agood article about WOT afr calculation.
https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...hreadid=214156

As well as a good arguement using both methods
https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...alculating+afr

 

When I said 18% PE, I mean 18% total PE, and by total PE I mean RPM PE + CE PE. And, if you do the math, even the GM ECM ends up with a simple ratio of fuel to get the final A/F from the base A/F. It does require that your .ecu file have the correct multipliers and offsets, which for $6E are in the first link below. The ECU equation is in the second.

14.7/12.5=1.176. I rounded to 18%.

See here:
https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...hreadid=259424

And Here:
https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...hreadid=214156

This is correct and verified.