i have been tuning AE now for past month. been logging with WB the results. as was said by someone it appears you can fall over a CLIFF rich/lean. i had tables way too rich before the WB install. so scalled them back till this morning got the lean pop in intake with 2nd gear moderate accelleration. first gear bog was worse on this tune. i took the "tip" to zero out the 0% TPS and 0 MAP. seems like it wants some AE in that constant so introduced some? trying to maintain balance between ae tps and aemap so the "net" usec is the same from tune to tune. last night i added in usec in map and removed same in tps. prior log to current showed clutch engage stumble to be greatly improved in that tune but showed very rich on WB log( AE 8/1). prior logs with stumble was 11/1 for AE. new tune today brought in a lean pop. i have larger #'s now in ae map. seems they should be about same in each tps/map value. anyone feel one should be larger than the other? now the question above. is the tps/map values linear? if i have say 61 in ae tps 3% should i have 122 at 6%? and 183 at 9%? same with ae map values? this is a struggle for sure.

 

AE isnt linear. Its based entirely on the motor. You could only need a little during small changes but need a whole bunch when you slam the gas down from low load. As far as zeroing it out, this worked for me as when the AE was winding down, the engine would gag on the fuel in that area. This assumes that you have enough AE duration.

AE is by far the most difficult thing to tune.

 

First to answer your question, no, AE is not linear but that might be what your engine likes. I tend to use more MAP AE with the 8746 since the TPS AE is so limited.
Example of how AE is a royal PITA;
Stock bore TBI at x degrees does NOT flow as much air as a larger TBI at the same x degrees. So that usually needs to be addressed but that's not too hard... or is it. Then you've got the MAP AE, based a lot on displacement, VE, and plenum volume. Of course GM has the AE in pulsewidths as apposed to a % . So change the fuel pressure, BAM, just like that the AE needs going over again, lol. These older ecm's are intertwined and are a big headache. It's a lot easier working with a newer ecm/pcm that has more advanced code for making changes easier to isolate.

 

i am at office so cannot post exact numbers but i suspect this is accuratte for:

tps map

prior tune 0% 0 0 0
3 61 20 61
6 61 40 122
9 122 60 122
12 122 80 122
15 122

new 61 61
122 122
122 122
183 183
244 244
244
prior tune had lean pop and noticible lag b4 the ae comes on and enrichens(WB)

the new one is very good. only lag bog is clutch engage on a easy take off. as i stated if aggressive on take off bog is almost nil. however the tune on AE is super rich like 8/1 to 10/1. TC only allows multiples of 61. TC says that is the code???

next Q is how can i isolate the TPS effect from the AE MAP effect. i understand tps is any % of throttle movement regardless of initial throttle position? so if at 10% throttle at cruise and i move it 6% quickly the usec is added (6% or 122) regardless of initial throttle position. what i dont understand is the AE MAP. is that the MAP change result from tps movement? like if idle at 30 map and the tps results in a 60 map cell is the 30 constant added in as usec on top of what the tps dumped in? so how can i tune one aetps vs the otheraemap? seems they are a blend? also what would the effect be of zeroing out one or the other and check the effect of only one functiong at a time. when i asked linear i also was refering to a 1/1 relationship of tps vs map. like if 15% value is 244 should 60-80 map be same value? is that wacky?

post distorts my value????

old tps is 0 61 61 122 122 122-- new is 61 122 122 183 244 244
old map is 0 61 122 122 122-- new is 61 122 122 183 244

 

ttt

 

What ecm are you using? I don't have a clue what the unit of measurement is.

 

7747.

 

That's really odd because all of the tdf and ecu/xdf files I have are using uSec for the unit of measurement. And if that's the case then your AE is on the next to nothing side. Do a comparison with a stock 7747 bin and you'll see what I mean. Also, the crossfire intakes need a lot of MAP AE because of their large intake surface area.
Another thing, I don't know what definition file you're using but the 7747 has 9 cells for TPS. Might want to get a new definition file. In anycase, just look at a stock bin to understand what the AE "looks" like. Always there is more AE with faster TPS and MAP changes.

 

not using a CF intake. holley projection.

i am using today AE TPS at 122-1222-183-244-305-366-427-427-427. i did not list all in this email. my error. i just looked up this minute as had laptop at office. for AE MAP i have 0-61-61-122-122.

i just logged this calibration first time today. i thought i had last week but battery on LM1 failed so lost that earlier data.. seems this is the best it has been as far as AE. any more that above and super rich and drowning motor per WB and SOP. now inj's are 80's at 20 lbs FP so i believe that affects AE quantity? my BPW is corrected for inj andFP. 80 BPW.