Roland@pcmtec

The tune.

What state are you in? If you are looking to do the flex kit on the BA v8, get in touch with Danny from Pirotta Performance and we can come up with a solution. If you are in VIC it would be preferable to go to a workshop that has done these before, there are a few which have worked closely with us doing the R&D for the new kits (eg the BA I6 kit etc) which make it a lot easier for us to get it working. We can liaise with Danny and the workshop when it comes time.

Trans temp is a good suggestion if it is available. Are you looking at doing this on your vehicle?

Mk1 or Mk2? If its a Mk1 I believe modifying the front axle ratio is possible, mk2 ignores the VID block afaik so there may be nothing you can do in that case.

We haven't had any workshops request a solution for a V8 BA yet, however when we do the answer will most likely be attempting to repin the boost sensor input (it may still exist on the PCM due to the V8s having the C connector) or using the power steering pressure sensor.

The procedure is still the same, just use the higher resolution tables instead, it should be obvious which ones are which.

Which vehicle and what transmission is this?

Idle spark is PID controlled to reach setpoint. So to get your desired idle RPM it needs 15 degrees, if it was commanding 20 degrees your idle rpm would increase. So if you want 20 degrees at idle there are two options, increase the idle rpm so it idles higher (and hence commands more spark). Or reduce the idle airflow, so that more torque (and hence spark) is required to obtain the idle rpm setpoint. The idle air tables are only used on open loop, eg decel or return to idle which is why you see more idle hang and no improvement. Once at idle the PCM also uses a PID to control the airflow. So to reduce idle airflow when in closed loop idle you need to modify the maximum airflow clip. I'm not sure what scalar this is off the top of my head, but I'll look it up when I get a chance.

The file you read from your car is licensed, so it has the latest updated templates which is what is downloaded when you see Downloading updated templates at startup. Only licensed files get updated. The only way unlicensed files get updated is if you use the stock wizard to download them, or someone else who has licensed the file sends it to you. Hence why those files are out of date in that old zip file. We do this as part of the copy protection so we do not have to ship the entire database of templates with the software.

Are you talking about the old zip file from early 2018? If you are using that those files will be completely out of date and will cause the issues you mention. You need to use the stock file wizard available in the professional version.

Are you using an old version perhaps? I just created a fresh stock file using HAEDJG4 and I see the following. I noticed that the "Delta Temperature - °F) etc are missing in y ours. Can you download the latest version of 0.75 off the website (it should show version 0.75.6988.19134 if you have the latest) You can check via Help -> About or by scrolling to the top of the log. If you are using the latest version and you still have the same problem, can you go to This PC > Document > PCMTec > 0.75 > Stock Files and delete HAEDJG4 Then restart the editor and then open the file again via Calibration Tools -> Create Stock File. Let me know how this goes. It sounds like either an old version of the software, it it has found an old stock file and failed to update it. Cheers Roland

Spark min clip

Good question finnigan. I actually had no idea this was 0 in most calibrations. This means there is no tip in / tip out fueling at all in most cars. Probably explains why I personally had such poor result many years ago (eg zero change) when playing with the pump shot table! The tip logic is as follows air_lb = Air mass scaled against ECT in (auF0205) and also put through a low pass filter. If (air_lb > auF1540 (tip in threshold)) transient_extra_air = auF1156 (tip in gain) * air_lb If (air_lb < auF2501 (tip out threshold)) transient_extra_air = auF1303 (tip out gain) * air_lb transient_extra_air is then added to the final airmass value which is fed into the injector slope model to determine fuel mass. So if you set auF1156 to 0.1 and your coolant is 156°F you would get the following extra air mass added to the calc: auF0205 (0.986) * 0.1 = 0.0846 so you would see an extra 8.46% fuel injected during a tip in event.

Do you know what FG specifically it came from? As you will need a base tune to compare it to. There may be some maps that are only available in the workshop edition so you may not be able to compare them all, however all the main important spark and speed density maps will be there. Bad fuel economy usually indicates a problem with O2 trimming. What are your O2 LTFT (Long term fuel trim) percentages? Once you get a base tune to compare it to I recommend comparing the speed density maps between them. Now the BA and FG use different resolution maps (and different IDs) so these will need rescaling and massaging if you want to copy them over. You can use the axes rescale wizard to do this, there is a thread on how to do this:

Quoted for emphasis. You have to test and datalog each change individually, otherwise you are guessing.

Ok so the BF (what this guide was originally written for and tested on) has a simple auF2233 table which is a lookup of torque reduction ratio and spark delta to command. The FG uses a much more complicated 3D model. In the FG the spark delta commanded is calculated using the following equation which is derived from what I imagine is an auto generated mathematical model: Torque_ratio_commanded = 0.8 (eg we are asking for a 20% reduction in torque via spark retard) K = auF1256(rpm,load) K = -0.00032 (4500 rpm and 1.7 load in HAER1UB) Torque_ratio_commanded = 0.8; Spark_Delta = -Math.Sqrt(-(4 * K * (1 - Torque_ratio_commanded))) / (2 * K); Spark_Delta = 25 degrees Knowing this you can see that if you want more torque reduction, you need to reduce K Eg a value of K = - 0.00016 would result in 35 degrees of spark retard. A value of K = -0.00064 = 17 degrees of spark retard. So if we wanted to achieve the same outcome in an FG we would multiply the spark retard table on full load by say -0.5 Here is the original auF1256 table in an FG Here is the new table with approximately 25% more spark retard This actually gives us a lot more control over the spark retard for traction control in some regards, if you wanted aggressive traction control to only occur at certain loads and rev ranges, you can now achieve this. In the BF this would not be possible. Remember this is used for all torque reduction events, so this will affect your transmission shifts etc. The BF version would not affect your transmission shifts as you could only modify the low torque ratio settings.

I'm not sure what causes Ford to change the factory settings there. Maybe different exhaust and turbo mean different temperature limits. Regarding auF2233 Are you running the pro version of the software? Which strategy or catch code is your vehicle?

You can use the create stock file wizard, same as returning a PCM to stock, just make sure you tick TCM only when you flash the file in.

We would have to charge about 1k in credits per vehicle to make a business case for it. The reality is the end user doesn't see the benefits only the tuner, so it is a hard sell for the large amount of development time required. There are development PCMs that Ford use available from Visteon etc that cost about $10k, then the hardware and software licenses to actually tune them would be close to 100k. One of the tuners in VIC bought an ex development car from auction that had one in it, so they do exist. HPTuners did real time tuning for a GM platform early on and they said the R&D/Support for it absolutely overwhelmed every other aspect of the business which is why they did not do it again for any other vehicles. Short answer, yes it is possible, but unlikely to be a good move business wise.

That is why the OEM takes half a year to do a tune from scratch.

Yes not all the parameters are available in professional as some of these are listed as "development parameters" which we did not previously know what they did. You can however get the same results by just increasing the amount of spark retard at approximately 0.2 and above torque ratio.

Camshaft will 100% throw things off. Is there any overlap at idle with the standard specifications? You may be getting some airflow oscillation/reversion as well.

Talk to crow cams, I'm sure they can help. edit: If they are already installed it isn't worth changing, as depending on the cam design it may not be easily achieved as the offset goes on the camshaft itself. This is more a guide if you were getting a camshaft ground it from scratch and wanted the best results.

What fuel pump and regulator are you running? Standard reg and say a walbro 460 will see high fuel pressure at idle which completely screws up your scaling.