Anything about Ford EEC tuning. TwEECer and Moates questions dominate, but there's some SCT and OBD-II knowledge too.

Moderators: cgrey8, EDS50, Jon 94GT, 2Shaker

Post Reply
Odrapnew
Regular
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 3:31 pm
Location: MN

(Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by Odrapnew » Wed Jul 21, 2021 5:32 pm

So, I recently disabled the WOT vs rpm functions in BE and adjusted my sea level table (disabled altitude spark table) to accommodate. My peak timing should match what I had for the WOT spark vs rpm (or close to it).

What I see is that the timing in my data log does not match what I have entered in my sea level table. At WOT, it seems like all my actual values are about 2 degrees (or more) less than my sea level table at that same rpm and load.

One example, at WOT, 4000rpm, 90%load, I should be at 32 degrees per my sea level table, but I'm getting around 29.8 degrees.

EGR disabled.
Load%=Load

When I had the WOT vs rpm functions active, datalog timing match that spark function.

I looked through all the scalers, functions and tables to see if I could find why, but coming up empty.

Any thoughts for why my data log timing doesn't match my table?

BTW, I don't have my blower belt on, so this is currently NA
'89 Notch, 304(5.0), Novi2K@13psi (currently not installed) TFS heads, TFS Stage 1 cam, Cobra intake, 60lb'ers and Pro-M 80mm, longtubes_x-pipe_flowmasters and more crap that doesnt increase power. 437rwhp@5500(and still climbing)/438rwtq@~4000rpm Tweecer R/T w_BE and EA

User avatar
EDS50
Administrator
Posts: 3847
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:17 am
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Contact:

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by EDS50 » Tue Aug 03, 2021 12:46 pm

This is typical of the tfi ignition. Ive seen on my own car on the dyno where I command 20 degrees in the top end of my sealevel table and standing next to the car with a timing light on the balancer showing 18 on the balancer. Every combination and parts used is different so I've learned to verify each motor on the dyno and compare actual to commanded throughout the rpm range so I can make adjustments and tune accordingly. Also make sure to zero out the load values in fn125 and zero out the spark values in the spark - base table if you havent done so already.
1992 Mustang LX - 25.1c Chassis, Vortech Blown Dart 333 on Meth, Lentech Trans, TRZ Backhalf, A9P Tune, Moates QH/SL v1.9, BE, EA, TunerView

2003 Mach 1 - Core Tuning RYAK1/ZYA2 QH Tuned, Borla Atak Cat Back, Pypes X-Pipe, Twin 65mm TB, K&N CAI, ICT Billet Intake Spacer, Eibach Pro Series Plus Suspension, Steeda Adj. Upper/Lower Control Arms, QA1 Bump Steer, Steeda Short Throw Shifter, 315/35/17's.

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 11071
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by cgrey8 » Tue Aug 03, 2021 1:15 pm

I think what he's calling "actual" is more correctly called "datalogged." Using a timing light would be "actual."

If I understand correctly, the datalogged value he's referring to is the calculated value that the EEC is telling the TFI module to run the engine with. Using a timing light would tell you what the combination of EEC, TFI, and distributor is all resulting in. I don't believe TFI EECs had the ability to determine what the "actual" spark advance is the way you do with a timing light.

More to the point, he still has a valid question of why the EEC is altering the commanded value by 2 degrees. My guess is one of the many spark modifiers in the mix is still in play. The fun part is figuring out which.

Just for starters, one of the things I'd do is copy the entire Sealevel table and paste it in for the Altitude table. I know the Op said the Alt table is disabled, but I'd do this just to be sure. If the Alt table is disabled, there's certainly no harm in doing this.

If this strat has a "Base" spark table, try making it the same as the Sealevel table as well. Although I'd hope the RPMs are well above where lugging mode would be interpolating between the base and sealevel tables, again it's just something to eliminate.

I think there's also a spark modifier related to ACT and/or ECT. I don't have BE in front of me to quote a table PID name, but I'd also check it out to see if the ECTs were high enough that it could've been pulling a few degrees.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

User avatar
EDS50
Administrator
Posts: 3847
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:17 am
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Contact:

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by EDS50 » Tue Aug 03, 2021 1:28 pm

cgrey8 wrote: Tue Aug 03, 2021 1:15 pm I think what he's calling "actual" is more correctly called "datalogged." Using a timing light would be "actual."

If I understand correctly, the datalogged value he's referring to is the calculated value that the EEC is telling the TFI module to run the engine with. Using a timing light would tell you what the combination of EEC, TFI, and distributor is all resulting in. I don't believe TFI EECs had the ability to determine what the "actual" spark advance is the way you do with a timing light.

More to the point, he still has a valid question of why the EEC is altering the commanded value by 2 degrees. My guess is one of the many spark modifiers in the mix is still in play. The fun part is figuring out which.

Just for starters, one of the things I'd do is copy the entire Sealevel table and paste it in for the Altitude table. I know the Op said the Alt table is disabled, but I'd do this just to be sure. If the Alt table is disabled, there's certainly no harm in doing this.

If this strat has a "Base" spark table, try making it the same as the Sealevel table as well. Although I'd hope the RPMs are well above where lugging mode would be interpolating between the base and sealevel tables, again it's just something to eliminate.

I think there's also a spark modifier related to ACT and/or ECT. I don't have BE in front of me to quote a table PID name, but I'd also check it out to see if the ECTs were high enough that it could've been pulling a few degrees.
I think you're on the right track with a modifier or 2 coming into play.
1992 Mustang LX - 25.1c Chassis, Vortech Blown Dart 333 on Meth, Lentech Trans, TRZ Backhalf, A9P Tune, Moates QH/SL v1.9, BE, EA, TunerView

2003 Mach 1 - Core Tuning RYAK1/ZYA2 QH Tuned, Borla Atak Cat Back, Pypes X-Pipe, Twin 65mm TB, K&N CAI, ICT Billet Intake Spacer, Eibach Pro Series Plus Suspension, Steeda Adj. Upper/Lower Control Arms, QA1 Bump Steer, Steeda Short Throw Shifter, 315/35/17's.

Odrapnew
Regular
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 3:31 pm
Location: MN

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by Odrapnew » Tue Aug 03, 2021 2:06 pm

Thanks for the responses guys, I forgot about this thread.

cgrey8 is correct that my 'actual' is meant to be what the datalog is showing.
So, the datalog is not matching what the tables show.

Both the sea level and base tables are identical and I do have the altitude table turn off.

As suggested, I turned the alt table back on and took a look.
I checked a few datapoints (rpm, load) and spark seems to align with the alt table.

The datapoint I mention in the OP (4000rpm, ~90%load), the alt table has 30 degrees in there, which is close to the 29.8 from the datalog.

I copied my sea level table data to the alt table (and again, turned it off), so all 3 spark tables match. I'll download that tune and see what happens.

So, if it's truly pulling from the alt table even with it turned off, why would that be?
Last edited by Odrapnew on Tue Aug 03, 2021 2:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
'89 Notch, 304(5.0), Novi2K@13psi (currently not installed) TFS heads, TFS Stage 1 cam, Cobra intake, 60lb'ers and Pro-M 80mm, longtubes_x-pipe_flowmasters and more crap that doesnt increase power. 437rwhp@5500(and still climbing)/438rwtq@~4000rpm Tweecer R/T w_BE and EA

User avatar
EDS50
Administrator
Posts: 3847
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:17 am
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Contact:

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by EDS50 » Tue Aug 03, 2021 2:24 pm

Just a thought, If you remove the decimal point in your display or equation your 29.8 would round up to 30.
1992 Mustang LX - 25.1c Chassis, Vortech Blown Dart 333 on Meth, Lentech Trans, TRZ Backhalf, A9P Tune, Moates QH/SL v1.9, BE, EA, TunerView

2003 Mach 1 - Core Tuning RYAK1/ZYA2 QH Tuned, Borla Atak Cat Back, Pypes X-Pipe, Twin 65mm TB, K&N CAI, ICT Billet Intake Spacer, Eibach Pro Series Plus Suspension, Steeda Adj. Upper/Lower Control Arms, QA1 Bump Steer, Steeda Short Throw Shifter, 315/35/17's.

Odrapnew
Regular
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 3:31 pm
Location: MN

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by Odrapnew » Tue Aug 03, 2021 3:05 pm

Looking at the log, it's actually 92% load at 4000rpm. My table has a cell at 90% and then again at 120% (getting into boost, starting to pull timing), so the 29.8 is likely accurate.
'89 Notch, 304(5.0), Novi2K@13psi (currently not installed) TFS heads, TFS Stage 1 cam, Cobra intake, 60lb'ers and Pro-M 80mm, longtubes_x-pipe_flowmasters and more crap that doesnt increase power. 437rwhp@5500(and still climbing)/438rwtq@~4000rpm Tweecer R/T w_BE and EA

User avatar
EDS50
Administrator
Posts: 3847
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:17 am
Location: Tampa Bay, FL
Contact:

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by EDS50 » Tue Aug 03, 2021 3:11 pm

Is it just interpolating into the next cell?
1992 Mustang LX - 25.1c Chassis, Vortech Blown Dart 333 on Meth, Lentech Trans, TRZ Backhalf, A9P Tune, Moates QH/SL v1.9, BE, EA, TunerView

2003 Mach 1 - Core Tuning RYAK1/ZYA2 QH Tuned, Borla Atak Cat Back, Pypes X-Pipe, Twin 65mm TB, K&N CAI, ICT Billet Intake Spacer, Eibach Pro Series Plus Suspension, Steeda Adj. Upper/Lower Control Arms, QA1 Bump Steer, Steeda Short Throw Shifter, 315/35/17's.

Odrapnew
Regular
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 3:31 pm
Location: MN

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by Odrapnew » Tue Aug 03, 2021 3:49 pm

It's definitely interpolating, but if it was pulling from my sea level and base tables, it should be closer to 31.8 degrees.

It's only about 2 degrees, which may or may not have a big impact on power, but my biggest issue is that it's not matching what I'm expecting. Once I get my blower belt installed, I want to make sure timing is spot on. I guess 2 degrees less timing is conservative and better than 2 degrees advanced (thinking detonation prevention).

We'll see what happens tomorrow on my way to work with the updated altitude table.
'89 Notch, 304(5.0), Novi2K@13psi (currently not installed) TFS heads, TFS Stage 1 cam, Cobra intake, 60lb'ers and Pro-M 80mm, longtubes_x-pipe_flowmasters and more crap that doesnt increase power. 437rwhp@5500(and still climbing)/438rwtq@~4000rpm Tweecer R/T w_BE and EA

Odrapnew
Regular
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 3:31 pm
Location: MN

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by Odrapnew » Wed Aug 04, 2021 11:43 am

I uploaded the new tune with the modified altitude table to match the others.
I again, disabled the alt. table (scalar).
Logged during my drive into work today.

The datalog timing now appears to align with the tables.
Using the same example (4000rpm, 90% load), I'm getting the 32 degree that is in the tables.
I checked a couple other points and they seem to match.

Now, the question is why is it still pulling from the alt table when it's disabled?
'89 Notch, 304(5.0), Novi2K@13psi (currently not installed) TFS heads, TFS Stage 1 cam, Cobra intake, 60lb'ers and Pro-M 80mm, longtubes_x-pipe_flowmasters and more crap that doesnt increase power. 437rwhp@5500(and still climbing)/438rwtq@~4000rpm Tweecer R/T w_BE and EA

User avatar
cgrey8
Administrator
Posts: 11071
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 5:54 am
Location: Acworth, Ga (Metro Atlanta)
Contact:

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by cgrey8 » Wed Aug 04, 2021 11:55 am

I don't know this, but there is a chance that the definition developer has mislabeled the Alt and Sealevel tables and that what he's calling the Sealevel table is the alt, and vice-versa. Similar problems existed in the VERY early GUFx defs (and CalEdit for that matter). So it's not unheard of. Definition files are written by humans that reverse-engineer the execution code. It would be easy to be reading the code and get those two backwards.

This is why I suggested making your Alt table equal to your Sealevel table even though you had it "disabled" just to eliminate this as a possibility. Based on what you are reporting, more investigation would have to be done to confirm this suspicion, preferably by the definition developer.
...Always Somethin'

89 Ranger Supercab, 331 w/GT40p heads, ported Explorer lower, Crane Powermax 2020 cam, FMS Explorer (GT40p) headers, aftermarket T5 'Z-Spec', GUFB, Moates QuarterHorse tuned using BE&EA

Member V8-Ranger.com

Odrapnew
Regular
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 3:31 pm
Location: MN

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by Odrapnew » Wed Aug 04, 2021 3:19 pm

That makes sense.

I guess for now, I'll just leave the altitude table active and any changes I make to spark tables, I'll just copy across all 3.

At least I can start messing a little more with timing tables and get what I expected.

Thanks for the input and suggestion.
'89 Notch, 304(5.0), Novi2K@13psi (currently not installed) TFS heads, TFS Stage 1 cam, Cobra intake, 60lb'ers and Pro-M 80mm, longtubes_x-pipe_flowmasters and more crap that doesnt increase power. 437rwhp@5500(and still climbing)/438rwtq@~4000rpm Tweecer R/T w_BE and EA

ChsReb
Regular
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 6:28 am
Location: Charleston, SC
Contact:

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by ChsReb » Sun Aug 08, 2021 4:46 pm

Odrapnew,

It would seem we are working on the same issue. Could you confirm what your SPK_SOURCE is in your data logs? Is it always 1 or 2?
95 GT, CBAZA with U4P0 Base, EEC 56k 1 Bank, 408 Windsor with Trick Flow intake, BBK 75mm throttle body, BBK Shorties, Ford 47 LB injectors, AFR 185 Heads, Custom Comp Cams Cam, Moates QH v1.6, BE 5.122, with Sailor Bob Strategy upgrade, AODE w/SatNightSpl and full TCI Rebuild. 4" Gen 1 Slot MAF with 4" K&N Filter in custom cold air enclosure. Street Use ONLY.

Odrapnew
Regular
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 3:31 pm
Location: MN

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by Odrapnew » Sun Aug 08, 2021 5:33 pm

I'm not seeing that in my logs or anywhere in my tune.

Looks like you are running on CBAZA definition (according to your sig) but I'm on GUFA (A9S ECU).

Could it be something that is only available on 94+ definition files?
'89 Notch, 304(5.0), Novi2K@13psi (currently not installed) TFS heads, TFS Stage 1 cam, Cobra intake, 60lb'ers and Pro-M 80mm, longtubes_x-pipe_flowmasters and more crap that doesnt increase power. 437rwhp@5500(and still climbing)/438rwtq@~4000rpm Tweecer R/T w_BE and EA

ChsReb
Regular
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 6:28 am
Location: Charleston, SC
Contact:

Re: (Assumed) Commanded timing not matching actual

Post by ChsReb » Mon Aug 09, 2021 8:25 am

That would be a: YES, Definitely!

We're operating in different worlds.

CBAZA introduces the concept of "Maximum Brake Torque" in a Table (FN2300). This is where I believe my retard was coming from. (I don't see any corresponding functionality in GUFA.) I'll be doing an extended test drive 8/11/21 that should confirm this. In CBAZA there are no less than 16 possible sources for spark advance. You know what is controlling the Spark. You just don't know what is involved in the calculation that got it there. Obviously the computer picks the lowest calculation,

The expertise in GUFx on this Forum is incredible. I've learned a lot. Thanks guys!

I'm always looking for fellow CBAZA users to compare notes with.
95 GT, CBAZA with U4P0 Base, EEC 56k 1 Bank, 408 Windsor with Trick Flow intake, BBK 75mm throttle body, BBK Shorties, Ford 47 LB injectors, AFR 185 Heads, Custom Comp Cams Cam, Moates QH v1.6, BE 5.122, with Sailor Bob Strategy upgrade, AODE w/SatNightSpl and full TCI Rebuild. 4" Gen 1 Slot MAF with 4" K&N Filter in custom cold air enclosure. Street Use ONLY.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jsa and 7 guests