[Squidward]

Just wanted to compare spark maps. I know that the 3x3 table is somewhat crude, but it works. I think Sniper systems run similar, but not sure.

I tried to emulate my HEI parameters, where I had 14 init, about 14 MVA, and 22 mech by 3000. I think I am close. Idle vacuum is about 14-15".

What do you think? What is your timing at?

[krisr]

IMO that looks fine but depending on how it interpolates from cruise to WOT it may be a bit "spicy" and ping. I tend to ramp timing out from cruise and my WOT timing is usually around 85kpa and I just copy/paste up to 100kpa. If you can build a table on the laptop instead of on the handheld, it generally works better and gives you a heap more controllability. The sniper2 on my GTO, I threw the auto generated tune in the bin from the handheld and built my own using the laptop, it works so much better.

[Squidward]

I'm gonna look into if I can do the full map on the FiTech with the pro tuning software. Years ago I was able to install and use the pro software, but I never used it for timing, just for data analysis and trends.

This engine used to eat up advance. I've dialed up to 40 total before when I used to race, with no pinging that I could tell. So now I am shooting for the rough equivalent of 34 total, adding some extra advance for high vacuum cruise. I am going more conservative these days since my performance needs have been reduced.

[JLMounce]

The table you enter is a 3x3 matrix, but the actual spark map the system uses is blended over several map and alpha-n tables as well. It's more granular than the input table suggests.

If those timing figures are performing well for you and your engine is happy, I think it looks pretty good. If you know where your peak torque is you can fudge around with the numbers to slow your curve down to reach total timing at your torque peak. Usually means lowering your 3K WOT timing and increasing the timing at the 6k WOT parameter. Not always necessary to do that though. Some engines will like a slower curve, others may not.

[Squidward]

Earlier tonight I loaded up the ProCal software and k line driver. I found a thread from 2019 in the boost section where this dude named Squidward gave instructions and links on how to do that. Most of it still worked. ProCal install is easy. K line driver requires altering a couple security settings to allow install of unsigned drivers. That Squidward sounds a little insane...

I made a little tweak at 1100/45kpa for a few degrees more advance. It made it more responsive.

I spend most of my time cruising at 45-50 mph. This means somewhere around 2500 rpm with my 3.73 gears. I'd like to see if I can get more advance for this cruise condition. So I might try bumping 3000/45kpa up to 45 or so to steepen the curve when I have good vacuum. I will leave the 3000 and 6000 wot/95kpa at 34-ish so that the advance softens as load increases.

[JLMounce]

If you're in the Procal software, you can edit the table directly instead of trying to fudge the numbers with the hand held inputs.

[Squidward]

Originally Posted by JLMounce

If you're in the Procal software, you can edit the table directly instead of trying to fudge the numbers with the hand held inputs.

I gotta learn more procal. All I'm seeing is just a windows version of the same idle/1100/3000/6000 settings I get on the handheld. Maybe that's all I can do? Was hoping to do one of these higher res tables like I see on other systems.

More practice needed. Thank you!

[JLMounce]

I was adamant about doing a higher res table as well for more granularity, but honestly, for a street car it doesn't really matter.

I took the HP Academy EFI fundamentals course just to kind of test my own knowledge a bit and make sure I wasn't completely wrong in how I was approaching tuning my car. One of the things they talk about in that course is granularity of the VE tables. The basic premise was actually that where possible you don't need a huge VE table and to add granularity only in areas where you need to. Of course they were working with an ECU that allowed you to do that. They even demonstrated the concept by doing several live dyno runs on a car with a 32x32 cell table and one with a 4x4 cell table. Power and fuel delivery were almost identical between the two, except for some minor drift in AFR around peak torque. But at no point was the 4x4 cell VE table in danger of damaging the engine.

Point being is that for a street car, the blended table that is created by the FiTech ecu has enough granularity to accurately fuel and deliver spark for almost any engine. Only if you are having trouble somewhere do I think it would be wise to add any granularity. For us Pontiac guys that aren't using boost and don't spin the car to 7000 rpm, we can typically gain 1 row and 1 column in the VE table by Moving the 95kPa row to the 200kPa row and moving the 6000rpm column to the 7000 rpm column. Then decide where you need that extra granularity, based on where the engine is having some trouble.

If you look at the VE table is the software you'll notice, that the VE table favors low speed granularity, which is your cruising zone. For a street car that makes sense.

Long post to say that unless your engine is behaving in a way that you don't like, I wouldn't bother with trying to make any changes to the VE tables. I'd also point out that at the point you feel you need to do that, the FiTech and most of the basic TBI systems on the market are no longer the product you need. It would be time to step up to things like a Holley Terminator, Haltech Elite etc.

[Squidward]

You are correct. It's just a street car that is either romping stoplight to stoplight, chill cruising at 2500 rpm and 45-50 mph, or buzzing at 3500 rpm on the interstate. So idle, off idle, cruise, and wot is where I play, and FiTech gave me those points.

I think part of it is that fun in geeking and tweaking.

I'm hoping to achieve at least 40 degrees at 2500 rpm cruise.

I will try to do some data logging of rpm and vacuum for my typical driving patterns, and go from there.