Re: MAF BLM based tuning

["Dan Plaskett" <dynastydan@worldnet.att.net>]

Hey Dave,

My 406 TPI L-98 is doing the same thing except I even have the knock with 93
octane.  I'm using the same ARAP as a base cal.  I've also got hypereutectic
pistons and I'm scared to get on it much at all for fear of shattering those
babies.  I definitely would not disconnect the KS.  I'd be interested to see
how much timing you've taken out and compare that with what I've done to
this point trying to solve the knock problem.  Mine is much worse when it
gets hot, but it gets hot fast.  I'm putting on an oil cooler and moving to
water wetter and RMI-25 like the GN boys run.  How hot is your motor
running?

Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Zug" <dzug@delanet.com>
To: <gmecm@diy-efi.org>
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:56 AM
Subject: Re: MAF BLM based tuning


> Thats okay, I saw your info in the archives, and I still have not twiddled
> with it since its only cell zero thats a problem. Since I applied a factor
> to the MAF tables based on gutting, the rest are dead on 128-130.
>
> FYI, my project status (383 TPI L-98) in 89 IROC has run a 13.14 on the
> stock lower intake and stock injectors, cycling at 12 ms max. Thats no
large
> accomplishment but its dialed in much better now.  Hint: (as if I was
saying
> something you did not know) dropping a set of headers in place of the
stock
> manifolds on that combo is worth a solid half sec, fun factor is
approaching
> Buick GN territory finally.
>
> My latest problem involves "launch knock".. 12 degrees of it (my max
> setting). I have taken lots of timing out of the 128-208(255 in other
words)
> LV8/ 1400-3600 RPM area (the area that during launch, gets passed thru and
> normally is set up to 35 degrees) when the 383 can take about 16-18 at
WOT.
> The launch knock is still as severe. No knock occurs during a quarter mile
> run using 93 octane (10:1 CR, alum heads, hypereu pistons, 0.200 deck).
>
> I was considering disabling knock retard below like 25 MPH but I'd hate to
> risk the hardware.
>
> Other suggestions? no teflon please ;-)
>
> PS, 89 ARAP '165 MAF Automatic.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Romans, Mark <romans@starstream.net>
> To: <gmecm@diy-efi.org>
> Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2000 4:14 PM
> Subject: Re: MAF BLM based tuning
>
>
> > Hi Dave:  Sorry for the deafening silence!  I will send you a copy of my
> bin
> > if you want.  I adjusted the flows at low grams in the maf calibration,
I
> > have also adjusted (Widened) the Block learn cell parameters.  (Using 89
> YB
> > code)
> > Mark
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dave Zug" <dzug@delanet.com>
> > To: <gmecm@esl.eng.ohio-state.edu>
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2000 12:42 AM
> > Subject: MAF BLM based tuning
> >
> >
> > > (This is for MAF '165 ARAP... 383 app)
> > > Given that the BLM cell seperators are 13,21,34 g/s, and 700,1200,2000
> > > RPM...
> > >
> > > and as an example, say cells 6 and 10 show high values (160)  and the
> rest
> > > are fine (low 130's).
> > >
> > > Since I have no VE tables to speak of,  What would be a good first
step
> in
> > > settling the bad BLM's back to normal, without affecting the rest of
the
> > > good BLM's?
> > >
> > >
> > > Please respond without using the word "MAP"   ;-P
> > >
> > > Extra credit:  Anyone tried expanding or sliding the range that BLM's
> > > affect?  like 13,27,40 and 700,1600,2800?
> > >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

> > >
> > >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------

> >
> >
>

>