i think the pcm use the last known value when going over so it's 6500
you can changed the value in the top of the graph, but i have tried to and doesn't do much than change the value on the graph not in real life...should but doesn't (when i tried)
i think the pcm use the last known value when going over so it's 6500
you can changed the value in the top of the graph, but i have tried to and doesn't do much than change the value on the graph not in real life...should but doesn't (when i tried)
not really the answer i was looking for. not looking to put it to rev to 7300 on my motor and have it pop again kus the sct wasnt able to be corrected to what you wanted
just got notice from mana4real today that the PRP software does not let you modify any tables/settings past 6500...
so say i wanted to rev out to 7300 (as i want), the PRP will "auto-tune" past 6500rpms and you cant adjust anything yourself...is that true?
ojcool? vendors?
Hope you get some answers on this. Im also gonna be revving out pretty far, and i really cant rebuild a motor again....hell i cant even afford this rebuild
Hope you get some answers on this. Im also gonna be revving out pretty far, and i really cant rebuild a motor again....hell i cant even afford this rebuild
seems like its true.
mana4real showed me the software 1st hand. i just didnt want to believe it.
for us big turbo guys trying to big hp at high rpms, this seems to be not the ticket.
and the lack of diff boost variables on your timing map on sct sucks. the last values you can adjust for are 18psi and 29psi...
That's where it takes someone who has messed with that to make it work. Yes, the tables CAN be set up to rev higher than 7k. Yes, you can get more resolution than that big jump at the end of the MAP values, too. It's all in the scaling, folks. You guys are too impatient, and too willing to throw in the towel.
That's where it takes someone who has messed with that to make it work. Yes, the tables CAN be set up to rev higher than 7k. Yes, you can get more resolution than that big jump at the end of the MAP values, too. It's all in the scaling, folks. You guys are too impatient, and too willing to throw in the towel.
that why i wanted to go stage 3 code..but like you said not a good thing
were you able to modify the scaling ?? i tried one time but the only thing i really change was the value on the table not the value the pcm was really using
That's where it takes someone who has messed with that to make it work. Yes, the tables CAN be set up to rev higher than 7k. Yes, you can get more resolution than that big jump at the end of the MAP values, too. It's all in the scaling, folks. You guys are too impatient, and too willing to throw in the towel.
post on how its done then.
but considering you tune for a living, you prolly wouldnt want to spill the beans. i asked in agp's section, and got no response...and that figures.
we are thrown a 1000-1100 software w/ no backing, no support, no vendors willing to talk.
ojcool, moreause, mana4real, and 1-2 others are making it happen. and what mana says, goes imo, since hes got more knowledge on this software than most.
im not gunna bother dropping over a G into some software where i cant even get direct answer for.
if you know how to rescale, fix the resolution, etc. why not explain how?
if i go into the ems section, i got virtually like 3 vendors and a shitload of people willing to help w/ issues, help w/ maps, create base maps, etc.
go to the sct section, you got nobody that knows a damn thing. and the people that do, wont speak up.
imo, you were better off not even speaking up about the situation unless you were coming in to help.
but considering you tune for a living, you prolly wouldnt want to spill the beans. i asked in agp's section, and got no response...and that figures.
we are thrown a 1000-1100 software w/ no backing, no support, no vendors willing to talk.
ojcool, moreause, mana4real, and 1-2 others are making it happen. and what mana says, goes imo, since hes got more knowledge on this software than most.
im not gunna bother dropping over a G into some software where i cant even get direct answer for.
if you know how to rescale, fix the resolution, etc. why not explain how?
if i go into the ems section, i got virtually like 3 vendors and a shitload of people willing to help w/ issues, help w/ maps, create base maps, etc.
go to the sct section, you got nobody that knows a damn thing. and the people that do, wont speak up.
imo, you were better off not even speaking up about the situation unless you were coming in to help.
You are damn liar! I responded....by singing
Would like to info on this before i buy it as well. Id hate to be building a high revving motor just to find out my device wont keep my setup safe
That's where it takes someone who has messed with that to make it work. Yes, the tables CAN be set up to rev higher than 7k. Yes, you can get more resolution than that big jump at the end of the MAP values, too. It's all in the scaling, folks. You guys are too impatient, and too willing to throw in the towel.
I suggested rescaling axis 6-7 months ago and Mana went balistic(lol), claiming its only a lable change, not a true programming change. Please clarify.
Quote: Originally Posted by duster360
From what very little i have learn so far about the NGC, I would evenly distribute the BITs to equate from 0=0kpa to 255=300kpa. The MAP slope is suppose to be constant and match the inputed value on all tables. Simply swaping in 300 in place of 225 is making too large leap, and the slope is no longer constant. Inserting a single extra point does smooth things out, but the slope is still not constant.
Quote: Originally Posted by Mana4real
YOU CANNOT DO THAT!!! The reason being is that you aren't actually changing the value of the cell... You are literally just changing how it's labeled. Do you understand? Those cells have set values that are not changed unless you are on the programming side on SCT... They can change it, we cannot.
Quote: Originally Posted by duster360
Can you explain more about this. I'm lost. It appears as if you can change the BITS/RPM or BITs/Kpa. And I know you have to stay between 0-255. So how does changing the BITS NOT really change them at all?
Quote: Originally Posted by Mana4real
When I talked to SCT they told me that you can change the how something is labeled, but the value in the cell will remain constant. If I am wrong tell me, but that's what SCT told me.
__________________
Quote: Originally Posted by Bell Intercoolers
Regardless of the [Thermal] efficiency, if too much pressure is lost, then the intercooler is either useless or can actually decrease performance...Corky Bell
I have tested it, and it does work. FTR, the scaling mopar did in the S2 cal is pretty lazy calibrating, IMHO. They rescaled that last couple of lines, and left the rest alone. The problem is, your MAP sensor is still covering 33% more range, so the values are not reading the same as your labels either - they are 33% higher. The normalizers and the scaling IS passed to to the PCM, too, BTW. If they weren't, and everything was just set to reflect 33% change, just not labled, then Mopar would not have bothered changing the scaling for those last couple of rows. Do a quick and easy test. Set up a new scale. When you get to a new break point that you want to test, change the timing or torque demand dramatically (go lower to be safe). Either watch on a scan tool, or watch the boost turn off at a new RPM, etc.
In the S3 code, look at how many things SHOULD have been changed to reflect the increased airflow and torque of the new turbo, but were not changed. The entire Torque Calculation section SHOULD be different, but it's not. I did extensive testing to set up all new numbers in that area. Guess what? It works.
Working the NGC calibrations is still a new thing. SCT gave us the ability to work with what's there. They make no promises to us on our ability to make it work. Lots of people out there think that since it is on the market, all tuners ought to be able to just put a program on the car, and it will work perfectly. Unfortunately, this stuff is still in development. You guys need to think creatively, and be willing to take the time to test ONE THING AT A TIME. I will literally change ONE value or ONE normalizer, and run another test. Want to test WOT spark? Put 0° in a spot, and watch for it. Until we have LiveWire support, this is the type of stuff we will need to do.
One more thing, don't scream at the vendors because they're not helping you. See it from the vendors' perspective. There is almost nothing made on the sale of PRP, and for a vendor, a lot to lose. The time and money it took to figure things out like this is essentially lost when a customer buys PRP, and then demands a calibration to work with from that vendor. That being the case, not many vendors will want to help you out with free tech support for your PRP. AGP/PWerks/FWD/etc cannot afford to give away what they have been working for. The few guys here on the forums who have PRP (and know what they're doing) are your best resource. There are solutions to your problems. The thing is, it will now cost YOU that time to figure out the workarounds. That's the caveat of a system like PRP.
I suggested rescaling axis 6-7 months ago and Mana went balistic(lol), claiming its only a lable change, not a true programming change. Please clarify.
I wouldn't say balistic is the term for it...
I agree that changing the scale for RPM would be good for some... But the problem is that I believe you are just changing how it's labeled, not the actual value... Remember? If I am wrong, sweet!! If not, then fuck!! There needs to be a way to tune at higher RPM instead of allowing the computer to just extrapilate (sp) from then on.
AutoForums.com is the premier network of enthusiast-owned
enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
We operate more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share
experiences and opinions as a community.
cant set up PRP setup to go past 7k rpms?
Linear Mode
