What makes an Economy tune?

[907DAVE]

Originally Posted by cleatus12r

Well in all actuality, commanding an increase in ICP does have an indirect "advancing" property to it as well.

As far as lowering the entire MFD map......yes and no.

You can lower the values enough to give a dead pedal.

Another idea would be to lower the fuel limit for RPM map and set the low boost fuel map to give the desired result and still be drivable. It's a balancing act.

I'd just put an egg on the accelerator pedal.

And the plot thickens

Would just increasing the ICP be enough to get better MPG's, or should it be accompanied with a slight increase in SOI?

I understand lowering the fuel limit stuff, but trying to understand how to make the engine more efficient on its own, without my negative influence.

The egg might not be a bad idea tho......

Grrr....damn touch screen, gotta be careful around these things.

[cleatus12r]

Originally Posted by 907dave

And the plot thickens

Would just increasing the ICP be enough to get better MPG's, or should it be accompanied with a slight increase in SOI?

I understand lowering the fuel limit stuff, but trying to understand how to make the engine more efficient on its own, without my negative influence.

The egg might not be a bad idea tho......

Grrr....damn touch screen, gotta be careful around these things.

Just increasing the Desired ICP table does little. It's a function of MFD and RPM. So.....

What I said before about a balancing act with the MFD map becomes a little more clear.

Yes, the Desired ICP map can be increased in those areas where you wish for a little more efficiency. Before you get too excited about asking for 1500 PSI where there was previously 700, there will be a point where it becomes a bear to drive; we don't want that. Also the benefits will start to diminish at some point.

On a side note, those ICP-fooling devices like the Workhorse module and Edge Juice actually DO work. They command an increase in ICP and mileage does go up. They wreak havoc on the HPOP, but they do give you a decent power increase with some mileage if driven decently.

[907DAVE]

Originally Posted by cleatus12r

Just increasing the Desired ICP table does little. It's a function of MFD and RPM. So.....

What I said before about a balancing act with the MFD map becomes a little more clear.

Yes, the Desired ICP map can be increased in those areas where you wish for a little more efficiency. Before you get too excited about asking for 1500 PSI where there was previously 700, there will be a point where it becomes a bear to drive; we don't want that. Also the benefits will start to diminish at some point.

On a side note, those ICP-fooling devices like the Workhorse module and Edge Juice actually DO work. They command an increase in ICP and mileage does go up. They wreak havoc on the HPOP, but they do give you a decent power increase with some mileage if driven decently.

Ok... I think I understand now.

What negative effect would there be with having too high of ICP, touchy pedal, increased engine noise, too much fuel too soon?

What problems did those modules cause on the HPOP's? (1211?)

[cleatus12r]

Noise, roughness, and jumps in pressure can cause a touchy or jerky accelerator pedal. Besides, I think that certain MFD becomes inefficient at certain ICP values. I can't say for sure, it's just my opinion.

Yeah, the P1211 codes were a side effect. Actually, the HPOP was forced to work harder ALL THE TIME. With most aftermarket tuning, the ICP is actually virtually unchanged. So when driving normally, the HPOP isn't working harder than stock.

[907DAVE]

I guess to say its a balancing act would be an understatement..........well at least to me. Guess it just comes down to experimenting, to see what works for me. Just wish it wasn't so damn cold here!

Thanks Cody

[soutthpaw]

This is why I need a 20 position chip... I was trying to shorten the PW and raise the ICP by the opposite amount. IE lower PW 10% and up ICP 10% thinking less fuel but better atomization...

I am wondering how advanced of the SOI would be safe at my altitude. wondering if there is a guideline like 1 degree per 1000 feet elevation for example. Now Cody is suggesting the SOI is not a big influence on economy right? I'm trying to get a good fwy econo tune thus I am working in the 1700-2200 rpm range with my mods. Cody, Do you think pulling the MFD down on the low end of the APP would have a bigger effect? the downside is that would affect the whole RPM range at that APP

Dave, say hi to Santa for me and tell him I been a good boy(lie) being you live in the same town as him

[cleatus12r]

Originally Posted by soutthpaw

This is why I need a 20 position chip... I was trying to shorten the PW and raise the ICP by the opposite amount. IE lower PW 10% and up ICP 10% thinking less fuel but better atomization...

I am wondering how advanced of the SOI would be safe at my altitude. wondering if there is a guideline like 1 degree per 1000 feet elevation for example. Now Cody is suggesting the SOI is not a big influence on economy right? I'm trying to get a good fwy econo tune thus I am working in the 1700-2200 rpm range with my mods. Cody, Do you think pulling the MFD down on the low end of the APP would have a bigger effect? the downside is that would affect the whole RPM range at that APP

Dave, say hi to Santa for me and tell him I been a good boy(lie) being you live in the same town as him

As far as safe SOI goes...... . There is no magic number. Without retyping everything I typed in the SOI thread, I will just say that there are
far too many variables to put a number on it.

I didn't suggest that SOI wasn't a big influence in economy....only that there are far more adjustments that can be made on top of SOI to help increase efficiency.

Pulling MFD down will do nothing for economy except slow your acceleration for any given physical accelerator pedal position. If you want to accelerate at a given rate, you will be injecting a similar amount of fuel whether or not you're at 20% APP in one program or 30% in another program with a less sensitive pedal. Besides, once you start really screwing with the MFD map, your shift points get out of whack and then you need to adjust them again (remember how shift speeds are based halfway on APP).

[907DAVE]

Originally Posted by soutthpaw

Dave, say hi to Santa for me and tell him I been a good boy(lie) being you live in the same town as him

Will do, next time I get outside of the igloo to go and feed my penguins. Just gotta watch out for those polar bears!

[907DAVE]

Originally Posted by soutthpaw

I was trying to shorten the PW and raise the ICP by the opposite amount. IE lower PW 10% and up ICP 10% thinking less fuel but better atomization...

I too was thinking about making adjustments like this, but I didn't think that the changes would be proportional.

Cody, do you feel like this would be a accurate way to increase ICP, or is there "a rule of thumb" when raising/ lowering ICP?

[Power Hungry]

Originally Posted by soutthpaw

This is why I need a 20 position chip... I was trying to shorten the PW and raise the ICP by the opposite amount. IE lower PW 10% and up ICP 10% thinking less fuel but better atomization...

DJ...

The thing to remember about the ICP/PW relationship is that the pulsewidth is already based partly off of ICP. So technically, if you raised the ICP then the pulsewidth should drop automatically. You shouldn't have to go in and make any further changes. Unless I change the injectors, the main pulsewidth table doesn't get touched. It's all handled elsewhere.

Cody...

Cow farts. That's funny right there, I don't care who ya are!