Did you know?The GMT900 Chevy Avalanche was introduced at the Chicago Auto Show in February 2006.
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
I sincerely doubt that I could figure out what Allen is having trouble with, but if you have a log where you are having the problem, email it to amber.noelthomas@comcast.net and I'll take a look at it.
Interesting reading here Frankie.....http://www.chevyavalancheclub.com/index.php/topic,1190.0.html maybe this will help.
OOOHHHH . I'm reading that now, so it looks like I have to find out how much PSI. my injectors cause that is a possibility that going to a 6.0 w/cam and S/C, these injectors may no be enough. Great find. Thanks
Old 7,After looking at your logs, I'd say it looks like you have an air-to-air intercooler with your IAT sensor in the stock location, or at least before the SC. Is this correct?
There are 2 basic things that through a tune you could adjust to help with the knocking issue: fuel and spark.You've probably heard it already, but it would be very beneficial to have some wideband data to go along with your log.Without wideband data, I've tried to interpret your narrowband sensors and other data from your logs. Compared to my non forced induction application, I thought your O2 sensor readings were a bit low under power enrichment, particularly in light of where your long-term fuel trims were at just outside of where power enrichment kicks in, in the negative teens. Additionally, when going into power enrichment, there seemed to be a bit of rolling into enrichment. I would suggest looking it where rpm and throttle-wise you have power enrichment kicking in, and how much fuel you are adding when you do go into enrichment.Something that may be at work here since you seem to have less issues when under more steady-state conditions is whether your VE table is well dialed in. I like to log not only MAF airflow, but also dynammic airflow, which is what the computer uses to get to dynamic air cylinder fill, which you logged, but I prefer to look at MAF flow and dynamic flow in a more apples-to-apples comparison. Under most conditions, they should track pretty well. Where they are not tracking well, you know the computer is using VE table input, which it does in transient situations.Something to keep in mind is that the VE table "floats". It is floated up and down via an adjustment factor to try to get a match with what the MAF is doing in steady-state conditions. Your VE table may be pretty good in areas where you are getting knockiing, but if your engine has been operating in an area where the VE table is high relative to what the MAF is seeing, the VE adjustment factor will bring down the entire table. When you then hit the throttle, the VE table has been floated down, and the computer will under-calculate the air going in under transient conditions until either it goes into steady-state, or you get around 4000+ rpm where the system just uses MAF input.One more thing thing to consider in relation to power enrichment, is how much spark advance is programmed to go along with power enrichment. You may want to scale this back some.Finally, I am concerned whether the computer is getting good IAT data such that it can compensate by pulling timing for high IATs. The IATs I saw in your logs were pretty consistent, but seemed to heat up when you were idling. I suspect that you are getting the IATs from a stock MAF upstream from the SC and intercooler. You may want to consider relocating the IAT sensor. You can find info on doing that on the internet - I've seen some descriptions of how it was done on a GTO forum.
That's great to hear Frankie I was afraid you wouldn't make that party if you got too much snow up there.