man, all the rockstars are in this thread lol...
bob kurgan
bob kurgan
Both Greg and "That LaSota Guy" are pretty knowledgeable. ;-)BTW - If anyone would like really good, in depth knowledge on how this all works, Greg Banish, who posted here has an excellent tuning DVD and he also presents terrific advanced Ford Tuning Courses. There is also some guy, LaSota or something like that that sells Ford Tuning books that go into all this.
Yes they have and I welcome it.man, all the rockstars are in this thread lol...
bob kurgan
man, all the rockstars are in this thread lol...
bob kurgan
haha the Flyin Hawaiin has entered the building:rockon:man, all the rockstars are in this thread lol...
bob kurgan
In Bobcat's example the only real unknown is the air model.
Hope this helps!
Don
Sure Ford does this type of stuff, Ford has a handful of calibration engineers that work on one car for months and months at several powertrain testing facilities in different climates.
I see your still sticking with this when even a real OEM calibrator steps in and gives his $02. LOL. Good luck with that argument.Bobcat's example for air model/camshaft?
The problem with the philosophy espoused here of tuning by moving accurate known MAF transfer functions is it is done as a matter of routine normal practice for every little modification.
Let’s take the example given of a cam upgrade and it’s relation to an accurate MAF. The new cam would have absolutely no affect on accurate MAF transfer functions. There are other parameters in the PCM that might need to be addressed but the MAF isn’t one of them. If the new cam did have an affect on the MAF in any way it tells me the meter curve was inaccurate from the start.
You guys want to depend the routine practice of moving known accurate MAF settings every time you tune go right ahead and we’ll continue to see more and more ill driving cars and even more blown engines like we’ve been seeing because of inaccurate meter curves which is especially crucial in these newer 2011’s and up vehicles.
I am certain Eric knows this and never meant that. What he was questioning was that the OP does this for EVERY TUNE???? Come on. I'm certain he does not spend that much time tuning every car. If that were the case then all tunes would cost thousands and thousands of dollars.Ford calibrators do indeed drive new prototypes for months in all driving conditions and temperatures. They do this not to calibrate the MAF transfer functions which they already calibrated to begin with but to address all kinds of real world situations like cold start-ups, hot starts,fuel mileage, drive-ability, etc. It’s mainly to make adjustments for drive-ability in all conditions.
If that were the case then all tunes would cost thousands and thousands of dollars.
Bobcat's example for air model/camshaft?
The problem with the philosophy espoused here of tuning by moving accurate known MAF transfer functions is it is done as a matter of routine normal practice for every little modification.
Let’s take the example given of a cam upgrade and it’s relation to an accurate MAF. The new cam would have absolutely no affect on accurate MAF transfer functions. There are other parameters in the PCM that might need to be addressed but the MAF isn’t one of them. If the new cam did have an affect on the MAF in any way it tells me the meter curve was inaccurate from the start.
You guys want to depend the routine practice of moving known accurate MAF settings every time you tune go right ahead and we’ll continue to see more and more ill driving cars and even more blown engines like we’ve been seeing because of inaccurate meter curves which is especially crucial in these newer 2011’s and up vehicles.
In the example of a Cam upgrade one should modify the air flow model correctly to account for the change in VE throughout the Load / RPM band instead of relying on the MAF (better Eric? ;-) ). In this instance if the ONLY change was cams 'theoretically' one would not need to modify the MAF curve assuming proper engine airflow modeling, you are correct.
I don't think anyone is debating this?
And yes we all know there are some out there that tune strictly via MAF, but that is NOT the norm.
man, they will let anyone in here LOL
:dancenana:Get back to doing my dirty laundry Old Man.
Ford calibrators do indeed drive new prototypes for months in all driving conditions and temperatures. They do this not to calibrate the MAF transfer functions which they already calibrated to begin with but to address all kinds of real world situations like cold start-ups, hot starts,fuel mileage, drive-ability, etc. It’s mainly to make adjustments for drive-ability in all conditions.
I am very well aware of the reason for it. My point was that just because Ford's calibration procedure is to do all of this testing, doesn't mean it that we have to follow the exact procedure Ford follows or else the result is a blown motor as some of the posts I've read in this thread would suggest.
This thread is misleading and was posted for the sole purpose drumming up business. PERIOD.
Having a flow bench derived MAF data for each car we tune would be great, but it is not feasible, nor cost effective, and definitely not something REQUIRED.
I mean absolutely no disrespect to Jimmy Larocca by saying this, but this information coming from someone selling "no tuning required" ETC throttle bodies :rollseyes seems a bit hypocritical to me. If tuning 100% properly is the main subject of discussion, then why isn't their flow data and Effective Throttle Area data supplied with the L&M throttle bodies?
This thread is misleading and was posted for the sole purpose drumming up business. PERIOD.
Eric, can you outline the post where 91svtbird was trying to drum up any business at all, or where HE SAID PEOPLE SHOULD GO, I must have missed it. The guy is trying to help the membership:bash::mj::bash: