Big Blue's Transformation

[Gary Lewis]

So let me share this with you, from yesterday. Thought about you and your frustrations!

Recall I have a lathe with a leaking gearbox. The machine has leaked like an old Harley Davidson since new. Several years back, I pulled the cover on the gearbox and sealed it with some high quality Permatex oil resistant sealer, only to find the next day that it still leaked.

A couple weeks ago, I decided it was finally time to really fix that sucker. I suspected it was leaking not only out of the gearbox faceplate but also out of the sight glass. I ordered up a 3/4" NPT sight glass and some Permatex 82180. Yesterday morning got up, pressed out the old sight glass, drilled and tapped the hole and meticulously sealed the gearbox face plate. As I was carrying the gearbox over to the lathe, I noted that I had forgotten to install the gear selector assembly before putting the cover back on. I hope none of my neighbors were anywhere near my property yesterday morning. They might have heard me yelling at myself, thinking there was a crazy man locked up in my shop. It was raining.....think I'm safe!

Let me guess - another utility knife blade hammered in to separate the parts? But you got it apart and back together and I’ll bet it doesn’t leak. If so, maybe you can also fix mine?

[Gary Lewis]

Let me guess - another utility knife blade hammered in to separate the parts? But you got it apart and back together and I’ll bet it doesn’t leak. If so, maybe you can also fix mine?

Two things. First, MPG. I've been getting the truck ready for 200 mile round trip to KS on Monday, and today I filled it up with gas. Well, I filled the rear tank up and put 4 gallons in the front tank before the pump tripped off at $100.00.

So I'll use the rear tank on the trip to/from KS, which it should do easily as the 19 gallons in it should get us 266 miles at 14 MPG - and I'm pretty sure it'll do it. And I'll switch over to the front tank for letting my brother and nephews "test drive" it so we stay true to the MPG quest.

And, speaking of "test driving" in filling the rear tank I did the math and the truck got 9.4 MPG for those 160 miles. And I think that is exceptional as there weren't any "easy" miles in it. Quite a bit of the time it sat warming up in the driveway w/o racking up any miles - I'm sure that it idled at least 40 minutes sitting still. And when it was being driven it was accelerating hard, with at least 6 WOT runs from 5 to 75 MPH. So I'm pretty happy with 9.4 MPG, strangely enough.

Second is the idle issue I'm chasing. Or more correctly, "issues". Below is a chart from BE of starting up at 64F and idling for a bit over 6 minutes before taking off. And here are the issues I'm seeing in it:

• At startup the idle went to 1400 RPM for about 6 seconds before coming down, but that is in spite of the desired idle speed being 928.

• After 60 seconds the idle speed has come down to 583 in spite of the desired RPM being 704.

• At the 314.9 second point, where the white line is, the engine has warmed up to 134F and the idle has come up to 609, which is getting close to the 656 that was desired.

• Finally, after almost 10 minutes (577 seconds) the engine is at 170F, after the thermostat opened opened @ 186F and then the ECT dropped to 164F, the desired RPM is 640 and the actual is 720. But, a bit later the actual RPM was more like 800. (Remember that each trace is on its own scale so you can't compare them.)

So I have some things to sort out, and I especially want to get the idle down to about 650 as at that point you can come out pretty quickly on the clutch in 2nd and be going. But much faster than that the clutch chatters and starts are jerky.

I did a LOT of reading today about dialing in the idle, and one thing I read said that if your long-term fuel trims at idle are more than 5% off, meaning less than .95 or more than 1.05, then you have a fueling problem and that must be sorted out before trying to dial in the idle. Mine are running around 1.10 to 1.14, so I need to figure out what is going on there.

[Machspeed]

Let me guess - another utility knife blade hammered in to separate the parts? But you got it apart and back together and I’ll bet it doesn’t leak. If so, maybe you can also fix mine?

Yep, but not as bad to separate as the sealant hadn't fully set up. The thing that miffed me was I put the sealant on and then put the face plate cover on, only I didn't torque it down. I waited about four hours and then torqued it down. Lots of wasted time doing the same thing twice.

And yeah, as of this morning, it has no leaks! Mission accomplished!

[Gary Lewis]

Yep, but not as bad to separate as the sealant hadn't fully set up. The thing that miffed me was I put the sealant on and then put the face plate cover on, only I didn't torque it down. I waited about four hours and then torqued it down. Lots of wasted time doing the same thing twice.

And yeah, as of this morning, it has no leaks! Mission accomplished!

Mission accomplished!

As for the problems set out above, I want to think through the issue of the idle going below the desired idle when the engine was cold. In the chart below for Idle Air Adder For ECT you can see how I modified Big Blue's table on the left, and what it was on the right. And on the chart the green line is what I have in BB and the blue line is the original settings.

I did this to get the idle down when the engine was cold, and it worked - too well. So I'm going to put some air back in while the engine is cold. And I'll figure out how much to put in by subtracting the actual idle from the desired idle at various Engine Coolant Temps and then adding some back in.

I want to get another tune ready to write and hopefully put it in and test it on Sunday.

[Gary Lewis]

Mission accomplished!

As for the problems set out above, I want to think through the issue of the idle going below the desired idle when the engine was cold. In the chart below for Idle Air Adder For ECT you can see how I modified Big Blue's table on the left, and what it was on the right. And on the chart the green line is what I have in BB and the blue line is the original settings.

I did this to get the idle down when the engine was cold, and it worked - too well. So I'm going to put some air back in while the engine is cold. And I'll figure out how much to put in by subtracting the actual idle from the desired idle at various Engine Coolant Temps and then adding some back in.

I want to get another tune ready to write and hopefully put it in and test it on Sunday.

Ok, the new Idle Air Adder for ECT table is shown below. And the way I got to the 86 - 136F #'s was "scientific". I opened the log file in Excel and created a new column that shows the Desired RPM minus the Actual RPM. And with a bit of looking it seemed that the first place it was going quite low was at 86F where Actual was from 94 to 148 RPM lower than Desired.

But I couldn't put "94 - 148" in as I need a single number. Fortunately Excel has a feature where if you highlight a number of cells it'll give you the average of them. So I found the first time the ECT went to 86 and the last time and highlighted all of the RPM differences between them and got an average of 119 low. But Binary Editor won't take 119 and turned it into 120. Then I did the same for 96F up through 136F, but by the time it got to 136F Actual and Desired were quite close.

We are headed to Grove tomorrow to decorate graves, but I hope to write this tune in on Sunday and then start it up to see how it does at idle as it warms up. Then I can tweak it a bit more if needed, but hopefully it'll be pretty close and I can move on to the next problem - getting the idle down to Desired after it warms up.

[Gary Lewis]

Ok, the new Idle Air Adder for ECT table is shown below. And the way I got to the 86 - 136F #'s was "scientific". I opened the log file in Excel and created a new column that shows the Desired RPM minus the Actual RPM. And with a bit of looking it seemed that the first place it was going quite low was at 86F where Actual was from 94 to 148 RPM lower than Desired.

But I couldn't put "94 - 148" in as I need a single number. Fortunately Excel has a feature where if you highlight a number of cells it'll give you the average of them. So I found the first time the ECT went to 86 and the last time and highlighted all of the RPM differences between them and got an average of 119 low. But Binary Editor won't take 119 and turned it into 120. Then I did the same for 96F up through 136F, but by the time it got to 136F Actual and Desired were quite close.

We are headed to Grove tomorrow to decorate graves, but I hope to write this tune in on Sunday and then start it up to see how it does at idle as it warms up. Then I can tweak it a bit more if needed, but hopefully it'll be pretty close and I can move on to the next problem - getting the idle down to Desired after it warms up.

Time for a quick update before heading to church.

I do plan to write that tune into the truck this afternoon and then check it out in prep for our trip to KS tomorrow. But beyond that the plans for how to do further tuning may have changed.

The reason for that is that I've realized that the software that Decipha uses to log and tune vehicles is free. That software is Tuner Pro RT, and if I used it then all of the parameters he talks about in his copious writeups on how to tune would match what I see in the software. IOW, there would be no need for a Rosetta Stone.

So I have a whole lot more learning to do, and I may start on it this afternoon. But here are my early assessments:

Binary Editor: This is a really powerful package that appears to be targeted at those who are heavily into tuning. I say that because there isn't much info on how to tune that I can find that goes with BE. And because Adam of Core Tuning said that they can answer questions on how to use BE for free, but if I want to learn how to tune they will have to charge me. On top of that, you need a $100 token for each ECU you are going to work on.

Tuner Pro RT: I don't yet know how powerful this package is, but there is a support forum/website and those guys are helpful. It is Decipha's website/forum and he is on it and has responded to my questions, but there are other individuals on there that appear to be like you and me - tuning just one or two vehicles and don't have a business of doing so. As said, the software is free and it is said to work with my Mongoose cable just as BE does. And there's no $100 token needed for each ECU.

So I'm going to do more research and will report back. But, this is quickly evolving to suggest we need to start a thread on how to install and tune EEC-V systems as was suggested. It looks like it is going to take on a life of its own.

[Gary Lewis]

Time for a quick update before heading to church.

I do plan to write that tune into the truck this afternoon and then check it out in prep for our trip to KS tomorrow. But beyond that the plans for how to do further tuning may have changed.

The reason for that is that I've realized that the software that Decipha uses to log and tune vehicles is free. That software is Tuner Pro RT, and if I used it then all of the parameters he talks about in his copious writeups on how to tune would match what I see in the software. IOW, there would be no need for a Rosetta Stone.

So I have a whole lot more learning to do, and I may start on it this afternoon. But here are my early assessments:

Binary Editor: This is a really powerful package that appears to be targeted at those who are heavily into tuning. I say that because there isn't much info on how to tune that I can find that goes with BE. And because Adam of Core Tuning said that they can answer questions on how to use BE for free, but if I want to learn how to tune they will have to charge me. On top of that, you need a $100 token for each ECU you are going to work on.

Tuner Pro RT: I don't yet know how powerful this package is, but there is a support forum/website and those guys are helpful. It is Decipha's website/forum and he is on it and has responded to my questions, but there are other individuals on there that appear to be like you and me - tuning just one or two vehicles and don't have a business of doing so. As said, the software is free and it is said to work with my Mongoose cable just as BE does. And there's no $100 token needed for each ECU.

So I'm going to do more research and will report back. But, this is quickly evolving to suggest we need to start a thread on how to install and tune EEC-V systems as was suggested. It looks like it is going to take on a life of its own.

Another update. I didn't write that tune to the ECU yesterday as I think it is treating a symptom. I believe the problem is in the MAF curve and I need to address that. However, I just got this in from Decipha on the EFIDynoTuning forum - with the bolding by me:

tunerpro doeant interface with the goose. You need pcmflash to read and write that.

You can read the tune off the ecu using a quarterhorse

since all u have is the goose and no qh you might as well stick with what you have

otherwise if u wanted to swap youd need a quarterhorse and premium membership

So that answers the question - I'll stay with what I have.

And now today's MPG test: 12.6 MPG.

Why? Probably because we had winds in the 30 - 40 MPH range. While we did travel with the wind for maybe 50 of the 200+ miles, we were going directly across it for 100 miles and directly into it for the other 50 miles. And going across the wind certainly does impact drag.

I looked around a bit for documentation on the effect of wind, and found this at the Freightliner site: "For every 10 mph of headwind or crosswind, fuel efficiency is reduced by as much as 13%." I'm sure that is meant for semis, but it does indicate that both a head wind as well as a cross wind significantly hurts fuel economy. And to put it into perspective, 12.6 is 10% off of 14.0 MPG.

[85lebaront2]

Another update. I didn't write that tune to the ECU yesterday as I think it is treating a symptom. I believe the problem is in the MAF curve and I need to address that. However, I just got this in from Decipha on the EFIDynoTuning forum - with the bolding by me:

tunerpro doeant interface with the goose. You need pcmflash to read and write that.

You can read the tune off the ecu using a quarterhorse

since all u have is the goose and no qh you might as well stick with what you have

otherwise if u wanted to swap youd need a quarterhorse and premium membership

So that answers the question - I'll stay with what I have.

And now today's MPG test: 12.6 MPG.

Why? Probably because we had winds in the 30 - 40 MPH range. While we did travel with the wind for maybe 50 of the 200+ miles, we were going directly across it for 100 miles and directly into it for the other 50 miles. And going across the wind certainly does impact drag.

I looked around a bit for documentation on the effect of wind, and found this at the Freightliner site: "For every 10 mph of headwind or crosswind, fuel efficiency is reduced by as much as 13%." I'm sure that is meant for semis, but it does indicate that both a head wind as well as a cross wind significantly hurts fuel economy. And to put it into perspective, 12.6 is 10% off of 14.0 MPG.

I was waiting for that. Moates Quarterhorse and TwEECer were devices used on EEC-IV systems. I knew of Decipha from back when I was on EEC Tuner.org and the old Yahoo group. I actually had a TwEECer I bought used, it goes on the J2 port on the inner end of the EEC case.

Here's a screen shot of one of the programs you can use (or could use 7 years ago).

The system I was helping the gentleman who built my engine was using for his Chevy system I found would also work on the EEC-V Fords.

[Gary Lewis]

I was waiting for that. Moates Quarterhorse and TwEECer were devices used on EEC-IV systems. I knew of Decipha from back when I was on EEC Tuner.org and the old Yahoo group. I actually had a TwEECer I bought used, it goes on the J2 port on the inner end of the EEC case.

Here's a screen shot of one of the programs you can use (or could use 7 years ago).

The system I was helping the gentleman who built my engine was using for his Chevy system I found would also work on the EEC-V Fords.

I really appreciate all that Decipha has done on his website, but it has some really confusing aspects. For instance on the page How To: Getting Started it says:

OBD-II Flashing

OBD-II flashing is available on 1996-2020 vehicles and is the only means of reprogramming the 2005-2020 pcm's. I use and highly recommend the Mongoose Pro Ford made by Drewtech. Its a bit of an expensive piece but comes fully equipped and includes the 19v pull-up for reflashing ford PWM (1996-2004 EEC-Vs).

So I took that to mean it works with Tuner Pro RT. Obviously I misunderstood.

In any event, I think I can work my way through Decipha's instructions well enough to figure out the problem with my idle.

[85lebaront2]

I really appreciate all that Decipha has done on his website, but it has some really confusing aspects. For instance on the page How To: Getting Started it says:

OBD-II Flashing

OBD-II flashing is available on 1996-2020 vehicles and is the only means of reprogramming the 2005-2020 pcm's. I use and highly recommend the Mongoose Pro Ford made by Drewtech. Its a bit of an expensive piece but comes fully equipped and includes the 19v pull-up for reflashing ford PWM (1996-2004 EEC-Vs).

So I took that to mean it works with Tuner Pro RT. Obviously I misunderstood.

In any event, I think I can work my way through Decipha's instructions well enough to figure out the problem with my idle.

Gary, I didn't even realize he had a website, after I moved on and started using BE on the EEC-V systems, I really hadn't thought about him until you mentioned him.