General Supercharger Thread

Was just going to mention thermostat. Also see if your O2's think your running lean?

 

I'm going to drive it to work tonight and log all that stuff just to see what everything is doing.

 

I feel seen

 

Magnuson 2650 ordered! Doing the YotaWerx tune, what else do I need?

 

Gas money...

 

Fuel injectors and one of @snivilous pullies

 

Also check, once warmed up if it's kicking out heat from radiator core. If it's hot then thermo is probably good.

 

Chasing those trims are like chasing that perfect beautiful girl...... who's a stripper

 

@snivilous pullies after I have it a while.

 

I would recommend a wide band 02 sensor - as was recommended to me - to properly monitor AFR, especially if you want a proper tune. If you look in to it, the factory O2 sensors don't read below 12:1 or 11:1 or some such. Lots of evidence here to suggest most canned tunes like the TRD tune have lots of room for improvement. I purchased an Innovate PSB-1 because it can monitor both AFR and boost, and includes the O2 sensor and bung. But there are many other options and I can't compare it to anything else, personally. We will see how well it works for tuning.

 

For the sake of information, the threshold is 0.814 lambda

 

Meh, it's all Greek to me...

 

I have some confusion on power Enrich, EQ ratio, WOT. 14.7 is 1.1? Most of you are targeting mid 10's. So per say wouldn't that be 14.7÷10.5 PE of 1.4? Looking at this TRD table I see nothing above 1.168. Is this not extremely lean? Sorry for my confusion.

 

I found the post from 10 years ago that mentioned 375 lph as the spec for the FFV pump:


I have also flow tested the FFV pump as per request. Results are in my fuel system testing thread.

 

@ViktorG thanks for finding that blast from the past. Good info and thank you for testing. Good flow especially if it's hardwired to 14vdc.

 

14.7 would be 1.0, since 1.0*14.7 is 14.7

But yes you are correct. The TRD tune also used the COTS (component protection) table for fueling enrichment to try and make it more dynamic about enrichment instead of the on/off switch that is PE. If you didn't have COTS then it'd be very lean, but because of COTS the TRD tune will run in the 9s in my experience.

Also, in a perfect world PE would be a straight divisor of AFR, but just like IC and MAF values it varies. PE relates to IC, so if you scale IC then PE needs to be scaled by a similar amount to maintain the same AFR. PE also has a cap of 1.5 like MAF has a cap of 512, so IC can be manipulated if you wind up at 1.5 PE not being enough. A higher IC will command more fuel, so a lower MAF (closed loop AFR) and lower PE (open loop AFR) would be used.

 

That is interesting, seeing as how the Whipple kit (and Magnuson kits, if I'm not mistake) come with a new 350 LPH pump.

For comparison sakes, if my maths are correct from your fuel testing thread, the stock pump did 1L/20.35 seconds, or ~176 LPH and the SC Pump did 1L/18.375 seconds, or ~196 LPH. The aero motive 320 LPH pump did 1L/16.575 seconds or ~217 LPH. This is, of course, including all of the pumping losses through the entire system since you had fuel lines and rails hooked up. Would it be safe to assume the actual flow would be higher if the FPR were not included in the test? Much like an air compressor is rated at 40 psi and again at 100 psi (typically) with lower volume at higher pressure?

If the Aeromotive is rated at 320 LPH and flows 217 LPH in the system, that's ~68% efficient. If the same efficiency were applied to the stock and TRD pumps, that would give them a rating of around 260 LPH and 290 LPH, respectively.

 

This table, is a ghost I can't find it anywhere! Lol

Well shoot, I did see you speaking of COTS table in the HP tuner thread, I apparently did not dig deep enough, tie two and two together and look at this tableThat makes much more sense. I couldn't make sense of this table in my mind all I saw was zoom zoom boom when I saw these numbers

 

Yes, the FPR reduces the flow because it creates a physical restriction and raises the pressure in the system.
The pump flows less volume as pressure increases, so that same Aeromotive 325 was flowing 353 lph with no restriction.

 

Cool. I was trying to work backwards to figure out how much the stock pump flows just as a comparison to what upgraded pumps need to flow to support certain HP levels as installed in the vehicle. It makes sense that Flex Fuel pumps need to flow much more fuel than the a non-Flex Fuel pump, as E100's Gasoline Gallon Equivalent is something like .67 - meaning, a gallon of E100 has .67 times as much energy in it as one gallon of regular gasoline. (even though I'm pretty sure flex fuel is only rated for e85, we'll use the e100 rating because I can find it and I don't have to interpolate) 260 LPH / .67 = 388 LPH, so I'm in the ballpark and no surprise that the flex fuel pump is rated for 375 LPH.

 

Ordered the PSB-1, has anyone tried mounting the gauge itself in the radio surround plastics below the drivers side inner AC vent and above the 4WD switch? Like get a universal ABS plastic mount and cut it up and plastic weld, body work sand and paint. I wonder if there is room...

For those who have put the gauge in the AC vent itself does that effectively block all air movement?

 

Blocks most air movement but not all...luckily, it's not the only vent one has in their trucks...it's a compromise though...I have no regrets having my PSB-1 in the air vent...incognito and OEM+ looks for the win!

https://www.tundras.com/threads/general-supercharger-thread.85513/page-210#post-3109261

 

Use the VCM Scanner configuration I sent you for the layout, then in the top right should be a window called graphs that has those options. VCM Scanner is a lot more powerful if you know how to configure it, and the layout I sent should be a good starting point.

 

Well yet again fail on my part for I was in editor and not scanner.

 

To add to peculiarities between stock tunes, looking at @blenton his "stock" fuel injector constant is totally wrong:



This is what it normally is:



So the file HPT pulled had the IC off by 100x. I suspect if the "stock" file was flashed as is it'd cause a lot of problems.

 

That’s funny. I promise I didn’t touch it! I did notice that my stock tune has the cylinder 3/5 fueling shuffle.

 

And another peculiarity, the tune is lacking 2/5 of the transmission tabs which is another first. I'm gonna send an email to HPT, considering it's a 2013 truck I don't know why it'd be lacking so much. Not the first time I've seen a tune that's messed up or won't work from HPT, but a first where it's flat out missing tabs.



Every other Tundra:

 

Cuz it’s mine, that’s why it’s messed up.. Like standing in line at the grocery store - I can pick the line with 1 person and the line with 7 people with be faster

I will open up the file on my machine later today and see if it has the same peculiarities. Truck is in for service right now and I won’t see it again til tomorrow.

 

All Toyota IC values used to be configured this way. They updated them quite some time ago. Seems they forgot one.

Until they update the definition for that parameter, you would not be able to use a IC value from the “normal” ECU’s.

 

I've seen, at least in my tune which is the only one that I have, in VFT, that the decimal point is in a different spot for the IC. I've wondered about that but just figure that it was just part of how the softwares differed.