Do the '99/'00 PCM's really suck as bad as some say....I don't think so, here's why:
04-10-2007, 02:22 PM
#43
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: belleville, il
Posts: 1,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well so far so good for my 99 pcm i just logged 15 min of data to try i tout and i got 0 knock the whole time even helped my fuel trims cause it wasent retarding so badly
i went ahead and tried the 02-07 knock data (cloned from a 2002 stock tune) i converted everything in the 3 knock folders except the burst knock delta air mass and the burst knock retard settings
time to drive to class that 1 hour of solid loggin if my laptop holds out
i went ahead and tried the 02-07 knock data (cloned from a 2002 stock tune) i converted everything in the 3 knock folders except the burst knock delta air mass and the burst knock retard settings
time to drive to class that 1 hour of solid loggin if my laptop holds out
04-11-2007, 08:29 PM
#44
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: belleville, il
Posts: 1,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well i was right the laptop crashed and i lost everything :-\
on the other note i can't HEAR ANY knock what so ever and once warmed up it's perfectally fine
i have a fuel issue when cold just starting out cold or when slightly cooled down from operating temp(way way to much fuel killing the spark out)
anyone have any thought opinions ideas? anyone reading this anymore?
-Erik
on the other note i can't HEAR ANY knock what so ever and once warmed up it's perfectally fine
i have a fuel issue when cold just starting out cold or when slightly cooled down from operating temp(way way to much fuel killing the spark out)
anyone have any thought opinions ideas? anyone reading this anymore?
-Erik
04-11-2007, 09:12 PM
#45
yep...i have been reading. people are scared of kr stuff. rightfully so. I dig the research you are...were doing, btw my laptop crashed a few months ago I lost 2 years of tunes, scans, screen shots, data, excel, cool engine simdyno stuff...feel your pain, just in simple theory of the blocks are the same, so why can't we assume the kr tables evolve as the GM engineers do...I am personally on the side of the kr settings were to aggressive in 99 and got less aggressive with each change. good work dude.
04-11-2007, 10:06 PM
#46
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (15)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: belleville, il
Posts: 1,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah thats what i was hoping too so far it's working well
i wanted to stick with a 5.3 base kr setting to cause i know the sensors are for resonant vibration pulses and thats going to be at a different frequency in a different engine, so i stuck with the lm7 block the whole way
i think my charger died on me i was using it on a power inverter and the inverter still works
i had to use the charger to power it cause the internals of the battery wireing must be shot cause as soon as i plug in a new battery it frys it instantly
hopefully the laptop is still ok but i lost the 45 min of tune that i didnt have saved yet
my next project is to fix the cold cam missfireing problems more than myself seem to be having, as soon as i can verify my KR problems are gone (seems to simple tho lol) i will say reading about how the 02+ pcm ecu's work vs the 99 pcms i was hesitant to try w/o knowing more about the burst knock settings
i got to go to class again tomorrow and i'll try to get my charger fixed (i hope) and log some more data
-Erik
i wanted to stick with a 5.3 base kr setting to cause i know the sensors are for resonant vibration pulses and thats going to be at a different frequency in a different engine, so i stuck with the lm7 block the whole way
i think my charger died on me i was using it on a power inverter and the inverter still works
i had to use the charger to power it cause the internals of the battery wireing must be shot cause as soon as i plug in a new battery it frys it instantly
hopefully the laptop is still ok but i lost the 45 min of tune that i didnt have saved yet
my next project is to fix the cold cam missfireing problems more than myself seem to be having, as soon as i can verify my KR problems are gone (seems to simple tho lol) i will say reading about how the 02+ pcm ecu's work vs the 99 pcms i was hesitant to try w/o knowing more about the burst knock settings
i got to go to class again tomorrow and i'll try to get my charger fixed (i hope) and log some more data
-Erik
04-18-2007, 11:33 AM
#48
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Arizona Bay
Posts: 4,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How the hell did I miss this thread?!? I don't really have WOT KR issues, but then again I'm not real aggressive with my timing. I have however been chasing radom part throttle KR so I hope tis is the fix.
So has anybody taken Yelo's advice? If so, how did it turn out?
So has anybody taken Yelo's advice? If so, how did it turn out?
04-18-2007, 09:51 PM
#50
Former Moderator :(
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BOULEVARDS OF BOOST CALIFORNIA
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I talked to a intelligent life source at GM Hydomatic and he said the big problem with setting shift times quicker then 0.250 is that it has not had enough time to release the previous gear so its trying to go into 2nd when it is still in first and causes a internal bind that breaks things. Putting it in plain words the trans does not work well when it is in two gears at once. Also if you monitor commanded and actual shift time and they are not the same it means it is being overpowered and slipping. There is a timing table in the trans torque management that removes timing on the shifts, just keep taking timing out until the commanded and actual shift times are the same.