03/04 Smarty Engine Load %

C

cj42

New England Texan
Joined
Mar 8, 2011
Messages
368
I'm hoping Brian can chime in on this but I have seen a number of post on other forums and here with early 3rd gen's not being able to get over 68% engine load using Smarty and Smarty UDC. I'm hoping we can get feed back from Smarty on what the issue is. I'm flat on my top end power and cannot get smoke or egt's above 1250 at WOT using UDC. It almost feels like its defueling. I blocked off my waste gate and I will get to44# of boost in about a second and just stop pulling. Already checked PRV, CP3, Pusher pump etc. I do not want to replace my injectors to find out that is not the problem. If run UDC on a 05 you will see 100% engine load on UG. So its not the gauge.
 
I got a ug about a month ago as I knew I was going with udc.
I did not have a smarty.
On my 03 I tried the iquad. Edge ez and stock. With all i could very easily get 100% load. ( I have a welsing truck) today I got a smarty and the udc dongle.
With the smarty set on 7 tm2 every thing else default I can not get more than 63.8% load.
 
I noticed this too. I also noticed that my rail pressure does not follow engine load at all on my modis. But if I subsitute tps for load when looking at my udc graphs it is right. I need to use the lab scope & see if it is doing what it says, just have not had the time & its cold outside.
 
The 2003-2004 ECM's do calculate the "real time" torque based upon a map in the software which is at the same time, a limiter. Marco HAS to raise that limiter in order to get any decent power out of it. Downside is that the ECM now calculates a lower torque than what it is in reality. IT IS ONLY THE CALCULATION FOR THE TEST EQUIPMENT! that's off.

If cj42 can't get anything more that 1200°F then he's not getting enough fuel into the cylinders, for whatever reason that may be.
 
So to make it clear 68% max engine load is normal for the 03's so we shouldn't worry about it correct? Just kind of sucks when trying to fine tune UDC maps.
 
Brian once it gets warmer and dryer up here in the north east I will be raising my duration up from 3200us to 3500us in my 2800-3400rpm range (70%-100% eng load) to hopefully see some smoke and heat. If that does not do anything then there is definitely something wrong.
 
On my 01/03 build date CR:

Did a WFO run uphill never got over 68% load. Went all the way to 110 so should have been plenty of time to increase.

Brain@Smarty I think you said that the load gauge is reading a dummy number right?

So how does this effect tuning? As in at cruise a run at say 12.7% load 12.6/18.8% load range at 1600 rpm which is 3.2* of timing. Or is the the cell with 18.9/25% load and 3.0* of timing?

If I see 12.7% on my gauge what does it correlate with on the maps?

Thanks
 
That's the problem I see for the 03's. Trying to fine tune or trying to do a very focused tune change. Engine load it's not accurate.
 
estrada5.9 said:
On my 01/03 build date CR:

Did a WFO run uphill never got over 68% load. Went all the way to 110 so should have been plenty of time to increase.

Brain@Smarty I think you said that the load gauge is reading a dummy number right?

So how does this effect tuning? As in at cruise a run at say 12.7% load 12.6/18.8% load range at 1600 rpm which is 3.2* of timing. Or is the the cell with 18.9/25% load and 3.0* of timing?

If I see 12.7% on my gauge what does it correlate with on the maps?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Gentlemen,

I quized Marco again on this.

This does NOT affect the tuning. If 68% is the max # the gauge shows then that means that 68 in reality is = 100%. It's JUST the number that shows on gauge!
Not much Marco can do there! If he doesn't alter the limiter the ECM uses for the load calculation we'll not make any serious power. If he alters it then the reading is off...
What do we want? Power or correct readings? We all know the answer to that question.

Thank you!
 
so you still tune the tables all the way out to 100 % load and they are used, we should not tune just to 68% correct? trying to eliminate confusion.
 
Brian - Why know issues with the 06's? ECM?
I agree with we all want power over an accurate Eng load gage. I guess the question is when tuning is 34% eng load really 50% on the chart? So when I'm cruising at 73 mph and my engine load is showing 17% is that really 25%? I think as long as we know that is the case then we can work around it pretty easily.
 
I could've sworn that I tried dropping rp after 70% to see if it follows the map or it stops at the highest load %. As I remember, it followed the map and dropped rp after passed the max load the gauge was reading. I'll try it again this weekend when I get the truck out of the shop to verify.
 
cj42 said:
Brian - Why know issues with the 06's? ECM?
I agree with we all want power over an accurate Eng load gage. I guess the question is when tuning is 34% eng load really 50% on the chart? So when I'm cruising at 73 mph and my engine load is showing 17% is that really 25%? I think as long as we know that is the case then we can work around it pretty easily.
Click to expand...

You are right on with that CJ.
 
So what happens when the 0-68% load falls in two 0-100% cells?

Average of the two?
 
This shouldn't effect how you program UDC . It only effects you when you are driving and using you engine load % gage. When you are trying to identify where you would like to make a change. So if your UG gage its showing 17% and you want to add more timing in this area you would adjust it in the 25% area of you're table.
 
Nothing to add, just want this thread in my replies for reference. Thanks!
 
UG Cheat Sheet

This is just a quick sheet to look at when you are trying to figure out what location you want to alter.
 

Attachments

  • 68_GAGE.jpg
    68_GAGE.jpg
    45.1 KB · Views: 0
Ah that makes sense.

My brain was stuck on less adjustment due to the scale but your right does not change anything.
 
Has anyone tried using John's calculator for the 03's? I'm curious on what changes you may have made if any in the 1400-2000RPM range at 40%-80% engine load area. The smarty sample have a much steep rise in timing compared to using the calculator.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top