Quote:
Originally Posted by GregWeld
Jody --
I was trying to get him to understand the VE --- get that close --- then leave that alone and fatten up the A/F... figuring that going from 14.3 to say 13.8 wouldn't "disrupt" the VE much.
I personally like to not make too many changes in too many tables - when trying to sort out a problem. Since he's happy with the tune - except just this one area he described... I was kind of thinking that if his VE is okay - then he could just change the one table (A/F) and see if that's the issue (a lean miss?).
Rather than messing up the VE table AND the A/F table too... if you get my reasoning?
I agree - that if - lets say he fattened the A/F to some point - and the miss went away... then he could go back and make sure his VE was accurate?
I might be wrong here - so I'm glad you chimed in.
I actually like working in my A/F tables and VE tables with the O2 in open loop... and when I'm seeing A/F's that match my desired A/F's with no correction - then I switch it back to closed loop... but I didn't want to complicate matter for him either.
|
you're right, assuming he has enough correction set up in the software he could simply adjust the a/f and let the competer adjust the ve to get there and see if it solves his issue.
Jody