2016 OVTune Tacoma 3.5L Manual Transmission / Engine ECU Reflash

What do you all you Otto guys think is going to happen? And why?

Matt already tuned for maximum (safe) power. He is not going to touch that with Otto only. It's only going to burn more gas when your foot isn't on the floor.

The only possible benefit I see is a quicker transition from low output to high; but, how much faster could it be? Has anyone seen how long it takes for the VVT to go from one extreme to the other? I'm curious. Techstream log?

 

Your right, I need to open my mind. If he comes up with a tune I'd be willing to give it a try.

On a side note, I'm back on the 104 with no surging issues in 1st and 2nd. It seems that I had a bad write to the ECM when I first loaded the 104. I used a different laptop and this time no issues.

 

What I believe is a full Otto tune is the only way to successfully put a supercharger or turbo on these trucks and have it work. I base that belief off of the idea that the Atkinson cycle cracks open the intake valves on the compression stroke which would pretty much make any forced induction impossible. The only way to get rid of the intake valve opening is to get rid of the Atkinson cycle, from what I understand. Matt said he would go into full detail eventually, just don't know when

 

Well we won't know until he tries it, right? We've seen countless times already that shit doesn't always work out as expected when tuning this engine.

We can theorize all we want, but until the code hits our ECUs it's all just bench racing.

I for one already know an OTTO file is not about more safe power - the engine is already in OTTO mode at peak output. I also know it'll burn more gas.

Low end response and yes, elimination of transition is what I'm curious about. Oh and engine braking too.


I just don't get all the hate lol. Why aren't some of you curious? Don't think it'll do much of anything? Meh - then don't bother running it right?

Anyway, it's just a side project

 

Some of us feel that there is still more work to be done after the 104. I believe Matt said this as well. If he starts spending his very limited time creating a Otto only tune and all the Otto tune improvements after, it will mean a longer wait for tunes after 104. We're already second in line to the alpha group.

 

I’m down for trying anything. Never know what to expect with this platform it seems.

 

He’s gonna have a lot more time once he’s back from overseas and gets the shop move finished. That’s sucked up a ton of time lately.

 

That's exactly it, there's still something holding this engine back and making it extremely laggy/slow to rev, maybe that extra transition time from being in "Atkinson" when you're not on the throttle to switching to "Otto" when you give it the beans is what's causing it to be so slow? And maybe it's not, maybe it's something else, all we know is there's still something causing very sub-par performance regarding throttle response compared to any other reasonable vehicle.

And some of us feel that those improvements that are still needed beyond 1.04 are to get rid of or at least drastically tone down the Atkinson simulation. Some of us feel that getting rid of Atkinson might help this engine finally spin up more freely and get rid of the awful throttle response which incidentally is what started the demand for this whole tune in the first place. I'm not going to say that's for sure what the issue is but some of us are interested enough in that being the case that we think it's worth a shot.

 

Seeing as how the Sienna, Highlander, Camry, LC500, etc. have 'Atkinson' VVT and everyone asks why the Taco can't be more like them; I don't see how anyone can think Otto only is going to change that. Especially, since Matt expanded 'Atkinson' in the tune while making more power and improving response. Does it really take more than a couple tenths of second for the VVT to change? Wasn't there an early shuttering issue that Matt said was the VVT going back and forth (i.e. multiple times per second)?

Maybe I could see engine braking being affected. If you are interested, do a TS log to see what the cam angle is while you're trying to engine brake. Is it in the 'Atkinson' zone? No? Bummer. Yes? Let's see if Matt can address this specific issue instead of remapping all the VVT tables.

Come on, I thought this was the manual thread with all the TS logging go-getters; not the alpha/auto whiners thread who think a clutch is a purse.

 

When I have some free time I plan to explain in depth how the atkinson cycle and the cams work in this engine (and most others). I can tell you like I said before, otto only is not the answer

 

TROLOLOLOLOLOL!

Git back to the alpha shitshow, you auto tranny whiner/purse holder!

 

So you're saying you're not going to do it then? If so, no problems.

After @Ruggybuggy gets his update to 1.04 , can we talk about more dyno testing and some longer term dev on a M/T please?

 

The stuff that gets posted here..... This is so wrong its not even funny. Google Miller Cycle Engine, if you are too lazy to research its in short an Atkinson cycle engine with a supercharger, it allows you to delay closing of the intake valves but uses a supercharger to keep the fuel and air in the cylinder. It also provides much lower charge temperatures which allows more aggressive timing. The issue is that turbos are not very good for a miller cycle engine since they lag, superchargers are typically used as instant boost is required to get this effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_cycle

 

I never said that I was correct or that I knew what I was talking about. Please stop being an ass

 

Stop posting nonsense on the forum which then causes Mat to get 91000 notifications about something that you know nothing about.

 

So if I'm hearing you correctly, what you're saying is:

 

If this guy gets the infinity gauntlet.. well, it's all over.

 

LMAO

 

Let's make this a discussion instead of an argument. According to the Wikipedia article you linked, the Miller cycle can only handle so much boost and it is not the same as an Atkinson cycle since their valve timing and valve controls are handled differently. We would be best off making the engine a full Miller cycle, correct? So we can get at least some boost off of forced induction.

 

Man o man, you are missing the point entirely.

This truck doesn't use a true Atkinson cycle, it just holds the valves open a little longer to simulate one. It does this only at low load.

Boost only comes on mid to high load. Controlled by clutch on a supercharger, or by wastegate etc, it would never interact with the Atkinson cycle.

The point is moot, but of course you can boost this engine, or any other Atkinson cycle engine. Why the hell not? Instead of 14psi ambient pressure, go for a bar of boost, and call it 28. The cylinder fills, pushes some air back out, but is still starting off with a bar of boost when the valves decide to close. What is so hard to imagine about that? Are you wondering where that boost goes that got "pushed out"? Into another $&%@ing cylinder!