Tacoma - OVTUNE - VFTUNER - Update Info and Original Development

Dude under normal acceleration the trans shifts between 2K and 2.5K RPMs why would you want 5th and 6th to be any different?

 

1.05 dongle software for M/T too?

 

Soon

 

After coffee?

 

It's good practice to run a tank of 91 first, then flash. However, you can get by with running the tank low, and then filling the tank with 93. If you run the 91 tune with less than 91 octane fuel, you will end up with engine knock which is very hard on the pistons. The ECU can compensate to a degree and retard timing, but that is only after it has sensed knock.

 

Too bad I'm in Ca and don't have access to 93. I guess I'll fill it up with 91 and flash it with the 87 tune for now.

 

This. S-mode + 1.04 feels almost like a normal vehicle.

70 feels like a pretty high number in 4th but I get where you’re coming from.

Dealer loaned me a Prius while they fixed some wiring on my taco. Prius had WAY more giddyup especially stop & go city driving. Wish there was a way to tune around that big soft spot 1-2k where there is so much pedal travel and... no response.

Fingers crossed 1.05 gets even better.

 

Don't forget that the Prius is a lot lighter than the Tacoma...you're comparing apples to oranges there. But there are definitely some instances where the pedal takes more push to get the same felt response.

 

The Prius has an electric motor to assist in getting up to speed.... don't compare it with a truck lol

 

shift points during acceleration and cruising rpm's are two different things and should be treated as such.

 

The ecu cannot distinguish cruising from acceleration, so tuning it has been tricky to get perfected.

The ecu uses desired torque to determine how and when to shift, based on certain criteria in the shift maps. Part of why the auto is levels of complexity above the manual. Nearly everything engine related is married to the transmission, if you want the engine to do...anything at all you must make the transmission match it. Desire more torque? Now it shifts like crap and locks the TC too soon because the calculation is too far off. Desire too little on transmission? Shifts are soft and sloppy. Crank up transmission expected torque, it will shift to 6th gear right out of idle

Desired torque is calculated almost solely on what the drivers foot is doing.

There is a massive improvement on 1.05 because rather than just changing shift maps, 1.05 changes how torque is calculated.

Cruise control though is still a work in progress, seems to use its own torque and shift routines.

 

Im soooooooo happy you are looking at CC! For me, and many others, its the last thing keeping the truck from driving great.

To get to all the fun places the taco's can get to usually requires a 6+ hour drive across boring Texas. Ive spent so much time driving into and out of Texas its just silly. In that time ive figured that CC is equivalent to a terrible driver. One who can basically only feather the throttle super lightly or floor it causing 2 downshifts and sometimes ends up in 3rd.

Literally *anything* you do to it will make it better

Edit: CC gets about 2MPG less for me as compared to my right foot. That 2MPG over a 700-1200 mile interstate trip adds up for sure.

 

Yes, I know.

I'm just referring to folks thinking that because a vehicle shifts at say 3k rpm at 10% throttle that once up to speed, it's ok to hold a gear at that same rpm for cruising. Mileage would just go to crap.

 

Right this is really not ideal. The expectation with 1.05 is that under normal, light driving the truck will use whichever gear is necessary based on speed and rpm will likely be under or around 2000 rpm. Moderate throttle / heavy throttle will be quite different.

Summer last year I tested a version of the tune that locks the TC nearly immediate on all gears. The response was horrible but mpg was awesome. I mentioned it many pages back nobody would like it so it was shelved. One of the reasons too is that with the TC locked on decel it did create that engine braking effect people wanted but made the truck feel very heavy and rigid.

 

Yeah, like OVTune said, it seems to use completely different tables to determine when to shift based on load and rpm. Since the driver isn't controlling the throttle, all it has is the desired speed. So say 65mph, it will (i'm assuming here) base torque demand on what's needed to keep that speed. I just wish it would use a greater throttle percentage vs immediately down shifting to based on the requested torque needed to hold that speed.

My 4 hour trip towing a 3k lb enclosed trailer on flat roads netted me 12mpg with 1.04 91. Yes i used CC because i couldn't maintain 65 in S5 (ECT ON). It either upshifted to 5th, couldn't maintain so i kept dipping into the throttle which due to the load, required x amount of torque, so it down shifted to 4th and once up to speed, i backed off the throttle starting the whole cycle over again. I have no idea how the truck would handle this stock so no complaints, just what i experienced.

So i just stuck it in S5 with ECT On and set the cruise to 65. Truck kept it in 4th even on flat roads but it didn't have the issue maintaining like i did. Down hill it would go to 5th, then back to 4th on flat and mild hills. Any significant hill was 3rd.

I really don't know what if anything could fix this besides regearing. Truck just doesn't have the torque.

 

Im stoked the 4.88 gears are sitting in the garage waiting to be installed. Should change my heavy truck dramatically.

 

Well in about 2 weeks I'm tow testing 1.05 towing my 370z 2000 miles. I'll make sure to gather as much CC data as possible.

 

That sounds very interesting. People don't seem to understand that an unlocked converter sucks down mileage while an aggressive locking just makes it numb but since it's locked, less energy is wasted, hence better mpg's.

Is there a middle ground that can be reached with this?

The locking TC on decel thing sounds interesting as well.

 

Locking TC on decel makes the truck feel like it weighs 10,000 lbs it's horrible

 

I'm jelly. I just am on the fence if 4.88's with stock tires would be too aggressive for my needs. I just don't know.