Tacoma - OVTUNE - VFTUNER - Update Info and Original Development

Are you running 87 octane or 91 on the 1.05 87 tune? I ran 87 octane on 1.04 87 tune and performance and mileage were fine, even with towing. Switch to 91 octane on the 1.04 87 tune preparing for 1.05 release. Running 91 octane on 1.05 91 tune now. Going to flash 1.05 87 tune on the remainder of the tank and top off with 87 octane and see what happens. Really think I will continue to run a blend of 87 and 91 in the tank on the 1.05 87 tune.

 

currently running the remaining 92 octane on the 87 tune. will go to 89 octane next refill. I didn't like the 91 tune, I was giving way too much gas pedal to keep up in traffic. not experiencing this with 87

 

If anyone who is having issues with their 91 octane tune :
1. Submit a ticket and let us know your ECU ID, so I can look into which ECU IDs might have some issue between the files.

We will only get back to people by tickets. Not on here.

 

There's a link to it on here, I'm sure someone is going to beat me to it. If not, I'll get it for u.

Edit: @20tacoma17 Here you go:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wCb1pU29yOgp9qlPwrKgqROwPGqj-VBu/view

I only know where to find it, I had nothing to do with making it available.

 

yeah, looks like the one code is injection related and the other isn't present in the service manual, but seems the P014-range of codes is all related to O2 sensor feedback...

 

@DCSBMurph
Did you maybe get E85 by accident?
A quick google search found ths (disable your ad blocker):

https://www.toyoheadquarters.com/th...nder-with-2gr-fks-codes-p017100-p017400.1061/

 

I gave the 1.05 87 tune a try today after 250 miles on the 91 tune. Initial impressions are, that first, the 87 tune drove nice, no issues in shifting or idle etc, MPG was about 20 with a combo of in town and highway. I can say I felt a noticeable difference in performance, not huge, but you can feel it. 91 definitely make the truck feel a little lighter with a bit more zip in the performance. I'll give the 87 tune more miles to settle in and decide which I like best.

 

What octane did you have in the tank?

 

P0174.... wow dunno how I screwed that one up. And I dont know of any e85 around me. Only go to shell and have only been using 93 for the past few tanks.

 

I usually use 89 and on 1.03 and 1.04 I only used the 87 tune, I decided to give 91 a try on 1.05 and so I've been running Costco 91. I have about half a tank of that left and then will fill it with 89 and see how it performs.

 

That almost sounds like a fuel pump issue...? In-tank fuel filter? I don't think we have a fuel filter outside the tank.

 

This intake uses a dry filter. Havent used an oiled filter on my last few vehicles

 

Well, after reading through the diagnostic procedure for those codes you get to a point where active tests can be done with techstream to see if the system remains lean in real time. If after forcing the use of direct injection and then Port injection, and the system is still lean on both, this is next:



Keep in mind that one of the first things Mat did long ago was to lean this sucker out. Perhaps that IN ADDITION to your CAI is causing the codes to be set. Just a guess...

 

@OVTune, no problem with 87. When in town, drinks on me...

 

With all the talk of trying 1.05 87 (vs. 91), I thought i would give it a try - I was on 1.05 91, flashed to 1.05 87, started it up, let it idle 10 mins, backed out of garage, all good, no idle surge or fluctuations, drove the same as 1.05 91, i couldn't feel any difference in anything to be honest, but i currently still have 1/2 tank of 91 gas. I will run the 91 out, put in 87 and give it some time to settle in and report back (oh, i may not be a good tester, I am one of those who likes to drive using only the first 1/4 range of the accelerator)

 

That sounds like a solid plan. It would seem that people are not giving enough time on the tune for it to settle. It would reason if Toyota says to wait 500 miles before towing on a new truck for the engine to break in, allowing some time for a tune to do the same, is reasonable.

As mentioned many times, these motors like to be driven seemingly harder, as they appear happier with slightly higher rpm's. I know when I shift at 3k, rathen then about 2.5k, it's drives better over all. Don't ask me how this is, but it does.

Seems some if you hit the skinny pedal a little harder, the truck response better. Just my observation

 

AT fix has taken a lot longer than expected. As long as there are no major issues, swap to MT and release that tune. It’s and an easier tune to release than the AT.

 

My quick impression of 1.05 93.

My truck is a stock 2017 4x4 limited (see signature). I had been on 1.04r 91 since August (thanks Mat) which worked perfect for me especially when driven on ECT PWR. Uploaded 1.05 93 (12/29/18 release, 1st and only 1.05 v I’ve tried) and have been driving with it since. I have had no idle issues and shifts are spot on for normal type driving. As others have reported, the shifts are easy to manipulate with the accelerator pedal. With ECT PWR it is perfect for me again. I have run at least 700 miles so far and I am very pleased with it. If this was Mat’s last version for me I would be content.

Rey

 

You are fine to run 85 at elevation with the 87 tune.

What’s not ok is to load the 91 tune and run 87 or 85.