OVT vF Map Edit - Air Load Control (ALC)

Hey, Folks.

This thread is for the Air Load Control map edits. The map names have recently changed. They are noted below with this explanation from @OVTune :

With the @OVTune vF editing taking off, I finally took the plunge and started messing around with the tune.

The main vF thread is here for reference:
https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/vf-tuner-for-the-3-5l-tacoma.662948/
Starting details in this thread are posted there. The intent of this thread is for info, instructions, and discussion about this one map for tune editing.

Credit to @OVTune for getting this going. His post is here:

@OVTune also posted an 04B04 Example tune:

The 04B04 Stock and unedited OVT 2.0 maps are the same as 04B14.


Following those instructions, below are choices of V2, V3, and V4 map edits:


V4 - Credit @MOC221_ :

Only the Airload Control Maps were altered from the V3 maps:



1. I stole your smoothed airload maps from 'hatch's file (I believe they were V3?);
2. Highlight area from 45.833 to end of map on load axis, and from 300 to 1000 on RPM axis - increase area by 10%;
3. Highlight same area on load axis but from 1000-1600 on rpm axis - CTRL I this area; and
4. Highlight same area on load axis but from 300-2000 on rpm axis - CTRL I this area.

The reason I smoothed in two distinct steps was so that it could be replicated.

I then did the same thing for the .999 Airload Control Map (or you could just copy paste the whole thing from .821 to .999).
Expected airload was not altered.


V3 and V2:

See the attached spreadsheets for the V2 and V3 Air Load Control maps.

-- Map: Airload Control - Ignition Efficiency (was Control Airflow) Lambda 0.82.

V3 - Slightly Smoothed OVT 04B04 Example

Spoiler: Version 2 - minimal edits to the low side

Spoiler: Version 1 - Tip In issues:

-- Map: Airload Control - Ignition Efficiency (was Control Airflow) Lambda 0.99.

V3 - Same map as 0.82.

Spoiler: Version 2 - minimal edits to the low side

Spoiler: Version 1 - Tip In issues:

-- Map: Airload Control - Throttle Efficiency (was Expected Airflow) Lambda 0.82.

V3 - Slightly Smoothed OVT 04B04 Example

Spoiler: Version 2 - minimal edits to the low side

Spoiler: Version 1 - Tip In issues:

-- Map: Airload Control - Throttle Efficiency (was Expected Airflow) Lambda 0.99.

V3 - Same map as 0.82.

Spoiler: Version 2 - minimal edits to the low side

Spoiler: Version 1 - Tip In issues:

To make the V3 changes:

-- I just used the Average formula in Excel.
-- The changes are noted with formulas applied in the 04B04 spreadsheet.​

To make the V2 changes, it was a bit of trial and error:

-- Copy and Rename the Tune that you want to edit.
-- Open the Renamed Tune in vF with Unlock Credits
-- Find the Airload Control - Ignition Efficiency or Airload Control - Throttle Efficiency maps
-- With the mouse, highlight a small grid of values as shown in @OVTune 's post quote above.
-- Hit CTRL + I to smooth (interpolate) the highlighted area.
-- Like shingles, keep creating small grids overlapping the previously smoothed selections and hit CTRL + I.
-- Repeat this until you are happy with maps.

Myself, I smoothed all parts of all four maps as seen above.​

-- Be sure to do all four maps by changing the Lambda value at the bottom left.
-- Close each map and Save.
-- Close the Tune and Save.
-- Flash up and enjoy!​

vF Editing Functions:

-- As far as I know, there is no Undo / Redo function.
-- To effectively Undo, just Close the Map that you don't like and Do Not hit Save. You can then reopen the unedited map.
-- To cut and paste, Select the cells that you want and Right Click / Copy.
-- CTRL + X / C / V does not work at this time.
-- A Copied selection can be pasted into a spreadsheet for editing if you like and Pasted back into vF.​

For reference below are the Stock and the unedited 04B14 SFOB Prem maps:

Spoiler: Stock, same order:

Spoiler: Unedited 04B14, same order:

Post up any questions!

Have a good one.

 

Just want to mention for this step you can use the export button, then name that file what you want to work on.

Good write up and very helpful.

 

Thank you Tony!!

 

This is great! I was hoping someone would take the plunge and start modifying O4B14.

 

Yes! With so many folks overwriting the tunes, I feel that copying on the front end is less of a risk / worry.

 

You're welcome!

I am not the first. Just finally got around to it!

These edits would work for any ECU ID though. 04B04 folks are doing the same.

 

Nice job......

 

Thanks!

You will be able to hit this soon.

 

Sure hope so.....thanks

 

I went a bit further and altered/smoothed out the maps up to 3200 RPM (04B41 Prem SFOB). This is beyond the scope of Mat's original suggestion, just to be clear.
I was happy how his mod made the truck accelerate very smoothly and gave it more oomph down low.. but couldn't help but feel that some response was missing once you got to about 1500. Could be my imagination?
Anyway, I wanted to see if extending the modified area and creating a more flattened table with somewhat higher values would do..

So, here's what I did:

Control Airflow maps (.82 and .99 Lambda)

1. Highlight area from 600 to 1000 RPM on the vertical axis, and from 45.83% to the end of the map on the horizontal axis. Then hit * on numpad and enter 110 (increase all values by 10%);

2. Highlight area from 600 to 3200 RPM (and same horizontal range as above) and hit CTRL-I (smooth everything in that area).

Results:





On the Expected Airload tables, I changed the areas to increase by 10% slightly:

1. Highlight area from 1000 to 2000 RPM on the vertical axis, and from 45.83% to the end of the map on the horizontal axis. Then hit * on numpad and enter 110 (increase all values by 10%);

2. Highlight area from 600 to 3200 RPM (and same horizontal range as above) and hit CTRL-I (smooth everything in that area).

Results:





I have yet to flash this change, but will probably do so today.

Again, just experimenting with these maps.. not endorsed by Mat or Tony.

Have fun!

NOTE THAT THE RPM AXIS ON THE 3D MODEL DOES NOT ACCURATELY REFLECT THE VALUES ENTERED IN THE TABLES. I FOUND THAT VALUES ENTERED AT 2000 RPM FOR EXAMPLE, ARE SEEN AT ABOUT 3200 ON THE MODEL!

 

I endorse all tinkering!


Interesting. I suppose that I should clarify that I smoothed the entire map in each. The whole range but in little overlapping selections (shingles). That was outside of the bounds noted by Mat also.

 

We are both tinkering outside the box!

Wait...

 

Just as long as you eventually get it in the box, all is goood.

 

Lol..

My original intention with these maps was to try and get rid of that horrible dead fish response from off idle to around 1000 when under load, say taking off on a steepish incline for example.

That's why I made it a point to increase the values in that area, and THEN smooth (so that the whole area would be brought up in value instead of just smoothing with the surrounding cells).

 

Trying not to muddy it, but I half wonder if the big cliff / climb in the throttle map is not some part of this. I typically accelerate with a steady throttle, esp in the Taco. The RPMs humping up in those areas might be some of it? I meant to take a look at the Stock maps yesterday to see what the differences are to the unedited tunes.

I will update the 1st Posts with the Stock versions for clarity.

 

Yep, stock maps for clarity would be a good idea in the OP.

 

Thanks! Will do.

I thought about reserving the 2nd Post, but chose not to. Hahaha!

 

I will try to stay out of the tweeds here as I'm a newborn, but in layman's terms......

I have always accelerated quickly but steadily....
When shellshock flashed my Prem SFOB tune, acceleration seems to happen in "steps" until the 3k rpm range. Like a passenger would assume I'm pushing the go pedal a little more with each passing 1k rpm. Once it hits its happy place in the powerband she levels out and screams - is this what you're trying to alleviate with your tinkering Tony?

 

Yes. Smooth acceleration with no artificial torque limits. For whatever reason, Toyota artificially strangled the motor. This smoother bottom end, to me, seems better for the entire driveline. I don't get their motivations, esp with the better MPGs and OVT meeting EPA limits.

 

Good deal. That's my only "complaint"......which isn't the right word because the truck is night and day better after the flash.

Now I'll troll the thread until our Midwest OVT guru chimes in, for some reason I'm unable to tag Gerald from my phone

@Shellshock throwing up the bat signal!!!!

Edit: it worked, sweet