Computer Diagnostics and Tuning Technical discussion on diagnostics and programming of the F-body computers

Setting Closed Throttle Spark Advance?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 12, 2003 | 05:12 PM
  #1  
Mikey97Z's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 646
From: West Palm Beach, FL
Setting Closed Throttle Spark Advance?

I just installed a cam and my idle is pretty rough. I would like to know how to set the proper closed throttle spark advance. I found this info on an LT1-Edit FAQ:

Closed Throttle Spark Advance

This is the amount of advance when the TPS reads zero. This will have a large effect on idle quality, and may need to be changed with larger cams/increased idle rpm. A vacuum gauge can be used to help determine the proper setting for this, as it will have a direct correlation.


According to Datamaster, I have 60kpa at 875rpm idle (stock cam had 32kpa @ 800rpm). Should the timing be advanced or retarded now that there's less vacuum?
Old Feb 12, 2003 | 08:49 PM
  #2  
Dr.Mudge's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,148
From: Bay Area, CA
You should probably be able to get better than 60, but you would advance the low end until MAP ceases to improve. With a big cam, you advance down low, a little at a time, and in a balanced fashion. While cell to cell there is automatic balance (interpolation), too much variance will make the idle rougher as it bounces from cell to cell in the MAP range, and as you decellerate, etc.

Most of your time will be spent working low end timing, if you want perfection, possibly a good deal of time. By comparison, a short quote as best I recall "it took us 200 chips to make the car run well, and 400 to make it perfect." I really wanted to spend more time down low because I felt there was amazing power to be found, but I kept running into pinging on 91 octane MTBE gas. If you can find those sweet spots though and have everything balanced just right (you may well be doing 1 cell at a time, burning, then testing), then you could have an even more driveable car than before.

So, while a pretty good overall dyno tune will take 1-2 hours, real perfection takes engineers plenty of time to perform I'm sure, for all kinds of varying situations/conditions, plus those guys are pros, so to duplicate the feat will take plenty of work for a real hot car through all the rev range.

Good luck
Old Feb 13, 2003 | 02:44 PM
  #3  
SILVERZZ28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 448
From: DAPHNE,AL USA
So what kind of timing are you guys running down low???????
Old Feb 15, 2003 | 04:34 PM
  #4  
pkincy's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 113
From: Scottsdale, Arizona
The absolute timing others are running won't really help. Simply kick up the timing a degree or two at a time in the idle range....40-60 kPa and 800-1200 rpm.

I took a wild cammed 93 with DFI from a choppy 72 kPa idle to a smooth 50 kPa idle by adding about 4 degrees of timing in the idle range. Don't go all that way at once but try it one degree at a time.

perry
Old Feb 15, 2003 | 06:24 PM
  #5  
Dr.Mudge's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,148
From: Bay Area, CA
Unless someone has exactly the same cam as you, timing down low is going to be pretty individual, heads will play a role as well, so find someone with the same cam as you and look at thier timing. Try to use it as a baseline and then WORK with it from there.
Old Feb 16, 2003 | 06:42 PM
  #6  
max929's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 250
From: Homestead, FL
hmmmm

This maybe my problem.
I have pinging along with part throttle stumble and idle stumble.
I have a chip from PCMforless.
When I pulled the chip out the idle stumble was all but gone but the car running rich and blowing smoke, soon as I put the chip back in the smoke cleared up.
What suggestions do you guys suggest.
I have hotcam, slp midlength headers, ported head 2.00/1.60 int/exh valves.
Old Feb 16, 2003 | 08:07 PM
  #7  
Dr.Mudge's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,148
From: Bay Area, CA
Your going to need to fix the timing on your own, or try to log and send the logs to Brian so he can make the chip for you.
Old Feb 23, 2003 | 11:27 AM
  #8  
SILVERZZ28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 448
From: DAPHNE,AL USA
Originally posted by pkincy
The absolute timing others are running won't really help. Simply kick up the timing a degree or two at a time in the idle range....40-60 kPa and 800-1200 rpm.

I took a wild cammed 93 with DFI from a choppy 72 kPa idle to a smooth 50 kPa idle by adding about 4 degrees of timing in the idle range. Don't go all that way at once but try it one degree at a time.

perry
Ok My car idles around 67-80KPA. So your telling me that if I keep adding timing in the 40-60range it will bring the idle down into that range. Sorry for the dumb questions
Old Feb 23, 2003 | 03:04 PM
  #9  
pkincy's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 113
From: Scottsdale, Arizona
No such thing as a dumb question.

Yes you need to add timing.....I think.

The "I think" is due to the WAY high idle kPa you have. Make certain we aren't trying to tune around a vacuum leak.

But yes. Add timing a degree or two at a time in the base spark table for 800 and 1000 and 1200 rpm and around the 50 kPa value up to the 80 kPa value.

So if you are at 18 or 20 or 22 change all the values to 20, 22, and 24. And than relog and let us know where you are on idle now.

Hopefully that will pull your idle kPa down to 50-60 kPa.

Perry
Old Feb 23, 2003 | 08:14 PM
  #10  
Dr.Mudge's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,148
From: Bay Area, CA
With a cam like that, you should eventually see somewhere around 45-55 kPa is my guess. Anything close to 80 is ridiculous, that would be a huge cam, if tuned right.

Dont add to much timing at once, and dont leave your tables very unbalanced, as the car bounces from one MAP point to another, erratic timing will cause an even worse idle.

Good luck!
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
HectorM52
Parts For Sale
26
Jul 30, 2017 11:46 AM
dbusch22
Forced Induction
6
Oct 31, 2016 11:09 AM
armedtrigger
LT1 Based Engine Tech
10
Feb 24, 2015 08:30 PM
edman
General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech
3
Jan 25, 2015 02:41 PM
FIREBIRDMARK1
LT1 Based Engine Tech
2
Jan 7, 2015 03:36 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:59 PM.