Cadillac Owners Forum banner
17K views 75 replies 15 participants last post by  AJxtcman 
#1 ·
I just found the missing link!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:D

So who want it?:D

Clarkz71 I have your your BMFX program. Thank for posting it

MED is was very easy to find!!!!!:D

About 20 minutes is all it took.

The BMFX is a leaded fuel program :D :D :yup:
 
#3 ·
I have all the programs and I think I have the libraries for it. MED stopped by today so I took a look at what I could find out on GM's side. I can down load all the files still from GM.
Some of the aftermarket programing program I have work with OBD I and MEMCAL's. Hmmmmmmmmm:D

I just have not seen the light.
I just don't think I should jump into a market that has programmers already.

MED talked me into looking at least. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm :D

I have everything and I can do a lot with them with no effort.
 
#6 ·
The leaded tunes are EXPORTS, but not all exports are leaded. They have a more aggressive tune to them.

I am at home so I can dig through all the old programs that I have.:thumbsup:


BTW ever seen a Northstar with a manual? Allante?
 
#7 ·
I will be building new spread sheet for the next few hours or days:bomb: just 93 to 95 and :banghead: all the broadcast codes first
 
#9 ·
DUMASS SO CAN I :rant2:

I HAVE ALL THE ODB I PROGRAMING SOFTWARE THAT ANYONE COULD EVER WANT:mad:

Dude I will show you what I showed MED today!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:yawn:

I even have all the old OBD I libraries!!!!!!!!!!!!:rant2:

All this old worthless junk I have disregarded because it has no place in 96+:rant2::rant2:

some days I feel like I need to :smack:

If I can make a few $ then :wtf:
 
#10 ·
OK I have some new pictures.

The first is a snapshot of a WOT from a dead stop with a stock DHS program
look at how much the PCM allows for max power/torque on this run



This WOT run is at a dead stop with a tuned PCM
99% torque Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm:rant2:
of course this is mine!!!!:rant2:
 
#12 ·
AJ,
In my testing of my 98 STS motor with 95 pcm, what I thought was 2nd gear starts was really the torque
management killing the power. It seems to be related to a timer off the brake circuit cause I can downshift
from 3/2/1 and then go wot WITHOUT touching brakes and I get a good launch but if you hold brakes and try to launch in either D or 1st, you get torque management and a poor, low power, launch.

If you can fix this, I will be your 1st customer and be very gratefull!!

frank
 
#16 ·
Hmmm! Ok so what kind of package could you put together?

Yeah! it cost money to play and if your the only one making go fast parts you can kinda set your own price because your not competing with any other company.

So It sound like your want to start a side biz. So like everone else you going to have to put Packages together. Dyno number and so on. There a nitch no one doing it yet. Keep it cheap and everyone will be buying. You will make all your money in the mass's. The guys that have car but not tons of cash.

So like I said the guy that has total performance package is going to be the man! chips, cams, performance goodies IE porting and the cool shiny stuff for the bling wow factor! and if you take it one more step and do body kits ground efects.

Just look at LMC or Yearone all the resto or custom part any one could ever want.

No one's doing Cadillac's:canttalk: Hmmm.

Craig
 
#17 ·
AJ:

I'd like to take a shot at your torque questions:

Q1: "If your PCM is limiting you to XXX ft lbs torque and you build the motor to make 5000 ft lbs how much torque will the PCM allow?" Ans. XXX ft lbs.

Q2:"If you make 100 hp at 2000 rpm and 275hp at 6000 stock Y engine SAE report
If I can make 130 to 150 hp at 2000 and 275 at 6000 does it make more power? Ans. Yes, because, over time (i.e., the rev band or power band) you make more power over stock because Torque = (HPx5252)/RPM. Low down at 2000 RPM you're making from 341 ft-lbs (@130 HP) to 394 ft-lbs (@150HP) compared to stock of 263 ft-lbs. At 6000 RPM both tuned and stock motors share 240.7 ft-lbs. A quick linear graph (attached below as: VIN Y motor (stock vs AJxtcman).gif) shows more torque over RPM (i.e., rev band or power band) for the tuned motor (please note: this graph is way over-simplified with no curves but proves the point nonetheless). For reference, a 1994 VIN Y puts out max 300 ft-lbs at 4400 RPM, which doesn't help the stock motor's situation when comparing it to the tuned motors.

Q3:"If you make 80hp @ 200 and 292 @ 6300 Stock 9 engine SAE report
If I make 130hp to 150 hp @ 2000 and 275hp @ 6300 does mine make less power?" Ans. I'm tired, but it looks like the same situation as Q2, AJ's tune wins the game by using the same old torque math equation above. For the stock "9" engine: 80HP@2000RPM = 210 lb-ft and 292HP@6300RPM = 243 lb-ft. For the AJ-tuned "9" engine: 130-150HP@2000RPM = 341-394 lb-ft, respectively and 275HP@6300 = 229 lb-ft. Who care's if torque is puking out at 229 vs the stock's 243 lb-ft, just grab another gear before 6300RPM and keep on flying using the AJ tune.

Q4:"If a quarter mile calculator says bert's aka Highline cady's DHS is producing 320HP out of a VIN Y 275 hp motor on my tune is it correct?" Ans. Yes, or at least pretty close. The torque math equation above tells us that if torque goes up under constant conditions such as same RPM engine, car tires, etc. than so does HP. Math is math and you can't beat it unless it's done wrong, in which case it's not math:annoyed: Basically, it's garbage in gets garbage out, but one can put stock in math if one takes the time using decent numbers under similar conditions. You and Bert have shown this by running undeniably faster times than stock using same car, same driver, same tires, same day, and same math/quarter mile calculator - so you must be making more power with your tune.

This is not an advertisement, I'm just an enthusiast -- so here's my questions

1) Why do we all sometimes fruitlessly waste our time asking ourselves: "WTF was GM thinking?" Maybe their just building cars to satisfy the majority of customers who might not all be "hard-core" power-addicted enthusiasts.

2) Do dyno numbers give the real numbers we're interested in? Half the graphs I see don't cross near 5252 RPM. Tires and drivetrain, no air resistance, torque control systems, etc can interfere with comparing one car to another when measuring from the wheel.

3) Can AJ get that torque delivered signal to 99% for our PCMs? This comes from Q1, all the extra mod Qs, etc. The N* may truly be a wicked enthusiast motor. The graph attached below as: AJ max torque signal.jpg

I'm not writing this stuff to be an ass or endorse product. I think enthusiasts should stick together instead of ripping each other apart. We're not really that big of a family and the market is limited. You'd be far richer tuning for a host of other vehicles - most of us need to keep our day jobs and remain enthusiasts doing it for fun and having fun along the way.
 

Attachments

#18 ·
I have 4 graphs 3 of them are SAE certified












So how does that 5250 thing work again?:bonkers: :hmm: ............ :histeric:
 
#19 ·
"So how does that 5250 thing work again?"

Just fine. The last graph crosses at 2125 RPM because Torque (lelft side) is 2x Hp (right side) on the y-axis of the graph. Torque = HP = ~410 for this motor at 5250 RPM so it's good SAE stuff - they got to get paid too. My fault though as I misrepresented the crossing idea.
Revised crossing idea designed to increase viewer confusion of how I interpret dyno graphs : the graph's Y axis units for HP and Torque must be demarcated the same and in units of Lb-ft and James Watt's definition of horsepower :bonkers:. Now I have to call my lawyer, because I'll be in trouble with everybody:shhh:.
 
#21 ·
That last chart has a BIG BLOWER on it. You need an engine hoist to remove it.:drool:

He has not.

So far only one of his customers has been on the dyno, and his PCM lost 30hp from the stock PCM.

Maybe it was faulty this, that or the other.... but until someone else goes on the dyno, we'll never know.
Eldo1 I had more than 1 customer go to the dyno. Read up.
 
#27 ·
Well......, we do know a stock 95 Y motor makes 230hp at the wheels and
with a fastchip it makes 245hp on the dyno.


The chip from fastchip added 15 hp to the wheels and removed my top speed limiter. He had it up to 149 in 3rd gear on the dyno. The horsepower went from 230-245 at the wheels and the torque was 260 on the last pull, I can't remember what it was on the first.
 
#28 · (Edited)
I want some more Numbers.

all the 93 to 99 cams wear!:mad2:

Most of the Exhaust Cams are BAD!:mad2:

This is a fact!:mad2: GM redesigned the engine to correct this in 00!:mad2:

This is not the thread to argue that point!!!!!!!!!!!

MED Stopped by and I showed him another worn cam and the inside of the valve cover! :banghead:The Metal from the cam spray coats the inside of the valve cover!:banghead: Again just facts!:banghead:

Not every engine will produce the same HP at 2000 rpm:blah: ......... :blah:
 
#35 ·
Stay tuned till tomorrow. :bouncy: Just got back from work and I'm off all day Saturday and should be back around 4pm at the latest from the yard.:thumbsup: I do agree with you and clarkz71 about putting the cam/lifter wear issue to another thread (good pics of it in the Fiero forum). Must go run errands now!
 
#40 ·
This is not a test dummy thing.

First GM produced this Magic program.

Second thing is that the Fiero guy's have been doing a lot with the 93 to 95 programs.

Third is I hate fiero's. :lies: Ok just don't like them. I drive caddy's all day long. The Fiero is a rattle toy.:bigroll:
 
#41 ·
AJ and all:

I just got back from the yard and picked up two 4.6L STS PCMs (BHMN and BMYH). I wrote down the VINs of both cars (I can PM them to you). Build dates of 11/93 and 06/95 on the door stickers. I picked up some other goodies, so my money be right.:yup: I stripped wood, radio, 4 sensors, but these PCMs took the longest to remove as I was on my back the whole time:drool:.
 
#49 ·
STSforfun says: "I assume your doing the dyno run to see what you gain in performance?"

I don't know. I wish AJ would chime in on this kind of stuff. I'm not exactly a dyno lover, but I am certainly interested and willing to learn. I thought taking it to the strip was the way to go, but everyone's all about dyno. This thread is cool as it deviates and then gets back on track.
That info from Clarkz71 was golden concerning the heater box/blower barrier thingie. It seems some underhood rubber and plastic parts have a harder time than others - I think it's caused by underhood heat also and it appears to be independent of climate. I'm sure those parts will be sought after as the years go by. Too bad they haven't been improved upon or some way found to protect them from going bad.
Anyway, I'm getting off track. Let's get the high drama of PCM tuning back in this thread.....AJ?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top