First thanks for all of the input! I was thinking I was nuts...

I'm looking forward to using the Torque app to gat a lot more insight into what's happening with my truck and maybe someday will even graduate to AE.

To confirm, yes the readings were KOEO with the plug connected to the sensor. I'll try that equation and see how it reads.

The good news is that the truck feels like it's running strong again after the replacement of the EBP tube and the TPS. I'm going to give the 5th wheel a tug this weekend just to test it under load. Last time I towed it felt very sluggish.

Thanks again!
Wink

 

Dragging this post out of the weeds because I think I have some new info that may make a difference.

I had shown that I tested my buddies EBP in his truck, after we talked I believe that the tests were all done in mine. So I had results (in my truck) for his OEM, my OEM, and 2 Borg Warner after markets. All read from 14.2 to 14.5. MAP was consistent at 11.5 and BARO is within .2 of that. So the EBP is +3 and out of the range considered normal. How big of and impact to fueling or shifting could be caused by this?

This weekend I used Torque to read codes on a guys truck and also looked at his EBP and MAP numbers and they were within .3 of each other. So I know the calculation is working. That got me to thinking and I that I had tested all the sensors in my truck.


Some observations / symptoms:

• I have been chasing a general lack of power especially under load.
• While under load I have seen turbo flutter becoming worse making towing in Colorado nearly useless and very frustrating.
• When I floor it under load (or empty) I get little to no smoke
• The EBP sensor issue (new tube, pigtail and sensor)
• My Torque boost reading on TP is -3.0 to -3.5 at KOEO and max is 13.2 at WOT (mechanical gauge "T"d into MAP line is reading 17 at WOT)
• Getting the tranny to downshift is not effective, it will but I need to let off the throttle 2x and floor it to get the downshift

So is the EBP sensor reading so out of whack that the truck is not calling for enough fuel? Or do I have a boost leak that the turbo can't do what it needs so there is defuel situation?
As I understand it the PCM reads the sensors and adjusts accordingly... so do I have an issue with my PCM?

I have checked/done recently:
Pressure tested for boost leaks test ok
No soot at the up pipes
Fuel filter less than 3k ago
New throttle position sensor
new 6637 air filter
added 6.0 liter cooler and replaced trans cooler crossover valve

I have a TP log from towing this weekend if that would be of any help?

Thanks,
Wink

 

What formula in Torque are you using for boost? It should read zero with KOEO.

 

(((A*256)+B)*0.03625)-BARO()

I have left the () blank, used (-11.6) or (11.6) and have always gotten the same # -3 to -3.5

 

Until your MAP and EBP reads zero at KOEO, we're all in the tall weeds. MAP, EBP and/or PCM... something's not right. 11.6 is the PSI at your altitude?

 

If you have the torque scan plugin installed, open it up while you're connected to the PCM and scroll down the list until you see Barometric Pressure (From Vehicle). There should be a number in square brackets listed, probably [33]. If you get a reading under it, edit the formula to use the bracketed number instead of BARO(). So if it's [33], the formula would be:
(((A*256)+B)*0.03625)-[33]

Before you save it, scroll down to the test button and see if it works. Also while you're in torque scan, look at the reading you're getting for Barometer (on Android device) and convert that value from millibar to inches of mercury to see if it's accurate. It's my understanding that when BARO() is used in a formula, it refers to the pressure read by the android device rather than the PCM. If the device doesn't have a barometric pressure sensor, it may default to a standard sea level reading. If that's the case, it probably explains the negative boost number.

 

Tugly-
Yes 11.6ish is right there for Denver.

Pikachu-
Installed plugin, got no reading from vehicle and device is not equipped with barometric sensor. I did get a custom pid from another post that returns a value of 11.82. When I try that (11.82) the test returns a dialog box that has a triangle with an ! and "result for equation -2.96375" along with a Command: 221440 and Response 6214400141. Also tried 14.82 to offset the -2.96 but no change to the reading.

 

I've been meaning to work out how to use the value from the baro sensor on the vehicle in the boost formula anyhow. I guess now I have an excuse to try a few things and maybe get it to work

What's the custom PID and formula you used that returned the 11.82 result?

 

From the torque pork thread.
This formula shows right on from what it seems.

05-31-2014 09:01 PM by djed
Is the following appropriate for BARO:

Mode/PID: 221442
Long name:BARO
Short name: BARO
Min value: 0
Max value: 20
Scale: x1
Unit: psi
Equation: ((A*256)+B)/4.01463133)*0.145038
Header: C410F1

 

Same one I'm using. I'll poke around a little bit and see if I can figure it out.

 

Is it possible that whatever has my EBP 14.2 and MAP 11.5 skewed (2.7) also has the boost out of whack by a similar margin (3.0)?

Another sensor wouldn't cause this to happen? Is it even feasible that the PCM could be having issues. They can be re-flashed can't they?

 

The boost reading, I'm pretty much convinced, is due to the lack of a barometric pressure sensor on the device. The EBP variance, I'm not sure what to think about that one yet.

 

I just went out an plugged in (((A*256)+B)*0.03625)-[221442] for the boost equation, and it seems to work fine for me. Give it a shot and see if your KOEO boost number comes down to zero.

 

That works great. Boost now reads -.2 ! Thanks for the help on that calculation!

 

You're welcome. I'm glad it worked for you.