** ECM TRUNK FUSE PULL ** - Page 3 - Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums

IndeedSS1 · 10-23-2012, 10:50 AM

Tank is very low so I'll have to fill up with 87 on my way home this evening.

IndeedSS1 · 10-23-2012, 06:41 PM

Tank was almost empty when I pulled up to the Shell station. As I was about to select 87 my stomach got a bit queasy and I almost backed out. My last car required 93 octane too and I put 96k miles on it, so it isn't natural for me to choose 87

.

Anyway, I'll drive the 60 miles round trip to work and back tomorrow and scan on Thursday's trip. I figure by the time the weekend is over I'll be back on 93 and we can see what those scans look like.

hapisok · 10-24-2012, 03:15 AM

very brave of you...

that is the one thing i am absolutely NOT looking forward to doing

can't wait to see your results...

IndeedSS1 · 10-24-2012, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hapisok

very brave of you...

that is the one thing i am absolutely NOT looking forward to doing

can't wait to see your results...

I decided to scan today as well to see if there is an amount of transitioning between the 93 in the lines already and as is initially mixes with the 87. Right at about 24 miles, an unplanned event caused me to have to make a spirited manuever that wound up going on for about 3/4 of a mile

Any drop in timing hasn't been detected by me...nor the Hemi that created the opportunity

IndeedSS1 · 10-24-2012, 07:39 PM

Pictured is after about 60 miles with the 87 octane. Hopefully tomorrow will give a better comparison to the 93 tables as the trip should be very similar. That said you can see the difference already, although I'm not feeling it much if any.

hapisok · 10-25-2012, 03:03 AM

as expected. what will be interesting is if those tables auto-correct with 93 or if they keep the same values locked in after the switch.

IndeedSS1 · 10-25-2012, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hapisok

as expected. what will be interesting is if those tables auto-correct with 93 or if they keep the same values locked in after the switch.

I had assumed the point it would lock was in cells where 1.00 KLF was achieved. But it appears that may never happen since the highest is only about 34% of that. I had heard that that stock timing was too high in certain places (cruise range) and I'm beginning to believe that may actually be the case.

While I'd like to see what the numbers look like at WOT at the very top, based on the numbers so far I'm not willing to go there for this experiment. I have about a half tank of gas left, so unles the numbers change drastically,over the next couple of days, this will be the final 87 octane scans posted.

hapisok · 10-25-2012, 09:02 AM

there is a good amount of timing being pulled up high...dang 87!

IndeedSS1 · 10-25-2012, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hapisok

there is a good amount of timing being pulled up high...dang 87!

I'm a bit nervous about this, because there are times, when opportunity knocks, that I will start to open it up, then remember 87 is in there, and have to back it down for engine health reasons

. There is no way I'll run 87 again and am going to have to be careful for the next couple of days.

Pace · 10-25-2012, 10:52 AM

I appreciate what you are doing man!

hapisok · 10-25-2012, 11:34 AM

i don't think there are is anything to worry about. there are quite a few nanny's built in that pull timing prematurely to keep things safe. if you don't do it...i'll be doing here shortly. the only thing you'll notice is that it doesn't have the same performance that your use to.

IndeedSS1 · 10-25-2012, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hapisok

i don't think there are is anything to worry about. there are quite a few nanny's built in that pull timing prematurely to keep things safe. if you don't do it...i'll be doing here shortly. the only thing you'll notice is that it doesn't have the same performance that your use to.

Interesting thing about the nanny's it that the knock happens first even though after a while it is predicted but it's the initial hits before that worries me. But I come from supercharged V6's where knock would chip pistons. Low to mid performance is still there if not a little better although I didn't expect that. While surprising, kind of follows what some have said about too much timing from the factory. I can't verify any of this yet, but once this test is over, I may play with with the timing in certain spots. Would be best to do on a dyno, but I'm not up for spending the money to do so.

IndeedSS1 · 10-25-2012, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pace

I appreciate what you are doing man!

Thanks. It isn't much and certainly not a very controlled test. My curiousity drove me to check it out.

OrngCrush · 10-25-2012, 02:09 PM

I'd be curious to see if the system resets itself to the 93 octane fuel settings without a fuse pull. Always wondered if the fuse pull was really needed. Appreciate your efforts here.

10-23-2012, 10:50 AM	#29
IndeedSS1 Drives: 2010 Camaro SS LS3 Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Eastern MO Posts: 3,786	Tank is very low so I'll have to fill up with 87 on my way home this evening. __________________ She is only memory now.

10-23-2012, 06:41 PM	#30
IndeedSS1 Drives: 2010 Camaro SS LS3 Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Eastern MO Posts: 3,786	Tank was almost empty when I pulled up to the Shell station. As I was about to select 87 my stomach got a bit queasy and I almost backed out. My last car required 93 octane too and I put 96k miles on it, so it isn't natural for me to choose 87. Anyway, I'll drive the 60 miles round trip to work and back tomorrow and scan on Thursday's trip. I figure by the time the weekend is over I'll be back on 93 and we can see what those scans look like. __________________ She is only memory now.

10-24-2012, 03:15 AM	#31
hapisok crazier than a coconut Drives: 2010 2SS/RS LS3 Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: virginia Posts: 1,547	very brave of you... that is the one thing i am absolutely NOT looking forward to doing can't wait to see your results... __________________

10-24-2012, 07:39 PM	#33
IndeedSS1 Drives: 2010 Camaro SS LS3 Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Eastern MO Posts: 3,786	Pictured is after about 60 miles with the 87 octane. Hopefully tomorrow will give a better comparison to the 93 tables as the trip should be very similar. That said you can see the difference already, although I'm not feeling it much if any. Attached Images __________________ She is only memory now.

10-25-2012, 03:03 AM	#34
hapisok crazier than a coconut Drives: 2010 2SS/RS LS3 Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: virginia Posts: 1,547	as expected. what will be interesting is if those tables auto-correct with 93 or if they keep the same values locked in after the switch. __________________

10-25-2012, 09:02 AM	#36
hapisok crazier than a coconut Drives: 2010 2SS/RS LS3 Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: virginia Posts: 1,547	there is a good amount of timing being pulled up high...dang 87! __________________

10-25-2012, 10:52 AM	#38
Pace Lifestyle = Deathstyle Drives: 11 SIM 2SS/RS Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 686	I appreciate what you are doing man! __________________ 11 2SS/RS

10-25-2012, 11:34 AM	#39
hapisok crazier than a coconut Drives: 2010 2SS/RS LS3 Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: virginia Posts: 1,547	i don't think there are is anything to worry about. there are quite a few nanny's built in that pull timing prematurely to keep things safe. if you don't do it...i'll be doing here shortly. the only thing you'll notice is that it doesn't have the same performance that your use to. __________________

10-25-2012, 02:09 PM	#42
OrngCrush Drives: 1978 Z28, 2010 IOM 2SSRS M6 Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Eastern Long Island, NY Posts: 38	I'd be curious to see if the system resets itself to the 93 octane fuel settings without a fuse pull. Always wondered if the fuse pull was really needed. Appreciate your efforts here.