[DallasBoosted]

Originally Posted by Joshboody

I still use procede OL, but a lot less than the stock maps. AFR is zeroed on procede. Basically works the same as without Cobb just reduced biasing, CPS.

The parallel fuel trims is more a result of the hardware and meth setup. Trims around 0% is the tunes working together.

So you just use the procede for boost/meth?

[Joshboody]

Originally Posted by DallasBoosted

So you just use the procede for boost/meth?

No I use all the functions of procede except for AFR bias. Just at a reduced degree compared with procede and stock DME.

[Ilma]

Originally Posted by Joshboody

No I use all the functions of procede except for AFR bias. Just at a reduced degree compared with procede and stock DME.

What do you set the Cobb boost profile to in order for Procede to still control the curve

[franzzz]

Originally Posted by Joshboody

Maxed trims is due to how piggies increase fuel volume. This is done by biasing (reducing) the rail pressure signal to the DME and thus DME increases pressure to meet target. This in turn gives a risk of DME recognizing HPFP issue not being able to meet pressure target. The tuning has to be below this threshold but also meet power desires of the consumer. Cold weather and AT can make the situation worse. But it does work well and is consistent when you're within the limits.

Hardware and BMW tuning can also play a role. If rail pressure is different due to these factors then the bias has an altered effect because it is a set voltage, but fuel volume percentage increase is based on actual pressure. So DME with lower pressure target for example will have greater volume increase with X bias.

You do have parameters to alter to change the end result like boost curve, E%, OL table/global.

I use Cobb with Procede and works very well.

"By biasing " (piggy solution) the signal it's possible to generate a 29F2 error on y car ?
When WOT also y fuel trims are on 33% and on track session the car switch off and generate a 29F2 error

[franzzz]

up