Lambda Overlay vs Active Tuning

FlashPro Manager software
Post Reply
web35
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 2:29 pm

Lambda Overlay vs Active Tuning

Post by web35 »

I've been trying to fine tune my calibration after adding some exhaust mods. When I look at the recommended changes from the Active Tuning they vary substantially from the Lambda Overlay recommendations.
With Intake, short headers, high flow cat and cat back, MAP calibration, is there a recommendation for which of these two options to use? Or both?

Thanks in advance
User avatar
Spunkster
Site Admin
Posts: 19489
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 5:06 pm
Location: Hondata

Re: Lambda Overlay vs Active Tuning

Post by Spunkster »

Not enough info has been provided to really give an educated answer to this.
web35
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 2:29 pm

Re: Lambda Overlay vs Active Tuning

Post by web35 »

Should active tuning yield the same recommended changes to the fuel tables as the lambda overlay recommends for the same calibration driven over the exact same time period?
Another way to ask the same question:
Should both methods produce the same recommendations for changes to the fuel tables?
web35
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 2:29 pm

Re: Lambda Overlay vs Active Tuning

Post by web35 »

I load a calibration with Active Tuning activated (checked). I drive the car AND do a data log. I review the Active Tuning tables but do not merge them. I screen print the active tables. I load the data log after removing the flashpro. I load the calibration into the software. I review the lambda overlay. The populated cells are not the same cells as the Active Tuning populated cells.
User avatar
Spunkster
Site Admin
Posts: 19489
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2002 5:06 pm
Location: Hondata

Re: Lambda Overlay vs Active Tuning

Post by Spunkster »

What vehicle are you referring to? Can you provide more specific details such as the calibrations and datalogs showing what you are referring to?
web35
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 2:29 pm

Re: Lambda Overlay vs Active Tuning

Post by web35 »

2008 Civic SI
I've attached my screen prints, the calibration and the datalog.
From the screen prints I see different values in the common cells; some negative and some postive for the same cell and not all of the same cells are populated between the two different methods of tuning.
Attachments
V2 R11 WITH ACTIVE 7-9-2020.fpdl
(6.3 MiB) Downloaded 65 times
WeberB.SD.V2.Rev11 (FuelComp-4).995VTEC Pressure Active tuning.fpcal
(22.44 KiB) Downloaded 59 times
40 degrees low.jpg
40 degrees low.jpg (323.56 KiB) Viewed 4724 times
40 degrees high.jpg
40 degrees high.jpg (329.99 KiB) Viewed 4724 times
User avatar
Hondata
Site Admin
Posts: 9565
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2002 12:13 pm
Location: Torrance, CA
Contact:

Re: Lambda Overlay vs Active Tuning

Post by Hondata »

The two methods working differently and you can't compare them like this.

Active tuning works sequentially, based on whatever changes have already been made. The changes also affect subsequent lambda readings.

Lambda overlay averages all the samples for a cell and shows the difference. The underlying fuel table value is not changed.
Hondata
web35
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 2:29 pm

Re: Lambda Overlay vs Active Tuning

Post by web35 »

Is there anybody on this forum that can give a brother a little help?
I'm trying to understand if for fine tuning a given calibration should the:
  • Active tuning be used or the lambda overlay?
    Or both one after the other and in which order?
    or neither because the Flashpro is WAY too complicated for a normal stupid degreed Mechanical Engineer with 40 years of engineering experience.
Post Reply