Tonight’s test was Tune 6F RETEST, a retest of the Tune 6F calibration to help build a baseline for comparison. For the record, the VCM scanner froze, the XLR tilted, I used the code reader to reset, then the scanner worked properly and I ran the test.
Tonight’s run is in BLUE. The comparison, same-calibration 6F is in RED. The GREEN Tune 6B is the great first test after VVT Tune with the mid-hump. Both 6F’s have the same tuning in that region.
This is the calculator I am using to adjust for altitude, humidity, and temp. Then I feed the dry-air absolute baro and test temp into Virtual Dyno. This results in a close match : the dyno correction is 1.058 above; the Virtual Dyno factor from uncorrected to corrected is also 1.058 with these changes for today’s conditions.
The Tune 6F retest matches well with the Tune 6F test result, which is what we hope to see. The peak is 4 whp different, but these are identical calibrations on different days.
The Calculated hp peak in HP tuners for Tune 6F Retest was 295.7; corrected that would be 295.7 x 1.058 = 312.9 hp in 2nd gear. Next will be more runs with this tune to further characterize baseline after the Virtual Dyno profile issue. What we want to see is when corrected for conditions, repetitive runs of the same tune show very close results.
This chart is a comparison of Cadillac’s engine dyno result in red with the corrected calculated hp result from HPTuners in blue. In my STS-V with a similar transmission the 2nd gear virtual dyno ran 6% less than my chassis dyno. If that correction is also correct here, it (yellow) overlays the engine dyno plot up to 5400 rpm or so.