Guess a thread got locked where we were discussing race tuners for LLY's. Probably it was in the wrong forum.

Originally Posted by McRat
Fixing the P1093 for LLY's requires editing the P1093 error parameters out of it. Change the parameter temp, RPM, etc, when it enables the check, or edit the 2000 RPM limit. If I had the tools to do it, I would. Still awaiting tools. Truck drives and races just fine. 1093's are still random occurances.

In a way, it IS important to mfr's to get rid of it. It is actually a safety issue as it occurs mostly when passing. For racers, it is of lessor concern.

Originally Posted by DieselTech
Are you reading what your typing? Turning the test off does not fix anything! This is just the kind of thinking that keeps things from working properly and yes, I am talking about your testing of the Beta II tune. You have been more interested in going faster than the next guy then doing the testing to get to the bottom of the 1093 problem and this post just points it out more! The pressure is falling out of specification and if you had done as you were suppose too you would have already known that. Turning a light off, and/or turning the corrective action off isn't a fix in my book but maybe it is in yours!

As far as your times verses Denis's times I did not compare them you did. You ran a stack at LACR to 13.99, 14.02, 14.03. Magu ran our single tune 14.04 3 runs in a row at the same event.

Yes, I do know what I'm suggesting. I've suggested deleting codes for quite a while. We should be able to delete emissions codes and P1093's with a PCM tuner. Let the user make the decision.

These tuners can destroy an engine if used incorrectly, yet TTS and everyone still sells them, so that argument of "it's not right" is puzzling. We take our chances.

You knew that I race since we first met. And I stated then I wanted to get my truck into the 13's. I think I had your #2 tune a whole 24hrs before I took it to the track. And I put quite a few miles on it since then, even towing 3500+ miles.

And the ET? A 14.000 is a full second slower than 13.999, you should know that! :D

:grd:

McRat by any chance do you have the code description? I have the LB7 version but I do not think it is exactly the same as the LLY?

P1093 is a fuel rail pressure does not match commanded pressure.

LLY's start getting them at about 375rwhp. They are typically infrequent, come in "packs", and seldom happen when dragracing or pulling. Most of the time they occur when accelerating to pass cars, or decelerating when you complete the pass.

I hope this doesn't drag the thread too far off topic but since I have been running the latest version of Edge/attitude i have not seen one P1093. It would be interesting to know if edge has done anything about this or if I have just been lucky. Has anyone had a P1093 with the latest version of Juice 1.2?

I used to get 1093 probably weekely and I have run 1.2 for over a month now I believe.

Here is what is states for the LB7.

P1093 Fuel Rail Pressure Low During Power Enrichment.
Negative rail pressure error should be within 20MPa. Commanded pump flow should be lower than pump capabilaty.

20MPa: 0-2200 RPM
30MPa: 2400RPM-5000 RPM



Monitored by Rail Pressure Sensor and Comanded Fuel Flow To Pump.

You were saying get rid of the codes with the tuner. When I read the list of things the predator could do for a gas motor, it included negating codes thrown by things such as 02 sensors etc. So why can't someone program that into a diesel tuner? I wonder if predator will update that in a new version since maybe they didn't know about 1093s and things like that when they first made their program? Perhaps an update could address these things? You're big on talking to the manufacturers pat, why not give them a call and discuss this with them, not as a custom one person tune, but as something to be added to all tuners.

What you all seem to be missing is there is truely a problem. It's not a false code! Turning it off does nothing to resolve the problem, just makes the light go out.

Pat, I knew going in you were a racer, you also agreed to do the testing the way we wanted but you have chosen not to do it, so the information over the phone just doesn't cut it. If all you want to do was race then you should not of told me you were able to do the testing and bring the truck here for follow ups if there were problems. The P1093 is a problem but you failed to say anything until I questioned you since another tester reported it. Your answer was yea it does it but they all do your's does it a lot less! That was not the agreement for the testing the product. Being part of developing a product doesn't always mean it works right out of the box, problems happen then they are resolved before we move on. This seems to be something your not able to grasp. Until the problems are solved the next level cannot properly be reached. Tuners can destroy an engine, your correct but to knowly sell a product with a design flaw is just not the way we work around here.

If you want to do your own programming thats fine, just return our test unit and we will call it a day.

Sounds as if we might be adding another member to the list.......

McRat....your contribution to LLY's strive for power is damn near unsurpassed and should be appreciated ...... as you have found out, there's more than one game in town.;)

I started talking to tuners shortly after the Predator LLY was released. Predator, TTS, Banks, PPE so far. So they certainly know about it.

You're right, they should do like they do for the gas engines and allow us to disable warning codes.

What you all seem to be missing is there is truely a problem. It's not a false code! Turning it off does nothing to resolve the problem, just makes the light go out.

Pat, I knew going in you were a racer, you also agreed to do the testing the way we wanted but you have chosen not to do it, so the information over the phone just doesn't cut it. If all you want to do was race then you should not of told me you were able to do the testing and bring the truck here for follow ups if there were problems. The P1093 is a problem but you failed to say anything until I questioned you since another tester reported it. Your answer was yea it does it but they all do your's does it a lot less! That was not the agreement for the testing the product. Being part of developing a product doesn't always mean it works right out of the box, problems happen then they are resolved before we move on. This seems to be something your not able to grasp. Until the problems are solved the next level cannot properly be reached. Tuners can destroy an engine, your correct but to knowly sell a product with a design flaw is just not the way we work around here.

If you want to do your own programming thats fine, just return our test unit and we will call it a day.

Steve please leave our private discussions about "beta" testing private. If you wish to discuss them publically, then let me know. I hope you won't make that request.

You helped me out of a bind when nobody else would, and I will aways owe you for that.

As far as the code on 2 of my PCM's, how do I erase it? I still want the blank PCM's.

As far as me doing my coding? I'd rather find someone else to do it, but if I can't, yes, I will have to do it myself. Just waiting for the price of the tool to come down within reason.

Just making power is not my primary objective. If all I cared about was sheer power, I would have bought a beat-up 12-valve Dodge and poured money into the Cummins for sheer power.

I'm interested in making REFINED power. In other words, I want to make power without spitting 1093s, so I for one am really not interested in being able to disable the 1093 code.

That's just my take on the whole deal.

Do it, I would be interested in it as I see them a lot.

Just making power is not my primary objective. If all I cared about was sheer power, I would have bought a beat-up 12-valve Dodge and poured money into the Cummins for sheer power.

I'm interested in making REFINED power. In other words, I want to make power without spitting 1093s, so I for one am really not interested in being able to disable the 1093 code.

That's just my take on the whole deal.

Even the most drivable PCM tunes over 85hp are doing 1093's. It's not affecting performance that I can tell. I started getting them at 375HP, and as I've slowly climbed up to nearly 100HP more, the frequency is the same, give or take.

It appears to have something to do with how quickly the CP3 is told to increase pressure, and how quickly the PCM is told to check after the rail pressure increase is matching commanded. This might be hard coded. That means it might be very difficult or impossible to adjust.

If it's hard coded, you will have to reverse engineer (disassemble) the PCM instructions, then use an emulator to debug the code, then recompile the entire program.

Perhaps the "perfect" fix is a new CP3, modified fuel rails, and removing the entire stock fuel feed system. I'd rather override the computer.

There are a few shops that are seeing this issue and are not saying anything about it. The first shop that comes up with ANY fix is going to sell some tuners. I'll be first in line.

Well knock on wood, I've only set 3 1093s in about 9 months of ownership now. For about the last two months, the Predator has been set to kill. I only get the occasional 1093 when I'm really low on fuel. I've never set one when I had over a 1/4 tank. Beats me why I've been relatively lucky. When I do get them, it's when I let off the throttle, not when I mash it, but you've noted this before.:confused:

I hope this doesn't drag the thread too far off topic but since I have been running the latest version of Edge/attitude i have not seen one P1093. It would be interesting to know if edge has done anything about this or if I have just been lucky. Has anyone had a P1093 with the latest version of Juice 1.2?

I used to get 1093 probably weekely and I have run 1.2 for over a month now I believe.
Your just a lucky SOB ):h

I had them before the juice upgrade and still get them after, some times twice in one 18 mile ride :mad:

It really sucks after u pass and get the code and can't do 50 mph going up hill :mad:

Well knock on wood, I've only set 3 1093s in about 9 months of ownership now. For about the last two months, the Predator has been set to kill. I only get the occasional 1093 when I'm really low on fuel. I've never set one when I had over a 1/4 tank. Beats me why I've been relatively lucky. When I do get them, it's when I let off the throttle, not when I mash it, but you've noted this before.:confused:
It seems i get them more below 1/2 tank but I get them ALL the time.

doesn't seem to matter if juice is level 1 or 5.

Even the most drivable PCM tunes over 85hp are doing 1093's. It's not affecting performance that I can tell. I started getting them at 375HP, and as I've slowly climbed up to nearly 100HP more, the frequency is the same, give or take.

It appears to have something to do with how quickly the CP3 is told to increase pressure, and how quickly the PCM is told to check after the rail pressure increase is matching commanded. This might be hard coded. That means it might be very difficult or impossible to adjust.

If it's hard coded, you will have to reverse engineer (disassemble) the PCM instructions, then use an emulator to debug the code, then recompile the entire program.

Perhaps the "perfect" fix is a new CP3, modified fuel rails, and removing the entire stock fuel feed system. I'd rather override the computer.

There are a few shops that are seeing this issue and are not saying anything about it. The first shop that comes up with ANY fix is going to sell some tuners. I'll be first in line.
Are you sure about that?

Are you sure about that?

Sure about what?

Sure about what?
I guess quad has the problem fixed (wheres that carrot on a string smilie ):h )
so now u have to buy the first one.

I guess quad has the problem fixed (wheres that carrot on a string smilie ):h )
so now u have to buy the first one.

Dunno. First I heard of that.

Dunno. First I heard of that.

Just asked? You said all tuners over 85hp cause this condition. I asked if you were sure? I know you dynoed a Quad and it makes good numbers, did it set a light?

Maybe the other tuners are using pressure maps?

Like I said, I just asked a question before everyone gets compiled into 1 group.

I have an idea. Before McRat spends 3K on an emulator lets just spilll the beans.

Did the Quad tuner fix the 1039?

Will the new releases of the TTS fix the 1039?

If you can not answer that then you are only spewing worthless garbage in an attempt to keep us, the end user from fixing our own problems.

SOP for the money makers. Lets cloud the issue untill we release.

What are the other implications of setting a P1093? Does the fuel pump on these trucks just let go or does its performance degrade over time?

It seems to me it would be a valuable alarm for indicating a real problem...for the sake of troubleshooting. If this is a possibility then indeed it would probably not be wise to simply disable the code.

I don't want any part of any hostility here, if that is what you call it. Hopefully most have thicker skin than this. But I'm just on the outside looking in and my technical background compels me to side with Diesel Tech....no offense at all towards McRat.

I think this is a bit different than say installing a FingerStick along with the EGR plate...hopefully that is obvious.

Does running a lift-pump help mitigate the P1093?

is the finger stick bypassing a possible code?

I am sensing on a few people ascotiating there 1093 with fuel tank level????????

Has any one disected an LLY fuel tank? Factory pickup unit could be the culprit.

Other fuel system kinks and bends could be the culprit?

Fuel pressure guage measurment right before high pressure pump would be handy right about now.

I think its pickup related seeing since we did away with ours (pickup) and havent seen a 1093 since with or without the airdog setup, regardless of tank fullness.

The FingerStick does not bypass a code per se, but is a means of removing the codes associated with disabling the EGR. The FingerStick does by hardwiring what a program perhaps [/I]could[I] do. With the EGR blocked, the related codes truly become irrelevant. THAT is what I am suggesting.

Clear as mud??

...forgot to ask about the fuel pickup.

Thanks for that DSTRBD. Are you running a bigger billet one like So Cal carries?

No, we ditched the stock pickup completely and went with a billet sump that mounts to the bottom of the tank. Not really ideal for everyone, but it did fix the 1093 issue.

Just asked? You said all tuners over 85hp cause this condition. I asked if you were sure? I know you dynoed a Quad and it makes good numbers, did it set a light?

Maybe the other tuners are using pressure maps?

Like I said, I just asked a question before everyone gets compiled into 1 group.


Does the Quad LLY 135 set 1093's? You can answer that.

I dyno'd the latest LLY unit and drove it for 5 mi, as a favor to J&D Performance. Sometimes I can go 2000mi on a tuner before it sets a code. 5 mi is not enough. I would think that if they have a 1093-proof tuner they would mention it.

What are the other implications of setting a P1093? Does the fuel pump on these trucks just let go or does its performance degrade over time?

It seems to me it would be a valuable alarm for indicating a real problem...for the sake of troubleshooting. If this is a possibility then indeed it would probably not be wise to simply disable the code.

I don't want any part of any hostility here, if that is what you call it. Hopefully most have thicker skin than this. But I'm just on the outside looking in and my technical background compels me to side with Diesel Tech....no offense at all towards McRat.

I think this is a bit different than say installing a FingerStick along with the EGR plate...hopefully that is obvious.

Does running a lift-pump help mitigate the P1093?

No offense taken.

I can still get 1093's with a pump.

I tried a new Dual Pleat vs. a LB7 Single Pleat filter. No change in codes. Switched pickups as well.

I've even had the truck burst from running a stack without setting the code. Run 15 back to back 1/4mi passes with no codes. Then at random while cruising, it will throw a series of them.

I can put a certain stack on (which is not that strong, ~400HP) and it will throw them constantly while driving, but the not on the dyno.

I've go another thing I can play with. Will report back.

I thought we were talking here about any LLY tuner over 85hp setting this code. I have never run my quad at anything less than 110hp and have never set a code ever. I encountered the soft engine limp mode way back when I first put the tune in but haven't had any issue since then. 10,000+ miles now on the quad and not one issue.


I haven't kept track in the last 8 months, I was unaware quad had a 135hp tune for the LLY.

Guess it is time for me to give quad a call!!!! More power! Whoop!

:ro)

I thought we were talking here about any LLY tuner over 85hp setting this code. I have never run my quad at anything less than 110hp and have never set a code ever. I encountered the soft engine limp mode way back when I first put the tune in but haven't had any issue since then. 10,000+ miles now on the quad and not one issue.


I haven't kept track in the last 8 months, I was unaware quad had a 135hp tune for the LLY.

Guess it is time for me to give quad a call!!!! More power! Whoop!

:ro)

I tested the new Quad LLY the first week it was released. It made pretty good HP, and was well behaved, but I only had it for 1 hr.

Perhaps it doesn't throw 1093's. We need more input from various users.