open loop load?
#31
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
Intersting...unfortunately the VIIIs cells go from
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
2.5
1.79688
1.81641
1.81641
1.77734
1.73828
1.73828
1.69922
500-6000 there. But we did not get the IX's scaling. Anyone know the conversions? In the MPG mod thread it still is looking like the IXs have something else in the coding that allows for leaning out a section of cells (aka MPG). Just doesnt work with the 8s.
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
2.5
1.79688
1.81641
1.81641
1.77734
1.73828
1.73828
1.69922
500-6000 there. But we did not get the IX's scaling. Anyone know the conversions? In the MPG mod thread it still is looking like the IXs have something else in the coding that allows for leaning out a section of cells (aka MPG). Just doesnt work with the 8s.
#32
I hope I can clarify what is going on here, ie I hope I understand it.
lemmonhead is making the crossover map more secure at basically stock conditions, while others are looking at changing general cruise into open loop.
two different goals
smikeevo;
looks like an 8 could just alter the change over location via load. or with the tps value by making the voltage drop happen where you want the change to be?
I think setting up for cruise makes sense in the load map anyway.
lemmonhead is making the crossover map more secure at basically stock conditions, while others are looking at changing general cruise into open loop.
two different goals
smikeevo;
looks like an 8 could just alter the change over location via load. or with the tps value by making the voltage drop happen where you want the change to be?
I think setting up for cruise makes sense in the load map anyway.
Last edited by nothere; Jan 5, 2008 at 07:46 PM.
#33
Intersting...unfortunately the VIIIs cells go from
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
2.5
1.79688
1.81641
1.81641
1.77734
1.73828
1.73828
1.69922
500-6000 there. But we did not get the IX's scaling. Anyone know the conversions? In the MPG mod thread it still is looking like the IXs have something else in the coding that allows for leaning out a section of cells (aka MPG). Just doesnt work with the 8s.
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
3.00781
2.5
1.79688
1.81641
1.81641
1.77734
1.73828
1.73828
1.69922
500-6000 there. But we did not get the IX's scaling. Anyone know the conversions? In the MPG mod thread it still is looking like the IXs have something else in the coding that allows for leaning out a section of cells (aka MPG). Just doesnt work with the 8s.
#34
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
I was comparing the VIII TPS scaling to the IX. The 8s use voltage (correct?) were as the IXs seem to use TPS sensor readings.
My scaling is a bit different. But I also have an 05. Looking at some of my 04 maps I see the scaling you have.
Mine:
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4250
4500
4750
5000
5250
5500
5750
6000
Interesting. I drive 500mi (freeway) week and I still only see 23-24 MPG (pre or post mod).
My scaling is a bit different. But I also have an 05. Looking at some of my 04 maps I see the scaling you have.
Mine:
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4250
4500
4750
5000
5250
5500
5750
6000
Interesting. I drive 500mi (freeway) week and I still only see 23-24 MPG (pre or post mod).
#35
The table is listed in volts, but I've never checked it myself. It is interesting that the scale is different but it shouldn't really matter for MPG since you're going to be below 4000 RPM anyway. Just so I understand, you have changed your open loop load to something under the load you see at cruise, but it doesn't switch to open loop? (I have set mine to 30 in the 2000-3500 RPM range.)
#37
The part that confuses me is that you saw no change in mileage at all. My AFRs are not rock-steady for the whole cruise, but mileage definitely improved. What I found was that my loads easily varied from 30-80 even with very smooth throttle input which is why I set Open Loop Load down to 30.
#38
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
The part that confuses me is that you saw no change in mileage at all. My AFRs are not rock-steady for the whole cruise, but mileage definitely improved. What I found was that my loads easily varied from 30-80 even with very smooth throttle input which is why I set Open Loop Load down to 30.
#40
It doesn't in and of itself but once you get the car running open loop at cruise you can run it leaner. There are other threads talking about this in more detail, but as long as you don't have a cat you can run ~15.5 AFR at cruise.
#43
mrfred,
yeah I would really think it would be wise to use a wideband. I don't see how the fuel map could be counted on to be correct out of the box. Although it looks like some have had numbers match.
JB could log his wideband and see by how steady his graph was when he was in open loop.
meanwhile, I have to ask: what difference does it make if you have a cat? The cat doesn't seem to mind when you are in open loop at high load. Why would low load open loop make a difference?
yeah I would really think it would be wise to use a wideband. I don't see how the fuel map could be counted on to be correct out of the box. Although it looks like some have had numbers match.
JB could log his wideband and see by how steady his graph was when he was in open loop.
meanwhile, I have to ask: what difference does it make if you have a cat? The cat doesn't seem to mind when you are in open loop at high load. Why would low load open loop make a difference?