In regards as to what numbers to omit/rename in order to rescale the load values so one can have his 300%, would changing anything between 70-100% have any negative effect on fuel trim or gas mileage?

 

Here is an example of a rescaled VIII ECU I did this morning:



To answer your question, no it wil not effect either as the ECU extrapolates the differences between load %'s. I havent loss mileage from rescaling and the driveability feels and logs the same.

 

I'm still getting the same, decent MPG I was getting before I rescaled my ECU.

l8r)

 

bump

 

Why don't [can't] you just add more columns?

 

You would be adding extra data into the ROM it's self. If you look at the ROM image in a hex editor, you'd see one table runs straight into another. You would also have to change the running code, so that it knows where to look for the extra colums.

MB

 

Interesting...Thanks a ton for the explanation...

 

Thanks for taking the time to do this write up.

 

I have a Buschur hard MAF pipe and an open element Buschur filter and am seeing my calculated loads in EvoScan go past 260 consistently from the high 3000 rpm range to around 6000 rpm at 20 psi. This surprises me. I thought that with an open filter the MAF reads low compared to what the engine sees, and therefore I would definitely not have a rescaling issue. Yet it seems like I do. I don't have a crazy setup. I haven't dynoed recently, but I'd expect to put down around 330-340 on a Dynojet if I were guessing.

Am I not understanding properly how the MAF pipe and open filter affect the load readings. I would have thought that lower MAF readings would translate to lower calculated loads and more headroom on load ranges, but it seems like the opposite is happening?

I've done a lot of searching and still don't quite understand what's happening.

Thanks,
RichJ

 

At 14 psi I hit 300 load

 

That doesn't seem right at all. Is this the calculated load? You can find out what load for sure by logging the two-byte load. I'm guessing that you haev different sized injectors or latency values and they weren't compensated for in the calc for load. You just can't hit 300 load at 14 psi.


Eric

 

2.4 Sohc Motor, and as I recall its stock compression so what 10:1. His car doesnt fit the rules of normal Evo type motors.

John

 

Ah...OK. Makes a bit more sense now. Didn't even realize he wasn't talking about an Evo.


Eric

 

I'm not following your point at all, as far as replying to my post/questions.

 

Basically whatever you do to allow the engine to be a more efficient pump means more air will be moved which means higher Hz at lower rpm which means higher load cell.

3G has a turbo'd SOHC 2.4 in a 3rd gen Eclipse running an Evo ECU. So he has a bigger motor (20%), higher compression (generally equates to higher VE all things being equal), and therefore at lower boost would move more air through the MAF.

You putting a low restriction filter on your MAF has basically taken a step in the same direction (although it cause some side effects that you should spend time reading about) as 3G because you also have more Air going into the engine.