log boost with JDM MAP sensor (updated instructions)
May 16, 2007, 11:39 AM
#49
Evolved Member
iTrader: (26)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have the GM 3 bar sensor which is used to monitor and log boost using my PLX wideband unit. I guess going this route won't help me much. Although, the idea of speed density would be enough for me to switch over to this setup.
May 16, 2007, 04:26 PM
#50
Mrfred, my MAP just came today. Thanks for checking on it for me.
Install went smoothly and took about 10 minutes. I flashed the ECU with the new JDM data and everything seems great. I'll do some runs tonight to see the real results.
I have to say though ... your PSI conversion for EvoScan is off. I logged the MAP sensor with the engine off and was getting a reading of 0.00004 psi. That's completely unacceptable ...
I'm about 610' above sea level.
So, everyone take note ... mrfred's calculations are not 100% correct ... they are only 99.99996% correct. Great job man!
Install went smoothly and took about 10 minutes. I flashed the ECU with the new JDM data and everything seems great. I'll do some runs tonight to see the real results.
I have to say though ... your PSI conversion for EvoScan is off. I logged the MAP sensor with the engine off and was getting a reading of 0.00004 psi. That's completely unacceptable ...
I'm about 610' above sea level.So, everyone take note ... mrfred's calculations are not 100% correct ... they are only 99.99996% correct. Great job man!
May 16, 2007, 08:23 PM
#54
Well, the MAP seems to read a little lower than my OE gauge, but it's probably more accurate. I'm going to trust it since the atmosphere comparison was dead on. Here is a log of 4th gear ...
May 16, 2007, 10:24 PM
#55
Well, the MAP seems to read a little lower than my OE gauge, but it's probably more accurate. I'm going to trust it since the atmosphere comparison was dead on. Here is a log of 4th gear ...
May 17, 2007, 05:12 AM
#56
Yeah, but I don't really know what I'm doing, so that's another difference.
I'm kinda jealous that you're spooling faster, but I honestly just guessed on my VVT map so it's not surprising. You also seem to have a little bit less boost taper. I'm running a bit leaner and running a little more timing.
Now, I did consider this a little conservative since I'm still on the stock cat and air filter. How do you think our numbers would compare?
I'm kinda jealous that you're spooling faster, but I honestly just guessed on my VVT map so it's not surprising. You also seem to have a little bit less boost taper. I'm running a bit leaner and running a little more timing.
Now, I did consider this a little conservative since I'm still on the stock cat and air filter. How do you think our numbers would compare?
May 17, 2007, 06:55 AM
#57
Yeah, but I don't really know what I'm doing, so that's another difference.
I'm kinda jealous that you're spooling faster, but I honestly just guessed on my VVT map so it's not surprising. You also seem to have a little bit less boost taper. I'm running a bit leaner and running a little more timing.
Now, I did consider this a little conservative since I'm still on the stock cat and air filter. How do you think our numbers would compare?
I'm kinda jealous that you're spooling faster, but I honestly just guessed on my VVT map so it's not surprising. You also seem to have a little bit less boost taper. I'm running a bit leaner and running a little more timing.
Now, I did consider this a little conservative since I'm still on the stock cat and air filter. How do you think our numbers would compare?
You should be able to lessen the taper at high rpm with WGDC adjustment. The 3rd gear log below shows my current WGDC map. Notice how I increase the duty cycle as the rpms go up? This log shows the boost and load tapering, but I've done that on purpose. With a more aggressive WGDC map, I can hold a load of 240-245 out to 6000 rpm. However, the car was too prone to knock at high rpm, so I started pushing up load and boost at lower rpm, and taking a bit away at higher rpm.
I see that at higher rpm, your motor seems to hold the same load as mine using less boost. Do you have a TBE?
I was wondering the same thing last night about how the two cars would compare on a dyno. Does same load = same power? I don't know.
May 17, 2007, 07:54 AM
#58
Well, I tried the WGDC adjustment and got pretty much no result. Basically, with the pill I'm using, the WGDC just goes up to about 65 and sits there even though my WGDC table has values that are higher. My boost seems to only be controlled by the boost desired and load offset maps. The WGDC just goes and sits where it needs to be.
That said, I can limit the max WGDC with the WGDC table, but that would require requesting much higher loads than i really want. I have not tried that route. I also still have the low end of the error correction map enabled, but it doesn't seem to really affect anything. I'll post my settings during lunch.
I have a manifold, O2 and downpipe, but stock from the cat onward. Those are my only physical power mods.
That said, I can limit the max WGDC with the WGDC table, but that would require requesting much higher loads than i really want. I have not tried that route. I also still have the low end of the error correction map enabled, but it doesn't seem to really affect anything. I'll post my settings during lunch.
I have a manifold, O2 and downpipe, but stock from the cat onward. Those are my only physical power mods.
May 17, 2007, 08:01 AM
#59
Well, I tried the WGDC adjustment and got pretty much no result. Basically, with the pill I'm using, the WGDC just goes up to about 65 and sits there even though my WGDC table has values that are higher. My boost seems to only be controlled by the boost desired and load offset maps. The WGDC just goes and sits where it needs to be.
That said, I can limit the max WGDC with the WGDC table, but that would require requesting much higher loads than i really want. I have not tried that route. I also still have the low end of the error correction map enabled, but it doesn't seem to really affect anything. I'll post my settings during lunch.
I have a manifold, O2 and downpipe, but stock from the cat onward. Those are my only physical power mods.
That said, I can limit the max WGDC with the WGDC table, but that would require requesting much higher loads than i really want. I have not tried that route. I also still have the low end of the error correction map enabled, but it doesn't seem to really affect anything. I'll post my settings during lunch.
I have a manifold, O2 and downpipe, but stock from the cat onward. Those are my only physical power mods.
May 17, 2007, 08:06 AM
#60
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 756
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I reversed the old setup instructions and used the new ones (evo 9 013 rom) and so far after a day and a couple pulls no CEL 
. It does read slightly off when the vehicle is off..
Reading: -0.18618
:-\
. It does read slightly off when the vehicle is off..Reading: -0.18618
:-\