2byte to 1byte load mod
That's all any of us are really concerned with, but answering that question is tough. The "corrected" 2byte load i have been using has worked fine for tuning. I have not had any issues using this in the last month. I completely re-tuned the car after porting to the 96530006 ROM from the original 96940001 ROM and have not seen any weird anomalies. It's hard to say what load the ECU is actually using to look up ignition/fuel. Maybe somebody with more ECU disassembly experience can chime in and enlighten us.
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,486
Likes: 67
From: Melbourne, Australia
well the corrected vs uncorrected argument is kinda a non-issue.
at the most they will be within 20 points difference, more like 10.
So when tuning if you sorta take that fact into account you will be fine.
Right now in terms of addressing:
LOAD_Temp_Compensated = Load_Raw + 2
LOAD_Baro_Compensated = Load_Raw + 4
LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated = Load_Raw + 6
In terms of usage:
Fuel maps will either use Load_Raw OR LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated depending on an unknown(to me) condition
Ignition Maps will either use LOAD_Baro_Compensated OR LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated depending on the MAF IAT.
at the most they will be within 20 points difference, more like 10.
So when tuning if you sorta take that fact into account you will be fine.
Right now in terms of addressing:
LOAD_Temp_Compensated = Load_Raw + 2
LOAD_Baro_Compensated = Load_Raw + 4
LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated = Load_Raw + 6
In terms of usage:
Fuel maps will either use Load_Raw OR LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated depending on an unknown(to me) condition
Ignition Maps will either use LOAD_Baro_Compensated OR LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated depending on the MAF IAT.
well the corrected vs uncorrected argument is kinda a non-issue.
at the most they will be within 20 points difference, more like 10.
So when tuning if you sorta take that fact into account you will be fine.
Right now in terms of addressing:
LOAD_Temp_Compensated = Load_Raw + 2
LOAD_Baro_Compensated = Load_Raw + 4
LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated = Load_Raw + 6
In terms of usage:
Fuel maps will either use Load_Raw OR LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated depending on an unknown(to me) condition
Ignition Maps will either use LOAD_Baro_Compensated OR LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated depending on the MAF IAT.
at the most they will be within 20 points difference, more like 10.
So when tuning if you sorta take that fact into account you will be fine.
Right now in terms of addressing:
LOAD_Temp_Compensated = Load_Raw + 2
LOAD_Baro_Compensated = Load_Raw + 4
LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated = Load_Raw + 6
In terms of usage:
Fuel maps will either use Load_Raw OR LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated depending on an unknown(to me) condition
Ignition Maps will either use LOAD_Baro_Compensated OR LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated depending on the MAF IAT.
Do you know what standard un-corrected 2 byte load would be from Raw load? Or are the two, one in the same? According to the info you just gave me, the 2byte load i'm using in my MUT table is actually LOAD_Temp_and_Baro_Compensated.
Last edited by iTune; May 12, 2009 at 07:21 PM.
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,486
Likes: 67
From: Melbourne, Australia
all of the afore mentioned loads ARE 2byte.
so in my previous example if you changed your MUT00 to 8488 and MUT01 to 8489 then you would be logging load raw(or uncorrected load) in a 2byte format.
it is an example only, the addresses are not specific to your rom... but the +2, +4, +6 holds for any CT9A..
so in my previous example if you changed your MUT00 to 8488 and MUT01 to 8489 then you would be logging load raw(or uncorrected load) in a 2byte format.
it is an example only, the addresses are not specific to your rom... but the +2, +4, +6 holds for any CT9A..
all of the afore mentioned loads ARE 2byte.
so in my previous example if you changed your MUT00 to 8488 and MUT01 to 8489 then you would be logging load raw(or uncorrected load) in a 2byte format.
it is an example only, the addresses are not specific to your rom... but the +2, +4, +6 holds for any CT9A..
so in my previous example if you changed your MUT00 to 8488 and MUT01 to 8489 then you would be logging load raw(or uncorrected load) in a 2byte format.
it is an example only, the addresses are not specific to your rom... but the +2, +4, +6 holds for any CT9A..
I will update the wiki with the correct info for the 2byte loads in 96530006. BTW, i just figured out how to read Hexidecimal!! woot!! Small victories man! lol
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 9,486
Likes: 67
From: Melbourne, Australia
1byteload is a 1byte version of LOAD_Raw yes...
Load_Raw will usually be the same as Temp or Temp+Baro corrected up until peak boost, then it will deviate by about 10-20 points (with load raw being higher)
Load_Raw will usually be the same as Temp or Temp+Baro corrected up until peak boost, then it will deviate by about 10-20 points (with load raw being higher)
I'm using tephra 510 96530006 in my 2g eclipse. The 1byte load is flat lining (maxing) at 276.9, and it's staying there for a long ways in my log. I saw the limits set in evoscan were 270, so I raised it to like 400 or something, but that didn't help. I changed from 1.2 multiplier to 1.3 (yes in evoscan AND my flash with ecuflash); I know it probably doesn't have anything to do with that (since 1.2*255=306), but I thought I'd give it a shot. Could it be something with my 2g MAS or something? My AFR's aren't getting lean or anything, so it must be reading higher. I haven't yet logged 2byte load, or 2byte MAS Hz. Usually the load follows along right with injector pulse width, but my PW still rises slightly after the load flat-lines.
I'm running a 16G at 31psi falling to around 25 at the peak hp of 5500rpms. BC272's, E85, RC750's, Evo3 style IM, SS o2 housing, 3" exhaust.
I'm running a 16G at 31psi falling to around 25 at the peak hp of 5500rpms. BC272's, E85, RC750's, Evo3 style IM, SS o2 housing, 3" exhaust.








