Adding load columns and RPM rows to maps
Oct 10, 2009, 12:59 PM
#286
I'm working on a revision for v7 as we speak for all Boost tables. It should simplify things and minimize the same questions being posted over....and over....and over,lol.
I'm a firm believer in "answering the questions before they are asked".
I'm a firm believer in "answering the questions before they are asked".
Oct 11, 2009, 03:14 AM
#288
Evolving Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On DSMTuners, a lot of us DSM guys have switched to 9653. There are a few that run the 9055 due to various reasons that were we haven't pin pointed a cause (and solution) yet. I don't know how many DSM guys are running 9417. With the flashability of the 98/99 ECU, the DSM support for the Evo 8 Ecu has faultered.
'95 have the EPROM ecu and DSMLink
'96 run the 95 EPROM ecu so they don't have to worry about switching injectors and stuff around because of a different CAS. They have to do the opposite of installing DSMLink in a 97-99 to run the Evo 8 Ecu.
'97 seems to have the most support for the Evo 8 Ecu, since the 1.3 cable is cheaper than the 2.0 used for the 98/99 ecu.
'98/99 run their stock flashable ecu.
As long as we (DSMs) have a 9653 rom to run, I think we can all make it work.
I know I've only run 9055 and 9653 on my car. 9653 took a little more work to setup than 9055, but it seems more responsive at low throttle, and has more support than 9055.
There isn't a DSM making big power on the Evo 8 Ecu yet. And oddly enough, many of us more involved with the Evo 8 Ecu swap have automatic transmissions, so we don't even use half the bells and whistles that Tephra has come out with.
Last edited by knochgoon24; Oct 11, 2009 at 03:18 AM.
Oct 11, 2009, 04:30 AM
#289
Evolved Member
On DSMTuners, a lot of us DSM guys have switched to 9653. There are a few that run the 9055 due to various reasons that were we haven't pin pointed a cause (and solution) yet. I don't know how many DSM guys are running 9417. With the flashability of the 98/99 ECU, the DSM support for the Evo 8 Ecu has faultered.
'95 have the EPROM ecu and DSMLink
'96 run the 95 EPROM ecu so they don't have to worry about switching injectors and stuff around because of a different CAS. They have to do the opposite of installing DSMLink in a 97-99 to run the Evo 8 Ecu.
'97 seems to have the most support for the Evo 8 Ecu, since the 1.3 cable is cheaper than the 2.0 used for the 98/99 ecu.
'98/99 run their stock flashable ecu.
As long as we (DSMs) have a 9653 rom to run, I think we can all make it work.
I know I've only run 9055 and 9653 on my car. 9653 took a little more work to setup than 9055, but it seems more responsive at low throttle, and has more support than 9055.
There isn't a DSM making big power on the Evo 8 Ecu yet. And oddly enough, many of us more involved with the Evo 8 Ecu swap have automatic transmissions, so we don't even use half the bells and whistles that Tephra has come out with.
'95 have the EPROM ecu and DSMLink
'96 run the 95 EPROM ecu so they don't have to worry about switching injectors and stuff around because of a different CAS. They have to do the opposite of installing DSMLink in a 97-99 to run the Evo 8 Ecu.
'97 seems to have the most support for the Evo 8 Ecu, since the 1.3 cable is cheaper than the 2.0 used for the 98/99 ecu.
'98/99 run their stock flashable ecu.
As long as we (DSMs) have a 9653 rom to run, I think we can all make it work.
I know I've only run 9055 and 9653 on my car. 9653 took a little more work to setup than 9055, but it seems more responsive at low throttle, and has more support than 9055.
There isn't a DSM making big power on the Evo 8 Ecu yet. And oddly enough, many of us more involved with the Evo 8 Ecu swap have automatic transmissions, so we don't even use half the bells and whistles that Tephra has come out with.
Oct 11, 2009, 12:38 PM
#290
Here is a snapshot of how I have my 96530006 XML setup for MrFred's PSI based boost. I made a copy of those tables and have them scaled for load and give them their own category. The load tables are technically already loaded in the evo9base XML but I prefer to simplify the organization by making my own section that easier to read/follow. This way when I open someone else's ROM, I can see whether they are running PSI based boost control or LOAD based boost control quite easily without editing all of my scaling if I convert them.
As another option, I've played some tricks in my XML as well to help with this issue. Similar in fashion to Tephra's 96530706 ECU ID change, I have done the same for other options. I also created a 96530006_base.xml that gets called in all of the 9653 variants and calls the evo7base.xml. I also did a seperate scaling.xml that gets called in evo7base.xml just to make sure all the scaling equations get called up correctly and to help eliminate repeated scaling equations.
96530006.xml has the factory boost tables and calls for 96530006_base.xml. This will open up a stock ROM and show all the currently defined tables you'd find in a factory ROM without stuff that you don't find in the stock ROM.
96530706.xml has the tephra mods along with the factory load based boost tables and calls the 96530006_base.xml and evo7base.xml. This brings up the load based boost maps and the tephra mods.
I also did a 96531706.xml which has the tephra mods and mrfreds direct boost and calls 96530006_base.xml. Because the load based tables aren't in the 96531706.xml, they do not come up at all.
Lastly, I also did a 96532706.xml which has the tephra mods, mrfreds direct boost, JCSBanks Speed Density patch and calls 96530006_base.xml.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Raptor58559
Lancer Engine Management / Tuning Forums
7
Jul 7, 2011 01:20 PM
Boosted Tuning
ECU Flash
5
Jul 16, 2010 11:25 AM
