so my formula for apexi map sensor is x*.3-22.5 in evoscan. Would you be able to work out the appropriate ecuflash formula from that?

or even if I just knew the correlation between the two I could just not work in kpa but at least know what corresponds to what. say if I put x*1 in ecuflash, what would i put in evoscan to make it log the same scaling.

Is there an easy way to convert evoscan formula to ecuflash scaling?

 

Mine is the same way, no flat spot to tap into, as was my friend's...we both have '03 models. I ended up with it in the UICP, works fine there for me.

If you want to get technical '03 MY's are actually Evo 7.5's just freshened up with the '04 trimmings. Maybe that's why.

 

Suggestions...

I've got my SD pretty much setup. At idle i get a bit of flying around but for the most part its settled on 14.7. Id like a little more steady but ill work on it. My issue now is if i am cruising in 4th gear and around 4k to 4500, my fuel fattens up to low 12's to digging into 11's as if i am starting a pull.... only im still in vac because i am cruising. Im assuming its seeing the load and rpm and throwing the fuel in as it would if i was actually in boost. Im looking for any suggestions to tune that out. I dont have any of the asynch tables. Im on an SD modded 88590715 rom.

 

Personally I'd just adjust the fuel map to tune it out and maybe adjust your throttle crossover points. I noticed after I did this patch that the normal trace of the fuel/timing maps is not the same as it was with the maf and I needed to make some slight table adjustments to get it where I wanted it. Just to give you a rough idea (I'm using one of my old small maps as an example, they fit better on the forum for viewing), here's 2 examples:

Maf curve...



Map/SD curve...

 

That's because you tuned it that way. Ideally you should tune it to match from MAF to SD. Then, as you add mods, you adjust the VE to match once again. This way, you can easily tell where a certain mod increased (or decreased) VE.

 

You're right, I did tune it this way. It made more sense for me to tune it to mimic a standard SD controlled ecu system than try to follow the same maf type curve. I have more experience on SD systems than maf-based, so it's more of personal preference i guess. Honestly I'm not sure how it can exactly match the MAP to MAF curve, as they react in totally different ways. For instance, previously on the maf if I would go full throttle at 1000rpm load would climb slowly up to 100% (now as kPa), but in current SD trim going full throttle immediately will jump you to 100%/kPa as that's the reference point for 0psi. Also, when in 5th gear climbing up a hill on the MAF I would see up to 180% load but less than 5psi on the gauge. SD now shows the equivalent of that 5psi in kPa now, which is less than 180% load. So there are variances in how the sensors react, and I'm sure it's possible to adjust the VE curve to match them exactly...but would you really want to? That's why I adjusted everything the way I did, so it reacts and behaves like it was SD from the factory.

That and I like to be difficult lol.

 

I personally tune SD to match MAF. It just makes more sense to me seeing that we are coming from a maf based ROM, so anything that I can do to emulate maf makes everything else fall into place.

Your method of having 1:1 map/load is just another preference and has both advantage and disadvantages.

I wasn't trying to say what you did was wrong...simply stating that your curves were different because you set it up that way with your VE tables.

 

You can always tell if a part or change worked if your AFR has changed though as well. Even when its a fixed MAP style (I do this as well) where load is dependent on boost and not VE, if it goes lean you are getting more air, if its rich then its less. One benefit of setting up a ROM like this is injector sizing is completely mathematical with displacement it seems. I go up 10% in displacement I drop scaling 10% to keep the fuel map correct.

Just my experience.

 

Yes, that's what I mean by being able to tell if your mods help. It leans out because of VE increasing. You can then adjust VE to get back to the original AFR.

I don't like the mapve table 1:1 because it can't account for proper VEs throughout the 3D VE map. Many people that I help tunee SD has seems to have their trim seither maxed out or way out of whack, which can easily be fixed with better tuning of the VE tables. Having one of the two 2D table fixed limits the ability to tune the resultant 3D VE map.

 

Do you adjust the RPM VE in closed or open loop?

 

Both. Same goes for map VE. There are independent of open or closed loop.

Obviously, for closed loop you can use your fuel trims to check accuracy and for open loop you can check your AFRs.

 

my car starts up really lean (~17 afr) for the first few minutes. after a few minutes of idling, it goes down to 14.5-15 afr which im assuming the VE is correct. What table would fix the lean start? Is it the low coolant temp timing trim map?

 

mine still cruises fat in 4th. Im not sure what the problem is now. Given, i havent devoted much time to tuning it because of work lately, but the adjustments i have made arent really doing anything for it. Any ideas ?

 

What are your STFT and LTFTs?

It may be lean at initial startup because it's running in open loop. Once the coolant temp gets high enough for close loop, the fuel trims may bring your AFR back to normal.

What do you VE tables look like?

 

What do your STFT/LTFTs look like? What do your VE tables look like?