**Need Help setting up V7???** Here is your answer
Apr 8, 2010, 01:23 AM
#211
Anyone seeing an issue with the gear based boost crossover. No 6 th gear here, and I just copied what was in the 5th gear location to 6th gear? Same goes for the 0 column...? Does this function work strictly off of the speed to gear? I dont need the MAT sensor upgrade. i am still on MAF. I assumed when i read the initial post by MFRED that it would run on the stock MAF.
Also, trying to tune and the boost error in my logs stays the same, -3.048...any thoughts?
The boost is registering, the WGDC is registering, I have verified the EvoScan deffinitons are correct, running out of thoughts.
My ROM deff is 94170715.
Thanks in advance.
Also, trying to tune and the boost error in my logs stays the same, -3.048...any thoughts?
The boost is registering, the WGDC is registering, I have verified the EvoScan deffinitons are correct, running out of thoughts.
My ROM deff is 94170715.
Thanks in advance.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...-issues-3.html
Apr 8, 2010, 01:35 AM
#213
I have both problems (gear is stuck at 1, and boost error is not reading right), and the hex address fix is the first attempt for solving the gear-based-boost-control function. I haven't had a chance to test the hex fix solution yet. I will do it tonight see if it solves the problem. You can try it yourself too.
Apr 8, 2010, 04:49 AM
#214
Newbie
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cyprus
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi
First post here. I have been reading a lot though.
I have a JDM EVO VIII. I have crossed over to V7 96530706 in the last few days and before that 9626009 tephra v5
What I have understood reading my logs through Evoscan (logging 1 byte load) is that the ECU sees a lower load than the Evoscan sees, by a factor of 1.1 approx. I say that because I log advance and the ign advance in my map shows different values than the ones that I get.
For instance in 240 load and 4000 rpm I should have an advance of 2 degrees according to my map, but I log 6 degrees (which corresponds to a load of 220 and 4000 rpm)
I have started looking at older logs (96260009 with 2 byte load) and I see the same there.
What could be the problem and how can I fix it?
Thx in advance, keep up the good work
First post here. I have been reading a lot though.
I have a JDM EVO VIII. I have crossed over to V7 96530706 in the last few days and before that 9626009 tephra v5
What I have understood reading my logs through Evoscan (logging 1 byte load) is that the ECU sees a lower load than the Evoscan sees, by a factor of 1.1 approx. I say that because I log advance and the ign advance in my map shows different values than the ones that I get.
For instance in 240 load and 4000 rpm I should have an advance of 2 degrees according to my map, but I log 6 degrees (which corresponds to a load of 220 and 4000 rpm)
I have started looking at older logs (96260009 with 2 byte load) and I see the same there.
What could be the problem and how can I fix it?
Thx in advance, keep up the good work
Apr 8, 2010, 06:23 AM
#215
Anyone seeing an issue with the gear based boost crossover. No 6 th gear here, and I just copied what was in the 5th gear location to 6th gear? Same goes for the 0 column...? Does this function work strictly off of the speed to gear? I hope I dont need the MAT sensor upgrade. I am still on MAF. I assumed when i read the initial post by MFRED that it would run on the stock MAF.
Also, trying to tune and the boost error in my logs stays the same, -3.048...any thoughts?
The boost is registering, the WGDC is registering, I have verified the EvoScan deffinitons are correct, running out of thoughts.
My ROM deff is 94170715.
Thanks in advance.
Also, trying to tune and the boost error in my logs stays the same, -3.048...any thoughts?
The boost is registering, the WGDC is registering, I have verified the EvoScan deffinitons are correct, running out of thoughts.
My ROM deff is 94170715.
Thanks in advance.
Check out the wiki for help: http://evoecu.logic.net/wiki/Main_Page
Apr 8, 2010, 11:54 AM
#216
Did you setup your RPM/Speed to define all your gear crossover points?
Check out the wiki for help: http://evoecu.logic.net/wiki/Main_Page
Check out the wiki for help: http://evoecu.logic.net/wiki/Main_Page
As for the gear based boost control, you need to make sure to set up the "RPM Speed to Gear" table properly.
0 6
43.3186 5
61.9912 4
84.6903 3
117.301 2
176.195 1
2899.78 0
"Main Map Wastegate Duty" for the 0 and the 6 gear columns should be all 0
0 6
43.3186 5
61.9912 4
84.6903 3
117.301 2
176.195 1
2899.78 0
"Main Map Wastegate Duty" for the 0 and the 6 gear columns should be all 0
Apr 8, 2010, 12:22 PM
#217
Newbie
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cyprus
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi
First post here. I have been reading a lot though.
I have a JDM EVO VIII. I have crossed over to V7 96530706 in the last few days and before that 9626009 tephra v5
What I have understood reading my logs through Evoscan (logging 1 byte load) is that the ECU sees a lower load than the Evoscan sees, by a factor of 1.1 approx. I say that because I log advance and the ign advance in my map shows different values than the ones that I get.
For instance in 240 load and 4000 rpm I should have an advance of 2 degrees according to my map, but I log 6 degrees (which corresponds to a load of 220 and 4000 rpm)
I have started looking at older logs (96260009 with 2 byte load) and I see the same there.
What could be the problem and how can I fix it?
Thx in advance, keep up the good work
First post here. I have been reading a lot though.
I have a JDM EVO VIII. I have crossed over to V7 96530706 in the last few days and before that 9626009 tephra v5
What I have understood reading my logs through Evoscan (logging 1 byte load) is that the ECU sees a lower load than the Evoscan sees, by a factor of 1.1 approx. I say that because I log advance and the ign advance in my map shows different values than the ones that I get.
For instance in 240 load and 4000 rpm I should have an advance of 2 degrees according to my map, but I log 6 degrees (which corresponds to a load of 220 and 4000 rpm)
I have started looking at older logs (96260009 with 2 byte load) and I see the same there.
What could be the problem and how can I fix it?
Thx in advance, keep up the good work
Is there a chance my MAF readings are off? Wouldn't that affect my 1byte load as well?
Apr 8, 2010, 03:30 PM
#218
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Milwaukee ish
Posts: 775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So I have a problem; I successfully converted my 96940011 rom to a phenem V7 96530706 rom and got the car running well with the new rom. I did this last night but when I tried to open my saved V7 rom today, none of the V7 tables appear, only the tables I had on my stock 96940011. And when I open the tables all the axis and values are gibberish. I read the image off the ecu and got the same result. Also when I look under the ROM Id, it still says 96940011 after internal ID. What am I missing. Also car still runs with all the tephra options I had setup yesturday.
Apr 8, 2010, 05:31 PM
#219
So I have a problem; I successfully converted my 96940011 rom to a phenem V7 96530706 rom and got the car running well with the new rom. I did this last night but when I tried to open my saved V7 rom today, none of the V7 tables appear, only the tables I had on my stock 96940011. And when I open the tables all the axis and values are gibberish. I read the image off the ecu and got the same result. Also when I look under the ROM Id, it still says 96940011 after internal ID. What am I missing. Also car still runs with all the tephra options I had setup yesturday.
P.S. - don't ever change the ROM ID unless we tell you to....
Apr 10, 2010, 10:21 AM
#223
Newbie
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cyprus
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thx Freddie, but I don't think so.
The map is pretty smooth and I see large differences in logging.
To test this I flashed the original rom back on the car (93660005) and logged today. I saw that that happened even with the original rom. I get more advance than what I have in the maps for the high cells (>200 load ) and less timing than the map for the low cells (<100 load).
How does the ECU decide what load to take in account in order to decide the timing? (I logged 1 byte load, load calculated, 2byte load and the result was the same). Because my timing is unpredictable.I end up with the timing for 230 load when in fact the load is 260.
Is there an error somewhere? I think I have tuned around it but something is not right I think
The map is pretty smooth and I see large differences in logging.
To test this I flashed the original rom back on the car (93660005) and logged today. I saw that that happened even with the original rom. I get more advance than what I have in the maps for the high cells (>200 load ) and less timing than the map for the low cells (<100 load).
How does the ECU decide what load to take in account in order to decide the timing? (I logged 1 byte load, load calculated, 2byte load and the result was the same). Because my timing is unpredictable.I end up with the timing for 230 load when in fact the load is 260.
Is there an error somewhere? I think I have tuned around it but something is not right I think
Apr 10, 2010, 12:45 PM
#224
I think you can have issues with what is logged in load depending on the version of ecuflash and evoscan you are using. Do you have a recent evoscan and ecuflash? say 2.6 and 1.4xxxx
also, sorry for the thought, make sure its 1byte you are logging and not 1byte4 or whatever it is.
also, sorry for the thought, make sure its 1byte you are logging and not 1byte4 or whatever it is.