Going back to 94170015
Appauldd,
I am just now preparing to go V7 (94170715) from V5.10. V5.10 works perfectly for me, but I desperately need the increased map resolution, which is the only reason why I am upgrading.
Having relatively recently been exposed to the V7 happenings, I find both Tephra's V7 XML (posted as with fixed gearing and tested by several, including yourself), and I find your V7 XML on your Wiki page. Obviously, opening your and Tephra's XML files in ECUFlash reveal two very different looking interfaces. Additionally, his file is dated as last modified in Dec, 2009, and yours as April, 2010. This is somewhat confusing, so I'm trying to gain a better understanding of the divergence.
Given all the various updates and pages of discussions with updates happening in between, my question to you is very simple. Given my particulars (Omni 4-bar, Load Based Boost Control):
(1) Is your XML functionally advantageous vs. Tephra's much simpler appearing XML?
(2) Are they both relatively free of obvious errors?
(3) Is it simply that yours provides more detail that doesn't necessarily impact the most pertinent user functions?
I really appreciate short answers to these three questions, which would provide clarification to anyone coming into this at this point in time.
I am just now preparing to go V7 (94170715) from V5.10. V5.10 works perfectly for me, but I desperately need the increased map resolution, which is the only reason why I am upgrading.
Having relatively recently been exposed to the V7 happenings, I find both Tephra's V7 XML (posted as with fixed gearing and tested by several, including yourself), and I find your V7 XML on your Wiki page. Obviously, opening your and Tephra's XML files in ECUFlash reveal two very different looking interfaces. Additionally, his file is dated as last modified in Dec, 2009, and yours as April, 2010. This is somewhat confusing, so I'm trying to gain a better understanding of the divergence.
Given all the various updates and pages of discussions with updates happening in between, my question to you is very simple. Given my particulars (Omni 4-bar, Load Based Boost Control):
(1) Is your XML functionally advantageous vs. Tephra's much simpler appearing XML?
(2) Are they both relatively free of obvious errors?
(3) Is it simply that yours provides more detail that doesn't necessarily impact the most pertinent user functions?
I really appreciate short answers to these three questions, which would provide clarification to anyone coming into this at this point in time.
Newbie
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
New to the Evo scene, and i'm looking for file i need to flash my Ecu with. I got an 03 Evo VIII GSR 5-speed. Currently just running a stock 015 map from mitsu to try and eliminate the P0300, but need to update so i can disable the code for good. Does anyone have a link to the file i need?
Newbie
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Everything you need is on the Wiki page. I think I said that already.
http://evoecu.logic.net/wiki/File:94170715-v7.zip
http://evoecu.logic.net/wiki/TephraMod
You do realize that you still have to copy all of your specific tables, settings, and tune over to the new ROM.
I actually prefer the universal ROM - 9653 - on my '03. I suggest trying them both and use the one you think runs the best on your car.
More info here: https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...hramod-v7.html Gook luck!
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 7
From: Northern KY near Cincy
Appauldd,
I am just now preparing to go V7 (94170715) from V5.10. V5.10 works perfectly for me, but I desperately need the increased map resolution, which is the only reason why I am upgrading.
Having relatively recently been exposed to the V7 happenings, I find both Tephra's V7 XML (posted as with fixed gearing and tested by several, including yourself), and I find your V7 XML on your Wiki page. Obviously, opening your and Tephra's XML files in ECUFlash reveal two very different looking interfaces. Additionally, his file is dated as last modified in Dec, 2009, and yours as April, 2010. This is somewhat confusing, so I'm trying to gain a better understanding of the divergence.
Given all the various updates and pages of discussions with updates happening in between, my question to you is very simple. Given my particulars (Omni 4-bar, Load Based Boost Control):
(1) Is your XML functionally advantageous vs. Tephra's much simpler appearing XML?
(2) Are they both relatively free of obvious errors?
(3) Is it simply that yours provides more detail that doesn't necessarily impact the most pertinent user functions?
I really appreciate short answers to these three questions, which would provide clarification to anyone coming into this at this point in time.
I am just now preparing to go V7 (94170715) from V5.10. V5.10 works perfectly for me, but I desperately need the increased map resolution, which is the only reason why I am upgrading.
Having relatively recently been exposed to the V7 happenings, I find both Tephra's V7 XML (posted as with fixed gearing and tested by several, including yourself), and I find your V7 XML on your Wiki page. Obviously, opening your and Tephra's XML files in ECUFlash reveal two very different looking interfaces. Additionally, his file is dated as last modified in Dec, 2009, and yours as April, 2010. This is somewhat confusing, so I'm trying to gain a better understanding of the divergence.
Given all the various updates and pages of discussions with updates happening in between, my question to you is very simple. Given my particulars (Omni 4-bar, Load Based Boost Control):
(1) Is your XML functionally advantageous vs. Tephra's much simpler appearing XML?
(2) Are they both relatively free of obvious errors?
(3) Is it simply that yours provides more detail that doesn't necessarily impact the most pertinent user functions?
I really appreciate short answers to these three questions, which would provide clarification to anyone coming into this at this point in time.
1... My XML has much more in it as I am one who enjoys having everything available even if I don't need it.
2... Yes, both are free from errors.
3... See answer 1.
Were those answers short enough ? ?
Appauld, in your maf scaling table, it says the 140 adder is included. Have the values on the right just not had that 140 added to them yet or is the 140 going on behind the scenes? hard to explain but I prepared a phenem 9653 rom last week and got my maf scaling pretty close. On his rom (with the same table title), the numbers are waaay bigger. Do I just copy/paste them in or start over with your scaling?
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 7
From: Northern KY near Cincy
The 140 adder is already in there. If you have your MAF scaled away from stock, you need to add 140 to all of the values and then input them into the table.
OR
Change the scaling back to what the stock 94170015 is, then past in your values, then change it back to the 140 added scaling. This is how I did it.
The adder was put in to save time when doing any scaling as all you would need to do is add or subtract value as opposed to adding in the adder, make your adjustment, subtract the adder, and then input the change.
OR
Change the scaling back to what the stock 94170015 is, then past in your values, then change it back to the 140 added scaling. This is how I did it.
The adder was put in to save time when doing any scaling as all you would need to do is add or subtract value as opposed to adding in the adder, make your adjustment, subtract the adder, and then input the change.
the first entry in yours is a default of 145. the first entry my phenem 9653 rom is 372. I completely understand why the adder was added in. Its just that phenem's defaults look to be around 140 more than the stock values, yours doesnt. im really just curious. Im sure it will be obvious if the default values are off by 140 when I start it. The neighbors should be up by now, I'll give it a shot.
thanks for the response and all your hard work.
thanks for the response and all your hard work.
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (22)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,408
Likes: 7
From: Northern KY near Cincy
the first entry in yours is a default of 145. the first entry my phenem 9653 rom is 372. I completely understand why the adder was added in. Its just that phenem's defaults look to be around 140 more than the stock values, yours doesnt. im really just curious. Im sure it will be obvious if the default values are off by 140 when I start it. The neighbors should be up by now, I'll give it a shot.
thanks for the response and all your hard work.
thanks for the response and all your hard work.
357.363
366.141
382.441
394.98
403.758
410.027
415.043
420.059
423.82
426.328
430.09
433.852
436.359
446.391
453.914
458.93
467.707
471.469
472.723
470.215
466.453
so it was just defaulted to show the stock 9417 scaling. I switched it to show the maf + adder scaling. But how do I get it to show more digits? All I see is 3.., when it should be 347.5 (as seen in the 9653 rom). sorry if its a noob question but nothing is apparent in the xml or map definition.