So when you say 1byte is more stable do you mean the factory 1byte or the 2byte to 1byte mod... basically should I just change my mut tables back to the standard definitions?

When logging with mitsulogger the load doesn't come out. It says something about division. And I never really understood which load I should be logging in EvoScan.. LoadCalculated I think..So basically what load should I be logging for good measurements.

Im trying to get the maptracer to work so I can start looking at where i am on my maps. Im failing currently. Seems so simple yet i still mess it up. There really should be an instruction manual for EvoScan. Your paying for a license so there should be some direction. In my opinion anyway.

 

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...-work-lol.html

 

I saw that thread before and skimmed it briefly. Maybe I should have another look. Thanks for posting the link!

 

IMHO you should be logging 2byteload (temp + baro).
1Byte still spikes, just not as often as 2byte. The spikes mean NOTHING just ignore them... Using 1byteload ONLY speeds up the logger, as its 1 less byte to log, to get the same results as 2byteload "raw". What Ive found in my reading, is that the ecu follows 2byteload (temp + baro) in its fuel/timing routines, so (to me) it would be best to tune the car w/ 2byteload (temp + baro).
U dont need to change the definitions for the MUT table (in the .xml), you just need to change the values, for the request ID of 2byte or 1byte. The values for 2byte/1byte, temp + baro, etc. all have different values that go into the MUT table, so make sure you add the correct value in the correct request ID.
You can go into EvoScan, look at the request ID. 2byteload for me is 00 , 01. Then you go into your MUT table in EcuFlash, and look up 00 , 01. I believe 8450/8451 is 1 byteload, 6B41/6B42 for 2byte "raw" , 6B48/6B49 is 2byte "temp + baro"
Keep in mind this is for "88590715" and the actual values that go into the request ID's might change per rom...

If youre using evoscan 2.6, and logging 2byteload, all you "should" need to do is load up your rom. If your using a v.7 rom u will need to drop the .xml posted up by fostytou, located in the wiki, and a couple threads around here, into your "roms" folder in evoscan, and "should" be good to go!

thanks again fosty!

 

Subd

 

with the rom ethan has i also recommend logging 2byte load and 2byte rpm. download the latest beta EvoScanv2.7beta5. By default this version of evoscan bases map tracing off 2byte load and 2byte rpm. No need to edit the MUT table in 94170015 rom either , the correct MUT requests are already defined in evoscan 2.7 beta5.

when logging its best to log the least values as neccessary, that way you dont slow down your receive rate for datalogging.

 

Ok so Ive been playing around a little with smoothing my timing map. I started by trying to make my idle area look a little better. The big block of 10* at idle all the way to 100 load worked pretty well on keeping the idle solid but i seem to be getting some part throttle low rpm and load knock. Im assuming its from the way things were around the low rpm/load areas?

So heres what i tried doing. I looked at my stock ROM in that area and tried migrating it into the new tune. I changed the block of 5* into the block of 10" and smoothed a little bit. I also kept the bar of increased timing around the 50 load column for the AC i think? How does this look? Ive changed the high octane and the low octane maps. Left side is unchanged and the right side is the modified idle region maps. Ive labeled them accordingly.



Secondly ive found this spreadsheet that helps you smooth timing and fuel maps. Autosmoothing tool fuel and ignition maps

I ran these two new maps that ive made through them ONCE. What do you think? It didnt change a lot but has basically changed the line where part throttle meets WOT?



Thoughts?

 

Definitely an improvement. You will notice at how much smoother your car will run too.

 

ya its much smoother, but the end should not have all those 6's and 7's. smooth that area out more, infact lower those numbers... at that rpm at that load.

what gas are you using? im sure you can use much more than 13*

 

6 at 260 load is ok so long as boost is low. You can't determine his timing because you don't have a fuel table and a log of a pull to go with it.

Remember....every car is different.

 

6* at peak torque is not ok though.

 

i would bet that 3* will be his cars mbt, so why run higher and create higher egt?

 

Soo the timing down low looks ok?

Also should I back down the timing at peak torque? It doesnt seem to be knocking at WOT. Ive attached a two logs that are taken with the origianl maps above. (although they all have the same WOT characteristics. So this is with that 6* at peak etc... Seems to be no to minimal knock. Ive logged 2byte load and rpm on those as well.

Boost is quite low in my opinion. 22psi with an occasional touch of 23psi. see the logs though and you can asses for your self the boost level.

Id like to try this new map that ive created if you guys think its not too drastically different. i also havent touched my fuel table at all. I could run it through this smoothing spreadsheet as well though...

 

what gas are you using?

 

93 octane. and this is prob about as crappy as it gets for gas. I was out and had to fill up to the closest place to work. It was a phillips 66 place or something. Never seen another one before. Either way its 93 octane. I dont want to be limited to just for instance shell 93. The car needs to be a monster in all weather and all gas conditons. (93 of course)