EvoScan AFRMAP not mattching "High Octane Fuel Map" in V7 Rom
EvoScan AFRMAP not mattching "High Octane Fuel Map" in V7 Rom
For example:
AFRMAP:
12.97655
RPM:
3875
Load1B:
184
But my V7 Rom's High Octain Fuel Map says it should be about 11.3 for that load and RPM.
For what it's worth, Wideband logged: 13.1
I'm confident I'm at fault here, but anyone know wtf I messed up?
Any help would be appreciated.
AFRMAP:
12.97655
RPM:
3875
Load1B:
184
But my V7 Rom's High Octain Fuel Map says it should be about 11.3 for that load and RPM.
For what it's worth, Wideband logged: 13.1
I'm confident I'm at fault here, but anyone know wtf I messed up?
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks for the quick response.
Next question, after loading V7, my 2byte is now way off. It reads super high, like over a thousand at times. Any ideas? I'm pretty sure it was perfect before the V7 conversion. It looks like i have a multiplier somewhere it shouldn't be, possible in EvoScan? Do you know the Evoscan formula for that variable?
thanks!
Next question, after loading V7, my 2byte is now way off. It reads super high, like over a thousand at times. Any ideas? I'm pretty sure it was perfect before the V7 conversion. It looks like i have a multiplier somewhere it shouldn't be, possible in EvoScan? Do you know the Evoscan formula for that variable?
thanks!
V7 doesn't have 2-byte logging setup by default because Tephra say's to use 1-byte logging now.
I'm fuzzy on the rest of this, but the 1-byte load is a raw load, which I believe should read higher then the temp/baro compensated load.
I'm fuzzy on the rest of this, but the 1-byte load is a raw load, which I believe should read higher then the temp/baro compensated load.
Trending Topics
Anyway, i found this:
2byte to 1byte load factor
- simple divide routine to convert 2byte load into a 1byte field and then Evoscan will convert back to 2byte.
- MATCH you LoadFactor in ECUFLASH to the SAME as your Eval in evoscan
- MaxLoad is loadfactor * 255, ie a loadfactor of 1.2 will allow a Max Loggable Load of 306, 1.3 = 331... etc (choose an appropriate loadfactor based on your existing max load)
So i went into my Rom, changed the factor to 1.4 and then went into Evo Scan and changed the Eval to 1.4*x
I'll attempt a log on the way home today, but does this seem right to anyone else here?
Eitherway, this kinda puts me back to my original question :-/
or my 2btye load reading way off?
Because changing my "eval" formula in evoscan I think is required for it work properly...?
Last edited by Carloverx; Aug 24, 2010 at 11:04 AM.
As far as changing the value to 1.4 I believe you did it correctly if you changed it in both evoscan and ecuflash. That should increase your maximum load to around 360, but I don't think it will help with your problem.
Edit:
I don't think it will help either of your problems. Not sure why there is the mismatch, but I vaguely remember reading something about mismatches in V7 and how they are supposed to be there in the V7 thread. It's a huge thread, and I'm only on page 22 so if there is information about the mismatches.
Found it, see if this helps https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...ml#post7609716 look around post #273
Also my two-byte load is way off in V7 I'm assuming that's because my mutt table isn't setup for it because V7 isn't supposed to be logging it, So you could go and set it up yourself as long as the table entries aren't being used for something else, but I don't think that logging 2-byte is going to help you much.
Edit:
I don't think it will help either of your problems. Not sure why there is the mismatch, but I vaguely remember reading something about mismatches in V7 and how they are supposed to be there in the V7 thread. It's a huge thread, and I'm only on page 22 so if there is information about the mismatches.
Found it, see if this helps https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...ml#post7609716 look around post #273
Also my two-byte load is way off in V7 I'm assuming that's because my mutt table isn't setup for it because V7 isn't supposed to be logging it, So you could go and set it up yourself as long as the table entries aren't being used for something else, but I don't think that logging 2-byte is going to help you much.
Last edited by rgar; Aug 24, 2010 at 11:58 AM.
But yeah, still, Tephra i think recommends using 1byte anyway
lol
Here IS something relevant to one of your issues, from the V7 thread
So you'll need to reconfigure the MUT table if you want to log 2-byte load.
Preconfigured MUT Requests
MUT00+MUT01 = 2byte airflow (ie MrFreds mod in g/s or lb/min)
MUT02+MUT03 = 2byte airflow (ie MAFHz)
MUT40 = 1byte gear
MUT41 = 1byte load
MUT42+MUT43 = 2byte SPEED/RPM ratio (to get your gear ratios correct - if you need to)
2byte load AND 2byte RPM are no longer included and IMHO not needed!
MUT00+MUT01 = 2byte airflow (ie MrFreds mod in g/s or lb/min)
MUT02+MUT03 = 2byte airflow (ie MAFHz)
MUT40 = 1byte gear
MUT41 = 1byte load
MUT42+MUT43 = 2byte SPEED/RPM ratio (to get your gear ratios correct - if you need to)
2byte load AND 2byte RPM are no longer included and IMHO not needed!
I'ma leave it alone like i before, it seems 1byte is the weapon of choice anyway.
So why don't my AFRMAP logs match my fuel map



