Notices
Evo X Engine Management / Tuning Forums Discuss the major engine management systems.

The PCMScan Thread

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 27, 2009 | 10:56 AM
  #76  
flagg77's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Stoked:

I'm still seeing that you cap out at 75inHg though. I think the reason your boost is going past the 22/23 that we see is due to the way in which pcmscan does that calculation:

ManifoldRelativePressurePSI - BarometricPressurePSI - 14.70

Perhaps in your case the 14.7 psi (atmospheric pressure at sea level) constant is not quite accurate if your @ a higher altitude?

Reply
Old Mar 27, 2009 | 11:39 AM
  #77  
stokEd's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 1
From: Denver, CO
Originally Posted by flagg77
Stoked:

I'm still seeing that you cap out at 75inHg though. I think the reason your boost is going past the 22/23 that we see is due to the way in which pcmscan does that calculation:

ManifoldRelativePressurePSI - BarometricPressurePSI - 14.70

Perhaps in your case the 14.7 psi (atmospheric pressure at sea level) constant is not quite accurate if your @ a higher altitude?

Yes, you're absolutely right, my local barometric pressure is ~12 psi which explains why I'm able to see 25 psi when you sea level guys get stuck at 23psi. Altitude FTW? When I made the post last night I was a little confused over reports of the cap being 1.5 bar.

The AP recently received some firmware updates that apparently allows logging beyond the cap. Maybe if we ask nicely...

Here you can see I'm showing barometric pressure of 83 kPa = 12.0 psi:

Reply
Old Mar 27, 2009 | 11:44 AM
  #78  
flagg77's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Originally Posted by stokEd
The AP recently received some firmware updates that apparently allows logging beyond the cap. Maybe if we ask nicely...

Ha!

I may or may not be constantly lurking that thread in case they share

Reply
Old Mar 27, 2009 | 04:19 PM
  #79  
nj1266's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,254
Likes: 13
From: USA
Which Throttle Position are you guys logging. I am logging SAE.TP Absolute Throttle Position but that only goes to 86.7%. Do any of the other TPs go 100%?
Reply
Old Mar 27, 2009 | 04:47 PM
  #80  
GST Motorsports's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,366
Likes: 2
From: Hayward
Originally Posted by nj1266
Which Throttle Position are you guys logging. I am logging SAE.TP Absolute Throttle Position but that only goes to 86.7%. Do any of the other TPs go 100%?
87% is normal and WOT.
Reply
Old Mar 28, 2009 | 12:13 PM
  #81  
nj1266's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,254
Likes: 13
From: USA
Originally Posted by GST Motorsports
87% is normal and WOT.
I know that I guess my question should have been stated better. Basically, in the image in post 77 there are multiple Throttle parameters, but do any of those go to 100% at WOT. I have only tested the one that goes to ~87%.

Anyone test the others?

The reason I want 100% is that it makes it much easier to edit the log once it is exported in csv format. Finding 100 is much easier than finding 87. It might not be possible to get 100 given that the Evo X has a throttle by wire.
Reply
Old Mar 29, 2009 | 09:34 PM
  #82  
GST Motorsports's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,366
Likes: 2
From: Hayward
Originally Posted by nj1266
I know that I guess my question should have been stated better. Basically, in the image in post 77 there are multiple Throttle parameters, but do any of those go to 100% at WOT. I have only tested the one that goes to ~87%.

Anyone test the others?

The reason I want 100% is that it makes it much easier to edit the log once it is exported in csv format. Finding 100 is much easier than finding 87. It might not be possible to get 100 given that the Evo X has a throttle by wire.
Sorry I meant 87% is normal and the new "100%"
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2009 | 09:08 AM
  #83  
yukevin's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
From: new york
PCMscan

Does anyone has a problem with RPM & Load, while logging. It seems like it is jumping all over the place.
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2009 | 12:27 PM
  #84  
verkion's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
From: Over there!
Let me guess, PCMScan crashed at some point and you killed it? LOL. A couple of us have had this problem. I managed to solve it by uninstalling the Tactrix Drivers from the device manager, (deleting them completely off the computer), then uninstalling ECUFlash, then PCMScan. Then, reboot, and reinstall ECUFlash and then PCMScan. That fixed the wild bouncing/crazy values.

verkion
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2009 | 04:28 PM
  #85  
yukevin's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
From: new york
Still not working

Do you guys have any more suggestion? I am still have problem with the RPM and Load.
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2009 | 08:02 PM
  #86  
Noize's Avatar
EvoM Administrator
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (24)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 8,849
Likes: 138
From: Franklin, TN
My car is going on the dyno again Friday. In addition to the UICP, exhaust components and the GST boost pill are going in.

I don't want to use PCMScan to log (at all), so I might spring for an EcuTeK license on this car so I can have a real logger.
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2009 | 08:35 PM
  #87  
GST Motorsports's Avatar
Account Disabled
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,366
Likes: 2
From: Hayward
Originally Posted by Noize
My car is going on the dyno again Friday. In addition to the UICP, exhaust components and the GST boost pill are going in.

I don't want to use PCMScan to log (at all), so I might spring for an EcuTeK license on this car so I can have a real logger.
You're going to kick yourself in the *** if you do that and Evoscan comes out next week.
Reply
Old Apr 6, 2009 | 10:10 PM
  #88  
nj1266's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,254
Likes: 13
From: USA
Originally Posted by Noize
My car is going on the dyno again Friday. In addition to the UICP, exhaust components and the GST boost pill are going in.

I don't want to use PCMScan to log (at all), so I might spring for an EcuTeK license on this car so I can have a real logger.
PCMScan is a real logger. It is even faster than Evoscan. The only thing that it does not log is knock sum. If you know how to read a timing curve, then you can tune w/o knock sum.

Before mrfred figured out how to log WGDCC, we tuned ECU boost w/o it. If you know how WGDC and BDEL interact, then tuning ECU boost should be very easy.

Besides, I am sure that Bryan provided you with all the WGDC and BDEL settings necessary for the pill.
Reply
Old Apr 7, 2009 | 07:59 AM
  #89  
criptballer's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
From: Utah
questions for you guys

I'm trying to log timing but my RPM's and Load are going crazy, do you guys know what PID's i need to check or uncheck for it to work properly? and which goes on the columns and rows? Do i also need to change the min and max counts of each?

also, I have an AEM wideband, what do i need to do to have PCMscan read it and log?
Reply
Old Apr 7, 2009 | 02:52 PM
  #90  
verkion's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
From: Over there!
See Quote...I ran into this problem, and this is how I fixed it.

Originally Posted by verkion
Let me guess, PCMScan crashed at some point and you killed it? LOL. A couple of us have had this problem. I managed to solve it by uninstalling the Tactrix Drivers from the device manager, (deleting them completely off the computer), then uninstalling ECUFlash, then PCMScan. Then, reboot, and reinstall ECUFlash and then PCMScan. That fixed the wild bouncing/crazy values.

verkion
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:45 AM.