UPS website says it's scheduled for delivery on May 18th. Bleh.... another couple of weeks to go I see.

 

oh man, i got 2-3 days!!!

 

I wonder how accurate this is: (EVOScan HP & Torque Estimate)

 

it all depends if you have your gearing right. do you happen to know if the gears are the same between 02 and 03? if so what are you putting in for them

 

Yea.. the vehicle settings probably aren't right... I basically used the Evo 8 settings, but reduced the weight to 2701 lbs as found on a technical specs website.

 

I see, im going to try and research that and see what i can come up with for gear ratios. ill keep yah informed

 

Glad to see you got the right def file in there. The maps look much better.

Also, about the HP/TQ curves - I was just researching all that today. Here are the gear ratios for the 02-07 Lancers (tranny # F5M42)

mph @ 6000 rpm on 195/60/15
1st ... 3.583 @ 31.8 mph
2nd ... 1.947 @ 58.52 mph
3rd ... 1.379 @ 82.63 mph
4th ... 1.030 @ 110.63 mph
5th ... 0.767 @ 148.56 mph

Final Drive...3.722

Input those values as well as the proper weight and you should get pretty accurate numbers.

I'll be doing full out tuning on my Lancer tomorrow night, pushing for 11 PSI. My target AFRs will be 11.1-11.2, with no knock, and EGTs below 1600* F. Wish me luck

 

LOL... good ole Z_Lancer... just a wealth of knowledge!

Actually... those gear ratios really messed up the HP/Tq estimates... actually, it put HP up to 185 and Tq to 174.

I just found this link: http://outlander.kiev.ua/manual/Outl...004800-22A.pdf

It's a Mitsubishi manual for the F5M42 (2WD) transmission, and has the following gear ratios:
1st... 3.583
2nd...1.947
3rd... 1.379
4th... 1.030
5th... 0.820
Reverse... 3.363
Final Drive... 4.625

I put those ratios into EVOScan and got a result of 109hp/102 ft.lbs of torque. I think these just might be the correct ratios.

 

Nope, those are actually not the right ones. At least according to Rhyzin, one of our EvoM gurus: https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=62415

 

You have to realize as well that it also depends on your tire size/diameter. There are actually several variables to you have to get right:

* Gear Ratios
* Tire Diameter
* Vehicle Weight
* Front Surface Area ( we are not the same as an EVO)
* Drag Coefficient (again, not the same as the EVO)
* Altitude Pressure
* Air Temp

Once all those are properly inputed, then you should get pretty close numbers

 

Hmm... weird. Maybe there's a flaw in the 4th gear pull log that I'm using, but those gear ratios throw it way off, while the one in the link I posted are really close according to a dyno graph that lancerrally45 sent me, and we basically have the same engine mods. His dyno had him @ 112 HP, 121 Tq... I dunno, maybe I'll just have to wait until I really dyno it this summer!

Edit:
True true.... wanna try and gather up what our surface area and drag coeff. are? lol j/k

 

Your ignition map is wrong....

You are supose to see retard ignition in the low octane map, if you look at the 60% load, you see more advance in low octane map vs high octane... (20 in high octane vs 26 in low octane at 3000 rpm...)

If you take a look at the first post of this thread, you will see 4 to 5 degree of retard between 60 to 100%. (26 in high octane vs 21 in low octane....)

 

yeah this is just what is on my stock ecu. im waiting on my wideband to fully tune it. it should be here with-in this nexted week

 

The engine in your file is for a Outlander... (http://outlander.kiev.ua/manual/Outlander_2.4_AT_MT/GR00004800-22A.pdf

I think Zlancer have the rigth one.

 

I think is more your definition file is wrong.... In the first post of Zlancer, It's the stock map comming from is stock ecu without any tuning on it.

My stock map look like the Zlancer, mitsubishi retard the ignition when they get knock... They don't advance. (The engine will boommmm)