***ECUFlash Now For Base Lancers!***
Okay so after reading the tech in this thread and wading through all the other stuff, I see why rescaling very radical at all is unneeded. I tested ECUload versus the 2 byte load in my car this morning and found that it is more accurate than load calc but less than 2 byte. I have a couple of theories about why your car isnt going over 100 load (other than software limitiation) and one of them is the fact that the NA MAF is rated at like 237 or 213 g/s where the Evo is 357.5 g/s ( I have that one memorised). The Evo ECU will hit max load at 379.38% which is where our software runs out.
It would be interesting to see what happens if you swapped in an EVO MAF and used the EVO calibration tables. Heck, Evo injectors would be an easy swap as well since there is factory latency/scaling already done for you.
Can you log barometer and IAT temps with your Lancers as well?
It would be interesting to see what happens if you swapped in an EVO MAF and used the EVO calibration tables. Heck, Evo injectors would be an easy swap as well since there is factory latency/scaling already done for you.
Can you log barometer and IAT temps with your Lancers as well?
Ive done a bit of editiing on both my fuel maps and the ignition maps and there seems to be a consistant relation between leaner AFRs and knock...
When i leaned out the fuel maps a bit i noticed that the knocksum also increased accordingly. So ultimately what i end up doing is cutting back some fuel and then decreasing the timing in the areas that i had edited. After i got a decent tune with around 12.7ish AFRs with 0 to 1 knocksum comparing my stock ignition maps with my edited i noticed that they were substantially lower...
few pics
Octane maps(High on tops)(Stock maps on right)

Ignition Maps(High on tops)(Stock maps on right)

Just curious as to what others are using for the timing maps cuz it seems like i would lose power if i decreased timing so much...
When i leaned out the fuel maps a bit i noticed that the knocksum also increased accordingly. So ultimately what i end up doing is cutting back some fuel and then decreasing the timing in the areas that i had edited. After i got a decent tune with around 12.7ish AFRs with 0 to 1 knocksum comparing my stock ignition maps with my edited i noticed that they were substantially lower...
few pics
Octane maps(High on tops)(Stock maps on right)

Ignition Maps(High on tops)(Stock maps on right)

Just curious as to what others are using for the timing maps cuz it seems like i would lose power if i decreased timing so much...
Last edited by sykou; Oct 29, 2007 at 12:06 AM. Reason: DO NOT LOAD THIS....Map had been drastically edited since(Maps are for reference only)
Ive done a bit of editiing on both my fuel maps and the ignition maps and there seems to be a consistant relation between leaner AFRs and knock...
When i leaned out the fuel maps a bit i noticed that the knocksum also increased accordingly. So ultimately what i end up doing is cutting back some fuel and then decreasing the timing in the areas that i had edited. After i got a decent tune with around 12.7ish AFRs with 0 to 1 knocksum comparing my stock ignition maps with my edited i noticed that they were substantially lower...
few pics
Octane maps(High on tops)(Stock maps on right)

Ignition Maps(High on tops)(Stock maps on right)

Just curious as to what others are using for the timing maps cuz it seems like i would lose power if i decreased timing so much...
When i leaned out the fuel maps a bit i noticed that the knocksum also increased accordingly. So ultimately what i end up doing is cutting back some fuel and then decreasing the timing in the areas that i had edited. After i got a decent tune with around 12.7ish AFRs with 0 to 1 knocksum comparing my stock ignition maps with my edited i noticed that they were substantially lower...
few pics
Octane maps(High on tops)(Stock maps on right)

Ignition Maps(High on tops)(Stock maps on right)

Just curious as to what others are using for the timing maps cuz it seems like i would lose power if i decreased timing so much...
Senate, there is one other thing I am wondering if you can fill in a detail or 2.
Now the load calc is based on injector scaling, battery voltage, and the AFRmap in the Evoscan xml, so I am wondering why it would be inaccurate if the injector were properly rescaled. I am not arguing, just curious if this is a case of where Mitsu has radically altered programming between cars. The reason I ask is 3Gturbo runs his 3rd gen Eclipse on an Evo ECU so it can obviously communicate with everything else.
Have you compared loadcalc based on the proper injector scaling for your car (232) into that, and if so, how far did it vary from ECUload? What I noticed the other morning was 2 byte load was at a value of for instance (this is the actual variance) was 100 and ECUload was 108 and load calc was 116. This was taking the default xml value of 513 (stock Evo value) and bumping it to 650 the scaling that I use to correct for my 780's.
For Sykou, remember boost is more important than timing. The more air the more fuel, the more of that means more power...timing takes care of itself as long as there is no knock. Always run the highest timing you safely can, but keep it low enough to be knockfree (or 1-3 counts in the case of Mitsubishis).
Now the load calc is based on injector scaling, battery voltage, and the AFRmap in the Evoscan xml, so I am wondering why it would be inaccurate if the injector were properly rescaled. I am not arguing, just curious if this is a case of where Mitsu has radically altered programming between cars. The reason I ask is 3Gturbo runs his 3rd gen Eclipse on an Evo ECU so it can obviously communicate with everything else.
Have you compared loadcalc based on the proper injector scaling for your car (232) into that, and if so, how far did it vary from ECUload? What I noticed the other morning was 2 byte load was at a value of for instance (this is the actual variance) was 100 and ECUload was 108 and load calc was 116. This was taking the default xml value of 513 (stock Evo value) and bumping it to 650 the scaling that I use to correct for my 780's.
For Sykou, remember boost is more important than timing. The more air the more fuel, the more of that means more power...timing takes care of itself as long as there is no knock. Always run the highest timing you safely can, but keep it low enough to be knockfree (or 1-3 counts in the case of Mitsubishis).
^ thanks. I got my timing set to about the highest it can go i believe. If i advance it any more i get knock greater than 3 but gotta do some more refining in the top end tho cuz it seems i can advance it a bit more....
I think i figured how to see i you are getting lean knock or rich knock... lemme know if i'm right or wrong...
K so you start off by leaning out the fuel map to around the afrs you are aiming for. Whilst doing this you should be seeing an increase in knock due to the lack of fuel in the combustion chamber(timing is too advanced in this scenario so you are getting LEAN KNOCK)
So what you do is back off on the timing till you get away from knocking so much. If you decrease the timing too much you will now be in RICH KNOCK(Too much fuel in the combustion and not enough timing to compensate)
If you have an EGT gauge you will see EGTs rise in both Lean Knock and Rich Knock. If you moniter it during each adjustment you will notice the switching point in which it goes from HIGH EGTS to LOWER EGTs and back to HIGH EGTs. You should aim for right in the middle.
EGT gauge is not 100% necessary in tuning your AFR as you can determine which side of knock(rich or lean) you are in by doing what i mentioned above. Nevertheless a definite measurement of EGT will help make things a bit easier.
AFRs also change with the adjustment of timing. Increasing timing leans out the AFR and decreasing richens it slightly.
-well this is what i've gathered while tuning with ECU flash. Would anyone like to maybe chime in and either correct or verify?
I think i figured how to see i you are getting lean knock or rich knock... lemme know if i'm right or wrong...
K so you start off by leaning out the fuel map to around the afrs you are aiming for. Whilst doing this you should be seeing an increase in knock due to the lack of fuel in the combustion chamber(timing is too advanced in this scenario so you are getting LEAN KNOCK)
So what you do is back off on the timing till you get away from knocking so much. If you decrease the timing too much you will now be in RICH KNOCK(Too much fuel in the combustion and not enough timing to compensate)
If you have an EGT gauge you will see EGTs rise in both Lean Knock and Rich Knock. If you moniter it during each adjustment you will notice the switching point in which it goes from HIGH EGTS to LOWER EGTs and back to HIGH EGTs. You should aim for right in the middle.
EGT gauge is not 100% necessary in tuning your AFR as you can determine which side of knock(rich or lean) you are in by doing what i mentioned above. Nevertheless a definite measurement of EGT will help make things a bit easier.
AFRs also change with the adjustment of timing. Increasing timing leans out the AFR and decreasing richens it slightly.
-well this is what i've gathered while tuning with ECU flash. Would anyone like to maybe chime in and either correct or verify?
Sykou, are you boosted? With the tables you posted it doesn't look like a tune for boost. 12.7:1 is a bit lean for boost on pump gas, so I'm assuming you are still NA.
About the timing being lower, you are correct. Lowering timing generally reduces power. Running as lean as you are will definitely require less timing advance than stock. However, if you are encountering knock, reducing timing can actually increase power since you can dial in the exact timing you need rather than the ECU pulling a ton of timing, likely putting you below the timing value you could actually be running and still be knock free.
I just made a new thread about knock with the stock tune on a Lancer. The ECU will pull huge timing from the stock high octane map if you run on low octane fuel and I feel that the ignition maps are overly aggressive for the fuel recommendation.
Your post above seems quite accurate. One thing to consider is that timing makes more power than fuel. You can make nearly the same power anywhere within the .85 - .90 lamda area, so you might be able to squeeze out a little more power with a mix around 12.2:1 and adding a degree or 2 of timing back in.
About the timing being lower, you are correct. Lowering timing generally reduces power. Running as lean as you are will definitely require less timing advance than stock. However, if you are encountering knock, reducing timing can actually increase power since you can dial in the exact timing you need rather than the ECU pulling a ton of timing, likely putting you below the timing value you could actually be running and still be knock free.
I just made a new thread about knock with the stock tune on a Lancer. The ECU will pull huge timing from the stock high octane map if you run on low octane fuel and I feel that the ignition maps are overly aggressive for the fuel recommendation.
Your post above seems quite accurate. One thing to consider is that timing makes more power than fuel. You can make nearly the same power anywhere within the .85 - .90 lamda area, so you might be able to squeeze out a little more power with a mix around 12.2:1 and adding a degree or 2 of timing back in.
^ Just checked on the thread today and that is exactly what i had done in the past few days... Increased the timing quite a bit and aimed for a richer AFR which led to what feels like a better hp increase....thanks
you have to pull your rom from your car and have a def file that is compatible with it. if you are trying to use his def file you need either a copy of his rom or one that is compatible. there are several roms for both 02 and 03
I found a definition for the '03 OZ that worked perfectly for the '02 ES. I'd go out on a limb and say thats the definition you need.
(I tried to find it on OpenECU.org but couldn't. That's where I found the one I'm using though ...)
(I tried to find it on OpenECU.org but couldn't. That's where I found the one I'm using though ...)
senate6268 Tweak3D sykou & last but certainly not least JohnBradley Evolved Member, you guys are my hero's I've been reeding this forum for almost a year cuz I thought it was $150 finally I was gonna bite the bullet and pay it to realize its free. You all have taught me so much and now I can actually ask you..lol I'm your up north link(no evo's) So I have a 2003 lancer es. My car has been down all summer cuz this idiot mehcanic screwed up a T.B bypass cuz I left when he did it got on the higway and warped my head so I got rrm p&p head I also have an underdrive pully, adj. cam gear, gates timeing belt, magnacor wires, k&N, fpr, still need to install fidanza flywheel, 2 optima battteries, and while my car has been down buddy never fixed it so I got it towed from 2 hrs away did the head and the other mods and still wouldn't start anyway my ecu is shot and I bought aem ems, get here tommorow and I'm dying to drive my car but I need base map??? PLEASE?? I beg you? I use royal purple, sunoco 94, and I am just getting started with mods I might take us to the next level and for once its worth it for someone cuz there's no evo's in canada..lol I got complete fiber glass interior gold carbon fiber hood and trunk no back seats fiber glass mould 4 12'JBL's, I won one show before my car got wrecked but prior owner won a couple its been in a magazine but no engine work thats where I come in all this and turbo at some point. Names mike nice to meet ya'll(finally) Thanks in advance cuz I have total faith, one day soon I'll be help'en the newbies but till then u guys gotta teach me!! catch ya
Mike
P.S I love you guys....I'm home!!
Mike
P.S I love you guys....I'm home!!
senate6268 Tweak3D sykou & last but certainly not least JohnBradley Evolved Member, you guys are my hero's I've been reeding this forum for almost a year cuz I thought it was $150 finally I was gonna bite the bullet and pay it to realize its free. You all have taught me so much and now I can actually ask you..lol I'm your up north link(no evo's) So I have a 2003 lancer es. My car has been down all summer cuz this idiot mehcanic screwed up a T.B bypass cuz I left when he did it got on the higway and warped my head so I got rrm p&p head I also have an underdrive pully, adj. cam gear, gates timeing belt, magnacor wires, k&N, fpr, still need to install fidanza flywheel, 2 optima battteries, and while my car has been down buddy never fixed it so I got it towed from 2 hrs away did the head and the other mods and still wouldn't start anyway my ecu is shot and I bought aem ems, get here tommorow and I'm dying to drive my car but I need base map??? PLEASE?? I beg you? I use royal purple, sunoco 94, and I am just getting started with mods I might take us to the next level and for once its worth it for someone cuz there's no evo's in canada..lol I got complete fiber glass interior gold carbon fiber hood and trunk no back seats fiber glass mould 4 12'JBL's, I won one show before my car got wrecked but prior owner won a couple its been in a magazine but no engine work thats where I come in all this and turbo at some point. Names mike nice to meet ya'll(finally) Thanks in advance cuz I have total faith, one day soon I'll be help'en the newbies but till then u guys gotta teach me!! catch ya
Mike
P.S I love you guys....I'm home!!
Mike
P.S I love you guys....I'm home!!
Please post pics in show and shine using photobucket.com








