I was following the numbers down on Map 4 -- Smart Timing

They appear to go from 29, 31, 34, 32, 38?

Just wondering.

 

What the hell? That makes no sense, lemme check mine.

EDIT: yeah, mine too. That boggles the mind. I thought that that scale was generated by giving Xmap a range and stepsize. Vishnu, what be the deal?


d

 

No it is created by typing in the "load" points. That is unless you add a row.

I wonder what the Xede does with a non-monotonic "load" range? Nothing good is my guess.

Hmmm... I wonder how long it will take them to update the maps on the web site?

 

wow. amazing how so many people can miss a typo for so long


*grabs laptop and runs to evo*

 

Well it can't be THAT bad, because if it creates trouble then the noise level will move out of that cell and into one that responds correctly. We also know that it doesn't cause any kind of catastrophic failure in the Xede signal translation because it would be obvious to everyone using SMART.

EDIT: oh wait, there is one degenerate case here. Suppose that an out of order RPM point switched the sign of the row. Then SMART would push the noise UP. Now two things could happen. 1) the rows above push it back down and you have a really unhappy "happy zone". 2) SMART advances timing everywhere above that row and the stock ECU gets really angry and goes into 'your car sucks' mode. Is everybody terrified now? No, really. It's probably not a big deal.



It seems to me to be a big no-no though. I don't think that chiptorque should allow users to specify RPM points that are not strictly monotone. Imagine the headache if there were duplicates!

d

 

Oh wait, I just saw that... needs to be a 36

 

It's because the labels are so SMALL and the fact that the version of Xmap that was on the street for months didn't permit users of the Xede to edit the maps. The latter issue was a huge mistake that thankfully has been resolved.

For reference I changed the 32 to 36, left the data intact and just ran some logs. Zero problems as one would expect.

Notable is that the AFR with the SMART system is right where it should be at a temperature of 28F. In fact I have logs for the substantially the same map set over a temperature range of 16F to 78F, all with substantially identical results!

The only changes to the map set over this period of time was to the boost map. I have been playing with "closing the loop" by using MAF to limit boost. More or less I'm able to stick boost to a maximal 1.5 kg/cm2 at this juncture across a range of temperatures (first gear aside). The map is attached.

 

The typo is still on all website maps. so what should the scale be 31,32,34,38 or 31,34,36,38?

 

I changed the 32 to a 36 also, based on cell values and previous load points. the load points jump around, adding 2 or 3 points each time.


good work on the boost map freedom, but i dont have that much time. im tired of trying to zero in on that damn boost map. i just ordered a manual boost controller.

 

While we are all on the topic of the smart system, who is using smart timing advance with the CReader?

To date I have found that part throttle response is significantly improved, as well as mileage. I could be convinced that this feature alone is one of the most significant developments in the Evo tuning community during 2005. No kidding.

 

If this didn't work my plan was to purchase a 3 bar GM sensor and hook it up to the Xede's AN2 analog input. That still might not be a bad idea as it would take a lot less time to hit the right table entries.

I'm still curious as to what Vishnu planned for "smart boost" as in its current stock implementation it is simply basic.

 

I just realized I typoed myself in the title of this thread templete/template

rather ironic

 

I do, but I haven't found the difference to be noticable. However, my low row advance values are pretty mild.

d

 

I was using it, but i took a long trip awhile back (like 400 miles in a weekend), and twice i got misfires (even with the creader plugged in) and a fairly low advance, max of 1.0 or 1.5, i dont remember. after that, i didnt think that the minor performance gain was worth the UN-reliabilty.


EDIT: Oh, and i have an 05, i'm not sure what you guys have. before when i was having knock problems, shiv said dont be afraid to take out alot of timing because the 05s have a pretty aggresive timing map. maybe my timing advance has more of an impact than 03-04s.

 

'smart boost' SHOULD be hooking up a MAP sensor to the system to help auto-correct, but i have seen vishnu say absolutely nothing about it. i have enough weekend projects to keep me busy for awhile, but i have wanted to try that MAP input.