2009 Lancer Ralliart - GST Basemap
Dec 13, 2011, 05:42 PM
#2371
Have did that broad change, seems I am still over boosting, 23psi on one WOT and 22.8 on the other. The WBDC correction has changed now, but still over boosting, and then below target for most of the WOT. Wondering if Bryan has an idea of how to further tune this. Also still wondering about using the TBE basemap with just installing a HFC and keeping rest of the stock exhaust. Other than that, now a few days with new basemap, I am really enjoying the driving, shifts are more crisp and acceleration is like butter, so smooth. Thanks again for all your hard work rich and bryan.
Hi Turtle.
Yeah, your spool-up peak was 23.3psi - 1.8psi over target (so nice to have logged psi-based boost targets!). Also, it didn't once need to use the MAX upward error correction to maintain boost at target levels - most people's logs show WGDCC cranking up to +8% early on.
Looks like your RA lives at the right-hand end of the bell-curve! Perhaps your boost pill has a slightly smaller hole size... who knows.
My RA is the same - more boost than most for a given WGDC %. That's kind of why I got deeper into the ECU stuff - and why most of my patches are boost-control related!
From the single, solitary pull you've logged, it looks like your particular car would benefit from a custom boost control tweak. I'd reduce the BWGDC tables by 4%, broad-brush. See this post for full details! I reckon that simple tweak would come pretty close to nailing both the initial peak and the follow-on boost target tracking.
Guys and gals... TurtleRA's work here is a good example of how to approach base maps. Every car is different! Perform initial testing, log, check results and confirm correct operation of your particular vehicle. Turtle's RA probably wants a bit less BWGDC than most - he's spotted that, and can progress safely.
It works both ways - some RAs using v27 aren't actually meeting their boost targets. The only way to find out... is to log and review... 
Rich
Yeah, your spool-up peak was 23.3psi - 1.8psi over target (so nice to have logged psi-based boost targets!). Also, it didn't once need to use the MAX upward error correction to maintain boost at target levels - most people's logs show WGDCC cranking up to +8% early on.
Looks like your RA lives at the right-hand end of the bell-curve! Perhaps your boost pill has a slightly smaller hole size... who knows.
My RA is the same - more boost than most for a given WGDC %. That's kind of why I got deeper into the ECU stuff - and why most of my patches are boost-control related!
From the single, solitary pull you've logged, it looks like your particular car would benefit from a custom boost control tweak. I'd reduce the BWGDC tables by 4%, broad-brush. See this post for full details! I reckon that simple tweak would come pretty close to nailing both the initial peak and the follow-on boost target tracking.
Guys and gals... TurtleRA's work here is a good example of how to approach base maps. Every car is different! Perform initial testing, log, check results and confirm correct operation of your particular vehicle. Turtle's RA probably wants a bit less BWGDC than most - he's spotted that, and can progress safely.
It works both ways - some RAs using v27 aren't actually meeting their boost targets.
The only way to find out... is to log and review... Rich
Dec 13, 2011, 06:41 PM
#2372
Evolved Member
Yep, got your logs, replied, forwarded to Bryan!
Thanks for the ongoing testing, everybody - we're collecting data from different altitudes, different ambient temps, etc. That helps a lot.
Rich
Thanks for the ongoing testing, everybody - we're collecting data from different altitudes, different ambient temps, etc. That helps a lot.
Rich
Dec 13, 2011, 08:23 PM
#2374
Evolved Member
Looks good! You're now getting 5 lines a second logged, and that's with the "extra" ROM-patch-related items. According to those, the ROM patches are working as required.
However, I'm still not that happy with your LTFT_Cruise being -10.2%. That's out of normal expected range. Also, for reference, LTFT_Idle is -17.5%. If that were my vehicle, I'd be looking into that before going and testing wide-open throtttle stuff for the new v27 base map.
I don't know what the issue could be - I'm no mechanic. Whereabouts are you? Perhaps someone can recommend an expert shop nearby that could take a look...
You could also start a new thread about this issue... see if anyone has some ideas... search for existing info on here, etc.
I'm just a bit cautious about your fuelling, particularly in transitional areas of the map, like spool-up! Best to play it safe...
Rich
However, I'm still not that happy with your LTFT_Cruise being -10.2%. That's out of normal expected range. Also, for reference, LTFT_Idle is -17.5%. If that were my vehicle, I'd be looking into that before going and testing wide-open throtttle stuff for the new v27 base map.
I don't know what the issue could be - I'm no mechanic. Whereabouts are you? Perhaps someone can recommend an expert shop nearby that could take a look...
You could also start a new thread about this issue... see if anyone has some ideas... search for existing info on here, etc.
I'm just a bit cautious about your fuelling, particularly in transitional areas of the map, like spool-up! Best to play it safe...
Rich
Dec 14, 2011, 08:13 PM
#2376
Evolving Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: fl
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^^^that's the problem!!!
Thanks Bryan.
Where can I find all the addresses and info to double check everything and variables I can add?
I thought we could see transmission temp, how do I do that?
Thanks again,
Jose
Thanks Bryan.
Where can I find all the addresses and info to double check everything and variables I can add?
I thought we could see transmission temp, how do I do that?
Thanks again,
Jose
Dec 14, 2011, 08:19 PM
#2378
Evolved Member
Like this... for EvoScan...
I don't think there's a way to do that for "standalone logging" (yet) - no CAN style requests direct from OP2.0 firmware yet.
Rich
Code:
<DataListItem DataLog="N" Color="" Display="SST Transmission Temp" LogReference="SST_TM_Temp" RequestID="CAN28-0" Eval="x-50" Unit="Deg F" MetricEval="x-50" MetricUnit="Deg C" ResponseBytes="1" GaugeMin="0" GaugeMax="1000" ChartMin="0" ChartMax="1000" ScalingFactor="1" Notes="" Priority="1" Visible="False" /> <DataListItem DataLog="N" Color="" Display="Odd Clutch Temp" LogReference="OddClutchTemp" RequestID="CAN33-0" Eval="x/4" Unit="C" MetricEval="" MetricUnit="" ResponseBytes="2" GaugeMin="0" GaugeMax="255" ChartMin="0" ChartMax="255" ScalingFactor="1" Notes="" Priority="1" Visible="False" /> <DataListItem DataLog="N" Color="" Display="Even Clutch Temp" LogReference="EvenClutchTemp" RequestID="CAN33-2" Eval="x/4" Unit="C" MetricEval="" MetricUnit="" ResponseBytes="2" GaugeMin="0" GaugeMax="255" ChartMin="0" ChartMax="255" ScalingFactor="1" Notes="" Priority="1" Visible="False" />
Rich
Dec 14, 2011, 08:20 PM
#2379
Evolved Member
Dec 15, 2011, 02:13 PM
#2380
hey just an update been running 2.7 for bout a week now and i love it thanks bryan anyone notice how when the cars cold it shifts a bit ruff in normal mode? (thats what i do all my driving in) only lasts bout 2-3mins max even if u get in and go, not a complant just something i noticed. btw snows coming here cant wait to "play"
Dec 15, 2011, 02:32 PM
#2381
hey just an update been running 2.7 for bout a week now and i love it thanks bryan anyone notice how when the cars cold it shifts a bit ruff in normal mode? (thats what i do all my driving in) only lasts bout 2-3mins max even if u get in and go, not a complant just something i noticed. btw snows coming here cant wait to "play"
I do know when I first tested out v2.7 on Normal mode.... it was much more aggressive than stock.
Bryan/Richard.... When Upgrading the SSP Clutch packs, Does it make the car shift quicker? Meaning like does it shift like GTR status? hahaha
Dec 15, 2011, 03:41 PM
#2385
Evolved Member