So i need to know some current info about rescaling the fuel and timing maps.

When ECUflash first came out, people would just remove columns they though were not significant, like the 10% or 30% column, and shift everything over and add 280% and 300% columns.

But now we have found out that there is other newly discovered maps that use the same load column scaling, so changing the load scaling on one of our regular timing/fuel maps, also changes the load scaling on these new maps and will possibly cause a problem.

So, with that said, how do we add more load columns?

 

I think that would be written in the code/definitions of what the max possible "ranges" are. I'm not sure though. i'm pretty dumb when it comes to stuff like that. I'm just a driver and a VW tech with a little bit of basic tuning knowledge. Stuff like that is left to the engineers/disassemblers/etc.

 

anyone else?

 

bump

 

I`ve added the columns in all maps that i could find in my rom.

 

Umm you cant "add" columns. if you try to add a column using "edit map" in ECUflash, you actually write over code before/after the actual table your trying to add them to, which is very bad.

 

I was under the impression that the "70% load was the consensus for adding 1 column, since ppl cruise in the 30 - 60 ish load cells... I took out the 70% load column to add a 310% load column, but since changing to temp + baro, I dont need it anymore...

Lil tip, if you can find the (Temp + baro) for your 2byte load/rom, you will not hit as high of a load and wont need as many columns... For those w/ stock ish set ups... I was using raw 2byteload and seeing upwards of 305 load, but when I made the switch to temp + baro, Im barely hitting 280 load...

Also, from my understanding, you do NOT wanna re-scale your fuel and timing maps... you can re-scale your boost tables tho... And as evokid has said, you can NOT just add columns to the maps!!!

 

What maps are we talking about? We should be able to go into those and shift the stuff around so it matches up again.

Right now, I'm using a 95630006 rom and I need to do something. Every once in a while, I cross over the 260 load max in my fuel and timing tables. I was just going to delete the 70 and 90 load columns and add 280 and 300 columns, so that it matches the 90550001 rom.

 

There is maps that arent necessarily defined in our definitions that have the same load scaling as the fuel or timing map.

So even if you fix the fuel map after you change the load scaling on the fuel map, there still a possibility that another map that is using the same scaling gets messed up and we cant fix it cuz it undefined.

Something like that.

 

thats very interesting i always thought that the maps that were in the rom defined or not gathered there info independently. like the fact that the ecu auto interpolates the missing segments that we dont realy care to much about when rescaling, i thought it would d the same for the other maps defined or not.

 

I havent seen anything affected by rescaling the load/rpm in other maps. I am sure it does but other than the EGR advance table I havent been able to track anything that directly affects how the car runs.

To the point-

Evos typically idle at 30%, cruise at 50-70%, spend very little time at 80-90, and then can generally drop 120.

Something like this:



I have gotten even crazier with the rescale and been able to drive the car perfectly fine on the street:



and



Now that we have SD the load doesnt get so crazy but the RPM still can (and does)

 

Thanks for the post.

So on an 8, what two load column do you think would be the best get rid of so you can add a 280 & 300?

 

20 and 50

 

Thanks! I think that's about as extreme of an example as we're going to see.

 

The load axis for ignition advance is used for:

1) Ignition advance tables
2) EGR ignition advance trim table
3) low coolant temp ignition advance trim tables

The load axis for fuel is used for:

1) fuel tables

These tables (at least for the USDM Evo 9) should all be included in the latest version of ECUFlash. I think the only potential issue might be causing unintended ignition advance by changing the position of some of the EGR trim values to different load cells.