View Single Post
Old 04-09-2014, 10:19 AM   #42
HSayaovong
Member
 
HSayaovong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Drives: blk;2dr;rwd;fun
Location: Milwaukee WI
Posts: 59
Thanks: 6
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodename47 View Post
I wouldn't change it point by point, make sure you change it as a curve. If the lowest end of the MAFv scale get's increasingly distant from 0% error at as you near 1v then you need to look at latency. Random errors on the chart could be due to where the PI/DI systems change. What I would add to the chart above is % change. I have a table setup that compares my new table to OEM scaling. You can have the percentage of change increase/decrease as you go up the scale, but ideally you want that to be a smooth transition. Looking at the table above, there's nothing I'd change below 2v and notice how you have + error around 2.5v and then - error after.

For example, on one I've done recently the % change from the stock scale at 2.5v is 1% but I'm seeing 6% at the top end. I look at the data and work out at which points I should start to smooth the transition to keep the scale a nice curve.

Remember there will be no STFT in OL.
Wait, I can't seem grasp this... by apply change evenly across a section of the maf scaling table..wouldn't this create skewed and inaccurate result?
I.e reducing from 1.16v to 1.7v down .03 would have more of an impact on the lower voltage then on the lager one wouldn't it?
So by tackling each given voltage column and adjust each one to the ltft readout should yield greater accuracy shouldn't it?

Please advise. Thanks
__________________
Life is like taking a dump, sometimes it's easy and other times its hard. But it always stinks
HSayaovong is offline   Reply With Quote