OFT - Example alternate maps for AT, 98RON, E85, MAF Scales

[Wayno]

Tables were renamed to be consistent with the few US MT defs that had those tables.

[xsnapshot]

Originally Posted by Wayno

I don't know. I haven't changed the timing for e85 at WoT because shivs timing is already at mbt. I only smoothed it and modified it at cruising speeds where it's now at stoichiometric.

AT generally hit different load columns than MT and that's why the timing would be different.

Unless my eyes deceive me, it seems you added timing in the 4000-4800 region in loads 1.3 & 1.4 on the AT E85 UEL map. This seems like it would be WOT to me.....

I was comparing AT to AT. Before and After. (The logs you posted).

I'm questing where the power difference comes in. I'm sure some is from the different front pipe, but some must be from the leaner AFR's as well.

My other question is why is timing reduced/flat from 7000 RPM to redline? As RPM increases you generally need slightly more timing. I would think you should gain at least a full degree from 7k to 7.5k. I plan on making this change with my car. Now I WILL keep the soft rev limit, so from 7500-7600 I'll rapidly decrease timing.

[mid_life_crisis]

Originally Posted by Wayno

Tables were renamed to be consistent with the few US MT defs that had those tables.

So what were the old names?
I'm finding
Engine load limit (maximum)
Engine load limit B maximum (rpm)
Engine load limit C maximum (rpm)


Are two of these the ones I'm looking for?


Running a comparison shows a lot more tables as different than what you listed. Are those additional tables just the difference between U.S. and European?

[drewbot]

Originally Posted by mid_life_crisis

Running a comparison shows a lot more tables as different than what you listed. Are those additional tables just the difference between U.S. and European?

Yes I think so. When I ran a comparison in RomRaider, there were many items listed as different, when it turned out to be individual CELs either ON/OFF

[Wayno]

The best things to do is compare the two roms with the TARGET in the first field and the SOURCE in the second field. If a table is red AND it appears in the list or the spreadsheets on the first page then copy it.

If it's red but not in the list its region/cal specific and shouldn't be modified.

There are specific reasons for all the table changes, if you learn what each one is then which tables to copy will make more sense.

[drewbot]

After 2 days of driving to and from work, some observations:

- Didn't update TEMPLATE file on OFT, my log got all effed up
- The first millimeters of throttle appear "lighter" than before, which I actually like to modulate easier
- The RPM climb and throttle response is much smoother in daily driving. I was actually surprised!
- WOT runs feel the same, except much smoother.
- VVT rasp at 4k RPMs isn't as pronounced
- Cold starts now less obnoxious
- I have not experienced the "rubber band" upshift
- Idling doesn't sound as rough

This is copying all v79 tables over, running Canada 94 Octane

[KoolBRZ]

Originally Posted by drewbot

After 2 days of driving to and from work, some observations:

- Didn't update TEMPLATE file on OFT, my log got all effed up
- The first millimeters of throttle appear "lighter" than before, which I actually like to modulate easier
- The RPM climb and throttle response is much smoother in daily driving. I was actually surprised!
- WOT runs feel the same, except much smoother.
- VVT rasp at 4k RPMs isn't as pronounced
- Cold starts now less obnoxious
- I have not experienced the "rubber band" upshift
- Idling doesn't sound as rough

This is copying all v79 tables over, running Canada 94 Octane

Do you have any knock? Are you monitoring IAM and FLKC? I'm using the same tables/versions, except I have a larger intake with more maf compensation, and custom AVCS tables for more low-end torque. I think the knock I'm getting is because of increased compression due to AVCS changes, but I need more data. If you're getting knock then my theory is wrong.

[drewbot]

Originally Posted by KoolBRZ

Do you have any knock? Are you monitoring IAM and FLKC? I'm using the same tables/versions, except I have a larger intake with more maf compensation, and custom AVCS tables for more low-end torque. I think the knock I'm getting is because of increased compression due to AVCS changes, but I need more data. If you're getting knock then my theory is wrong.

I was trying to log but then my template file was old and kept locking up the OpenFlashManager

Anyhow, my IAM on 94 is 1.00 24/7....was with 91 OTS and "Wayno" 91 v79

KC learned is around 2-3 during moderate throttle.

To monitor FLKC I need to actually get this stupid OFT to log to look at exact RPM ranges

[Wayno]

You won't knock on 94. I hope you're using the 93 base timing.

[drewbot]

Originally Posted by Wayno

You won't knock on 94. I hope you're using the 93 base timing.

I'm using 91 base actually, sometimes I get stranded in areas without 94 and only 91 is available

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

[Bergen23]

Originally Posted by drewbot

I'm using 91 base actually, sometimes I get stranded in areas without 94 and only 91 is available

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

Drew, make me a D00D tune. I'll buy you beer and give you money

[drewbot]

Originally Posted by Bergen23

Drew, make me a D00D tune. I'll buy you beer and give you money

Stage 2 UEL, 91?

[Bergen23]

Originally Posted by drewbot

Stage 2 UEL, 91?

Word

[xsnapshot]

Originally Posted by xsnapshot

Unless my eyes deceive me, it seems you added timing in the 4000-4800 region in loads 1.3 & 1.4 on the AT E85 UEL map. This seems like it would be WOT to me.....

I was comparing AT to AT. Before and After. (The logs you posted).

I'm questing where the power difference comes in. I'm sure some is from the different front pipe, but some must be from the leaner AFR's as well.

My other question is why is timing reduced/flat from 7000 RPM to redline? As RPM increases you generally need slightly more timing. I would think you should gain at least a full degree from 7k to 7.5k. I plan on making this change with my car. Now I WILL keep the soft rev limit, so from 7500-7600 I'll rapidly decrease timing.

Originally Posted by Wayno

I don't know. I haven't changed the timing for e85 at WoT because shivs timing is already at mbt. I only smoothed it and modified it at cruising speeds where it's now at stoichiometric.

AT generally hit different load columns than MT and that's why the timing would be different.

Wayno, can you comment on this? If someone is hitting a load above 1.2 in the RPM range you modified, then they ARE running more timing.

You said not to adjust timing without a dyno. Did you dyno to verify this increase in timing resulted in a corresponding increase in torque.

I'm not sure why you would've said you did not increase timing at WOT when you did (from what I can see on the UEL E85 tune)

Thanks