Openflash Tablet v1.31 beta maps (including Stage 2!) now available for download

[jeebus]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Assuming the A00C rom's TIR table was scaled like the A01C TIR table, there was 20 degrees too much transient retard before. If they were scaled differently, the actual TIR is unchanged. This is because all maps were based off the A00C rom.

So now it is as it should be. This table uses standard a01c values. And the roms are based off of the A01C rom. So the values in this table were not modified.

But the A00C rom's TIR tables WAS NOT scaled like the A01C TIR table. AFAIK, it was at -30. Whereas the A01C was scaled at -50. This is why when you ran the old maps on an A01C equipped car, it looked like you had the right values in the TIR table but the ECU was subtracting 50 from the values rather than 30, so you ended up pulling 20 degrees too much timing between shifts.

So, based on that logic, running A01C based roms on an A00C car, you will end up with the opposite, 20 degrees TOO MUCH timing between shifts.

[Shiv@Openflash]

Originally Posted by jeebus

But the A00C rom's TIR tables WAS NOT scaled like the A01C TIR table. AFAIK, it was at -30. Whereas the A01C was scaled at -50. This is why when you ran the old maps on an A01C equipped car, it looked like you had the right values in the TIR table but the ECU was subtracting 50 from the values rather than 30, so you ended up pulling 20 degrees too much timing between shifts.

So, based on that logic, running A01C based roms on an A00C car, you will end up with the opposite, 20 degrees TOO MUCH timing between shifts.

Afaik, it is the rom itself that defines map scaling. So if you have a A00C rom and update to one of our OTS roms, you essentially have a A01C rom at that point. This should be no different than going to the dealership to get your software updated. I have tested out OTS maps in a car that came natively with a A00C rom and after loading an OTS map it behaved indistinguishably from our car which came natively with A01C. But if anyone has any reason to believe otherwise, please let me know and I can make an adjustments if necessary.

[jeebus]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Afaik, it is the rom itself that defines map scaling. So if you have a A00C rom and update to one of our OTS roms, you essentially have a A01C rom at that point. This should be no different than going to the dealership to get your software updated. I have tested out OTS maps in a car that came natively with a A00C rom and after loading an OTS map it behaved indistinguishably from our car which came natively with A01C. But if anyone has any reason to believe otherwise, please let me know and I can make an adjustments if necessary.

Calling @Td-d ... maybe I'm wrong, but I want to be sure.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50088

[jeebus]

In my testing, scaling is defined at the XDF level.

Which is why I think there needs to be different XDFs between A00C and A01C, etc.

If I modify the XDF to -30 scaling (how I believe my ECU is actually reading this), then here's the actual running TIR table...which is no bueno

[Shiv@Openflash]

Originally Posted by jeebus

In my testing, scaling is defined at the XDF level.

Which is why I think there needs to be different XDFs between A00C and A01C, etc.

If I modify the XDF to -30 scaling (how I believe my ECU is actually reading this), then here's the actual running TIR table...which is no bueno

The XDF is a man made file to account foe the scaling in the rom. Altering it has no effect on the performance of the engine. Only changing values in the rom will have an effect. Changing the rom completely will also have an effect. The is what we have done for those cars that didn't have the newest software update.

[jeebus]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

The XDF is a man made file to account foe the scaling in the rom. Altering it has no effect on the performance of the engine. Only changing values in the rom will have an effect. Changing the rom completely will also have an effect. The is what we have done for those cars that didn't have the newest software update.

Right, it's man made...but it has to account for the scaling the ECU itself does. If you're saying the ROM alone does all the scaling, then I don't see why people with A1C were having issues with TIR pulling too much timing but A0C were not.

[Boofneenee]

man...Shiv can't catch a break. Dude just rolled out some new stuff and within minutes "booooom".

[jeebus]

Originally Posted by Boofneenee

man...Shiv can't catch a break. Dude just rolled out some new stuff and within minutes "booooom".

I'm just trying to make sure this issue is fully understood. Shiv knows more than I do about this stuff, but sometimes even the expert misses something. I'd rather be proven wrong than right.

[Norkoastal]

Great discussion.. Carry on

[Shiv@Openflash]

Guys, I'm at sema for the rest of the week. I'll try to make this clear and brief as possible. There is one such thing as a "00C car". The 00C designates the rom type. The rom itself has all the mapping info. This includes scaling info. All our OTS maps are O1C roms. This is why we are able to use only one XDF file to cover all usdm cars regardless of whether they started life with an earlier rom version. We just separate them into 700c, 900c, 00c and 01c classes because the OFT firmware, once installed, doesn't permit you to change rom types. Instead of writing custom firmware, we just approached it by accommodating this restriction by making many versions of the same 01c rom. That said, I'm quite sure the same scaling applies to every car running any of our OTS maps. Perhaps I'm still not explaining this clearly enough. But I hope I am.

[ztan]

Originally Posted by jeebus

But the A00C rom's TIR tables WAS NOT scaled like the A01C TIR table. AFAIK, it was at -30. Whereas the A01C was scaled at -50. This is why when you ran the old maps on an A01C equipped car, it looked like you had the right values in the TIR table but the ECU was subtracting 50 from the values rather than 30, so you ended up pulling 20 degrees too much timing between shifts.

Scaling is different between =<A00 ROMs and A01 ROMs internally.

Shiv's ZA1J___Cv2.5.xdf is scaled for stock =<A00 ROMs
Shiv's ZA1J___Cv2.6.xdf is scaled for A01 ROMs
He has stated that all the =<A00 v1.33beta files have been updated to A01 calibration and scaling.

So...
If you want to modify your existing stock <=A00 ROM, use the v2.5 xdf file for correct TIR scaling;
If you want to modify your existing stock A01 ROM or any of the 1.33beta files use the v2.6 xdf file for correct TIR scaling.

So, based on that logic, running A01C based roms on an A00C car, you will end up with the opposite, 20 degrees TOO MUCH timing between shifts.

If you plug in the table numbers from an A01 ROM to an A00 ROM without changing the internal scaling from the ROM file, yes you will do this.

I agree that it would probably be better to have seperate xdf files for =<A00 files and A01 files.

[ztan]

For those running ZA1J___G ROMs (AU/SA/UK/EUR), I've translated Shiv's v2.4 xdf file appropriate for our use. I've scaled to A01 calibration as that is what I have on my car.

PM me if you want a copy.

[jeebus]

Thanks guys. I think I get it now.

[solidONE]

Well whatever the changes in 1.33beta I see some positive results. This is coming from a A01C tune. Immediately after reflashing this time I did not get any hesitation at throttle application as opposed to when I first flashed the 1.2.

The idle dipping and shooting back up when the throttle is completely closed in neutral has returned that was experienced with the stock tune where with the 1.2 and 1.31 it would dwell at 1000rpm for a second before slowly coming to rest at 700rpms. Although it would never dip below the target idle speed like it did on the stock tune. I'm guessing this was not done intentionally, but a side effect or result of whatever changes were made that were not targeted at the idle. Strange, but not a big deal.