Hymee

iTrader: (1)

Kerry Packer spends (oops used to spend) more than $1000 a pop on his hobby of trying to put Casino's out of busines...

Cheers,
Hymee.

Yeah - I know, who is Kerry Packer??? A late media magnate. There was a story he was in Vegas, gambling up big at a casino. The story goes there was this other weathy US gambler, and they had a slight confrontation (for whatever reason). Kerry Packer said to the other paty "Who do you think you are to tell me what to do.." or something like that, to which the other dude proceded to tell him how important he was and what his personal fortune was in millions of dollars. Aprraently Kerry reached into his pockets, pulled out a coin and said to him, "Well how about I toss you for it?" LOL

Cheers,
Hymee.

lolachampcar

I enjoy my hobbies. Go to www.lolachampcar.com and you will see that I do a lot of rather different things for fun.

I went on to say that EFIDude has my full permission to use any of my work royalty free. I do not own even the smallest part of EFIDude nor am I compensated in any (monetary) way from their success. They are good people and I do get a big grin from watching them succeed. That is worth a ton to me.

I will also get a big grin from watching Hymee succeed as well. Before you start on me again, I do not own any part of his deal either. I just like the way he does business and the way he treats people. I will be first in line to buy his product.

By the way, what the heck does it matter? If the files are free and they can be installed by any flashing tool that supports open (non-encrypted) bin files, I'm clearly not making any money off of anyone nor am I forcing people to buy my favorite tools to enjoy the fruits of our collective labors.

lolachampcar

It would be one of my cheaper ones if I were loosing $1K.

My issues with H R&D are personal and, as been rightly pointed out by others on this forum, do not belong on the forum. However, if I can address my issues in a positive way, that does belong on the forum.

I hope my offer will-

Provide a better, more capable and more reliable scan tool package for people in need of such things.
Provide revenue for EFIDude as it uses their dongle.
Provide revenue for XYZ scan tool software source.
Repay my $1K with the first licenses.

In short, I am taking the risk out of someone to either generate a new or port an existing scan tool package to an existing high speed USB2 to CAN interface. If I pick the right partner, I'll make my money back too.

Everyone that matters will win.

lolachampcar

Ok, the process has begun which has forced me to make good on my claim to implement other's fuel map edits.

I've generated the spreadsheet below to facilitate the process. It is starting off with a 2004 fuel table only as this was the first one someone asked me to edit for them. I will be adding timing (for doing nitrous) and then extending it with additional sheets to cover the 05 and 06-07 firmwares as well as time goes on.

If you are interested in helping to generate and test files, please grab the excel sheet and add your fuel table edits for testing. The first page is dedicated to the stock table and should be locked. The second page or tab is the editing page. Please only change the % change table. The resulting lambda and A/F modifications from stock will be reflected below. Once you are happy with the edits, please email me the sheet and I will generate a file. Also let me know what programmer you will be using so I can give you a compatible file. One caveat is that I have yet to figure out how to do AP files. I've asked Jeff for an import function that will take a binary image. This is not available. I will email Trey and ask him for an import function so people that bought APs can try their own files and, once the Cobb, Hymee or Dude freeware editor is released, can edit them as well.

This is a first pass so please chime in with observations or corrections.

Thanks, Lola

dannobre

iTrader: (3)

Looking at the file...the first thing that springs to mind is that there must be a lot more to it than load/RPM/Lamba tables

Care to give us a bit of an idea of the layout of the PCM data tables........

CnnmnSchnpps

iTrader: (1)

Yeah, fuel is the easy part.. Let's start talking timing, AE, etc.

lolachampcar

There is a lot more to it, but I am trying to take this in small steps and document the process. I'll post the NaarLeven single pass edits (that were good for 8hp while still falling way short of 13:1) shortly (it is 05 firmware so I need to add another page).

I noted from the beginning what Jim M of RacingBeat put on his site about timing and have not touched it yet. I think the best idea would be to put mixture on your desired target and then play with timing. That being said, I am not making the edits, I will not tell anyone what they should do and I will do whatever anyone wants to try. If you want to try timing, I'll add it to the spread sheet and I'll generate the files for testing. I am curious as well, I just tend to give good weight to things that people like Cam, Jim and the like have to say simply because they have been around a while. It does not mean they are always correct; it is just that I think it is prudent to keep both ears open to all ideas.

As for the table layout in the files, this is where it gets real sticky. I could post all the tables but I do not think there is much good to come of that. I do think it might damage people like Cobb and Hymee that have spent, and will spend, a lot of time on providing people with good quality editing software and support for that much (very confusing) information. Personally, I forward everything I learn to Hymee because I like the quality of person and I hope he does well. To avoid charges of having a hidden agenda, I do not charge him for anything and I do not have a piece of his business. I just want him to succeed.

For now, please let me build out the fuel and timing tables for all three primary standard gearbox firmwares. Once that is done, we can talk about adding other things you may want to play with (fans, rpm limits,,,).

Spin9k

Excellent, thanks for that spreadsheet! So to clarify if we have 'alternative' base tables (from a non stock flash in our ECU for example) should we:

1) use this sheet as a template, then add our unique tables at the bottom of "Stock tabes - Do Not Edit" sheet, then make our desired plus or minus % corrections and return to you?

2) send you our current a/f data files and you will add to this "Stock tabes - Do Not Edit" sheet for all to have available to request % edits on?

3) do none of the above and just 'fudge' our % changes to approximate what we actually want to have in the end based on our model year stock maps?

lolachampcar

By the way, I started this thread with Open Source in mind and sharing.

Given that I have done half the firmwares in excel and should finish the rest over the next few days, I thought it best to extend the editing offer to pro-tuners who have yet to pick their tool set and who want to play with tuning. If you want me to, I will make edits and provide files without posting the edits. This will let you get started down the PCM learning curve while we all wait for the professional editing packages to become available.

rotarygod

Since there are a few maps depending on load/rpm/gear, etc, which one is that? Are any of those numbers from closed loop or are they open loop? I've never looked into the stock ecu so I have no clue exactly how it's all done.

MazdaManiac

iTrader: (3)

Good question.

lolachampcar

As Jeff has pointed out, there are different fuel maps based on speed/gear. I've combined them into one to start to reduce complexity. Once you get your mere mortal speeds mapping done to get on your target, we can add the other (higher speed) table and you can alter then test that table at the much higher speeds. I would tend to start rich on the higher speed map before running higher speeds then lean as desired but this is only my approach.

As for closed versus open loop, the tables are targets. In closed loop, the PCM builds trim such that actual meets target. In open loop, the car uses target and Long Term Fuel Trim to provide fuel. Either way you cut it, the table values are targets that can be edited. Jeff, please feel free to correct me here if you think I am off base.

Again, I am trying to keep this simple so that maps are built step by step in an easy for everyone to understand way. I am also trying to keep my workload under control.

lolachampcar

The "Do not edit" comment was to keep things simple. I thought it best to give people the stock starting point for trying different things.

If you already know where you want to go with your targets and do not need to base them on a percentage of stock, then please feel free to copy the target lambda table to a separate sheet and enter your values as needed. I will simply block copy your edits to the file if you want to give them a try. I think this addresses your question in the most straight forward way.

Spin9k

"The maps are for hysteresis (deceleration), first through fourth gear, and fifth and sixth gear. Some of these maps are the same." (Racing Beat)

If these are the maps, then there are only 2 plus deceleration for each parameter (we're dealing with fuel here). I'm not sure I've ever been in 5th-6th gear on track, so I really don't care about changing them so much and I'm not sure where I could get to go fast enough to get the data I would need to do the changes except perhaps on a dyno lol.

So the maps you provide would be changing the lower gear maps only? (hopefully)

I don't view this a very complex, just something to know. How could you "combine them into one"? They are different and should be treated that way, yes? And certainly if you are producing a flash file, I would want to know what tables I'm flashing.

Hymee

iTrader: (1)

Nice work! It is easy to see where the transition point from "closed loop" to "open loop" is in a traditional sense, where closed loop was used to maintain Lambda 1.0, and anything else was open loop. But the point you raised with the difference now being when the trims are built, compare to when the trims are used. Care to comment on when that transition happens? Or is it automatically based around the 1.0 Lambda?

Cheers,
Hymee.

MazdaManiac

iTrader: (3)

That fuel map has nothing to do with the "transition" since there isn't one in the traditional sense (other than the RPM limit).
That is the target lambda for the range that map is dedicated to. "Closed-loop" is a separate part of the calibration that acts on that table when appropriate.

lolachampcar

No problem and I am willing to provide as much as I can to aid people in their decisions. The 04 and 05 maps have three fuel tables 06-07 reduced it to two. I just went back in and routed around a bit to confirm. The 04 maps are three by 21X19, the 05 are three by 21X19 and the 06-07 are two by 17X17.

I do as Jim M suggested and put the two speed/gear maps equal and then follow the previously posted approach to tuning the high speed maps after the low speed stuff is done. It is reasonable to do third gear pulls on the street if you are careful to get the first one right then enrich the higher speed one before doing that testing (on a track?).

I do not claim to know all the answers here and am open to a different approach that makes sense.

lolachampcar

I agree with Jeff.

Hymee, it is worth noting that these controls have gotten a lot smarter. For instance, you can be in closed loop and have a target other than one which really was not the case with the early fuel controls.

I also tend not to mess with when the factory does and does not want to be in closed loop. I did log fuel system status early on to see when the PCM did the transition but lost interest when I realized I did not want to play with that part of the factory's logic. My primary interests were on high load tuning where you are not in closed loop. I considered the closed loop logic a drivability issue and a Long Term Fuel Trim building strategy. I did not have anything to add to that work.

rotarygod

When I tune my standalone ecu maps on my RX-7, I make the low load/rpm economy based and then as rpm/load increases, I transition it to max power tune. It's smooth and does very well for everything I put the car through. I disable closed loop mode as I run leaner than stoich at cruise. My question is why couldn't you develop a single map with this same tuning strategy and then just enter this 1 map into each of the RX-8's maps. It could switch between them all day long but from an effective standpoint you may as well be running on one. Why wouldn't that work?

Spin9k

Pardon my ignorance, but from what you say..and with the efidude tool...

- when we flash the OPEN LOOP tables, we are flashing with a 'hand built' table completely fabricated as per whatever is in the spreadsheet we give you and overwriting whatever is in the ECU?

and because

-we are not pulling the tables from the ECU and modifing what's there and putting it back in to meet our spreadsheet goals.

and therefore

even though we really don't know what is in the 5/6th gear tables nor have a/f ratios datalogs under WOT for those (short of a dyno pull there) we HAVE TO overwrite them if we write a flash?

or

can we selectively flash individual tables?

Hymee

iTrader: (1)

I wasn't arguing with either of you. I guess my point was that the definition of closed and open loop has changed very subtly. I always considered closed loop as maintaing stoich, and adjusting the trims. Now closed loop can have any target lambda. Not sure if I'm explaining myself well, but I understand me, you and Jeff.

Cheers,
Hymee.

lolachampcar

Yes, I would think so.

lolachampcar

No
No argument at all. Jeff was right in what he pointed out (from what I know) and I just added that you could have all kinds of closed loop targets if you wanted. There was absolutely no negative pushback in my comments.

Hymee

iTrader: (1)

Cool Dude

Cheers,
Hymee.

MazdaManiac

iTrader: (3)

Precisely.
It is also important to note that the target lambda on a primary table is not the final word on that actual target lambda.