DO NOT TUNE THE SCALINGS YET! No maps have been changed but scalings were updated.
Hello guys (and gals), I have been busy this summer with my Galant and will be throughout the winter. I have been very neglectant in the ROM archiving and recently went over all the ROMs again to make some requested updates. I am running into separate versions of ROMs with the same CAL IDs. A simple solution to this is just use the XML of the ROM you need, and comparisons will need to “swap” XMLs to compare like model mapping.
One of the changes affects the whole EVO lineup, being boost limit. (thank you Zakie@TIC)
There were also updates for the entire Mitsubishi lineup on scalings, in particular Open Loop tables, Accel Enrichment, Boost Desired Engine Load, and Wastegate Duty. Previous scalings were tied to addresses associated with 3 dimensional tables, or in other words; If RPM scalings were needed, the scaling would be sought after in association to the sensor scaling (CAS, temp,) based off of a 3D AFR map or equivalent. They were good to tune the map with, but if one wanted to re-scale the particular map, it would have been applied to the 3D scaling. In the beginning of the scalings data (where the maps end when read in HEX) there are the scalings used for “single variable” tables or 2 dimensional tables, followed by 2D fuel map scalings, then followed by sets of scalings used in the 3 dimensional maps. (The scalings are surprisingly listed in the same fashion the maps are laid out). I have run tests on my car via data-logger, with most of the fuel/open loop maps responded closer to the new set of RPM scalings. There were 4-8 variations per ROM on RPM scalings based on the cell count a map uses and features of the model. I am hoping on having the ability to change the actual scaling values to better tune in different mechanical set-ups, or focus on distinct areas of an RPM/Load range (particularly fuel system upgrades or cams).I do not know how to disassemble using IDA, so if IDA is linking the maps up to the other set of scalings (with the matching loads underneath for like AFR) let me know and I’ll change them back. It just seems logical that each particular system (fuel maps, ignition maps, MAF scalings, and Open Loop settings) have its own reference based on the sensor feedback, where maps/scalings would not necessarily intermingle on the data level, like what scaling is looked up and applied to a system on the ECU end. One circuit, one scaling…
I am still working on the idle maps on the temperature scalings to find the appropriate temperature ranges based on logged temps vs. temperature/voltage ranges.
My major issue with the EVO Wastegate/Boost-Engine Load scalings is verifying the feedback using a data-logger (like EVO Scan) and making sure the scalings are accurate. I do not own an EVO, or would have been done already. I am using my factory ECU and will not be swapping in a sister ECU, or an EVO ECU with a re-pinning, till winter.
What I need is for the EVO owners with electronic boost control to compare logs with the actual output of the engine management to make sure everything is copasetic with the correlation of RPM scalings, to the map data. Look to make sure the RPM scalings match what is being output by the ECU.
None of the changes will affect the ROM in any way other than the variable your tuning with as a reference. So no worries people.
I hope this not a case of where I just convinced myself! So give me direction on this and set me straight on the ECU’s method of lookup on scalings.