Enginuity question

[GTWILLY]

Not that this necessarily pertains to you, but at some point I thought I had the same situation, i.e., a High Det Fuel table that was leaner than the Primary. What I discovered, however, in my case, was that the two maps had two different load scales and what I perceived as leaner was not so.

 

The High Det table is usually left untouched, as it probably should be. As such it retains the 2.5 max load scale Cobb designed it with. When someone buys, or makes, a map it is usually for increased performance and the fuel, timing, and DA tables are rescaled. This will create perceptual errors when comparing them with tables with other load scaling, such as the High Det map.

 

Just a thought. Otherwise someone made a grevious mistake. No High Detonation Fuel table should be anything other than richer than the Primary Fuel table.

 

ECU Flash says both tables (primary) and (fail safe) are measured in g/rev. Only difference is that the last 3 colums of (primary) read 2.20, 2.30, 2.50. and (fail safe) reads 2.30, 2.50, 2.70. I compared the values according ly and they are still way leaner in the (fail safe) table.

[GTWILLY]

That is not what I am saying.

 

The map you read off the ECU probably is displaying the correct failsafe map (as it is not a RT table) but the primary fuel map that it is displaying is likely not the table your ECU uses for primary fuel (as that part of the map is a RT table).

 

Does that make sense now?

 

I don't know, but your map may be just great, but you cannot rely on what it got from the ECU in certain tables.

 

 

RT tables in AP:

 

-AVCS

-Boost limits

-Boost targets

-TD High

-TD low

-TD proportional

-WGDC high

-WGDC initial

-CL modified load

-CL TPS

-injec lat

-injector scale

-intake cal

-primary fuel

-DA

-primary ignition

-rev limits

 

 

Any of the above tables that you are looking at in some other software is likely not what yor ECU is actually using.

 

Ok well let me give you the whole story and then you can let me know if I am an idiot for doin what I have done. I used to have an AP and had a protune done through it. I got all excited with the notion of Open ECU and read the tune from the car while married, then unmarried and sold the AP and have been running that tune ever since using ECU Flash. Is my car still using those RT Values and I can't see them or have I lost them entirely, and am now running on purely a base map?

[SeeeeeYa]

ECU Flash says both tables (primary) and (fail safe) are measured in g/rev. Only difference is that the last 3 colums of (primary) read 2.20, 2.30, 2.50. and (fail safe) reads 2.30, 2.50, 2.70. I compared the values according ly and they are still way leaner in the (fail safe) table.

 

 

Something is screwed up. You can see that those loads are reversed from the situation I described. Essentially, backwards.

[GTWILLY]

Something is screwed up. You can see that those loads are reversed from the situation I described. Essentially, backwards.

 

Right, I looked at the pro tune I have as well to compare to this map and the pro tuned map reads after 1.95, 2.20, 2.50, 2.80, 3.10 on the primary table and 2.10, 2.20, 2.30, 2.50 on the fail safe...

[mickeyd2005]

Right, I looked at the pro tune I have as well to compare to this map and the pro tuned map reads after 1.95, 2.20, 2.50, 2.80, 3.10 on the primary table and 2.10, 2.20, 2.30, 2.50 on the fail safe...

 

The load scale doesn't really matter on the fail safe tune because above 2.5 g/sec, you should run the same AFR... 10 to 10.5. Also, when the ecu drops into failsafe mode, I believe boost control is disabled so the ecus runs 0% WGDC and therefore should be running only about 9-10 psi unless the signal line fell off the actuator.

 

Your failsafe fuel map sounds like it is incorrect if it has WOT AFR target of 11. If the tuner rescaled the primary fuel map then he knows which one is which. He may have accidentally copied and pasted incorrectly. Happens all the time.

 

EDIT: Wait a second. This is opposite of what you said in Post #51. Which one is which?

[GTWILLY]

From what I understand from LBGT. The tables and values that I have read from my ECU and protune are not exactly what should be as it will not pull up the RT maps with it.

 

The question comes on the side of this Map I am looking at from Open ECU where these values seem to be reversed and seem that someone just reversed what they were doing... so I would think that I need to switch these values in the Open Map if I want to run it right?

[mickeyd2005]

ECU Flash says both tables (primary) and (fail safe) are measured in g/rev. Only difference is that the last 3 colums of (primary) read 2.20, 2.30, 2.50. and (fail safe) reads 2.30, 2.50, 2.70. I compared the values according ly and they are still way leaner in the (fail safe) table.

 

 

Okay... I got it.

 

The old ECUFlash and the new enginuity defs are opposite. The old ECUFlash defs were wrong. I believe if you download the new ecu defs, it will be corrected. Which version of ecuflash are you using and which def version.

[mickeyd2005]

Make sure you use these defs for ecuflash. I believe it only works with the ecuflash version 1.34.

 

http://forums.openecu.org/viewtopic.php?t=3031

 

And these defs for enginuity.

 

http://forums.openecu.org/viewtopic.php?t=3029

 

Don't change anything in your tune until you download the latest defs.

[GTWILLY]

The load scale doesn't really matter on the fail safe tune because above 2.5 g/sec, you should run the same AFR... 10 to 10.5. Also, when the ecu drops into failsafe mode, I believe boost control is disabled so the ecus runs 0% WGDC and therefore should be running only about 9-10 psi unless the signal line fell off the actuator.

 

Your failsafe fuel map sounds like it is incorrect if it has WOT AFR target of 11. If the tuner rescaled the primary fuel map then he knows which one is which. He may have accidentally copied and pasted incorrectly. Happens all the time.

 

EDIT: Wait a second. This is opposite of what you said in Post #51. Which one is which?

 

It is sounding like that is the case and I think I am going to swich Values and re evaluate situation.

[GTWILLY]

ok hold on I'll do it in a minuit and see

only thing is though that I am analyzing both of these tunes in Enginuity side by side and I have already uptaded the software and definitions in Enginuity over the weekend. Is this still the case then, and since I downloaded the tunes with the old ECUFlash is that going to make a difference?

[mickeyd2005]

I only use enginuity to view and edit tables.

 

I only use ecuflash to flash. I never view or edit tables in ecuflash. Your post #51 said that you viewed it in ecuflash. I definitely know that the old ecuflash defs were incorrect.

[GTWILLY]

I can't find anything to actually download on those links? I have updated Enginuity's Definitions already I need to get ECUFlash definitions still though.

[mickeyd2005]

You have to log in.

[mickeyd2005]

Don't forget that the new ecuflash defs only work with ecuflash V1.34.

[GTWILLY]

I only use enginuity to view and edit tables.

 

I only use ecuflash to flash. I never view or edit tables in ecuflash. Your post #51 said that you viewed it in ecuflash. I definitely know that the old ecuflash defs were incorrect.

 

 

Sorry yes I was comparing from program to program and then I updated both versions and updated the definitions in enginuity, but can not find the updated definitions for ECUFlash. So now I have been comparing data in solely Enginuity

[GTWILLY]

You have to log in.

 

 

lol oh yea I forgot about that.

[GTWILLY]

Ok all updated now and things still seem the same. I think that the tuner just flipped the tables and put the values and scales in backwards.

[LittleBlueGT]

I am not sure if the RT values would be applied in your map. Since the AP is unmarried I would guess not.

 

I don't really know what is carried over, or what is applied where.

 

All I do know is that when I read my ROM while my AP is married the RT values don't seem to match up. I have not checked all of them either, but the ones I have didn't.

[merchgod]

To clear up some confusion in this thread:

 

1. With the factory tune for the LGTs, about half of the failsafe fuel map IS leaner (less enrichment) than the non-failsafe map (some portions are richer, however). This seems counter-intuitive, but this is way Subaru/Denso set it up. With other Subarus, the failsafe map is primarily richer. This is very easy to determine in the code. THERE CAN BE NO DISPUTE ON THIS MATTER. The load and RPM axes on the LGT fuel map are identical between both factory maps.

 

2. Ecuflash versions 1.30 and earlier use old, old definitions (like sept 06'). These old definitions had the two fuel maps reversed. Back then (in the dark ages ), we had assumed the richer map was the failsafe map. However, shortly after, when looking more closely at the code, it was determined they were reversed. No one was making updates to the Subaru Ecuflash defs back then (after the sept 06' release). I had been regularily updating Enginuity defs (as I still do today), and had fixed this a while back, at least for Enginuity.

 

3. Starting with Ecuflash version 1.31, I created a converter to convert Enginuity's xml to Ecuflash's format. I sent the converted definitions to Colby and he released version 1.31 with those new defs. I will continue to release an Ecuflash version of defs everytime I update the Enginuity defs (as I have with the latest version that came out 12-04 0.8.0b). Here's a temporary mirror with both the Enginuity and Ecuflash latest defs:

http://www.ken-gilbert.com/wrx/enginuity/

 

4. The two fuel maps ("Primary Open Loop Fueling" and "Primary Open Loop Fueling (Failsafe)") ONLY switch based solely on a specific IAM (ignition advance multiplier) thresholds as determined by the "Primary Open Loop Fuel Map Switch (IAM)" table. Nothing else determines the switch. Boost control is also potentially disabled below a specific IAM ("Boost Control Disable (IAM)") when current fine learning correction is below a threshold (not currently defined) for a minimum period of time (very brief).

 

5. I don't know if the OP has a Cobb tune, but as mentioned, if you do and you are running a real-time map, the RT specific tables that Cobb's supports will always "override" the corresponding base map table. Ecuflash only reads the "base map" of a Cobb setup. So, you may not be viewing the actual tune, at least for the specific tables, if your tuner requires you to run a real-time map.

[GTWILLY]

To clear up some confusion in this thread:

 

1. With the factory tune for the LGTs, about half of the failsafe fuel map IS leaner (less enrichment) than the non-failsafe map (some portions are richer, however). This seems counter-intuitive, but this is way Subaru/Denso set it up. With other Subarus, the failsafe map is primarily richer. This is very easy to determine in the code. THERE CAN BE NO DISPUTE ON THIS MATTER. The load and RPM axes on the LGT fuel map are identical between both factory maps.

 

2. Ecuflash versions 1.30 and earlier use old, old definitions (like sept 06'). These old definitions had the two fuel maps reversed. Back then (in the dark ages ), we had assumed the richer map was the failsafe map. However, shortly after, when looking more closely at the code, it was determined they were reversed. No one was making updates to the Subaru Ecuflash defs back then (after the sept 06' release). I had been regularily updating Enginuity defs (as I still do today), and had fixed this a while back, at least for Enginuity.

 

3. Starting with Ecuflash version 1.31, I created a converter to convert Enginuity's xml to Ecuflash's format. I sent the converted definitions to Colby and he released version 1.31 with those new defs. I will continue to release an Ecuflash version of defs everytime I update the Enginuity defs (as I have with the latest version that came out 12-04 0.8.0b). Here's a temporary mirror with both the Enginuity and Ecuflash latest defs:

http://www.ken-gilbert.com/wrx/enginuity/

 

4. The two fuel maps ("Primary Open Loop Fueling" and "Primary Open Loop Fueling (Failsafe)") ONLY switch based solely on a specific IAM (ignition advance multiplier) thresholds as determined by the "Primary Open Loop Fuel Map Switch (IAM)" table. Nothing else determines the switch. Boost control is also potentially disabled below a specific IAM ("Boost Control Disable (IAM)") when current fine learning correction is below a threshold (not currently defined) for a minimum period of time (very brief).

 

5. I don't know if the OP has a Cobb tune, but as mentioned, if you do and you are running a real-time map, the RT specific tables that Cobb's supports will always "override" the corresponding base map table. Ecuflash only reads the "base map" of a Cobb setup. So, you may not be viewing the actual tune, at least for the specific tables, if your tuner requires you to run a real-time map.

 

Thank you for your clarification. This thread started out because I had severly outdated software and definitions. I have recently updated both Enginuity and ECUFlash to the most current versions.

 

I have to imagine that the RT Map that was initially flashed while I had an AP is now gone as I have flashed the car a few times now with different tunes and back to the original one downloaded from the AP now. Can anyone say for sure if I am right or not on this matter please?

 

The Open Tune that I have had on my car before and am analyzing now had the two fuel maps reversed, where the (fail safe) read much LEANER all through the table and was scaled out to 2.70. While the (Primary) was scaled to 2.5 and was RICHER. I have now reversed the two Tables.

[GTWILLY]

I am not sure if the RT values would be applied in your map. Since the AP is unmarried I would guess not.

 

I don't really know what is carried over, or what is applied where.

 

All I do know is that when I read my ROM while my AP is married the RT values don't seem to match up. I have not checked all of them either, but the ones I have didn't.

 

Since upgrading Enginuity I have gone back and read a lot of the values in the Protune I am using, and the boost tables are stock now excet for Target boost A (AT) which read the proper boost for the tune. I have to expect that I am running on solely a base map now.

[LittleBlueGT]

I would guess that if you unmarried the AP that there are no RT maps applied. I don't know for sure though. ie: if you took a flash of the rom (while ECU was married) and then re-applied that after unmarrying what would happen.

[GTWILLY]

LBGT I remember you talking about (tip in) but I can't find the posts you talked about it in. Do you mind explaining to me how that works or anyone who knows for that matter?

[LittleBlueGT]

I think I posted my findings here.

 

Take it all with a grain of salt. We are all still learning.

 

http://www.legacygt.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76269

[GTWILLY]

Thanks, also I know this shows I like to beat on my car from time to time but I like to drift her around turns and I have to be very careful with the throttle as to not hit the limiter too much when sliding otherwise the car falls on its face and it pisses me off a lot. I thought I could fix that with the rev limiter values but it does not. I noticed with the update that a new field was available for (rev limit fuel resume) Does anyone know if that is something that would help with my situation??