Viewing my lower VE table in these two apps show different values (subtle in some cells, downright wacky in others). Am I missing something here ? does Tuner Pro factor in other value(s) ?

here is the table in TC's RT Tuner :


and in Tuner Pro :

 

My guess is that the ECU file is the wrong one. It has the X & Y axis reversed.

RBob.

 

good pickup ! after comparing the two, cant believe i didnt catch that one

I am using the 8746jonprevost61h.ecu . . . maybe jon or mark s/be notified as this was the public ecu for download on TunerPros site ?

thanks,
~alex

 

That would be Jon. =)

 

I've made this clear in the past so if the site's haven't been updated and the old file aren't removed that's beyond me.

 

ah. guess its my fault. i'll take the file down completely.

 

-- so (here i go again, thinking . . . ) wouldn't it be a relatively easy fix -- e.g. transposing the axes ? or is there something else . . .


/* Table 25: Main Fuel Table #1 %Volumetric. Effeciency. */
{
/*startAddr =2B1,
/*columns =9,
/*rows =8,
/*elementSize =1,
/*bitMask =0,
/*offset =0.000000,
/*mulOrDivOrBit =0,
/*factor =0.390625,
/*map_name =Main Fuel Table #1 %Volumetric. Effeciency.,
/*ylabel =RPM,
/*yaxis =400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2800 3200 ,
/*xlabel =MAP (Kpa),
/*xaxis =20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100,,
};

 

I just researched this a little more. Turns out some tables are populated by column rather than by row (where row population is much more common).

The only way to accomodate this with the ECU format is to exchange rows and columns (put RPMS in the columns and MAP in the rows). Unfortunately thats not the only ECU shortcoming - you won't have enough characters in the column headings to fully list the RPM values. =(

This will change in the next release of TunerPro.

 

:hail: thank you . . . my prominated '91 anxiously awaits ver 4.0
-- and may my registration and generous donation serve as a virtual 'kick in the pants'

 

Indeed; I'm left with a bruise... Thank you kindly!