and then scailed my stock fuel tabels acordingly i know that the resolution would suck and it would not be ideal but would it be beter than using a fmu this is for a TBI setup using the 747

 

The short answer is no, it won't work... not worth doing.

It's been tried, and from what I have heard... bad results.

The long answer is, while you could rescale everything, there is more in the code (when under boost) than just a rescaled fuel table.

There are several adders that are not present in NA code.

A better option is swap to a 749 ECM, keep the TBI, set the bit in the code for TBI and use either $58 mask or Grumpy's source code based off $58. Grumpy's mask is labeled $60.

See the DIY Prom board for more info.

Bob

 

 

ok now what is involved in running the $58 or the $60 how would i run the injectors

 

there really is no strait answer to what grumpy's $60 code is? it's just based on the $58. I have been trying to figure it out

what makes it differant from the $58b tunercat has?

 

The difference is Grumpy's $60 is fully commented assembleable source code based on $58.

Commented source code is good karma.

Either is fine, however if you want to make code changes (patches), expand,extend fuel, timing tables, using $60 makes it sooo much easier than before. BW

 

Actually, it does work. That’s what the 165/808 guys are doing. I’ve burnt a few chips that work OK, and Joby’s friend with the turbocharged Camaro is running that setup. I was expecting resolution problems but I don’t have any evidence of it.

 

Yeah... But their using Holden code. Not $32/$32B/$6E. BW

 

165 or 808?

A MAF setup with boost doesn't count. Its gonna read airflow til it maxes out the maf.

On the SD setups, you need a 2-baro bin to start with. I tried every trick imagineable with the '730. It's VERY inconsistant under boost.


-- Joe

 

This is a 165, running some 808 stuff in it, a 5d bin, no maf, but a map sensor. The bin that we both started with was a 1bar, 305 bin (I believe that it was originally used in an aussi TPI police interceptor). I’ve scaled the map tables to work with both a GM 2 bar map and a Honda 1.75 bar map. I’ve also scaled the table in the .ecu to show 0-200 or 0-175Kpa depending on what map I was working with. It works fine (though I don’t think I have the KS working right, but I’ve broken my car again so I haven’t had enough time to experiment and check for sure). I think Joby is running it with a GM 2 bar (at least that’s what we were bouncing back and forth via email for a while)

 

Yes, My friend with the Turbo Camaro is using a 2-bar MAP and the stock 165 ECM with 808 code.

 

Interesting.. I thought there was a blown Holden mask (not $5D). I knew about the MAF to MAP code. Must have cornfused it..

I take that your just adding "X" fuel at "X" MAP @ "X" RPM for fueling, or is there a seperate fuel adder table? BW

 

this is geting interesting i dont understand how alot of it works ( in that alone it makes it scary for me to try) but i am hoping to lern

 

The problem is the million constants and loops that are based on xxx amount of map, and so on. But its not worth arguing over. If they got it running well enough to make 'em happy, good for them.

-- Joe

 

If you know of one, I’d love to see it. If I ever get the time to play with this more I will probably experiment with some of the newer masks in hopes of getting better KS control and possibly TCC… OTOH, I doubt that most of what I can afford that uses a TCC will live behind what I can build with some boost, so that might be moot.

For fuel it has a VE vs MAP table which we’ve scaled as well as assorted adders. Same deal with spark tables…

FWIW, Joby and I exchanged probably 2 dozen emails and PM’s brainstorming this. He was probably about ½ done when I got started on it, and I admit that I was more interested making it more “friendly” to work on (Jonas seemed content to have map tables that showed 100kpa and just knowing that it’s actually 200kpa, where I had to change all the labels…), but I think that it’s actually pretty good right now. The one thing that it doesn’t do is you can’t just tell it that “oh, I’ve got a 2 bar in it now,” but you have to go and scale everything. I’m not sure that any of the other ECM’s/masks do that, but I that is what I’m used to with aftermarket stuff.

I’ve tooled around with my car with the 2 bar and 1.75 bar, and compared it NA to NA with the original MAF setup. So far it’s running the same times at the track, I’m getting slightly better gas mileage (comparing it to the MAF setup with highway mode enabled), and much better idle/part throttle. I was never able to get that quite right with the MAF, with the stock injectors/stock chip it was always RICH where it rand the fastest, with 42pph injectors and assorted chips I was able to get it to run with roughly the right mixture but not really steady, always felt like it was right on the verge of dieing but never did (OTOH, change the fuel pressure a little and it wouldn’t run). The butt-o-meter tells me that it’s significantly more responsive to throttle input then it was with the maf (the axles with hammered splines that I just pulled out of it and refuse to reinstall seem to agree)

For the most part with the exception of the TCC stuff it runs better with this setup. I’d like to know how people have hacked/changed table sized in other bins/masks and double the map table resolution to run with a 3 bar map (I suspect that it would run fine like it is, but it’s only 9 columns wide now, I expected the resolution to be too low already).