tuner pro help initial timing

[Sean Rupp]

I am just going to have to ask for help and show my ignorance here, been reading for over an hour and I cant even figure out how to get started here.  Even the help section, how to get started is leaving me confused.

 

Anyway I loaded the bin George and Randy helped me with in Goshen.  Went to the scalars and found the SA initial SA (definition set to base setting of distributor) should be initial distributor seting I would guess but its set at 36.21 instead of the 8 degrees it was.  I set the actual distributor at 4 degrees and want to tell the computer where its set now.  Am I looking at the right place to edit it? There is a box come up to make a change but it seems to much of a change from 36.21 to 4 cant believe it would be the right thing to do… I remember setting the timing and randy changed the bin to tell it where we were but this does not look familiar.

 

Maybe I’m not in the right place.  It takes me a while to learn new computer stuff, I really am an old school gearhead with adhd.

[George Beckman]

Wow. If SA- Initial SA was set at 36.21 it is a wonder it ran. This would mean that the engine, at cruising speed would be running an actual advance of only 20 degrees or so. The ECM removes or discounts the original timing once it takes over so the timing table #s represent timing at the crank. Your original 8 at the crank (before you lowered it) minus 36 in the bin = -28 in the computer's reality.  28 would be "subtracted" from the timing tables. So an table advance in lean cruise of 50 would be trimmed down to 22. That could be sluggish.

I looked at all my SA Scalers and Constants and do not find 36.21 anywhere.

Could you send me that bin?

gbeckman at pggp dot com

On Mar 14, 2012, at 10:50 AM, Sean Rupp wrote:

Anyway I loaded the bin George and Randy helped me with in Goshen.  Went to the scalars and found the SA initial SA (definition set to base setting of distributor) should be initial distributor seting I would guess but its set at 36.21 instead of the 8 degrees it was.  

----

Best Wishes,

George

http://www.pggp.com

[kdpotato]

hey Sean, make sure you have the right XDF file loaded for the BIN
you're editing.
This is the definitions file that tells tunerpro what line in the
table is mapped to what value.
If you have the wrong definitions, nothing will make sense and you
won't be editing what you think you are.

When I started with tunerpro, I was really confused by what I was
seeing because I
was using the standard "$42" XDF file for regular old 7747 ECM BINs
while looking at EBL BIN files I had picked up here. If you're using
EBL, you need to load either the XDF file that DynamicEFI provided
(EBL_V31.XDF) or better yet the one Ken added helpful comments to
(EBL_V31Help.XDF).

If you're using a microsoft computer, the EBL_V31.XDF file is located
in C:\Program Files\Dynamic EFI\EBL Flash\
Best to make a copy of this file so you don't accidentally modify the
original. To load it into tunerpro, click on "XDF" on the top left
of the tunerpro program, click "Select XDF" and then select the copy
you made of the EBL_V31.XDF file (or if you have it, the
EBL_V31Help.XDF file)


hope this helps,
Karen

[George Beckman]

Good get, Karen.

Here is the XDF for the files you are using, Sean:

[Sean Rupp]

George,

I compared it to your original bin that we started with and yours is set at 9.84 to my 36.21.  Randy took out a ton of timing on the higher rpms of my bin and it certainly falls off on the top end but maybe that is why.  I will try to send the bin, another new feature I need to learn anyway.

[George Beckman]

Wow. After sending Sean Ken's xdf with help I loaded it just to make sure that is the one I have. I looked at my initial SA, which is set at 8 and it said 71.

Sean, look at your file with this original xdf. Perhaps we have a corrupt xdf running around. I know Ken's original worked, but something is wonky.

[George Beckman]

Gang,

The EBL_V31Help.XDF copy I have, with KenH's help file is corrupt. I posted it here to Sean on 3/14/2012. Who knows where I got it or what is wrong with it but every constant/scaler SA shows 71.n

On Mar 14, 2012, at 11:45 AM, George Beckman wrote:

Good get, Karen.

Here is the XDF for the files you are using, Sean:

On Mar 14, 2012, at 11:34 AM, kdpotato wrote:

hey Sean, make sure you have the right XDF file loaded for the BIN
you're editing.
This is the definitions file that tells tunerpro what line in the
table is mapped to what value.

----

Best Wishes,

George

http://www.pggp.com

<EBL_V31Help.XDF>

[Sean Rupp]

Alright. I was having trouble getting it into tuner pro so I will just stop there.

[Sean Rupp]

I just looked at the same sa table with comparison and the xdf file ebl-v31help.xdf and both bins show 9.84 deg now.  I can’t find the screenshot feature you were using, I will keep looking.

[Gordon Reid]

Thanks George, I had saved it, now deleted.
Gordon

[Bruce Hislop]

Do you guys having a working EBL_V31Help.XDF file now? Otherwise I have
one on my laptop here.

Ken is likely busy working on his CAD500 so he likely won't see the
posts till tonight if you are needing a good file.

Bruce Hislop
Perth Communications
519-273-3300
br...@perthcomm.com
www.perthcomm.com

Emailed using Thunderbird!

[Ken Henderson]

George,

Now I'm worried. I just downloaded the file you sent and renamed it
BAD-*.*. I then used WinMerge to compare it to the version I used
today to reset my Initial SA. They're identical. I then loaded
TunerPro and spot-examined my most recent, before today, BIN. No
unusual values appeared in any of my samples.

Something's rotten in the state of 1's & 0's.

Ken H.

[Sean Rupp]

I need the good one as well once we figure out what is going on here. Why would I get two different readings with the same file? I compared georges original bin to mine and got a way off reading then selected the bin with the same name as georges but not the one he sent and they read the same. In either case if you use an xdf to read both being compared they should read the same correct or not right? If the two did not match values or cells they came from under one xdf it would be reading from the same incorrect cell in the comparison right? It cant read one right and one wrong when you are comparing the two... I am getting a headache again...

-----Original Message-----
From: gmcm...@googlegroups.com [mailto:gmcm...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken Henderson
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 8:53 PM
To: gmcm...@googlegroups.com

[Ken Henderson]

The same .XDF and the same .BIN should always display the same
results, for sure, since the XDF is really just a data base definition
file which describes the .BIN data base.

I dunno what's going on, but I can assure you that the file George
posted is identical to the original I have. I'd suspect that your
download was corrupted, but then George reported trouble too.
Baffling. I'm too old & rusty to be much help.

Ken H.