8F .xdf file in d/l section

[Mars]

Hi,

The .xdf file in the DL section has a real common error that can really mess someone up that is starting to tune. EVERY single .xdf for 8F I've seen has this wrong.

Problem lies with the rev limiters.

"RETURN ALL FUEL IF RPM <= THIS"

and

"SHUTOFF ALL FUEL IF RPM >= THIS"

The conversion for both reads "25.0000 * X + 0.0000"

should read : "1310732.000000 / X + 0.000000"

I know it's a minor issue, but we may as well fix it. It confused the hell out of me once, I was raising rev limiters and they were actually being lowered and it was annoying.

That is all.

I can't attach my updated file cause I don't have the Winzip.

[robertisaar]

don't need winzip, you can directly attach XDFs...

[sil]

thanks for pointing that out
the xdf is so complete that it is over 400KB the limit is 195 for the uploads lol
gotta zip it

[sil]

now someone with privs can upload it and remove the old one

[SappySE107]

Done

[Mars]

great thanks.

[Syclone0044]

Thank you very much for posting this update and "heads up", Mars.

I had been using another 8F XDF that was HEINOUSLY wrong, especially in the AE fueling areas! Resulting in a bug that I chased for years. All this time my changes were having a random and illogical effect due to a bad XDF. No wonder it was so difficult to tune!

BTW among the worst offenders for 8F XDF errors is GMPCM - contrary to his arrogant confidence in the accuracy of his definitions. Due to his DRM I can't even use the program anymore despite having paid for it. Wish I could get that $ back from the crook.

[robertisaar]

Due to his DRM I can't even use the program anymore despite having paid for it. Wish I could get that $ back from the crook.

and this is why i help the tunerpro crowd. mark just added in the ability to encrypt and password protect XDFs, but hopefully that function won't get used that much...

[Joseph Upson]

I ran into the rev limit problem some time ago and discovered it by switching back and forth between Tunerpro and Tunercat due to the differences in tables available between the two programs and realizing that the rev limit worked in reverse. I assumed it was just the xdf I had and since Tunercat seemed to be more accurate with that particular bin I didn't worry about it. I did get a pm from a Fiero member a couple of weeks ago about a problem with setting the limit.

Glad someone is taking the time to sort it out. I nearly gave up at one point during the early part of the 3900 install due to several run-ins with failed parts that prevented the engine from running or nearly did; two intermittent crank sensors and one bad MAP sensor. The MAP sensor was the worst because it made the engine run terribly without setting a code. Thank God for TunerproRT and a sharp eye that noticed the MAP value was constant at all times while scanning.