Tuning Table size

[powerboy]

More then 10  with Link ECUs with difference engines/cars.

Size of fuel and ignition main tables 22x20 cells are too small, especially number of rows for high boost engine.

In case of multi target boost levels, 20 rows are concentrate to  boost levels, thus 2-5 rows in vacuum for constant speed and relax drive are not perfect.

Haltech elite is often compare  with Link which Haltech's table size is  32x32.

If the new firmware is concentrate on fuel and ignition table size, Link ecu will be no competitor and closed to the best Ecu in market. 

[Simon]

You are aware that the steps between the rows and columns are adjustable so for areas where the VE is not changing so much you can use less resolution and then where the VE changes rapidly you can then use closer spacing? 

We found on our test engine a 1UZFE vvt motor that you could achieve a very acceptable tune on 4 cells.

[mapper]

Cell size was a criterion many years ago to compare ECU's. The VE modell Does a great job. Sometimes you want to move brakepoints arround, but I never felt that there are too less cells in a real world application. You can spent days to tune every cell perfect on the dyno (which needs anyway much more time if you expand the number of cells) and on the track you will find that transient AFR can vary alot depending how boost kicks in. 

I personaly found that I get more stable transient lambda readings (or less lambda error) if I tune TPS vs RPM in the main table and use a 4D overlay with boost compensation (MGP vs RPM). 

That virtually makes your Map even bigger than what Haltech has! And it will make a great job even with 10bar of boost.