Which MAP Units do you prefer?

Recently the calibration maps were changed from displaying MAP from inHg to PSI. That has broken the PID link between the scan tool which reports MAP in inHg and the tuning tool maps which now expect MAP in PSI.

The problem is this: the SAE mandate that a scan tool must report MAP (and BARO) as kPa or inHg. Many of our customers have requested that the tuning tool maps be displayed in either kPa or PSI (instead of inHg).

The question now is, do we change the tuning tool maps back to inHg or do we "break" the scan tool and change it to PSI to match the tuning tool?

Note: EFILive version 8 software will not suffer from this problem. With EFILive V8, you wil lbe able to customize the units to whatever you want and it will not impact the underlying software operation.

I tune in metric, but given a preference, kPa and PSI.

I like kPa for MAP (...and psi for trans. parameters...).

I know the question is in regards to MAP, but here's another parameter with "strange" units: low oil pressure warning is in inHg, but it would be more meaningful in psi.

whatever gives me more precision, with metric preferred

i like imperial settings for all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redhardsupra

whatever gives me more precision, with metric preferred

---

Precision is defined by the PCM ;)


I am with most of the others. Metric is my preferred choice.

Most people have gotten use to a certain set of values , changing will only bring more confusion .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tunedbyGM

Most people have gotten use to a certain set of values , changing will only bring more confusion .

---

Hence the poll. I want to know what most users are used to and want they want to keep using, so I can set it to that.

Looks like we need to put MAP and BARO back to inHg...

At least til V8 is ready - then it won't matter. Units can be whatever you want. (Hogs heads per mile anyone?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blacky

Recently the calibration maps were changed from displaying MAP from inHg to PSI.

---

The part I missed out saying in the original post. I think the change was accidental, that our calibration generation program did not generate the correct units. I'm pretty sure we didn't change it deliberately.

Regards
Paul

please make sure that imperial setting are available.
i do not want to have to use metric.
thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr.prick

please make sure that imperial setting are available.
i do not want to have to use metric.
thanks

---

cubits and furlongs anyone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ringram

cubits and furlongs anyone?

---

They would only work on the 98 pcm.

I'll take furlongs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joecar

I'll take furlongs.

---

Wouldn't furshorts give better precision?