Bug in SManager v2.5.4.0

[crluver123]

I've actually known about this bug I discovered for quite some time. I was first led onto the issue when I realised the spacing for the loads in the 3d ign graph were never consistent with the actual load indexes, they were always spaced incredibly awkwardly. I finally was able to spend a little time creating a map to easily display the actual issue, so here goes...

The problem is the visual scaling of the MAP in the 3D graphs. The fuel graph displays correctly but the ign map does not. When you change a load cell, it visually alters the data at the opposite side of the axis (ign graph only, fuel graph is good). It makes it rather difficult to see how smooth the ignition maps are, especially when the load cells are not equally incremental. The best way to explain it is to simply show screenshots.

To describe what I did for this visual:
1) set all load cells to even increments
2) set ign table to even increments based on load, same values for all rpms
3) set fuel table to even increments based on load, same values for all rpms
4) change one load index value, look at 3d graph to verify it graphed it correctly. It graphs correctly in fuel map. It does not graph correctly in ign map.

fuel even.png

fuel correct.png

ign even.png

ign incorrect.png

As you can see, in the first and third pics load and table values are perfectly even increments throughout.
For the second and fourth pics, I changed the load value for column 10. In the fuel graph it correctly shows a proper visual of column 10. But in the ign graph, column 10 does not change in the 3d graph, but rather column 4 is what has changed visually even though nothing has been altered for column 4 in the actual table.

I believe this to be a simple coding error, that I hope will be resolved sooner than later for the sake of visual aid while tuning.
Thank you in advance, and please advise or comment if possible

[Hondata]

Thanks for the report. We have reproduced this, and will fix for the next release.

[crluver123]

Awesome! Thank You!

[crluver123]

oh, I only checked this in the low cam by the way, I did not check it in high cam. So you may want to verify if it's the same for both or not