1. KFMLDMX is not a monitoring map. It is SRC high and SRC low for HFM.
2. KLMIMAX is not a monitoring map, it is a torque limiter.
3. KLMIMAX_UM has no connection with KLMIMAX. No, there will not be "some action". You do not understand anything about the function monitoring concept. The only time you need to change any _UM maps is if you change the mathematical formulas in the function assembly. No calibration change warrants changing them on ME7.

Why do you present your opinion as fact? When you don't even understand the function monitoring concept of the ME7 ECU?
All the _UM maps run in a different raster with mock inputs and outputs, they have nothing to do with the main engine control raster. They are only checking if the function math is operating correctly.

100% of what you wrote is BS. Consider your next words more carefully, or even better, read the FR.

Genius!
These maps KFMI_UM KFMI_UC KFMDZOF_UM are not explained in FR and nobody tell about them because there is some power secrets i think.
I don't try to copy, tried to understood them.
I found them modified in many maps, greate maps for 400-600hp cars.....I think they are not so idiots!

ridiculous assertion


even more ridiculous unless they have modified the ASM that uses that code such that the stock _UM values are no longer valid, which is highly doubtful.

You don't even have to dig around. There are only 3 outputs

fuel
timing
wgdc

What outputs are their files generating that yours can't without _UM modifications? If you can't answer that, you have no business doing any tuning at all.

Right, first class greec tunning and bulgarian tunning company, both modified the file with these maps..... they are idiots
I don;t know about these maps but yes , i saw difference, error on checksum. HAHAHA

You really are clueless about the industry.

One more time.

What outputs are their files generating that yours can't without _UM modifications? If you can't answer that, you have no business doing any tuning at all.

There are many people with years of experience who do not know what they are doing. See the answer of a person with more than 10 years of experience and over 897 Posts:

http://nefariousmotorsports.com/forum/index.php?topic=20435.msg151444#msg151444

IamwhoIam:
"Why do you want to avoid changing them? Do you know what role all these maps play or you just don't want anything to do with "torque"?"
"This shows you really haven't understood anything about how the torque calculations work in a ME(D) ECU."

In fact, after 2 to 3 days of reading FR and it became clear to me about these _UM maps.

The conclusions are clear.

In fact,  according to FR in my case (MED9.1) I realized that KLMIMAX is not a limiter above a 40% PED position.

Above 40% PED position in KFPZU the torque is ~100%

If:
KLLLRZU_0_A = 0.781 @ 3520RPM
KLMIMAX = 92.578 @ 3520RPM
Temperature_Dependance = 0

(92.578 - Temperature_Dependance) * 100 = 9257.8
 
(9257.8 * 0.01) + Temperature_Dependance = 92.578

The result is 92.578 whether the Temperature_Dependance is 0 or different than 0.


Then 92.578 + 0.781 = 93.359 (mizuvfil)


Above 40% mizuvfil in KFMOF the torque addition is 60.938.

Then 93.359 + 60.938 = 154.297 witch is limited from MDIMX = 99.219 (or ~100%)


Does this mean that KLMIMAX may remain unchanged even KFMIOP last Load axis has values ~100%?