RomRaider

is it true that no matter how high i write the open loop fuel map, the fuel consumed under close loop situation will not be influenced (as long as i keep in low throttle)?

It is the primary open loop map - it does not influence closed loop and you cannot change the value to leaner than 14.7:1 - those values closer to stoich are simply used to determine the cl\ol transition if they are leaner than the active threshold.

Still a bit confused as to the purpose of the OL CL delay?
If I understand correctly, Ol and Cl are two different fuel maps that the ECU with switch between depending on certain values such as RPM, load, Coolant temp? Is this even close to right?

If Car A has delay value of "1" and Car B has a delay value of "0" does that mean that Car A will switch between OL and CL based on other parameters specified such as Coolant temp, RPM. vehicle speed etc? How will this be different with car B's delay set a "0"?

No, that is wrong. First you need to have an understanding of what closed loop v. open loop fueling means. Closed loop means the ECU is using the o2 sensors (primary the front o2) to make corrections to hit its target. It is using feedback to make sure that you are hitting the target. In closed loop, the target is generally around 1.0 lambda (i.e 14.7:1 AFR gas). You are in closed loop when you are cruising, for example. When the ECU switches to open loop, it ignores feedback from the front o2. It doesn't know if it is hitting the desired fueling target or not. At WOT (after the transition), you are in open loop, for example.

The delay value is a threshold compared to a counter that increments as long as the base pulse width OR throttle continuously exceed the thresholds in their corresponding primary tables. When this counter is equal to or exceeds the CL to OL delay value, then the ECU will check your primary fuel map and make the decision to switch to open loop or not. If the CL to OL delay value is zero, the counter will always equal the threshold, therefore the primary base pulse width and throttle thresholds are irrelevant and the fuel map will be the decision maker. If the CL to OL delay value is non-zero, the BPW or throttle primary threhsolds will have to be exceeded continuously until the counter is equal to the delay value. Therefore, the larger the non-zero delay value, the longer those thresholds have to be exceeded and therefore the longer the potential transition to open loop will take (as well as the more difficult it would be to enter open loop depending on how variable the BPW/throttle are relative to the thresholds). The fuel map is always the last step, regardless, though. The other tables not mentioned - all they do is clear the current CL to OL delay just as if you set it to zero. Think of them as extremes where you don't want the normal delay process to be in effect.

Thank you for the in depth explanation.
I'm going to ask a couple of possibly dumb questions:

I know that the MY04 and 05 were said to have "problems" with the OL/CL delay. Is this because the "non-zero" values in the delay group value (A-1, A-2 etc.. B-1 , B-2, C-1...D-4) were set at high values? The stock map for my '04 has numbers as high as 2075. Does this high of a number increase the time in the transition between ol and CL? If that is the case why wouldn't you just want to set all to "0" ? Is it bad to have the fuel map as the decision maker? Does this remove some of the ECU's intuitiveness (sp) and create a margin for error?

It's my understanding that the CL-to-OL delay is there to keep the car in CL for brief periods of high throttle/load/boost/whatever. Basically, it's there to keep the car in CL unless it's really sure that you want to go in to OL. At least that's how I interpret it.

As Merchgod said, CL isn't exactly a map, it's just a mode where the ECU will always target 14.7. OL is where the fueling table comes into play.

Personally I just set the delays to zero. That way, the only thing that governs the transition from CL to OL is the fueling table. The main reason I did this was just to keep things simple. If I have a log with load and RPM, I can look at the table and know which mode I was in. I've driven around with OL/CL mode showing on my CarPC and it seems to me that it transitions under reasonable circumstances, so I'm not inclined to mess with the delays.

This also resulted in a smoother acceleration when I roll on the throttle, which was a nice side benefit. With the stock tune, I could feel the car lurch slightly a couple times when rolling on the throttle, and one of those lurches is gone now, so I guess it was the transition from CL to OL. Now the transition happens with a much smaller change in AFR, so I don't feel it. (I think the other lurch is related to timing but I haven't really investigated that theory.)

I get the impression that the 07s stay in CL way too long, to the point of blowing up motors. I hadn't heard about issues with 04/05 but it doesn't surprise me.

Dude, you need to actually read the sticky. This is exact question is answered in the mini-faq at the end.

Q: What exactly is the base pulse width value as used in the 'CL to OL Transition with Delay (Base Pulse Width)' table?

It is the base pulse width in ms for stoich fueling at a given engine load. You can determine the equivalent engine load (g/rev) for your ROM by the following calculation (these are assuming you using the latest RomRaider ECU definitions):

engine load g/rev = base pulse width table value / (2707.090 / Injector Flow Scaling)

For example:
base pulse width table value = 6.0 ms
injector flow scaling = 550 cc/min

engine load g/rev = 6.0 / (2707.090 / 550)
engine load = 1.22 g/rev

--
Since Im using 650cc injectors, I need to adjust ms to get the same value as stock? Leaving it as is will make me target an engine load of 1.27 (with 650cc) instead of 1.07 (with stock) I multiplied the ms value by .84(550.67/650.1) to get the same engine load target. Correct or leave this table as is?

Apologies for digging up an old thread, but I saw this parameter and I noticed for the 08 STi, the intelligent delay is 0 and the regular delay is 750. Would putting the intelligent delay to something like 1500 result in slightly better fuel economy say if there's an abrupt/accidental throttle input?