boosted

Yes, ever one to do something different (or do
Something at all appart from get the cheque book out)
I'm not sure it will de value the car at all as it can't be seen, and as for chopping the harness, well that's very easily fixed.
Was up the road for a tune on my own today after fitting the bigger turbo and decatting. Got the fuel pretty close now at .7 1.0 and 1.2 bar, all around 11:1 afr. Seems to be going well at that so far.

boosted

Quick update, over 500 miles covered after the aem has been fitted and mapped.
I ended up tuning the fuel map by mapping the MAF voltage as this is the main input to the factory ecu. And any adjustments here are constant and will remain so. So far a have a very good stable afr, with very good controllability. I am also able to use the factory electronic boost control with good results, peak boost of 1.4 bar with a sustained 1.35. Not sure on power output but 300bhp is a good guess.
So for those who said it couldn't be done, it can, and it's actually a very easy and successful process.

Andy Stevens

No one said it can't be done, but why go to the extra effort of chopping the harness to fool the ECU when you can map it directly?

boosted

Because I can't map it directly, took a couple hours to wire this in, no one would know to look at the car. And then I'm
Straight in about tuning it, not having to pay any extra or learn anything new, and no risk to std ecu. Live mapping on the fly, not data logging and re flashing.
Are there people within a 30 mile radius of me that can teach me otherwise?

Andy Stevens

You can map it directly.

http://www.romraider.com/

boosted

No you misunderstand my statement, I can't, I don't have the cable or the software or the knowledge and experience. So unless someone can show me locally I'm stuck. So I stuck with what I know and it works well.
Can you live map on the fly with rom raider?

Andy Stevens

So you have based your decision on the fact you weren't prepared to learn and use the cheaper, easier and better system. That's your call but don't expect anyone to follow, piggybacks are not a good solution when free remapping software exists for the OEM ECU.

boosted

You've avoided my direct question twice. I'm always prepared to learn if required, but there's not always people prepared to teach. Oh and I recon only 1% of people fully understand what I have done and how I have achieved it. Your following!?

boosted

Also remember its ecutec locked

Andy Stevens

People tend to learn from online manuals and by experience rather than go to a teacher as that limits you by location and availability. I'm not sure there are many courses on any given mapping systems in the UK although it is something I'm considering admittedly.

I think you underestimate the community if you think only 1% have followed what you have done, it's not exactly rocket science.

I am glad you are pleased with the result, but IMHO using opensource over a piggyback will get a better result for less effort.

boosted

It's not that 1% are following this, I am saying less than 1% are actually mapping their own cars. Maybe I didn't make that very clear.
I'm guessing by your lack of response that you can't use open source to live map? Which is a right pain if that's the case.
Not sure if your trolling for an argument or not?

Andy Stevens

ECUs are my day job. Lots of my customers are retail and map themselves, much more than 1%. Open Source isn't a right pain, it's well designed and my software has a similar look and feel.

If you genuinely feel that a piggyback is a better solutions than mapping the OEM ECU direct then I'd have to say it's you that is trolling.

boosted

Lol, so that's why you have such a negative attitude. I never said it was a better solution, but it's a good solution. The best solution is a standalone ecu, and I've fitted and mapped many of those too on many Marques of cars. Why do you insist on tearing a thread apart that dares to be different?

Andy Stevens

Why do you think a standalone is better than OEM?

DT-SPD

iTrader: (7)

Let me answer that one, no you can't live map, it's log data and reflash with open source. It's actually not a bad system and pretty simple compared to more advanced ECU's ( the sort I use in my day job ).

I've followed your posts and think its great what you have done, it clearly works and is a system you are happy working with so I don't understand the negative comments from others.

boosted

I think what everyone needs to understand is that this is not a "how to use open source to map" thread, if that's how you want to do it then great, do your own thread and let us all know about it, that would be great.
If someone came along tomorrow with a cable and a laptop and showed me how to use open suite I would gladly take in as much as I can and try to learn, and then only after many questions would I make a decision on what is best. But I still wouldn't change what I've done to my car as it works well and is very easy to use, the cable is right beside me if I ever want to tweak the map.
With regard to standalone being better than Oem, I am mainly used to turbo charging NA cars or cars that have completely the wrong engine in them, so it's kind of a necessity rather than choice.
I thank the people who "get" what I am doing but just wish there was more on topic discussion and questions. I mean its only the fact my car is a blobeye that we are even having the open source discussion. If it was an old classic or forrester then this aem would be perfect no?

mickywrx

iTrader: (29)

Answered the question yourself.

Andy Stevens

To make an informed decision, you need first to be informed.

john banks

If you fake the MAF signal you move the engine load and alter the ignition timing. Are you piggybacking cam or crank position sensors to compensate? What about cooperating with OEM knock control?

For minor mods it can work, but I wouldn't use it even if I had it sitting there if an open source option is available. You would have very untidy compensations for ignition, closed loop transitions, injector latency, airflow meter limits and would struggle with valve timing and acceleration enrichment etc.

To get a full picture you should use open source logging to see knock/IAM/fuel trims. With a bigger turbo the ignition requirements at the top end with much greater cylinder filling are usually retarded compared to OEM bottom right hand corner, plus if you are leaning it lit by dropping MAF voltage there you will likely be running a low IAM. Needs a bit of thought to get the most out of it.

boosted

Basically I am only modifying maf voltage up at 1.2 bar and above, the rest of the map did not need any work at all. I am pulling 2% of the voltage out of the MAF signal to change my afr from 10's to mid 11's, so essentially I will be advancing the ignition timing a ball hair, however looking at live data on the factory ecu through a code reader I can see the exact ignition timing, it's a very small fudge I have going on here, remember the rc was remapped to a similar boost before, albeit with a slightly smaller turbo. I think this is why I can get away with what I've done. Agreed a massive turbo and injector change would require a "proper" remap as you could end up tying yourself in knots with the aem.
I can post my maf map to show you how little the adjustments are to the maf I you want?

john banks

Logging the factory ignition timing doesn't show you how hard the OEM ECU is working to remove your possibly excessive timing, it just shows you the end result. The change in engine load as perceived by the OEM is far more critical than a change in non linear MAF voltage, your 2% becomes more like triple that depending on the OEM MAF curve... download Ecuflash and you will see the curve and where you are on it, and how many load cells you are moving.

Your method works, but it is a bit 1990s when there are much better methods available on your car.

boosted

I am listening to what your saying. And I don't really know how hard it's pulling timing, but at a guess probably not that hard tbh as I'm running Water meth injection above 12 psi.

john banks

Even more reason to log it to optimise, I added 5 degrees timing when I used water and or meth. Have you got water/meth safeguards setup in the piggyback?

boosted

Quite, I have no safeguards with the aem, however I mapped the car without the water injection, then fitted it afterwards. I still have the safeguard of the factory boost control, this is a good indication of knock as I've had the situation where it drops the boost to actuator default setting, although this was before I had even started interfering with the car at all on the old td04 running on std unleaded when I had just bought the car. I've never heard it pink, as long as it's going well and the afr is correct with no knock then I'm a happy bunny. I know I could advance timing to take advantage of the WI, but to be honest I would rather have a reliable car than one on the ragged edge, it is my daily driver and only car just now after all!

Andy Stevens

For your boost to drop to actuator pressure IAM<2. If this was the case you would have experienced severe and continuous detonation.

If you want a reliable car you would have been better to map in conjunction with the OEM ECU so you can monitor such things and map accordingly.

boosted

Aye but mind this was before I had even touched the car, was the first week I bought it. Ran it on normal unleaded, did not hear it pink at all, and I know what pinking sounds like! Been mapping cars for 11 years now, destroyed several pistons in my time

Andy Stevens

Yes I see but I'm not sure it was the ECU reacting to detonation as dropping the boost is the last thing it does after retarding ignition and enrichening the mixture. Even the cars that use our system out in Africa with 89RON don't see that kind of advance multiplier.

It's described on p.26 of our manual (This is aimed at earlier cars but the control algorithms tended to carry across)

http://www.enduringsolutions.com/Manual.pdf

john banks

I'd want to fault find the standard car before adding piggybacks or water injection.

Adding water/meth without retuning is a band aid or could lose power. Adding water/meth with tuning to take advantage without safeguards is an option/calculated risk if the engine isn't valuable to you and proper engine management setup isn't possible.

I think you've got it all topsy turvy to be honest.

boosted

Water meth is as much of a band aid as putting in v power, you run the best fuel you can, wether that is super unleaded or super with additive or even super and WI, it all helps. IMO this is not a band aid (gay American term that)
Was several faults with ems I had to fix before aem was fitted, but that's another story

john banks

Putting in V power is running the car on the octane it is optimally setup for from the factory.

Using water injection as a means to fix a near OEM setup that is dropping the wastegate duty because of knock (whether you can hear it or not) or a fault is a band aid or whatever you want to call it, a terrible idea.

Using water and/or meth injection on an engine that already runs brilliantly and is optimally tuned, and then tuning for it with safeguards and measuring the benefits in terms of EGT, knock resistance, torque and smoothness is an intelligent pursuit. This isn't coming across in your approach unless I am misunderstanding?

Perhaps you mistake my comments as dislike for DIY tuning, water injection, piggybacks in all situations, but nothing could be further from the truth. Poorly executed or chosen mods without fixing the underlying basics or using the best readily accessible tools which are free and extensively discussed over many forums for years is another matter. Do I misunderstand?

With the experience you state, it will be easy for you to do a datalog of the OEM ECU, posting that with and without water would be interesting.