New open ECU rule

[tbtapper]

Well, hopefully now that the vitriolic and slanderous comments are subsiding regarding the impending change I am interested in what folks with GII's who don't run the big buck Speedsource MoTec system are thinking.

I for one am pleased, I have been chasing a nasty stumble in the 5 to 6k range for this whole season and have not finished a single race. That represents a LOT of wasted $$ and time and I perceive the rule change to give me some hope for a resolution.

Now that the "in the stock box and connectors" is out I perceive that I can rewire the necessary connections for whatever ECU I select and know with certainty that the connections are good. That eliminates numerous failure points.

Looking for thoughts and opinions on ECU options. The ones that come to mind right off the bat are: MoTec M4 (of course) $2,000??, EMS $1,000??, MegaS $1,000?? or stick with Chris' modded factory ECU assuming he gets the S4 unit available soon??

Travers
ITS19

[Newbie]

How can I find out more detail about this change in regulations??? I bought an ECU designed for rotary powered aircraft last year and have not done anything with it because it's not legal. Since I already spent the $$$, I'd like to play with it.

Steve

[Eagle7]

...MegaS $1,000?? or ...[/b]

MegaSquirt is about $500 for a pre-built unit or about $250 if you want to build it yourself.

No matter which way you go I strongly encourage you to install a wideband O2 sensor.

[lateapex911]

Just a note on the proposed rule change:

The ITAC debated and made a recomendation to the CRB, who in turn debated it and has passed it along to the BoD for their approval. They meet in August to go over all the proposed changes, and vote on them.

IF the BoD decides that the ECu rule change is a good one for IT, they will approve it..... if not, it will be turned down, and the rule will remain as is.

Now, I do know there is some support on the BoD for the change, but i do not know if it is more than 1 person, or all of them or any thing in between.

So, if you like the proposed rule, by all means seek out your BoD person and let them know. If you do not, do the same. This is NOT a no brainer, and there is considerable squaking about what idiots the ITAC and CRB are for even thinking of this. I can see the BoD reacting in either direction, but if they have real input, and well reasoned input, (if you're going to make sweeping generalizations, providing actual facts to back them up is always important) they will have a much better "feel" for the situation, and will be better informed.

[cmaclean]

How do we find out who our BOD representatives are and how to contact them?

[JoshS]

How do we find out who our BOD representatives are and how to contact them?
[/b]

SCCA.com, go to "Inside SCCA", then "Boards & Committees." Hopefully this link (http://www.scca.com/Inside/Index.asp?IdS=57948C-D2111F0&x=080|070&~=) will work.

[cmaclean]

Thank you :)

[C. Ludwig]

Here is part of an email I sent to another customer with my thoughts on the matter.


"A standalone will have more resolution. I really feel it won't be worth the extra expense. To hear some people on IT.com tell the story resolution alone will make power. It won't. Basically extra resolution allows you better control by offering more load points over more RPM points. My ECU has an 18x14 (252 points) resolution where the Haltech I also sell has has a 32x32 (1024) resolution. For reference a Motec M400 has 40x21 (840).

The extra resolution will allow you more control over a finer range. If you look at the a/f log I posted in the ECU thread on it.com you'll see small waves in the graph, A/F varying a little less than a full point across the entire rev range. Though that's a huge improvement over stock, and the HP numbers show that, there is slightly more power to be had there by hitting the optimum mixutre across the rev range. My educated guess is that it's less than two hp at an one particular spot and much less than that in average power across the rev range.

When looking at price my ECU is selling for $450 and is plug-n-play. To do the Haltech E8 you're looking at $1400 (ECU, harness, all sensors) for the kit and $600 for me to do the basic install. The Haltech has many more features and some neat datalogging capability but is it worth it to you? In the end, in your case neither ECU is going to give you much in the way of a bump in peak HP. It will help below 7k where we left your car lean of best torque as a compromise to get the best top end power. As far as price, dyno time is a wash between the two."

Another note on resolution that I forgot to include in the above is that as far as max power at WOT most of that resolution is lost on the user. For an NA car when tuning for WOT you're only worried about tuning around 0 in/hg. On ITS RX-7s I've logged manifold pressures fluctuating between 0in/hg and 2 psi positive at WOT. And that is pretty much the only area you are tuning. All those other available areas to tune below WOT are there to sort out driveability (do any of you with a properly functioning stock box really have any off throttle driveability issues?...shouldn't) and to sort out fuel mileage if you're an endurance racer. See the screen shot below. All the vertical bars are load cells for one rpm range (the Haltech happens to have 32 availabel RPM ranges). The only load cells you'll really be tuning for WOT operation are the three to the right that are highlighted in yellow. For a standalone all the rest would need to be tuned to get the car running right but when comparing the resolution of the standalones to the programmable stock box it's my point that most of the resolution has no bearing on the power numbers you'll see on a dyno. Makes sense?

http://www.ludwigmotorsports.com/haltech_screen.JPG


My Haltechs, the Motecs, Pectal, etc., etc. have many more features than you'll get out of a reworked stock ECU. I have never looked in the MS. I imagine you can make it do anything you want but do you have the time and inclination to do so is the question you'll have to answer. All the stand alones can function as stand alone data aquisition. The higher end units can drive lambda sensors. It all depends on what you want to get out of your system and what your budget will be. When looking for power alone I can't see a totally compelling reason, within the discussion of the 2nd gen RX-7, to spend a load of cash.

One final note that I think someone brought up already is that you will need a lambda meter to tune any system. Now most good dynos will have one available but the cost and function of the decent systems has come down to the level that it's a good idea to just permanently mount one in the cockpit so that you can see what's going on at all times.

[Weaver7]

[I for one am pleased, I have been chasing a nasty stumble in the 5 to 6k range for this whole season and have not finished a single race.


Travers I also have that same stumble but it is only for a split second I feel the car surge. I believe it is the secondary injectors coming in. Although I have heard that they come in around 4500 so I'm not positive.

[Z3_GoCar]

Just a note on the proposed rule change:

The ITAC debated and made a recomendation to the CRB, who in turn debated it and has passed it along to the BoD for their approval. They meet in August to go over all the proposed changes, and vote on them.

IF the BoD decides that the ECu rule change is a good one for IT, they will approve it..... if not, it will be turned down, and the rule will remain as is.

Now, I do know there is some support on the BoD for the change, but i do not know if it is more than 1 person, or all of them or any thing in between.

So, if you like the proposed rule, by all means seek out your BoD person and let them know. If you do not, do the same. This is NOT a no brainer, and there is considerable squaking about what idiots the ITAC and CRB are for even thinking of this. I can see the BoD reacting in either direction, but if they have real input, and well reasoned input, (if you're going to make sweeping generalizations, providing actual facts to back them up is always important) they will have a much better "feel" for the situation, and will be better informed.
[/b]

Jake,

I e-mailed our local Bod member expressing my support for the change, and he responeded positvely to it. I've run in the same run group as he does... Who's you're person?

James

[lateapex911]

My guy is the big cheese, who writes the column in Sportscar. Grand poobah Bob Introne. (LOL)

I actualy have not written anyone on the subject. I brought the whole thing up and wrote the stuff you read, now it's your turn to make it happen, or not.

[Z3_GoCar]

So we've got two Bod members on board then. Did you know that Andy Porterfield runs GT-1 in addition to making and selling brake pads?

James