August Fastrack out!

[JeffYoung]

My understanding is that this is already possible with Motec right? You can essentially "run" each cylinder as its own separate "engine" so long as you have as many 02 sensors as cylinders.

That "what has changed" is a relevant question, because scream all we want, we aren't going back to stock ECUs. I personally would prefer that as well, but the fact is the majority of the folks racing IT expressed their opinions -- and they didn't want that. Dead issue. Not sure why we are discussing it.

[Joe Harlan]

Here's the thing Joe, I'm willing to listen, but I expect intelligent and specific answers, not misused tech talk with little factual basis.

Your "You know what I mean" comment is classic. Yes, I know what you mean...direct injection is direct injection. You used words, I understand them, therefor, THATS what you mean.

from Wikipedia:
Gasoline direct injection or GDi is a variant of fuel injection employed in modern two-stroke and four stroke petrol engines. The gasoline is injected directly into the combustion chamber of each cylinder, as opposed to conventional multi point fuel injection that happens in the intake valve, or cylinder port injection in two-strokes, and utilizes a high pressure single-piston injection pump and common rail fuel line.
If thats NOT what you meant, then WHY did you use it???? It only serves to confuse, or to mislead.

Then you tell me to stick to an industry that I have knowledge of??? Well, sir, if YOUR knowledge of your industry is defined by your use of the direct injection term above, then i wouldn't throw stones, if I were you.

Stick to real facts, and your case is stronger than a bunch of "Trust me on this"s, and incorrect terminology.
[/b]

Jake, please tell me how many EFI systems you have actually installed and or tuned. Please share your direct experience on fuel injection. You can dick with my poor use of the english langauge all day long I will give you that but as I said your direct knowledge of EFI has more to do with your ability to make a reasoned choice on this rule.

[gran racing]

Once you take the proceeds from your book and you buy a pro motor with a full Sequential direct injection 3d EFI system and your making more HP than your car was ever considered to make in the current process. You can then tell me it was a fair and good idea that won't hurt the entry level status of the classes we are effecting.[/b]

Want to buy the rights to my book and assume the bank loan Joe? <_<

I still do not understand how this will make racing more expensive for people, and my lack of knowledge does make me a bit nervous of what the true impacts might be. Will this truly allow people to accomplish more than they can now by stuffing a MoTec or other expensive unit in an OEM box? Or will it allow more people to afford to control their ECUs? If more people are able to afford it, others will feel like it is a necessary modification to their car in order to keep up. That I get although it really isn’t a valid argument no matter how much I try to convince myself otherwise. (Ray, stop doing stuff to your car darn it!)

[planet6racing]

Bill Last time I answer this. It is not about now or then. The issue is the rule should have been changed back to stock flashed boards and chips.

[/b]

So, just so everyone here is clear, Joe:

You&#39;re problem is not with this specific rule change. Your&#39;s is with the rule in general. You feel that the cat should be put back into the bag and ECU&#39;s locked down again, right?

Based on that, why are you arguing about direct injection and the like (not trying to tell you how to argue )? From what I&#39;ve read, I really thought you were discussing why not to change from the current rule to the new rule...

[AntonioGG]

"Furthermore, I&#39;m trying to understand the rationale behind some "allowances" (such as allowing stuffing an ECU into the stock box because the stock ECU has a speed limiter, or limp mode, etc.) when for some others, the answer is always tough nuts if the car has some handicap that puts it at a disadvantage compared to other cars."
Do you really believe a car classed in IT should have a rev limiter? Do you also believe it should go into limp mode after sensors that are mandated to be removed make it undrivable. Think about your statement for a minute--sound stupid yet?? This has nothing to do with "the car you decide to race" if it can not be made to run under the rules. Somehow we got alternate carbs in the early days of IT for some cars--wonder why?? The stock unit was unable to be tuned. See anything similar yet.


[/b]

Thanks for calling my post "stupid" Steve.

I&#39;ll return the favor....do you really think I was saying an IT car should race with a rev limiter. Now does your post sound stupid? :P

[RSTPerformance]

This has been asked by many, but I&#39;ll try to do it calmly:

What stops anyone from doing any of the things you have pointed out from doing so now?
[/b]

I will answer calmly as well... I have NO FRIGGEN IDEA!!!

and I will ask again calmly:
If you can do it now, then WHY DO WE NEED TO CHANGE THE FRIGGEN RULE?

Raymond "I don&#39;t see why the "rule is clearly written as is"... I just don&#39;t get it" Blethen

[planet6racing]

To make the option available to POOR people, like me!!

[JLawton]

If you can do it now, then WHY DO WE NEED TO CHANGE THE FRIGGEN RULE?

[/b]

In reality, the only thing it changes is the expense of doing it............That&#39;s all!!

I have to admit, I had to grill a few people becasue I couldn&#39;t understand the difference either. I thought I was missing something........


I&#39;m going out to clean my air filter...........That should see the same gains as paying $10K for a MegaMotec ECU......

Actually, if people spent this much time and money on improving their driving skills, they&#39;d be MUCH faster!! If people are slow and want to blame it on not having a $10K ECU......They will always be slow.........

[RSTPerformance]

I don&#39;t think we want to make a list of rules that we should change, just to make things more affordable for individual causes...

Raymond "A fellow poor racer" Blethen

[seckerich]

On a national level there is some chance of enforcement of the old "stockECU rule" but not on a regional level. There is zero chance of an inspector having the knowledge and equipment to test them. Almost impossible for Topeka unless they have the "code" for the manufacturer to even tell what is stock. The chip and piggy back boards are so easy to get around as to make it laughable as a happy medium.

You can all remember with fondness the good old days all you want. Wish every car had an easy to police carb,ashtrays, and full interior. Cars, drivers, and the rules have changed with time. Good or bad can be discussed all day with 10 different opinions. What really matters is the wishes of the majority of the drivers actually running IT TODAY who have a real vested interest in the class and their investment in equipment. That is what was asked for by the comp board and the ITAC and I would expect them to listen. If you were so concerned about this then I hope you wrote a letter or called --I did. I asked anyone I raced with to do the same-Did you? Everyone does not read this forum but it was in fastrack. If they don&#39;t pay attention to fastrack and care what goes on in their class-- Oh well. A little late to give a crap now.

[Conover]

In reality, the only thing it changes is the expense of doing it............That&#39;s all!!

I have to admit, I had to grill a few people becasue I couldn&#39;t understand the difference either. I thought I was missing something........
I&#39;m going out to clean my air filter...........That should see the same gains as paying $10K for a MegaMotec ECU......

Actually, if people spent this much time and money on improving their driving skills, they&#39;d be MUCH faster!! If people are slow and want to blame it on not having a $10K ECU......They will always be slow.........
[/b]

Right, and the fact that some really couldn&#39;t do it, because the wicked expensive stuff people were shoving into their ECU&#39;s wasn&#39;t compatible with their wiring harness, and/or sensor. For that matter the cheap stuff that would get them half way there wasn&#39;t going to work either, so this rule is proposed to help that situation.

[gran racing]

A little late to give a crap now.[/b]

While I agree people should have taken the time to provide their feedback when originally asked (I did), I wouldn&#39;t go this far either. It&#39;s out there now. If people have valid reasons why it shouldn&#39;t happen, they should be given this opportunity to be heard. Send in your e-mail to the appropriate place(s).

[Eagle7]

If you can do it now, then WHY DO WE NEED TO CHANGE THE FRIGGEN RULE?


Raymond "I don&#39;t see why the "rule is clearly written as is"... I just don&#39;t get it" Blethen
[/b]

Same reason they allowed the threaded body shocks after they had been banned. Prices on them came way down and people were jumping through hoops to legally use the now much less expensive TB shock, so why not make it cheaper and easier and just allow them.

[Ron Earp]

There is another really good reason to do it that is not brought up so much. It is called ITR.

ITR is part of IT now, like it or not. Many of these cars will not be racable due to their ECU stepping in and stopping the party due to various factors ranging from traction control (which is illegal by the way) to rev limits to timing, airflow parameters, etc. Sure, some you can work around with reflashes and chips and other devices, but other issues are not avoidable and will cripple some of the ITR cars unless they have an aftermarket standalone ECU.

This rule change is an enabler for ITR the way I see it. And, it doesn&#39;t force anyone to do anything that is already racing IT and likes their setup the way it is.

R

[tlyttle43]

Maybe I shouldn&#39;t raise this question after all the fun discussion so far, but.... For most cars, how much extra horsepower do you REALLY get from a full-blown MOTEC system versus your basic, re-chipped, stock ECU or even a stock ECU. I don&#39;t have much recent, real-world experience, but when I did, the answer was not very much. So is the current answer, what -- 5, 10, 15 HP? When I was having an engine done by one of the big name builders several years back, the gains just weren&#39;t all that much over even a stock ECU (once you got rid of the rev limit.) The explanation I got was - outside of the operating conditions seen on the Federal (emissions) Test Procedure (i.e., idle, low or moderate accelerations, no speeds over 62 mph) the engines are basically tuned at the factory for close to optimium power already. In other words, where we operate our IT cars, they&#39;re close to maximum power when they come out the factory door (with almost all the increases that we see over stock due to open exhausts, free air cleaners, etc.)

If it really doesn&#39;t make much difference, that leads me to two conclusions. The people who want to spend $5000 on a Motec will spend the $5000 on some thing else that will provide them a similar, small incremental benefit. The people who don&#39;t want to, won&#39;t, just like the don&#39;t now.

Or am I missing something, and there are really large gains over stock? And, yes, I know 15 HP is a real advantage and even 5 is useful. But I&#39;m not sure I&#39;d spent $5000 for it versus buying tires more often or some other improvement.

Tom Lyttle
IT7 Mazda
ITS Nissan 200SX


P.S. I run mostly in IT7, so the new rule doesn&#39;t affect me one way or the other.

[trhoppe]

There has also been some talk about this hurting the "middle back" guy. The buy who has been running a stock ECU and now will have to spend $10K for a motec.

My POV is that the rules are NOT WRITTEN for the "middle back" guy. No matter what the rule is, he won&#39;t maximize it anyways. He never maximized the previous rule, why would he maximize this one?

The rules are written for the POINTY END of the field. This rule makes it easier then it was before to make it to the pointy end of the field. This rule allows for less cheating at the pointy end of the field then if you had a "stock ECUs" rule put into effect.

I would MUCH rather have open ECUs then have "stock ECUs" as a rule and have to police the fact that people are flashing them or hiding some sort of management.

For example, for honda/acura products, this rule changes nothing. We already have a great $500 system, Hondata, that is going to be just as good as a $10K motec for an IT car. Sweet! Someone spent the TIME and EFFORT to design that. Sounds like someone is also doing that for the ITS RX-7. Hell, if your car doesn&#39;t have that and oh my, you HAVE to buy a $10K motec, take the time and effort to design and build something that works. I&#39;m really surprised that there isn&#39;t such a product for a Mazda Miata. Of all the mazdas that are out there, I figure Mazdata or somethinng similar would be out. Maybe its time for that to happen

-Tom

[zchris]

A large fear of mine is the problems that can be encountered when installing any aftermarket ECU. I spent 1.5 years and more money than I care to admit converting my GT2 car to fuel injection. I bought a new TEC3 from Electrmotive and suffered 1.5 years of hell with them before I got a fully funtional unit. And that was only because on the 4rth time at the dyno with the engine running poorly the ECU went up in smoke. They dyno shop happened to be an Electromtive dealer. They called Electromotive and had a hard time getting them to fess up to replacing the ECU. I lost out on almost 2 years of racing chasing down a bum ECU that they repeatedly refused to replace. And this is one of the largest ECU manufacturers in the US. Most of these ECU suppliers have horrible at best customer service poeple. Look on the various boards about the problems encountered. Be careful what you wish for.
Chris Howard

[stevel]

A large fear of mine is the problems that can be encountered when installing any aftermarket ECU. I spent 1.5 years and more money than I care to admit converting my GT2 car to fuel injection. I bought a new TEC3 from Electrmotive and suffered 1.5 years of hell with them before I got a fully funtional unit. And that was only because on the 4rth time at the dyno with the engine running poorly the ECU went up in smoke. They dyno shop happened to be an Electromtive dealer. They called Electromotive and had a hard time getting them to fess up to replacing the ECU. I lost out on almost 2 years of racing chasing down a bum ECU that they repeatedly refused to replace. And this is one of the largest ECU manufacturers in the US. Most of these ECU suppliers have horrible at best customer service poeple. Look on the various boards about the problems encountered. Be careful what you wish for.
Chris Howard
[/b]

I agree. A lot of people are going to run into lots of problems. My plan of attack would be to stay on a stock ECU next year, you&#39;ll end up winning by attrition. Lots of people will be blowing up motors cause they dialed in too much timing or not enough fuel (or both) or will have ecu issues (could be user based, software based, or hardware based) and will either be limping around the track or not even make it in. Stock ECU FTW!

I think the rule is what the majority wanted, but I think it&#39;s going to be difficult for a lot of people to get fully functioning. This stuff is not easy, so many things can go wrong that are not obvious or simple to diagnose.

Good luck!

[Knestis]

...so you and anyone else that feels that way say "no, thanks" and opts out. It&#39;s not a requirement - any more than pro-built engine internals, balancing, or anything else might be.

K

[trhoppe]

I&#39;ve never used one, but I would be suprised if a $Texas Motec or Electromotive ECU wouldn&#39;t have the same "self tuning" options that a Hondata or most new stock ECUs have. No way you can blow your motor, as the ECU will tell through the wideband how lean you are and adjust itself for the perfect mixture

-Tom