E-Manage powered Mazdaspeed!

oh and the evo is sick nick, im following ur thread ove rin evolutionm.net....cant wait to see what ur makin pushin that much psi thru that turbo.....
 
DooMer_MP3 said:
So that means it has switched to open loop then, right? So theoretically you could manipulate the temp sensor, or O2 sensor at boost onset to make it look like they aren't working, and the ECU would go into open loop? But I imagine just making it look like the sensor isn't working would trigger a CEL?

Chris

Its easier to tap both sensors. Like, making another FM Signal modifier for the Air Temp Sensor and send the voltage we want the ECU to read, this way it will not trigger a CEL.

...It may work. (dunno)
 
igdrasil said:
Then hurry up, the MPI is winning the first rounds!
How much time you need.
Dont get me wrong, we are not looking to compete with other piggybacks. This isn't about who is winning and who is going to lose. It is just a matter of personal preference with those modifying their cars. I have used the SMT6 and know what it can and cannot do. I have also used MANY piggybacks on many cars. And i know what they can and cannot do. That is why we are chosing the path we are. Our future in EMS solutions is more important than petty pissing matches about "mine is bigger than yours"
Every system will have good and bad points. That will be evident once we show what a true EMS can do for the enduser.
 
igdrasil said:
Its easier to tap both sensors. Like, making another FM Signal modifier for the Air Temp Sensor and send the voltage we want the ECU to read, this way it will not trigger a CEL.

...It may work. (dunno)
Isnt that easy. The ecu knows when you should be in closed loop. In "counts" and knows that you cant possibly be cold starting the vehicle all the time when you step on the gas. It will see an intermitent problem. AKA CEL.
Doesnt mean it wont work. Just an annoying light will come on. Till it stays on for good.
 
The PNP standalone would be great Nick. Whats the time frame on that?

Ive got to start looking at more options now for the fun that will begin in the summer.
 
igdrasil said:
PNP standalone is not easy, Im sure it will not be PNP
PNP is very easy. How are you sure its NOT going to be PNP. We have done it.
I guess all will have to see. HUH?
 
perfworks said:
PNP is very easy. How are you sure its NOT going to be PNP. We have done it.
I guess all will have to see. HUH?

Still waiting! :D
(Just giving you s***, man!)

So, with the IAT disconnected, is the car really going "open loop"? Hmmm. . .most interesting!
 
igdrasil said:
Yeah, If the standalone will take control of the rpms gauge for example without splicing more wires....
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO SPLICING INVOLVED.
aka PnP.
We do have more tests to do on the prototype board. Alot more tuning and we will be ready soon.
Trust me you all will be the first to know. ;) :p
 
perfworks said:
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO SPLICING INVOLVED.
aka PnP.
We do have more tests to do on the prototype board. Alot more tuning and we will be ready soon.
Trust me you all will be the first to know. ;) :p

hope so...cus we the ones buyin it :)
 
Little Beavis said:
So, with the IAT disconnected, is the car really going "open loop"? Hmmm. . .most interesting!

Is this true? Is there a way to tell this? If you have an OBDII scanner, how can you tell open loop versus closed loop? I want to experiment (my scanner arrives today)!
 
Decent idea, would probably make tuning interesting.

You can see in the software the status of "Fuel System 1" it will say OPEN or CLOSED loop.
 
turboge said:
Decent idea, would probably make tuning interesting.

You can see in the software the status of "Fuel System 1" it will say OPEN or CLOSED loop.
Yes it would be interesting. Anytime you disconnect an input sensor like that you will go into open loop. It is a very crude way to tune though
 

Latest posts

Back