ECU question

[Randy Van der Ree]

I was just wondering guys, what do u use the most:
Stock ECU's or New ECU's. what brand? and why?

[Randy Van der Ree]

I was just wondering guys, what do u use the most:
Stock ECU's or New ECU's. what brand? and why?

[BStoney]

Performance Electronics - best value and best service by light years. You won't find a better system out there for this application that has the support and quality service behind it. The guys at performance are the best we have ever dealt with at Cincinnati.
Also, even suspension guys can understand, use, and control the system.
Granted I don't have any experience with the Motec units, but the PE unit, along with it's bang for the buck, outweighs all the competition.

Good luck on selecting an ECU!! http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[jack]

after the claude rouelle/motec seminar, i would give my right foot for a motec. with a motec ecu, ADL, and the "pro" software i would probably learn more than i will with my degree. however, you could get about a dozen PE ecu's for the cost of that stuff.

[Colin]

we've been lucky enough to use a motec ECU for the past 4 years with the addition of a dash logger last year. although the system is on the more expecsive side the felxibility you get with motec is awsome you can get it to controll anything from variable intake runners to shiffting systems, and the support is very good too.

[-]

I guess nobody likes the piggyback type system like a powercommander? We have used this system this year and to be honest I would throw this in as the best bang for the buck. You can pick one up for less then $300 brand new. You start off with the stock map that the bike uses in its ECU so there isn't any worry about building a full set of maps from scratch. Also from what I gathered that most teams do whether they have an ECU set up like this or not, is they just play with the spark and fuel curves anyway. Both of these variables are easily adjusted with a powercommander. If time and money weren't an option I along with some others on my team would love to play with a motec and really be able to use all of its functions. However when it comes down to the point of getting car running as quickly as possible so you can get to the important part of testing the rest of the car (seeing what breaks, bends, or falls off) a stock ECU from a bike along with a powercommander seems like an easy choice to make. Also in the off chance that you crap an ECU and if you have bought some cheap spares off ebay (can get ECUs for under $20 for a good one) you simply need to just plug in a new one rather try and find a new motec in the middle of a race.

I hope these points help to make the case for a piggyback system more justifiable. And to the negative comments that some of the design judges make about piggyback systems, I would like to welcome them to read the eloquently written summary of design suggestions written by Carroll Smith (http://www.sae.org/students/fsae-judge.doc). I would especially point them in the direction of the comment "A brilliant design that is not finished on time is useless"�. There were a few teams (cough.. UTA... cough) that had problems with their stand alone system this year and it goes to show that a good and somewhat complicated ECU system can in fact fail, leaving the remaining parts of the car unable to work properly.

[Colin]

you make some good points but you have to addmit how limiting a piggyback system is, do you guys use the stock bike loom as well? http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif as for starting the car for the first time it dosn't take very long to get a map good enough for your first dyno run with an aftermarket ECU. and with a system like motec you can get away with out even using a dyno with the lambda logging. also i'd be interested to know how good a stock bike fuel map is with the sae restrictor, plenium and exhaust?
what about temp and pressure warning's i'd hate to destroy a $4000AUS engine becuase i used a $300 ECU

[jack]

i think that data logging is very important if you want to get anywhere in design, as well as a fast car. to me, this alone makes a motec well worth it. oh yeah, anyone with a haltech should find the nearest trash can immediately!

[B Lewis @ PE Engine Management]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>There were a few teams (cough.. UTA... cough) that had problems with their stand alone system this year and it goes to show that a good and somewhat complicated ECU system can in fact fail, leaving the remaining parts of the car unable to work properly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just for the record, UTA did not have problems with the ECU. There was no failure as the previous post implies. Thanks.

[Chris Boyden]

I believe that UTA had a diff leak that took them out of endurance.

As far as ECU's go, The Performance Electronics unit is definitely the best ECU for the dollar hands down. The software, support,ease of use, functionality, the Deutsch connector, and the price make it a wonderful system. Also, the system integrates beautifully with the Honda F4i and other engines.

We've had alot of problems with the TEC3. The AMP connector is rated for 10 plug/unplug connections. We definitely exceeded that. And guess what, the connector stopped working. We've had injectors lock up and other funky things happen because of the connector. It sucks.

Deutsch connectors are awesome. The are very serviceable, although they are little more expensive. However, the engine is worthless if the electrical/ECU fails for whatever reason.

The MOTEC seems like a good unit...but holy shit...it's expensive.

I don't want to put words in Brians mouth, but I believe they are planning on implementing some data-logging and other features while keeping the cost low. Definitely, keep these guys in mind when choosing your ECU.

Chris

[-]

Opps, look like I made the wrong comment about UTA's problems. The problems that I heard about from UTA were mearly through the grapevine as I stuck my head up from working on other issues on my own car. Sorry if I offended anyone.

As for how we are running our car, we simply modified a stock wiring harness which by all accounts was the easiest thing to go to get the car working and out to test. The luxury of this is that you can still use the stock dash for a the bike which has the pressure and temperature sensors still built into it so we don't cook any of our motors. In hindsight if I or our team had the chance work with a motec I am sure I would change my tune, but for the most part with our limited budget a piggyback system works for us.

[C Z]

Just to throw another ECU into the fire, we here at U of Kansas used an AEM this year and liked it a lot. With wideband capabilities it's a little more expensive than a Tec III (which we've used and liked as well) but has a better interface, tons of capabilities including data logging, and auto mapping and an engine accelleration based traction control built in. We have been happy with the service Scott provided us and to top it all off it uses all of the stock sensors and coil on plugs.

www.jayhawkmotorsports.com (http://www.jayhawkmotorsports.com)

[Eric Wort]

We used the Performance Electronics ECU this year and were happy with it. It is extremely easy to use with a Honda F4/F4i, pretty much a "wire-in".

A slight hiccup with the map being a little scrambled did occur during competition. We're attributing it to a lightning strike that occured about twenty feet away from the car. Some of the home-grown electronics on the car failed shortly after the strike as well. A reload of the map fixed all of the stuttering problems, so it wasn't a big deal. It did leave the car less than optimal for acceleration and skid pad, as we didn't figure out the problem until just before autocross.

[MoTeC]

Hi Guys,
My two cents worth:
If you are after an ECU firstly work out what you want it to do. A few of you imply that you just want it to run the engine and this is basically true. The only problem I have with this is that most of you want you ECUs to do a lot more than just run the engine, eg. gear change ignition cut and logging etc.

A few years ago most of the Aussie teams bought MoTeC ecus based on price (M4s) and the next year, once they were familiar with the engine tuning, they wanted to know if they could upgrade them for more inputs which is not possible. I now always recommend that they at least get an M400. I know it is more expensive but my point is (at least in Australia) the teams now are pretty handy when it comes to tuning the engine and they want a system that will do lots more. Always think of what you want to do in the future as developement as well as running the engine.

Also familiarity with one system (and one company) means you do not have to keep learning every different version of software each year.

[D@UTA]

As far as ECU selection goes, you can't beat the Performance Electronics ECU. The guys are all ways willing to lend a hand and always have an answer, or will find out the answer to any question. For the money, excellent performance, and great customer service, you can't beat the PE.

Just so you all know we did not have an ecu problem at all. In the autoX we had a tuning issue, not at all related to the ecu. The problem was related to the battery voltage getting to low (Lack of charging the night before), and we tuned for way to much fuel compensation in the table as a result. Actually the P.E. guys stayed up with us till 5:00am developing a new map, which got us through the endurance. As for us not finishing the endurance, that was due to a minor diff leak.

Anyway over all I cant say enough about the P.E. guys and their ECU I defiantly recommend it for anyone looking for an ECU. Also just a little hint for connectors, there is a company called Lad Industries and distributes Deutsch Connectors. They love racing (at least the ones I've talked to) and have been more than willing to sponsor teams, I know of three right now. Check them out, the connectors are great!!

Denver Stone
UTA ('02, '03, '04.....)

[Charlie]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by -:
And to the negative comments that some of the design judges make about piggyback systems, I would like to welcome them to read the eloquently written summary of design suggestions written by Carroll Smith (http://www.sae.org/students/fsae-judge.doc). I would especially point them in the direction of the comment "A brilliant design that is not finished on time is useless"�. a good and somewhat complicated ECU system can in fact fail, leaving the remaining parts of the car unable to work properly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A crappy design that is finished on time is useless too. That quote is not a license to apply 'quick and dirty' mentality to anything and everything. Its simply to say know your limitatons and build around them. I'm not saying anything specifically about piggybacks vs. standalones, but niether did Carrol! So don't put words in his or anyone's mouth.

[-]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Charlie:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by -:
And to the negative comments that some of the design judges make about piggyback systems, I would like to welcome them to read the eloquently written summary of design suggestions written by Carroll Smith (http://www.sae.org/students/fsae-judge.doc). I would especially point them in the direction of the comment "A brilliant design that is not finished on time is useless"�. a good and somewhat complicated ECU system can in fact fail, leaving the remaining parts of the car unable to work properly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A crappy design that is finished on time is useless too. That quote is not a license to apply 'quick and dirty' mentality to anything and everything. Its simply to say know your limitatons and build around them. I'm not saying anything specifically about piggybacks vs. standalones, but niether did Carrol! So don't put words in his or anyone's mouth. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not trying to put words in anyones mouth, I am mearly saying that for our team with a limited amount of man power, its easier to use a piggyback system and get the job done faster then struggeling with a standalone system as we have in past years. In those regards plugging in some little box and having our guy spending a few days with it and a dyno to get a decent map is the best way for us. Also it costed us a hell of a lot less.

Also I know that quote isn't licesnse to slap crap together and call it a car, but like everything with a deadline, you need really need to look at the amount of time it is going to take to get each and every option done and then weigh those with the overall benefits and pitfalls of each system. In all I think we both probably agree on this point.

I am mearly voicing my opinion as to why we choose a piggyback system in response to a judges comment that he didn't like it because its not inovative.

[Vishwas Shelar]

Hi guys
its first time we are going to compete for FSC..we are using RE classic 500 EFI single cylinder engine So please suggest me the ECU which will be easy to remap<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by -:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Charlie:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by -:
And to the negative comments that some of the design judges make about piggyback systems, I would like to welcome them to read the eloquently written summary of design suggestions written by Carroll Smith (http://www.sae.org/students/fsae-judge.doc). I would especially point them in the direction of the comment "A brilliant design that is not finished on time is useless"�. a good and somewhat complicated ECU system can in fact fail, leaving the remaining parts of the car unable to work properly. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A crappy design that is finished on time is useless too. That quote is not a license to apply 'quick and dirty' mentality to anything and everything. Its simply to say know your limitatons and build around them. I'm not saying anything specifically about piggybacks vs. standalones, but niether did Carrol! So don't put words in his or anyone's mouth. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not trying to put words in anyones mouth, I am mearly saying that for our team with a limited amount of man power, its easier to use a piggyback system and get the job done faster then struggeling with a standalone system as we have in past years. In those regards plugging in some little box and having our guy spending a few days with it and a dyno to get a decent map is the best way for us. Also it costed us a hell of a lot less.

Also I know that quote isn't licesnse to slap crap together and call it a car, but like everything with a deadline, you need really need to look at the amount of time it is going to take to get each and every option done and then weigh those with the overall benefits and pitfalls of each system. In all I think we both probably agree on this point.

I am mearly voicing my opinion as to why we choose a piggyback system in response to a judges comment that he didn't like it because its not inovative. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Jon Burford]

I really like DTA
their units are great value and come with fast helpful support.

www.dtafast.co.uk (http://www.dtafast.co.uk)

Their interface is easy to use and the crank positions sensing is easy to setup even with complex systems.

[coastertrav]

Haltech over here.

Honestly, go with whichever company that wants to work with you as much as you want to work with them. We've used MoTec, PE, and Haltech with the Haltech my favorite. The user interface of their software is top notch, and customer support incredible.