Anyone using the Vi-Pec V44 or V88?

[xander18]

I'm sourcing a new ECU for our team. We had initially been looking at more expensive units like a Motec but the feature list of the Vi-Pec ECUs is really terrific and I like the software. All for quite a bit cheaper than the more expensive units. Anyone used them and have any feedback? Has anyone else in my position decided not to use them for one reason or another?

[jlangholzj]

I don't really like the fact that the 88 has a feature list of:

High efficiency power supply & output drivers for reduced power consumption and reduced self-heating.

if you have that technology, shouldn't that be something on ALL of your products??

also 1) no CAN. I love our can system.
2) what kind of compensations do they have? Motecs really shine when you start to fine-tune in your engine. And most of the maps you can change to be any parameter X vs any parameter Y.


Also, have you guys looked at a Performance Electronics ECU? If brian's got the file for your engine it'll be plug and play for just about any application. They're a great budget ECU that can do everything that you'd want out of a standard application.

another question is, what are you running now and why are you looking for a new one?

[penna]

we run both the v44 and v88 on separate cars and both work extremely well for what we need them for

[xander18]

We're upgrading from a PE3. It doesn't have a comprehensive enough starting compensation table, missing a few features like flatline shifting and launch control, and closed loop idle control isn't quite sophisticated enough for what I want to do with it. There are a few other issues and missing features (knock, EGT) but that's the long and short of it.

I've installed the software for all the ECUs I'm looking at (Pectel SQ6, Motec M400, DTA Fast S60/S80, Vi-Pec V44/V88) and have looked at sample maps to determine what compensations and features they have. The Vi-Pec isn't quite as sophisticated as a Motec or Pectel but it's definitely quite competitive considering that it costs less than half those units.

Also, the Vi-Pec website claims that the V44 has CAN, I'm not sure where you're getting that they don't have it. Jlangholzj, have you used this unit?

[Rex Chan]

We have only ever used MoTeC, so we're probably biased. Anyway:

We can pretty much do whatever we like in the software (M400 series, not M4/48), though I'd presume this holds for any type of after market ECU. The M400 (compared to M48) has nice, user customisable screens - your ECU software should be able to too. Thus, I wouldn't buy in features alone, but the interface is very important.

We were running an M48 in 2010, and the reason we went to M400 in 2011 was CAN bus. If you're serious about data, you kind of have to run CAN, as it means all your ECU data can be logged with other car data easily.

The main reason you would go with MoTeC is their data logging software - it's really easy to use, and is really set up for motorsport. The box is nice, but you're really paying for the software - if you don't that's worth paying, go right ahead and make your own (I've never used a homegrown data logger, cos they never work; I've used Race Technology DL1, and the software is ok, but not good for teams that change every year, and not as good as MoTeC).

In short, think about your "dream" data logging setup, and how to get there with your purchases - we bought M400 and PDM15 in 2011 ($5000), and the ADL3 in 2012 ($6000). It's a lot of money, but we won't have to spend that again for many, many years.

Not sure exactly why, but a lot of AUS teams run MoTeC, which means problems at comp can be helped with by other teams - we helped Monash troubleshoot their M400 at FSAE-A 2011 in our car (or maybe other way around...). Run a less common ECU, and people may not be able to help.

[xander18]

Rex,

Thanks for the feedback. As far as CAN, just about every ECU I'm looking at lists CAN as a feature. I'm not sure if all CAN is created equal.

Our chassis guys took Optimum G, where Claude uses Motec's data software to great effect. They're definitely pulling for that unit because of the software. We just might not be able to justify the purchase. The question I have for you, since you have both units, is how well does the M400 and the ADL3 interface? Would any CAN ECU output data just as well to the ADL3 or does having two Motec units offer benefits? We also have an AIM system that we've run and we're not sure if we're looking to upgrade that or not.

Was the PDM15 a necessary unit? We've built our own wiring harness in the past. Does the ECU programming control the power outputs or is it just a ready made harness essentially?

We're in the US so Motec won't be quite as prevalent but it's still a popular ECU up here. I'm not too worried about help from other teams, this year at competition we helped others with their PE3s.

[Owen Thomas]

We switched to the ViPec V44 last year (2011-2012), and have not had any issues with it. It was easy to set up, simple user-friendly software, good manuals, and our dealer managed to swing us a small sponsorship discount straight through ViPec.

I selected that particular unit because of the amount of features it has compared to similarly priced units. I thought the V88 was overkill for our application, but if you're planning on running a boatload of outputs for data logging it may be worth it (although the 44 has plenty).

One comment on the CAN output: One of the reasons we bought the ViPec was for the alleged integration with our PI DAQ, however we were then lead to believe that it requires some kind of data filter, or programming on the recieving end. I wasn't heavily involved, nor am I a sparky, but this seemed to be a problem that was not easily solved (and never was).

TL;DR ViPec's good, CAN output is weird.

[jlangholzj]

Originally posted by xander18:
We're upgrading from a PE3. It doesn't have a comprehensive enough starting compensation table, missing a few features like flatline shifting and launch control, and closed loop idle control isn't quite sophisticated enough for what I want to do with it. There are a few other issues and missing features (knock, EGT) but that's the long and short of it.

I've installed the software for all the ECUs I'm looking at (Pectel SQ6, Motec M400, DTA Fast S60/S80, Vi-Pec V44/V88) and have looked at sample maps to determine what compensations and features they have. The Vi-Pec isn't quite as sophisticated as a Motec or Pectel but it's definitely quite competitive considering that it costs less than half those units.

Also, the Vi-Pec website claims that the V44 has CAN, I'm not sure where you're getting that they don't have it. Jlangholzj, have you used this unit?

must have grazed over it, my mistake.

have you looked at an M84? We just put one in our car this last year and i absolutely love it! Paired it up with a AIM evo4 and its quite an amazing combination.

if i had to do it over though, i would save up for a motec ADL. The aim software is nice but i2 is just a little more refined.

the only downside to an m84 is that if you want to run true knock control, i don't believe thats possible.

[KustomizingKid]

We just use the old Motec M4... very simple, I like it a lot. The only feature it doesn't have is flatshifting built into the ECU. Beyond that though I don't know why you would really want more.

Having 101 corrections doesn't do anything for you if they aren't set right...

[jlangholzj]

Originally posted by KustomizingKid:
We just use the old Motec M4... very simple, I like it a lot. The only feature it doesn't have is flatshifting built into the ECU. Beyond that though I don't know why you would really want more.

Having 101 corrections doesn't do anything for you if they aren't set right...

this is true...I spent...many...MANY hours down in the shop to get ours set where they should be (somewhat) and I'm pretty pleased that with e85 its turn the master on, hit the starter and go. I've noticed lately that my cold end of my comps need a little more work with the changing weather from this spring/summer but once you know where to start, its pretty straight forward

[wweissin]

The Vi-Pec is a killer deal for the price. It offers all of the features that Motec or Pectel have at a fraction of the price. And for budget conscious FSAE teams it is a really good fit. The differences between Vi-Pec and Motec/Pectel start to show when you really start to push the limits of control strategies such as FBW, T/C, Cam Control or engine braking control most of which do not apply to FSAE.

As a dealer for all 3 of the above mentioned manufacturers the Vi-Pec software is on par with the other two. It allows customizable pages. It is easy and very intuitive to use and unlike Pectel the help file is well, helpful. With regards to comms and data logging a Vi-Pec with a CDL3 or a SDL3 would make for a very powerful, cost effective and user friendly engine controller and data logging setup.

If you have any questions about specifics ask away. I'll do my best to answer them.

[ksingh2463]

A friend of mine (FSAE engine development alumni) is actually selling a Vi-Pec V88 unit that he used on his turbo MR2. Its obviously not a MoTec but it has lots of features for the money. I'm sure he will cut you a good deal and potentially give you some FSAE engine tuning advise if you need. Send me a message or email me at ksc35f@mst.edu if your interested.

[xander18]

If you have any questions about specifics ask away. I'll do my best to answer them.

Hey Mr. Weissinger, thanks for chipping in. Can you speak to the CAN connectivity issues, especially in regards to Owen's issues (a few comments up in this thread)? Are the other units more intuitive in their CAN connectivity? I don't know if it matters but for the foreseeable future we'll be running an Aim Evo 3 Pro for DAQ.

At this point I think we'll either save some money and go with the V44 or splurge for an M400 and put some other projects on hold for a year.

As far as concerns about calibration, we're getting pretty good at it now and we have a chassis dyno w/ steady state in our shop. Makes it way easier to get those compensations right.

[jlangholzj]

food for thought as well,

out of all the ECU's you're looking at, is there a qualified dealer for ANY of them nearby?

this was part of the reason why we chose the motec, we have a rep not more than an hour away. This makes it VERY easy for help with the initial setup or any other tuning features with the ECU.

[jlangholzj]

Originally by Weissinger:

One comment on the CAN output: One of the reasons we bought the ViPec was for the alleged integration with our PI DAQ, however we were then lead to believe that it requires some kind of data filter, or programming on the recieving end. I wasn't heavily involved, nor am I a sparky, but this seemed to be a problem that was not easily solved (and never was).




Originally posted by xander18:
Hey Mr. Weissinger, thanks for chipping in. Can you speak to the CAN connectivity issues, especially in regards to Owen's issues (a few comments up in this thread)? Are the other units more intuitive in their CAN connectivity? I don't know if it matters but for the foreseeable future we'll be running an Aim Evo 3 Pro for DAQ.

At this point I think we'll either save some money and go with the V44 or splurge for an M400 and put some other projects on hold for a year.

As far as concerns about calibration, we're getting pretty good at it now and we have a chassis dyno w/ steady state in our shop. Makes it way easier to get those compensations right.

if this is the case then i suspect that it isn't a "true" can protocol (which would be extremely wonky). I'm guessing that what needed to be done is map out the addresses for the data to ensure they go to the proper place.

ie when a frame is sent it looks something like this:
<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">
| 1 bit | 11 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0-64 | 15 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
| frame start | ID | RTR | IDE | reserve | DLC | DATA | CRC | CRC delim | ACK | ACK delim | EOF |
</pre>

about all you need to know is DLC tells the receiver how much data is coming and that the data field will typically contain 4 or so values.

for example (something similar to motec's):

ID 1500
(0-15) TPS
(16-31) MAP
(32-47) IAT
(48-63) ECT

meaning that in the data field of the frame with the ID of 1500, 0-15 is the TPS and so forth where the individual values are 16 bit numbers.

Data word: TPSX_TPSX_TPSX_TPSX_MAPX_MAPX_MAPX_MAPX_IATX_IATX_ IATX_IATX_ECTX_ECTX_ECTX_ECTX

If the data logger doesn't know which values are in which ID fields then it can lead to some confusion. In which case you would either need to configure the logger or the ECU to output it in a stream that the other recognizes.

If it wasn't that, the only other thing i can think of is that the Baud rate didn't match, which would also be strange.


EDIT: formatting

[Rex Chan]

xander: the M400 and ADL3 work very well together (they should, considering how much they cost). The CAN output on the M400 is not super configuurable, so you'll have to make sure your AIM logger can deal.

OTOH, the ADL3 CAN inputs are hugely flexible (or at least appear to be), so should work with any CAN device.

On thing I haven't had time to sort out is how to send conditions from the PDM to the ADL3, so not sure if can be done.

The PDM is a seperate MoTeC unit,and is not needed. It basically replaces the fuse box and relays with programmable logic - fuses become circuit breakers that can keep on resetting. Relays only turn stuff on and off when you want to (via logic stuff called conditions in the DM). Only thing PDM can't do for us is high freq PWM of electric motors (need a solid state relay for that). So, I love the PDM, but can run M400 without it, and PDM doesn't need M400 (but PDM loves CAN bus, as you can send it whatever data you want for the condition logic).

btw: nothing to do with harness - you'll have to make your own (not that hard, if you already do wiring), or buy off MoTeC ($$).

M400 has outputs that normally trigger relays (and so I suppsoe could be programmed in a way), but we run fuel pumps, fans, brake light, etc off CAN data from M400 into PDM. INjectors and coils are still through ECU, but power now comes from PDM, so that's how I control/turn off the engine...

Sorry for rambling post - going to bed now.

[wweissin]

Originally posted by jlangholzj:
[QUOTE]Originally by Owen Thomas:

One comment on the CAN output: One of the reasons we bought the ViPec was for the alleged integration with our PI DAQ, however we were then lead to believe that it requires some kind of data filter, or programming on the recieving end. I wasn't heavily involved, nor am I a sparky, but this seemed to be a problem that was not easily solved (and never was).



Pi data loggers can be just plain weird sometimes especially with CAN and trying to use it with devices other than Pi/Pectel. That said, they can and do work really well once you get them setup. But it can take time and some trial and error.


Originally posted by xander18:
Hey Mr. Weissinger, thanks for chipping in. Can you speak to the CAN connectivity issues, especially in regards to Owen's issues (a few comments up in this thread)? Are the other units more intuitive in their CAN connectivity? I don't know if it matters but for the foreseeable future we'll be running an Aim Evo 3 Pro for DAQ.

At this point I think we'll either save some money and go with the V44 or splurge for an M400 and put some other projects on hold for a year.

As far as concerns about calibration, we're getting pretty good at it now and we have a chassis dyno w/ steady state in our shop. Makes it way easier to get those compensations right.

As far as CAN setup and flexibility there really is not comparison to MoTec on MoTec products. Where it gets interesting is when you start to cross manufacturers. We've successfully got a CDL, SQ6 and Pectel Diff controller to communicate over CAN which was a handful but not that bad in retrospect...

The AIM has a CAN template for the Vi-Pec already so integration will be easy. The AIM logging software is easy and intuitive to use as I'm sure you're aware. But it does pale in comparison to MoTec or Pi data analysis tools.

Most of what I am talking about is nit picking and only really noticable once you are using each system day in and day out and back to back. All the hardware listed in this thread will do everything you need it to do and then some.

[B Lewis @ PE Engine Management]

It doesn't have a comprehensive enough starting compensation table, missing a few features like flatline shifting and launch control, and closed loop idle control isn't quite sophisticated enough for what I want to do with it. There are a few other issues and missing features (knock, EGT) but that's the long and short of it.

Hi Guys,

I just wanted to let everyone know that you can do flatline shifting with our ECU via a digital input. You can also do EGTs using an external thermocouple amplifier which is the same as other stand-alones.

Also, we will be releasing a new version of firmware and software that has enhanced closed loop control, starting compensation, accel compensation and idle control. We have added much more adjustability to all of those functions. We are currently testing this version internally.

No external igniters are required with our ECU which is an additional cost when using some of the other ECUs available. We also have most triggers and sync setups built into the ECU already so that stock sensors and wheels can be used.

The CAN bus works well with other data loggers and dashes including the AiM units.

Also, FSAE pricing will be held at the same level again this year with the PE3 costing just $800 for the ECU.

If anyone has any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. As always, I am available to help.