Choosing an ECU

[chuckBYU]

We finally got our motor running. Thanks for all the help. Now we are deciding what ecu we want to go with. Right now our front runner is the Performance Electronics one. I would like to hear other options and why those are better or why the PE ECU is the best. We are just trying to get our feet on the ground as a brand new team. Thaks for all the help guys.

BYU Racing

[chuckBYU]

We finally got our motor running. Thanks for all the help. Now we are deciding what ecu we want to go with. Right now our front runner is the Performance Electronics one. I would like to hear other options and why those are better or why the PE ECU is the best. We are just trying to get our feet on the ground as a brand new team. Thaks for all the help guys.

BYU Racing

[Erich Ohlde]

Did you come by the Kansas paddock at competition?

My vote is for the AEM EMS. we've run it for 2 years now and we plan on using it for several more years. I've heard that the PE system is batch-fire/wasted spark. I'm not sure if there is truth to this. The AEM is sequential injection and you can do practically anything with it, i.e. onboard O2 controller, boost controller, dual fuel maps. Also Scott Matas is the guy to talk to. You can always reach him and he provides excellent support OTP and trackside.

[Sam Zimmerman]

PE is the best value for the money of the three I have dealt with (PE, Motec, and HalTech.) I used the Motec this year because part of my research involved a dual plenum, staggered runner design required individual cylinder fuel and spark maps. The Motec does more, but is more time consuming, cumbersome, requires external ignition drivers, is Dos based, and has very poor customer service compared to Brian's product. If PE had an ECU that allowed individual cylinder maps I would have switched back within the first week of trying to deal with the Motec.

I have heard that the AEM is a good choice. I haven't used it but a guy in my office uses one for an aquanol van and he really likes it.

[chuckBYU]

What AEM package did you get? My brother really likes the AEM on his S2000 but it is made specifically for it. I went throught the website and didn't find anything that looked like it would fit our application (atleast not as specific as the motec or the performance electronics). Since it is our first year doing this, the PE may still be the one to go with for us since it seems like the easiest to use for our application but I haven't talked to anyone using the AEM so your input would really help. Thanks.

Charlie
BYU Racing

[Colin]

Personally I like MOTEC it is more expensive but it is incredibly reliable, it may be a little harder to use but that goes hand in hand with having more functions, but it is an Australian company so support is a little easier for us,

Sam, MOTEC changed to windows software about 2 years ago for the M800 are u using an M4 or somthing?

[chuckBYU]

Also what was the cost?$$$$ Do they give discounts for FSAE? Thanks

[Bowtie Man]

I tuned the 2005 engine this year with the PE ecu, and had no problems what so ever. It was my first crack at it and i was impressed, especially with the simple diagnostic functions which saved me a few times. My sparkies want to go with the motec system this year so they can rig up some crazy wireless stuff, i'm a little concerned about the switchover and am wondering if we go to motec which ecu would be best to use. we'll be running an '02 F4i

[Colin]

bowtie man how much do you want to spend ?

[Jonathan S]

MoTeC offers a package for first time FSAE buyers, and I think they give a discount for all purchases after that. Check their FSAE website:
http://www.motec.com/formula_sae.htm (Motec FSAE)

We (University of Washington) have two M4 units. One is unlocked for "advanced tuning" (wideband O2, traction control, more user definable outputs, datalogging) and is the one we use to tune and run in the car. The other is not unlocked for advanced tuning, and is our backup.

I have been able to rely on Alumni for help with most of the questions I have had. I only had to call customer support a couple times and they were pretty helpful and explained how to resolve the issue.

[BeaverGuy]

A good way to make an ECU decision is to list out the ECUs and then the various features. Next put that info into a spreadsheet with the ECU as the column and features as the rows. This way when the spreadsheet is complete you have a quick reference to the ECU features. Now decide on what features you need and your ECU choice should become a lot clearer.

[Denny Trimble]

Yeah, the only problems we've had with our MoTeC were on our end (loose wires and a horrible hall-effect cam sensor installation we scrapped together for our F4's, before moving on to F4i's and using the stock sensor). That, and the $5000 hit in the cost report. Not a small item.

[Sam Zimmerman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Colin:
Sam, MOTEC changed to windows software about 2 years ago for the M800 are u using an M4 or somthing? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, our gracious snowmobile club was willing to donate their old M4 to us. Makes it kind of hard to convince the faculty advisor to buy a better model. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Strike the comment about the interface, that's what we get for using the cheap model. I didn't realize there was a better world out there. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The customer service at Performance Electronics is still better than I have received from any company of any kind in my 3 year's experience in FSAE. He will help FSAE teams out with any ECU/wiring/engine problems, regardless of whether there is a sale in it for him or not.

[Wizard]

Charlie,

I was speaking to some of your teammates at competition while watching the autox. I suggested since you are running a gsx-r (if I remember correctly) you look into a power commander to modify spark/fuel. Super easy system and two days of chassis dyno tuning net us the same results as a month with stand-alone. Is it the best system out there? Maybe not but it will get you the results you are after.

[Bowtie Man]

Colin,
I'm not sure how much i want to spend I guess i'll likely be lookin at around $4000 all said and done, what we're really looking to do is get the local computer companies to pay for it as we're putting in a bit of wireless technology. oh and does anyone know if there's a rule against tuning while on the go? such as changing maps and parameters as the car is on the track?
thanks
Luc

[LCheung]

I really still haven't seen any really good reasons why people choose Motec over any of the other EMS. Good product support is a good reason, but it all I've heard are positive things about all the brands for product support.

I don't see where the arguement that the AEM unit is designed for a specific application comes from (other than when the Motec rep said so in a thread from a while back.) Seeing that there is a universal unit planned or already being offered by AEM and that single design spans multiple cars and makes, it makes a lot more sense to say that they made a universal EMS and adapted it to many different plug and play applications. Wouldn't that seem to make more sense when going about designing an EMS?

If anyone has any really good insight about the relative capabilities of each of the systems, please chime in.

[Dan Deussen @ Weber Motor]

Bowtie Man,

I don't think there is a rule against that. There is a great risk involved in changing things on the fly though. If you corrupt your calibration during the enduro, it will take you out of the event. I don't think your driver would be very happy either if you change things that effect drivebaility. If you really feel the need to switch maps during an event, use an ECU that allows your driver to use a switch to change them. That way he/she knows how and when to adapt the driving style to it.

[Bowtie Man]

true enough, but after our first acceleration run when our throttle stuck wide open and our driver was to stupid to hit the kill i would have liked the capability of killing it myself wirelessly. instead of having him burn the clutch and me having to spend a night in the tent changing it before endurance

[Kirk Feldkamp]

A few BIG reasons to choose any Motec:

1. DATA ACQUISITION
2. Simple
3. Powerful (tuning features)
4. Accurate
5. Expandable
6. Reliability and support

I have talked to a TON of different engine guys in FSAE, and the common thread is that the vast majority of the teams that have good tuning know how to use DAQ effectively. Frankly, I can't IMAGINE how people got (or get) along without good data. The interpreter program (free from Motec) is a tuner's best friend. It is one of our most powerful tuning tools.

-Kirk

[LCheung]

Ok, maybe I didn't ask the question correctly.

I'm not any expert on this topic and that is why I'm asking. For example, the AEM unit has built in data aq. How is the Motec's data aq superior without the ADL? and with the ADL?

Simple... well that's sorta relative isn't it? If someone understands it, then that's the end of story. All the manufacturers claim simplicity.

Powerful... This is definitely one of those things I wanted to know about. How is the Motec more powerful? Does it extract more drivablility and power from your powertrain? How does it do this?

Accurate... Are you saying that if you set in a certain value for a fuel map that a Motec will run closer to that value than the other systems?

Expandable... Expandable in what ways? What if one has an expansion that you find to be more important than the other? Expansions are pointless unless you plan on using them.

Reliability and support... like I said before, I've only heard positive things about this for all the manufacturers.

-Leon

[chuckBYU]

For those who have used the AEM EMS, how easy or difficult is it to adapt the universal model to an F4i motor?

[Paul Nguyen]

ChuckBYU,

We've been running the AEM on our car for the past two years. The AEM, I believe, can be ordered customized for the F4i. Scott is our contact @ AEM. I believe it ran somewhere in the $2000-$2500 for our unit. Don't quote me on that.

The AEM has been working great for us, however, there were a few problems we encountered. About two weeks before competition, our AEM suddenly stopped communicating. We tried connecting to our laptop but to no avail. Scrambling, we sent our unit to Scott, to be serviced. The exact same thing happened to us in '04. We've linked the problem to a couple of possibilities. Our '04 unit was mounted to the frame sidepod with rubber grommets. This year we mounted it closer to our main roll hoop without gromments. After we had the problem, we put rubber gromments back on in the '05 car just to make sure. We think we've traced it to either vibration, loose wiring, or something to do with our wideband 02 sensor.

We also found out a week before comp that the prom chip was somehow getting erased. We're not exactly sure why. So we had to burn our own prom chips (luckily, we had the firmware) and put them in our '05 AEM.

So far, we haven't had problems with it yet. We finished all the events, including the endurance. The AEM is a great unit, and very easy to work with, tune-ability-wise. Its fairly easy to install (after FSAE modification), a couple of hours @ most. Mostly, its just sensors, power, etc.

I'm not trying to divert you from using the AEM system, just letting you know the experiences we've had with the AEM. Maybe, we've just done a few things wrong with it. I'm curious to hear any other problems that teams using the AEM have had. We're considering moving to a different ECU next year, but from alum standpoint, that's really not my call. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Good Luck with next year.

[dartmouth01]

In the beginning years of our team, some team members custom built our ECUs. The positives were that we could add exactly what we wanted, and the cost on the cost report was dirt cheap (this is one reason why Cornell can have one of the cheapest cars at the event). However, the negatives were the size was rather big, since the PCBs were customs and not made with space saving in mind, and things would break or not work the way they should.

After those guys left, and we didn't have the dedicated EE's we used to, we moved over to a Motec system and an R6 engine. Overall, it was great, lots of options, good reliability. But for the engine team made up of students who had never programmed an engine before, it was very confusing, the learning curve was quite steep. Also, more importantly, the cost was very high, and we immediately lost cost points the following year.

This year, we moved over to a PE system, and so far, we've been very happy with it. While it is simple and does not have the features of a Motec, it was much easier for the new engine team this year to work with and learn how to use it, and they were up and running and tuning on our engine dyno much sooner than if they had used a Motec, I would hazard to guess. However, if you want to consider real competition points, the money saved most likely netted us at least a couple points at competition. I did the cost report and I calculated that we saved almost $2000 on the cost report since last year because of the lesser cost of the PE box compared to the Motec, and not needing a separate ignition box for the Motec as well. Our new data acq team for this year also has done okay with the PE software, and while if they change the fuel map on the fly the car will "burp", they can still at least data log, i believe.

In short, if you have the money and some very fancy ideas, the Motec will do you good. but if you're a team living on the KISS philosophy, the PE box will do you fine. Plus, if you don't have experienced ECU guys, the PE customer support will come in very handy.

[Erich Ohlde]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PAUL NGUYEN:
ChuckBYU,

We've been running the AEM on our car for the past two years. The AEM, I believe, can be ordered customized for the F4i. Scott is our contact @ AEM. I believe it ran somewhere in the $2000-$2500 for our unit. Don't quote me on that.

The AEM has been working great for us, however, there were a few problems we encountered. About two weeks before competition, our AEM suddenly stopped communicating. We tried connecting to our laptop but to no avail. Scrambling, we sent our unit to Scott, to be serviced. The exact same thing happened to us in '04. We've linked the problem to a couple of possibilities. Our '04 unit was mounted to the frame sidepod with rubber grommets. This year we mounted it closer to our main roll hoop without gromments. After we had the problem, we put rubber gromments back on in the '05 car just to make sure. We think we've traced it to either vibration, loose wiring, or something to do with our wideband 02 sensor.

We also found out a week before comp that the prom chip was somehow getting erased. We're not exactly sure why. So we had to burn our own prom chips (luckily, we had the firmware) and put them in our '05 AEM.

So far, we haven't had problems with it yet. We finished all the events, including the endurance. The AEM is a great unit, and very easy to work with, tune-ability-wise. Its fairly easy to install (after FSAE modification), a couple of hours @ most. Mostly, its just sensors, power, etc.

I'm not trying to divert you from using the AEM system, just letting you know the experiences we've had with the AEM. Maybe, we've just done a few things wrong with it. I'm curious to hear any other problems that teams using the AEM have had. We're considering moving to a different ECU next year, but from alum standpoint, that's really not my call. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Good Luck with next year. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Were you guys taking the box apart and burning proms? and what is the 'fsae modification"?

[threehondas]

One more system to think about:

http://www.electromotive-inc.com/

You must mount a 60-2 trigger wheel good to a few thou' runout on you crank though.

[Jon @ Electromotive, Inc.]

Don't forget that all University purchases automatically get 35% off. I am a FSAE alum and I'd be glad to help anybody that needs it.

[Chris Boyden]

One issue we had with the Electromotive:

Our old laptop was stolen that had all of
the '03 car maps on it. Yes, we should have had backups, but we didn't. The Electromotive doesn't have a feature that can read the map off of the ECU and load it back into the Windows host software. So, if the MAP ever gets corrupted, then we have to start over.
Not necessarily a deal breaker, but it would be nice to have. The PE has this feature.
The other critique I have with Electromotive is the Windows software. It is rather clunky and could use a revamping IMHO. The AMP connector also leaves me with a sinking feeling. You can only mate and break the connector about 10 cycles before it starts flaking on you. This is fine if you know exactly what you are doing and never take the ECU off the car once it is plugged in. But, that is hardly the case in FSAE, so if you unplug and replug the connector too often, the system starts to act funny. The only thing that fixed the '03 car was a complete rewire of the ECU harness.

[Jon @ Electromotive, Inc.]

I had actually heard the complaint about the AMP connectors before and looked in it. Sure enough, AMP says 10 make/break cycles. The thing is that I connected disconnect test units that many time every day at least and have never had any problems with connections.

We have a new system in the works with release aimed to be in time for PRI (first week in December) and all of the issues Chris brought up are being addressed in the new system.

[Chris Boyden]

My issue with the Amp connectors turned into a
burned once-twice shy scenario. It took alot of work to rewire.

[aussie_guy]

I'd go with an Autronic Unit Personally (http://www.autronic.com). They are just as sophisticated and flexible as a MoTeC unit, but roughly 1/2 the price. They are however a little less user friendly, but for smart uni students it should still be a breeze. I worked with them for 2 years in an automotive workshop, and i couldn't fault their reliablility in any situation. Autronic is used thoughout australian and international motorsport, with Autronic being MoteC's main competitor. We're a first year team and we'll be using an Autronic ECU on our Car. There's a dealer list on the autronic website if you'd like to locate someone close to you to find out more about them, but there's a heap of technical info on all the units available on the website too. cheers Craig

[Jarrod]

Autronic is pretty good for most things, however it hasn't got the flexibility of the MoTec(crank tirgger in particular, and the magnetic reluctor interface black box? I'm still confused about that thing), and has some unusual features (oil pressure logging?). It can get pricey if you go for the upgrades, ie SM2, traction control, auto tune lambda system etc. The base system is cheaper though. Having switched from Autronic to MoTec, i would never go back. If the cheap system can do all you want, and you don't want to spend a little extra for the Motec, it is quite a good unit though. I have no experience with any other units, so can't offer any further comparisons.

[GTmule]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jon @ Electromotive, Inc.:
Don't forget that all University purchases automatically get 35% off. I am a FSAE alum and I'd be glad to help anybody that needs it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So how much is one of these guys with or without the discount?

[Jeff The Pyro]

electromotive -we got ours at cost... but i think they retail around $2200

[aussie_guy]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jarrod:
Autronic is pretty good for most things, however it hasn't got the flexibility of the MoTec(crank tirgger in particular, and the magnetic reluctor interface black box? I'm still confused about that thing), and has some unusual features (oil pressure logging?). It can get pricey if you go for the upgrades, ie SM2, traction control, auto tune lambda system etc. The base system is cheaper though. Having switched from Autronic to MoTec, i would never go back. If the cheap system can do all you want, and you don't want to spend a little extra for the Motec, it is quite a good unit though. I have no experience with any other units, so can't offer any further comparisons. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I agree that the crank trigger doesn't offer a whole lot of flexibility (when compared to MoTeC), but there are plenty of converters available and Ray Hall Turbocharging in cairns could help you fit it too pretty much anything with injectors. In my experience it's more than a little extra dosh between an Autronic and a MoTeC. I think if you add autotune, launch control and traction control and anything else you might need and compare it to the price of a base M4 (that's without of any of these features), The SM2 would still be cheaper. The only problem i've had with the SM2 is it's size, it's a tad larger than most ECU's, but it is extremely rugged and strong, the SMC is a lot smaller. But they've just come out with a new one called the SM4 which looks promising, and a lot smaller, got no idea what sort of money you're looking at for it. Anyway, was just trying to offer an alternative, but if you need help with an Autronic system, i'd be happy to help you as much as I can, or you could speak to Ray Hall of Ray Hall Turbocharging Cairns (he runs http://www.autronic.com); or you could try David Alexander at Silverwater Automotive Services if you can get hold of him. Both of their details are on the autronic website. Cheers

[Jarrod]

having been through all the troubleshooting with the Autronic, and then setting up a MoTec M400 from scratch, and running the engine about 4 hours after the first crank, i have no desire to run another autronic. We dealt with Beninca's here in Melbourne, that guy is very smart, but confused the hell out of me. I only needed to talk to the Motec guys once in the whole time i was setting it up, it was much easier to use. I haven't seen the SM4, I dont think the SMC has the options we need (fairly basic from what i recall?) Certainly is worth looking at for a cheaper option. And that is the pther thing, i think the units were developed with turbocharging in mind, so a lot of features are geared towards that. I never really liked those funky yellow connectors they use either, three connectors, two types of pins that are barely discernible from one another, but if you put the wrong ones in, start again. It took us a few weeks of chasing random dropouts to work that out.

[Adam D. Bell]

A while ago, the Western Michigan University FSAE team purchased a TEC 3 in 2002. This ECU worked during a senior design project which involved engine (GSX-R600) testing with this ECU. After that testing was complete, they placed the engine into the FSAE vehicle. The ECU had issues. Ever since that, it's been in the car it's had issues. The ECU has been back to Electromotive twice since we've had it there technical support hasn't been as supportive as one would think. Most of the time, you get the answering machine. The first time we sent the ECU back to electromotive, they had to fix some conditioning circuit. Another time was to fix some bad firmware and update our software. The root cause of our problem has lied within the ECU's sensitive Trigger wheel sensor setup. Electromotive's trigger wheel will mount so it doesn't deviate more than six thousandths of an inch, which is tight. I've also heard from some racers that there trigger wheel sensors are poorly designed (this is hear say) I don't know if that has played a role in our problem. However, our team has experienced this. We were a new team working from the 2002-2003 car the previous class built and entered (but never raced). In addition, in 2 years worth of time our school has not been able to get the car to even start reliability. We got it to about once every 10 tries and it only ran for seconds. Therefore, we don't ever plan to use an electromotive ECU again.

[Greg H]

We had just as much trouble with our TEC 3 as Western Michigan. The trigger wheel always gives us headaches, and we had to send one unit back to Electromotive for repairs. We are also not too fond of their software. We switched to the PE unit and are very pleased. I don't think our EE will let us go back.

[Scott M.]

Hello all,
I have not been checking the forum lately so excuse my tardiness in chiming in.
I do not work for AEM, but am the exclusive dealer/support guy for FSAE. All official FSAE AEM users have gone through me. AEM will not support calls regarding FSAE, they all are directed to me.
I suggest contacting me if you are interested in running an AEM. I do not like and have not supported schools that have bought boxes elsewhere and then called for support. There are non-user changeable items that must be changed in the box to make it "plug and play" for the F4i specifically. I have primarily supported the F4i and have base calibrations that will get you running very quickly.

I have used Motec, Electromotive, Honda CART, as well as other electronic control systems and it is hard to define all the differences.
The bottom line is that all of them will make the same power if calibrated the same. My opinion is that the difference will be who has access to the most data to make intelligent calibration changes.
The AEM can data log as high as 250 Hz. Obviously slower is available.
The last Motec I used could only log at 25 Hz. Sorry, not fast enough to work on transients with these engines.
I have not used the Tec3, but I heard that its internal logger could not operate (well?) above some engine speed (8000).
Data is king, and anything else is just a guess.

By the way the most annoying part of the Motec for me is that everything is "extra". O2 control, data logging, etc. The AEM has 2 options. Either with an internal UEGO amp or not. Data logging, traction control, O2, boost control, etc. are all included.

The data analysis is very easy to use. Math channels are used for customization or calibration of the 7 typical spare 0-5v inputs you get.
The other advantage is that the AEM does not require changing the cam or crank wheels or sensors. Neither Motec nor Electromotive can say that. The software is capable of running all known wheel configurations. This flexibility comes from the applications list AEM has for the street car apps.
I have been to the Pontiac competition for the last 3 years supporting the AEM systems and will continue to do so in the future. I have a day job, so my support hours are from ~5-10 weekdays, and whenever I am available weekends. This usually works well for the FSAE guys.
If you have any specific questions please email me, as I don't get on the forum as consistently as I check email. SuperiorEngineTechnology@yahoo.com

[Scott M.]

I haven't used any windows based Motec software, but the older stuff was not very good. The Electromotive Wintec software is better from an interface point of view. You are still limited on functionality though...

A summary of the AEM hardware capabilities:
10 sequential injector outputs with staged capability
5 sequential coil outputs
12 Low side drivers (fans, fuel pump etc.)
7 spare 0-5 inputs for typical FSAE app
6 switch inputs
4 High side drivers (12v)
4 frequency inputs

Software capabilities:
Fuel with cylinder trims vs engine speed
3D Mappable to crank angle
Coil dwell mappable to engine speed and battery voltage (significant improvement over Motec. No smoking coils here...)
Traction control
Boost control
250 hz capable internal logger
O2 feedback to a 3D target value
O2 feedback PI gains vs engine speed
Serial comms for telemetry coming soon
Lots more "normal" stuff that is very powerful.

[Travis Garrison]

So I'm looking at what our M4 does and what the AEM can do, I'm not seeing much of a difference, certainly nothing stands out as a + for the M4...anyone want to tell me what I'm missing here?

Also, the M4 lists for ~$3800 with a harness, of course the traction controll and ignition expander crank that up more than a tiny bit...but I can't seem to find a distributers price for the AEM...anyone with supperior google skills want to tell me what I would have to shell out for an AEM unit with a harness? Also what style of connectors does the AEM use? More crazy australian military stuff? I guess its all expensive but I'm still curious...

-Travis

[BryanH]

As an engine management professional I can say that Motec ECU's actually DO what they advertise 100% of the time, So many other systems when you really look up their arse are just random number generators. and this comment is from a Haltech dealer!
Haltech is OK too, the world's fastest fsae car uses one.

[Chris Boyden]

The MOTEC should be able to walk on water for that price.

[Scott M.]

AEM box with internal UEGO amp and sensor kit is currently $1903.13
Same box without UEGO is $1506.68
A connector kit is required at $57.33
An external coil driver is required. I have been selling a billet 4 channel of my own design at $137.59.
The AEM system can use the factory harness. Just re-terminate the ECU connector and ready to run. The documentation I supply has F4i factory wire color codes included in the AEM pinout so it is a quick and easy do.

I am very confident that the AEM does what it should. I have an aircraft application flying around. No pulling off when things go bad there...
Again if anyone needs specific info or a quicker response please email me. superiorenginetechnology@yahoo.com

[Jarrod]

we bought our MoTec M400 last year, and certainly didn't pay anywhere near $3800, we only got the logging option, no TC, but I would be shopping around for a better price.

[Nick McNaughton]

We've used Motecs for the past five years, the M4 Pro for the first two, and the M800 for the past three. They're a bit cheaper for Aussie teams, and are a great way to get into datalogging if you're new to the game.

You sure pay a bit extra to go Motec, but you won't find us using anything else. They're made for racing. They're made to run long track days and hectic schedules forever with absolute reliability. They're made to let you find and fix a sensor failure or wiring glitch in the 30 seconds you've got before the event starts. They're made to accept any sort of sensor setup you can devise. They're thought out well enough to never be the limitation on how well your engine package can be tuned. They're made flexible enough to let you trick it into doing things it wasn't made to do but is the only way to make something work on your car the night before the comp.

I'm yet to see another product that offers anywhere near the reliability and versatility of the Motec gear, but after using their products for a few years I haven't exactly been looking for alternatives.

[Chris Boyden]

Still doesn't walk on water.

For all that money, you can setup a dedicated ruggedized, single board computer, with
a lot more data logging capability than the MOTEC.

[B Lewis @ PE Engine Management]

Chris,

Are you guys still running our ECUs? I think that you are on the list for beta vesions of the new one.

[Chris Boyden]

Brian,

Yep, we're still running them and happy with the results. I plan on helping the team with electrical again, keeping them on the Deutsch water-proof solution path. The power box turned out nice, just too big and heavy. So, I'm gonna work on size reduction, integration, and simplification. However, the new team doesn't seem too fond of the power box, so I may be out of luck unless I come up with something better.

Do you guys have any preliminary documentation on the beta units?

[Chris Boyden]

Brian, any chance of buying some
T - shirts? Greasers are hard on clothes. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Chris

[Mechanicaldan]

OK, here's the list of possible ECU suppliers. From reading numerous posts, most teams are using the top 3. Why? Cost and customer service. PE, SET, and Motec all provide excellent support to formula team memebers.

The PE is the best entry level system because of the customer support you receive. Brian and his crew will have you up and running quickly.

If you want a more advanced system, pick either the AEM or a Motec. Just compare the features and pick the one that has the features you will use. Once again, both have very good customer support.

The Design judges will think you took the easy way out if you use a Power Commander, but for a first year team that purchases a fuel injected engine, it's probably the easiest and cheapest.

As for the rest, I've provided a link so you can look at the other options. The MegaSquirt is a build-it-yourself option for the truely advanced engineers. The only support comes from a community forum.

1. Performance Electronics (http://www.pe-ltd.com) $800
2. Superior Engine Technology (AEM) (http://fsae.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/412600868/m/7006028511/r/3236077871#3236077871) $1900
3. Motec (http://www.motec.com/formula_sae.htm) $3800
4. DynoJet Power Commander (http://www.powercommander.com/) $350?
5. DTA Fast (http://www.dtafast.co.uk/)
6. Electromotive, Inc. (http://www.electromotive-inc.com/)
7. Autoronic (http://www.autronic.com/)
8. Walbro (http://www.walbro-tdd.com/indexe.html)
9. Haltech (http://www.haltech.com.au/)
10. ACCEL/DFI (http://www.accel-dfi.com/)
11. FAST (Fuel Air Spark Technolgy) (http://www.fuelairspark.com/)
12. Simple Digital Systems (http://www.sdsefi.com/)
13. MegaSquirt (http://www.bgsoflex.com/megasquirt.html)
14. Pi Research (http://www.piresearch.com/)

[B Lewis @ PE Engine Management]

Chris, I will check to see if we have any T-shirts available and let you know. I'm pretty hard on shirts as well http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Also, I sent a preliminary data sheet for our new system to your UNM email account.

[Chris Boyden]

Brian,

My UNM email is down for the summer. Can you
send it to chris.boydenAAAATTTTgmail.com?

[Travis Garrison]

Jarrod, the $3800 was the # from the motec USA site, and it was a price break for FSAE teams...it was a starter kit with some ecu options and a harness...

I just added up what our ECU would cost and including Ign expander, traction control, wideband O2, and advanced tuning I'm looking at $3700 retail which is what counts as thats what goes in the cost report...nearly $2k more than the AEM box and ~$2800 more than the PE box...that stings more than just a little bit when you missed 4th place by 0.4 points! Coulda, shoula, woulda right? http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I do have some questions for you AEM guys though...

1) Is $1900 a realistic "retail" cost?

2) how many inputs and outputs does the AEM actually have? There are a ton listed but most aren't listed as generic I or O pins...typically something like "fuel pump relay". If I'm reading the description right I count something like 30+ (33 to be exact) inputs and ~36 outputs?! with 2 spare 0-5V inputs and 5 speed sensor inputs? plus 4 generic 12V outputs 8 "switch" outputs 2 stepper motor outputs and and 2 temp controlled outputs?

Someone please tell me I'm counting pins twice here...because thats alot of damn pins...

-Travis Garrison
UW FSAE

[Travis Garrison]

Found an answer to my question on I & O pins on the AEM forums
http://forum.aempower.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=12231
and
http://forum.aempower.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?t=12233

-Travis

[Mechanicaldan]

Read Scott's post above. $1900 is pretty realistic, and the best part is that includes the expensive wideband O2 sensor and amp. It's best to pick an engine that comes fuel injected, because you can pretty much use the fuel pump, injectors, and sensors. We added a cam position sensor, and designed our own coil driver to run F4i stick coils on our ZX-6R.

It really is a good deal. Some advice though, is to finish the intake and exhaust, and have the engine running by Christmas. The software is easy to use, but sophisticated, and like any custom fuel injection system, takes a while to get everything adjusted so it will start and run well. This will give you lots of time to use the AEM logging software, which is very helpful when tuning.

[Kevin M]

OK,

Back to the guy who started this post, I personally would suggest the PE Unit, its cheap, I believ around 650 its easy to wire you can use the stock engine pickups for the crank sensor, you can use the stock coil on plugs (less weight) and the program is extremely easy to tune with. there is one short coming with the unit and that is that the datlogging is to slow to use for tuning, we solved this last yaer by building our own wireless data aq. I f your a first year team I would not suggest this. I have also used the TEC3, sensor our a pain in the ass on it and I was not happy with the software. However it has more adaptability like tune in cockpit spark and fuel use potentiometers. I've heard nothing but good things about motec, but I don't think you really need all the bells and whistles if your a first year team.

PS Don't buy a Haltech

[Agent4573]

We here at Rutgers have used the PE-Ecu for 3 or 4 years now, after switching out from a TEC-2 unit.

The advantages over other units:

Best customer support ever, EVER!

Very easy to setup and get running, even to get tuned well. We have one of the highest if not the highest naturally aspirated horsepower for the last 3 years running on it.

Size: Compared to the motec and other units this thing is freaking tiny. something like 6x4x2.5 inches without the connect, with the connector its like 6x6x2.5.


Downsides:

No on board data logging, not a big problem for us because we run wireless data ac. system anyway.

Poling based interface, sometimes you just need the speed of interuppt based but I believe they're fixing this in the next generation.


Those are about the only two downsides we have ever encountered. If you get a stand alone o2 sensor you can use the output from that as one of the 3 user inputs on the ECU and have the ECU correct the fuel curve based on the o2 reading.
Also, I'm not sure what engine you were running because I only breezed through all these replies, but you can only used the stock pickup wheel on the f4i engine I believe. I know for a yamaha you have to get a different pickup wheel in there. Not that big of a deal though, I made ours in about 2 hours on a manual mill with a rotary table.

[B Lewis @ PE Engine Management]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kevin M:

I have also used the TEC3... However it has more adaptability like tune in cockpit spark and fuel use potentiometers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Kevin, thanks for the nice words. Just wanted to let everyone know that you can use "tune in cockpit" fuel and spark potentiometers with our system. They just get set up on the "User Analog Inputs". Thanks.

[david baldwin]

We currently are using a PE and are happy with it. We are going forced induction and wondering if there is a way to control boost with a PE by using a boost value vs rpm? ie. electronic boost control.

[B Lewis @ PE Engine Management]

Hi David,

What are you planning on using as hardware to control the boost? Give me a call sometime if you would like to discuss.