ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
mapping standard ecu
- Thread starter Big Bob
- Start date
I would if i could get my hands on the software to do it
I'm interested in this inlet do you haver any more info ?
basicly its the same style as what the BTCC cars are running. Nothing confirmed on figures or cost yet. But is going to be a hell of a lot cheaper then ITB's. Heres the link for you to follow progress
http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?t=404848
http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?t=404848
182
its yet to be done but RStuning in leeds is working on a solution allowing ITB's on the OEM ECU......
Thats ok you can mount the MAP sensor on the boddies as there is a vacuum port for the brake servo can be mounted there FBW well mount the new TPS on the boddies job done aint it
come on Paul what time scale are we looking at im looking to do this probably this summer as soon as my brakes are on MOT and twax then Boddies hope fully
LY 182
no as with a throttle bodie wide open you are looking straight in to the port theres no chamber there to produce any vacum
And part throttle?
With each cylinder running independant from eachother and the idle strategy based on a constant volume air bleed........generating a true and stable map value for low rpm/part throttle control is a hassle. No matter what people do, its never that good. A vacuum manifold from all 4 runners will effectively be bleeding air from the other 3.
It'll run, but it'll run like all those ITB cars that people import from japan on stock ecu's and fuel controllers.
With each cylinder running independant from eachother and the idle strategy based on a constant volume air bleed........generating a true and stable map value for low rpm/part throttle control is a hassle. No matter what people do, its never that good. A vacuum manifold from all 4 runners will effectively be bleeding air from the other 3.
It'll run, but it'll run like all those ITB cars that people import from japan on stock ecu's and fuel controllers.
LY 182
thats what i was trying to get at....
plus i dont know how you'd go about getting a throttle position reading to the ecu even if you did use a cable throttle... you'd have to convert to a ph1 ecu and loom which sort of defeats the obect unless somebody can come up with something using a butchered fbw tb
plus i dont know how you'd go about getting a throttle position reading to the ecu even if you did use a cable throttle... you'd have to convert to a ph1 ecu and loom which sort of defeats the obect unless somebody can come up with something using a butchered fbw tb
If you worked really hard you could probably try and use the FBW motor setup to drive the ITB spindle.....but i dont even see the point of all the hard work for a car that will drive awkwardly in the end.
If the stock ecu has a target map value for idle and the itb's fluctuate above and below it by any large amount, the stock ecu will just keep closing the throttle to drop the mb value....stall central. We've seen it on stock ecu's with wild cams, same thing.
If the stock ecu has a target map value for idle and the itb's fluctuate above and below it by any large amount, the stock ecu will just keep closing the throttle to drop the mb value....stall central. We've seen it on stock ecu's with wild cams, same thing.
ok then rather than having it on all 4 bods can it not just be run off 1 then ? to stop the air bleed
ITB'd MK1
oh my word. just lol
And for the hassle of generating an exact resistance curve to match.......?
Let me put it this way.....you'll put in 3 times the effort and have 80% of the result and maybe save a small amount of money.
still use cable throttle to drive the boddies but use the TPS to link back into the FBW throttle to give the ECU a reading of Throttle position
stevo172-RWD
ClioSport Club Member
clio 172 rwd
for whats its worth id go omex600 route.
but then im biased
but then im biased
its another 1300 cost and then there are the complications of the omex any way if i was doing a project like yours stevo i would defo pull out the old ECU and run something like the omex or emerald but its only boddies.
And i really dont like sensors having thier signals sent to 2 ecu's
And i really dont like sensors having thier signals sent to 2 ecu's
You wouldnt split any sensor signals to run standalone.
And as much as it sounds like a simple solution, its not. The OEM ecu has several potentiometer tracts to monitor pedal position and the fbw throttle position. Simply feeding back a spindle driven potentiometer will leave the OEM ecu confused as to where the rest of the system is. And like I said, you are going to have to match the resistance curves.....unless paul or someone can completely reprogram the break points....in which case your going to be spending over £500 for his time to do something quite so bespoke since the fueling and ignition maps will look so different.
The stock ECU will also use MAP as the main load indicator, not TPS. And when you are running bodies on a speed density setup you end up with half of the map doing practically nothing fueling wise, then the top half ramping up like mental as the mass airflow changes abruptly with throttle opening. So no only are you wasting half the map, but your asking a LOT from the interpolation capabilities of the ecu. If you rescale the breakpoints to make more use of the map, then you'll be having large jumps between mb values in the lower corner of the map and partial throttle/idle will be quite rough. Speed density is only really any good when you have a plenum to average out and dampen the manifold absolute pressure.
Speed density/alpha N blending is another thing, but not on the stock ECU I wouldnt imagine. But then again I dont know too much about the inner detail workings of the stock ecu since I dont mess around with winols or anything.
And as much as it sounds like a simple solution, its not. The OEM ecu has several potentiometer tracts to monitor pedal position and the fbw throttle position. Simply feeding back a spindle driven potentiometer will leave the OEM ecu confused as to where the rest of the system is. And like I said, you are going to have to match the resistance curves.....unless paul or someone can completely reprogram the break points....in which case your going to be spending over £500 for his time to do something quite so bespoke since the fueling and ignition maps will look so different.
The stock ECU will also use MAP as the main load indicator, not TPS. And when you are running bodies on a speed density setup you end up with half of the map doing practically nothing fueling wise, then the top half ramping up like mental as the mass airflow changes abruptly with throttle opening. So no only are you wasting half the map, but your asking a LOT from the interpolation capabilities of the ecu. If you rescale the breakpoints to make more use of the map, then you'll be having large jumps between mb values in the lower corner of the map and partial throttle/idle will be quite rough. Speed density is only really any good when you have a plenum to average out and dampen the manifold absolute pressure.
Speed density/alpha N blending is another thing, but not on the stock ECU I wouldnt imagine. But then again I dont know too much about the inner detail workings of the stock ecu since I dont mess around with winols or anything.
the resistance curves and sensors are a dodle to do
thats the easy part for me
i was still gonna use the map sensor on the boddies and yes initially it would be a bit of work on the mapping, but these cars have beeen about for over 10 years now what i am asking is not much for 10 years of development time.
as for the signals i dont want stand alone as theres the problem of the clocks and guages and such
thats the easy part for me
i was still gonna use the map sensor on the boddies and yes initially it would be a bit of work on the mapping, but these cars have beeen about for over 10 years now what i am asking is not much for 10 years of development time.
as for the signals i dont want stand alone as theres the problem of the clocks and guages and such
Ok, if you can sort that part, then thats good.
But your still running a map sensor on an induction setup that has no stable manifold vacuum. Running off one cylinder isnt an option, and running off all 4 has its own problems.
Its like trying to block a vacuum cleaner with 1 finger.
And its not that 10 years of development and nobody has progressed.....nobody has bothered because you are asking for a solution to a problem which it was never intended to solve.
Again, it'll run.......but probably not very well.
How are you going to control idle strategy as it conflicts between cable actuation and the ecu tries to control it via the fbw throttle?
But your still running a map sensor on an induction setup that has no stable manifold vacuum. Running off one cylinder isnt an option, and running off all 4 has its own problems.
Its like trying to block a vacuum cleaner with 1 finger.
And its not that 10 years of development and nobody has progressed.....nobody has bothered because you are asking for a solution to a problem which it was never intended to solve.
Again, it'll run.......but probably not very well.
How are you going to control idle strategy as it conflicts between cable actuation and the ecu tries to control it via the fbw throttle?
stevo172-RWD
ClioSport Club Member
clio 172 rwd
stevo172-RWD
ClioSport Club Member
clio 172 rwd
be easier with ph1 and alot cheaper.
im not using two.
just omex600 oh and im using racetechnology dash
yes i know that was what i meant i want to keep some of the comforts of the original ecu ie the clocks rev/speed and so on, so for me i would have to run an omex and standard wich i dont really want to do im not as hard core as you i still want to be able to use it as a day to day car if i had to.
ps i do like the race tech display though
RSTuning
ClioSport Club Member
R35 GTR
Well the 182 starts and runs on the stock ecu with bodies, this DOES NOT mean it's possible but thought i'd have a go as i have a plug and play ecu which is easy enough to swap between stock and aftermarket
With the map sensor connected thus reading atmospheric AKA WOT or near enough the car revs up very cleanly and sounds good too Totally stock CAL too
With the map sensor connected thus reading atmospheric AKA WOT or near enough the car revs up very cleanly and sounds good too
Totally stock CAL too Similar threads
