ECU Rule Input to the CRB

[dj10]

Just sent my letter to the crb.

I am in favor of an open ECU rule that allows the replacement of the stock ECU with an aftermarket unit and the addition/replacement of sensors and wiring needed to control the engine with the new ECU. The addition and replacement of sensors should not allow for an air intake path larger than the restriction provided by the throttle body butterfly valve and the idle bypass valve if fitted as stock equipment.

Here is an attempt at updating the rule.

9.1.3.D.1.6 with updates…
Altering or replacement of the engine management computer is allowed. The addition or substitution of a throttle position sensor, and/or a MAP sensor, and/or a crank angle sensor and their associated wiring is permitted. Existing sensors<strike>, excluding the stock air metering device,</strike> may be substituted. All air entering the intake plenum shall pass through the stock unmodified throttle body butterfly valve (cars originally equipped with an idle bypass valve may retain or remove the idle bypass valve) . Adjustable fuel pressure regulators are permitted. Where possible, wording has been removed that reminds competitors of things not permitted, such as the modification of the stock ECU box. As the category is based on the cornerstone principle that nothing may be modified unless specifically authorized, the extra wording can be counter productive

I am not a rule writing expert and this may cause more issues than it solves, but it seems reasonable to me....at least right now... [/b]

So are you saying, you may retain or remove the idle bypass and if you retain it, no air can pass through it, air may only pass through the throttle body?

I just want to be clear on your intent.

 

[Joe Harlan]

So are you saying, you may retain or remove the idle bypass and if you retain it, no air can pass through it, air may only pass through the throttle body?

I just want to be clear on your intent.
[/b]

So as a toyota guy you are wanting to loose the airflow meter in your stock system with this writing?

 

[dj10]

So as a toyota guy you are wanting to loose the airflow meter in your stock system with this writing? [/b]

Joe, I don't think that was his intent. I beleive and I think you do too (correct me if I'm wrong), I'll just say we for now , don't want everyone to map the cold air that bypasses the throttle body. If I remember correctly you stated that there could be and is a gain of some 15 hp by doing this. I don't think any of us want to lose the AFM. I'm concerned like you, how do we police this and any cars that might be running a EMS this year in what ever class be made to close this loop hole to them, NOW? If not, what is keeping some teams who sat out ITS last year because of the SIR to come back in ITR with their Motec's or whatever and have a unfair advantage with this 15 extra hp from the mapping of the extra air from the cold air bypass?

 

[Andy Bettencourt]

I think the intent is to have 100% of the air entering the engine travel through the stock air metering device AND the stock throttle body. Whether the stock air metering device is used to actually 'measure' would be up to how the final language turned out.

 

[dj10]

I think the intent is to have 100% of the air entering the engine travel through the stock air metering device AND the stock throttle body. Whether the stock air metering device is used to actually 'measure' would be up to how the final language turned out. [/b]

You are correct Andy, but we need to close off the loop hole of the bypass this year or as I pointed out someone who has this system already could and might have a 15 hp advantage THIS YEAR.

 

[Joe Harlan]

I think the intent is to have 100% of the air entering the engine travel through the stock air metering device AND the stock throttle body. Whether the stock air metering device is used to actually 'measure' would be up to how the final language turned out.
[/b]

If we are gonna (I am voting against) open up the ECU to harness and sensors then I say the only way to control it is SIR's for all EFI cars to insure they stay inside process.

 

[dj10]

If we are gonna (I am voting against) open up the ECU to harness and sensors then I say the only way to control it is SIR's for all EFI cars to insure they stay inside process. [/b]

Joe, what would your opinion be on having all cars, depending on class, be within a HP/Wt catagory, like nasa? Bring a portable dyno to the track and the top 3 go on it. It there over........bye bye. I saw this happen and I was impressed only with that part of nasa.

 

[Joe Harlan]

Joe, what would your opinion be on having all cars, depending on class, be within a HP/Wt catagory, like nasa? Bring a portable dyno to the track and the top 3 go on it. It there over........bye bye. I saw this happen and I was impressed only with that part of nasa.
[/b]

The issue is paying for the Dyno...We are not far away from 300 dollar entries and every 10 bucks it goes up we seem to loose one more driver...I don't believe that we need to work that hard for balance. I unfortunatly feel that we will throw the existing balance right out the window if we pass rule 3 and in time will be on the same path if we maintain option1... The closer we can keep IT to the average member being able to get there the better IT's chances will be in the future. I guess you got more than the answer you asked for. If it were practical and affordable it maybe worth looking at. Since I just ran the business model on a porta dyno last spring I don't think the region could afford what needs to be charged even on per car deal I am not sure how NASA does their system but I do know they have speced out dyno shops they use. Now how do we know that the program dynoed on is the same one raced on?

 

[lateapex911]

and....

....using a dyno to class or maintain parity is a tough bit of work, not just from a time and money aspect. I can imagine a bunch of subtle ways to "tweak" the output.

 

[GT240sx]

So are you saying, you may retain or remove the idle bypass and if you retain it, no air can pass through it, air may only pass through the throttle body?

I just want to be clear on your intent.
[/b]

I was trying to say that if your car comes from the factory with an idle bypass valve, it can still function...have air going through it.

So as a toyota guy you are wanting to loose the airflow meter in your stock system with this writing?[/b]

you could word it like that....or, as a racecar driver/engineer and that's a stretch ... I would like the ability to substitute my air metering device (flapper...not just on toyotas) with a new one (map sensor) to allow the aftermarket ECU to measure airflow.

I prefer to keep it simple, and it seems to me that the throttle body/butterfly valve is the main restriction on intake air...so, why keep a non functioning sensor in the car?

 

[dj10]

and....

....using a dyno to class or maintain parity is a tough bit of work,[/b]

LOL a tough bit of work! Is it any harder than what you (ITAC & CR go through now?!?

What's funny is that after all the hard work you guys go through, that every racing organization use our rules as a outline for their rules. So if you think about this, you must be doing a pretty damn good job! To copy someone is the sincerest for of flattery.



Thanks Joe, you gave me something to ponder.

 

[Joe Harlan]

I was trying to say that if your car comes from the factory with an idle bypass valve, it can still function...have air going through it.
you could word it like that....or, as a racecar driver/engineer and that's a stretch ... I would like the ability to substitute my air metering device (flapper...not just on toyotas) with a new one (map sensor) to allow the aftermarket ECU to measure airflow.

I prefer to keep it simple, and it seems to me that the throttle body/butterfly valve is the main restriction on intake air...so, why keep a non functioning sensor in the car?
[/b]

SO if you get your wish you won't complain when the car gets moved to ITR based on 2.8 liters of engine that can now take in air much more effectively than it was classed to start? I am just trying to get a picture of what it will be like once the rule is changed.

LOL a tough bit of work! Is it any harder than what you (ITAC & CR go through now?!?

What's funny is that after all the hard work you guys go through, that every racing organization use our rules as a outline for their rules. So if you think about this, you must be doing a pretty damn good job! To copy someone is the sincerest for of flattery.



Thanks Joe, you gave me something to ponder.
[/b]

What's funny DJ is that i remember a time when it was flattery. I see now though that more clubs are starting to even limit how much of our rules they want to use and seem to be writing rules that are similar but maybe a little more limiting. We maybe copying rules from other clubs soon...

 

[Eagle7]

I was trying to say that if your car comes from the factory with an idle bypass valve, it can still function...have air going through it.



you could word it like that....or, as a racecar driver/engineer and that's a stretch ... I would like the ability to substitute my air metering device (flapper...not just on toyotas) with a new one (map sensor) to allow the aftermarket ECU to measure airflow.

I prefer to keep it simple, and it seems to me that the throttle body/butterfly valve is the main restriction on intake air...so, why keep a non functioning sensor in the car?
[/b]

Russell, I see two problems. First, the existing cars were classed with the AFM in place. It may well be that for many cars the AFM is the primary restriction, not the butterfly. For example, on my car opening up the large bypass that runs the engine up to 3000 RPM at startup gained me nothing measurable (where did that 15 HP claim come from - I need documentation on that) because all the air still went through the AFM, and that was the primary restriction. If you eliminate the AFM you may significantly change the potential of some cars.



Secondly, allowing the bypass valve without the AFM is very likely to increase the potential of some cars. I'm in favor of keeping the bypass valve. It offers a great deal of convenience for idling the car under various conditions. Without it I need to babysit the car during warmup. But we can't allow the bypass to use air that doesn't go through the AFM.



You don't need to remove your AFM to use a MAP sensor. It'll work just fine with the AFM in place. That's exactly how mine's set up.

 

[shwah]

Yeah anything that opens up to allow ECUs and sensors being changed or added have to IMO require all air pass through the original air metering device AND the throttle body butterflys - even if there is an additional different air metering device added, or a manifold aboslute pressure system used. Also - the original stock fuel injectors must be used.

 

[Eagle7]

Joe, I don't think that was his intent. I beleive and I think you do too (correct me if I'm wrong), I'll just say we for now , don't want everyone to map the cold air that bypasses the throttle body. If I remember correctly you stated that there could be and is a gain of some 15 hp by doing this. I don't think any of us want to lose the AFM. I'm concerned like you, how do we police this and any cars that might be running a EMS this year in what ever class be made to close this loop hole to them, NOW? If not, what is keeping some teams who sat out ITS last year because of the SIR to come back in ITR with their Motec's or whatever and have a unfair advantage with this 15 extra hp from the mapping of the extra air from the cold air bypass?
[/b]

Does anyone have any hard info on this 15 HP? Is that supposedly using air that came through the AFM? What kind of car? I believe this to currently be legal, but I'm extremely skeptical of a significant gain like that.

 

[lateapex911]

Just to clarify, the rule is written as it would appear...and it allows no removal of any intake tract devices, so the removal of the AFM (or any equivilent device ) is NOT being proposed.

As pointed out, there is no concrete knowledge that says that NO car has, as it's limiting factor, the AFM device. So, the open ECU option won't allow any physical changes to the intake tract that aren't currently legal.

 

[DavidM]

I voted for 2, though I think leaving it as is would also be ok.

I think that the member solicitation period for this should be a pretty long time. I don't know what the normal period is, but this one should be at least a few months (maybe even reprint this in FasTrack for the next couple months). That will give this time to filter through the ranks to people that don't regularly read this board or others like it. This is a pretty important issue and needs as much input from racers as possible. Removing the FasTracks from Sports Car was a dumb idea.

David

 

[dj10]

Does anyone have any hard info on this 15 HP? Is that supposedly using air that came through the AFM? What kind of car? I believe this to currently be legal, but I'm extremely skeptical of a significant gain like that.

[/b]

Marty, I believe Chris Ludwig & Joe Harlan can verify these number gains. I don't know for sure what kind of car to be honest.

" How about cold air bypass the most if not all EFI systems use during warmup? How are you gonna prevent me from opening this valve and adding fuel through the 3d map and creating 15 more HP because of the additional air?" Joe Harlan

I'm happy to see that doors #2 & #3 have been selected by the majority. I don't really don't care which one replaces the current only that the current rule be shit canned and the sooner the better.

 

[Eagle7]

Marty, I believe Chris Ludwig & Joe Harden can verify these number gains. I don't know for sure what kind of car to be honest.

" How about cold air bypass the most if not all EFI systems use during warmup? How are you gonna prevent me from opening this valve and adding fuel through the 3d map and creating 15 more HP because of the additional air?" Joe Harden
[/b]

Chris and Joe (or anyone), do you have any concrete knowledge of any particular IT car that can gain significant HP by using the warmup bypass valve for air that goes through the AFM? I only have one data point (no measurable gain on my car). I'm in favor of keeping the bypass valve, in part because I don't expect to see HP gains from it. If there are documented significant gains to be made on some cars, then I see two options:

• Continue to allow it, because it is part of the OEM equipment, has been legal for several years, and was part of the landscape during the "process evaluation". You choose your car and you get what you get. Are there any other cases of OEM parts that must be removed or disabled because they provide performance potential?
• Mandate it's removal, because it's use during racing conditions is not something that the OEM provided or intended. This seems as though it would set a new precedent, somewhat along the lines of the SIR.

 

[Joe Harlan]

Marty, I believe Chris Ludwig & Joe Harden can verify these number gains. I don't know for sure what kind of car to be honest.

" How about cold air bypass the most if not all EFI systems use during warmup? How are you gonna prevent me from opening this valve and adding fuel through the 3d map and creating 15 more HP because of the additional air?" Joe Harden

I'm happy to see that doors #2 & #3 have been selected by the majority. I don't really don't care which one replaces the current only that the current rule be shit canned and the sooner the better.
[/b]

Who is joe harden?