ECU Rules from Old GCR (1995 & 2000)
- Thread starter jlucas
- Start date
Come on Greg, you mean to tell me if a repair is not specifically spelled out in the FSM we cannot repair our cars? That's a little over the top.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Is it really, George? Put yourself in the shoes of the ScruCrew:
"Mr. Roffe, I see you've made a modification to (insert part here); can you show me where that's allowed in your Vehicle Specs, the GCR, or your Service Manual? After all, I'm sure you're well aware that GCR/ITCS 17.1.4.B states 'Other than those specifically allowed by these rules, no component or part normally found on a stock example of a given vehicle may be disabled, altered, or removed for the purpose of gaining any competitive advantage.'"
"Well, no sir, I can't show you in the FSM where it's allowed, but even though it's not specifically spelled out it's a perfectly reasonable repair to make."
"Sorry, Mr Roffe, tell it to the Appeals Committee. You're excluded from the results."
Been there, done that. What makes you think that unapproved ECU mods are any more allowed than unapproved engine repair or unapproved suspension repair procedures?
"If it doesn't say you can..."
"Mr. Roffe, I see you've made a modification to (insert part here); can you show me where that's allowed in your Vehicle Specs, the GCR, or your Service Manual? After all, I'm sure you're well aware that GCR/ITCS 17.1.4.B states 'Other than those specifically allowed by these rules, no component or part normally found on a stock example of a given vehicle may be disabled, altered, or removed for the purpose of gaining any competitive advantage.'"
"Well, no sir, I can't show you in the FSM where it's allowed, but even though it's not specifically spelled out it's a perfectly reasonable repair to make."
"Sorry, Mr Roffe, tell it to the Appeals Committee. You're excluded from the results."
Been there, done that. What makes you think that unapproved ECU mods are any more allowed than unapproved engine repair or unapproved suspension repair procedures?
"If it doesn't say you can..."
John Herman
New member
I'll through something out. If you want to race one of the many cars (or a specific model) not supported by the aftermarket, what are you going to do about the computer? I have NO idea how to crack the code/software on a computer, and I know its not just a simple few line program. I have researched web sights that offer insight into it, but I am no computer whiz. Therefore, I like the idea of purchasing an engine computer/controller with software that was supported by a reputable company. If you are one of the lucky ones who have a big enough case and can fit a MOTEC computer (~$1600) in it, that is one way around the problem. Therefore, why not just make the computer open. Ultimately the engine performance limitation will be the stock cams. This allows people to purchase a readily available product with technical support. Whether we like it or not, the computer and car marriage is here to stay. I think we should embrace the technology.
Because IT has cars running side by side that have no computer, computers that can't be upgraded, computers that can be upgraded and ECU housings that can accept full blown programmable units. Is that fair or the intent of IT?
What's a cam?
AB
------------------
Andy Bettencourt
06 ITS RX-7
FlatOut Motorsports
New England Region #188967
www.flatout-motorsports.com
lateapex911
Super Moderator
Originally posted by ITSRX7:
What's a cam?
AB
C'mon, Andy, it's those little holes in the sides of your plates, (intake) and the little holes in the sides of the housings, (exhaust). You know, the ones that you can't touch! Which are connected to the manifold, that you can't touch. Which is connected to the other intake device that you can't port match........
(which was fine, because the rules were written with that in mind....until they changed the rules...for some of the field, that is.......)
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
[This message has been edited by lateapex911 (edited December 30, 2003).]
downingracing
New member
Who runs a stock cam in IT? You should hear some of the cams I hear on the grid...
------------------
Matt Downing
www.downingracing.com
OK.....
Are you trying to tell me that if the EPROM in your ECU goes bad, you are absolutely not allowed to replace it?
If you think so, then we'll just have to disagree. I see no reason you could not.
OK, so if you are allowed to replace the EPROM and you are allowed to alter the programming, replacing the EPROM with one with different code is fine.
If it says you can, you bloody well can. The suggested wording we have talked about says you can reprogram your EPROM. Agreed?
Would you not replace a bad EPROM with a new one? If not, they we will have to disagree (this is all theoretical anyway). If you would, then we can install a new EPROM, and the proposed wording would allow reprogramming. So, from where I sit, problem solved.
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
Absolutely not. Replace the ECU? Of course. Desolder and resolder in a new EPROM or even a socket for an EPROM? No way.
Of course, George, but the theoretical rule DOESN'T say you "bloody well can" replace the EPROM on an ECU. Show me where it does?
It's your contention that desoldering and resoldering in a new EPROM on an ECU is an approved repair procedure. It's "approved" then it must be documented somewhere, yes? Problem is, you cannot provide information from either SCCA or the manufacturer (from anyone, in fact) that says replacing an EPROM in the field - short of replacing the ECU in its entirety - is an approved repair procedure. It's not in the FSMs, it's not in any dealer tech bulletins, it's not in any recalls. The approved procedure for a failed ECU is to replace that ECU with a complete unit - new or remanufactured - from the factory.
Further, unless the factory is providing socketed EPROMs in its reman units, it would be contrary to the rules for you to insert one in the field, even if you re-inserted the original EPROM.
"Reprogram", not "replace."
This can be easily settled by you: show me where removing and replacing an EPROM on an ECU is an approved field repair procedure in any car. Use something you know, with books you have: the B13 Nissan. Or even the 944. Or a Ford truck. Or a Trabant (do they even HAVE an ECU?).
Document where that approved repair procedure is and I'll admit the error of my ways...
Originally posted by downingracing:
Who runs a stock cam in IT? You should hear some of the cams I hear on the grid...
You know, these comments are starting to get old....and insulting.
If you think someone is NOT running a stock cam, then do something about it.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but most of us still follow the rules (at least I like to think so.)
------------------
Lesley Albin
Over The Limit Racing
Blazen Golden Retrievers
I worked at GM dealerships in the early 80's to the mid 90's, Went to training at GM on drive abality issues (there where lots in the 80's) never ever where we to crack the computer. I was one of the first 25 people back then to be trained by GM. Maybe things have changed in the last 20 yrs. or different mfg's had different practices, but back then it was a replace the entire computer. I was told by one of my instructors that if we opened a ECU the devil would escape....kind of makes me laugh now.
Well, reasonable people can disagree, so we'll have to disagree.
BTW, by your logic above, don't even consider using bondo on your car. No where in the FSM does it allow for using Bondo. For that matter, don't even consider using Permatex RTV to seal your engine. You'd better be using the Nissan stuff.
But, in the spirit of the season (and because we're still friends
------------------
George Roffe
Houston, TX
84 944 ITS car under construction
92 ITS Sentra SE-R occasionally borrowed
http://www.nissport.com
I completely agree: if body filler is not called out in the FSM for body repairs (although most factory-authorized body repair manuals do) then it is an illegal repair to the ITCS. However, I would suggest that the use of body filler is far more acceptable as a "standard practice" than that of replacing chips on an ECU.
I also suggest that it is far less likely to get protested or cause a Steward's RFA than desoldering and resoldering an EPROM on the engine management ECU...
A much wiser choice of words!
lateapex911
Super Moderator
I agree, Lesley, at least I want to think so! Of course, a majority is only 51%, so that's not saying much!
On one hand, I think most of us do our best to build a legal car. On the other hand I've seen some pretty obvious and malicious items, and I've learned of some things after the fact that really surprised me. Not to mention disappointed me....
I guess I want to believe, but the part of me that stings when I've been 'suckered' is still kind of wary.....
------------------
Jake Gulick
CarriageHouse Motorsports
ITA 57 RX-7
New England Region
[email protected]
Bill Miller
New member
Thanks for saying it Lesley! And you're right, it does get old!
George,
Please show me the p/n for the factory-approved replacement EPROM.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
George,
Please show me the p/n for the factory-approved replacement EPROM.
------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
Just for your information, GM "DOES" authorize mecnanics to change the prom in the field. I quote from the Pontiac fsm page 6E2-A-19. Diagnostic tree chart A-2 Won't flash code 12. "check prom installation. If OK substitute a known good prom and recheck for code 12." Pontiac mechanics are authorized to change proms in the field.
Chuck
Chuck