ECU Rules.....is it time? HELL YES!!!

Be careful. Some cars this is true, but with others you open the door for some very creative work with cams, valves, and aux devices. If the car ran stock with the sensors it comes with it will run fine with those same sensors fed into a new ecu. Doesn't take much to pull the signal from the stock harness.

Joe, I just wish I had the torque to care about traction control. :lol:[/b]
Click to expand...

I wish I could believe you can't spin the tires....but I don't... :eclipsee_steering:
 
My personal perspective, as a case study of sorts...?

We're running an off-the-shelf chip from Tectonics - less than $100. It seems, based on our wideband O2 sensor input, to be putting the AFR in a happy place. It has more ignition advance, in sooner than stock and takes the rev limit to a place where it only gets used when the car owner goes through Oak Tree at VIR in 2nd instead of 3rd on one lap, because of backed-up traffic, then forgets to upshift. The mixture map is richer to deal with increased gas flow of the header and short pipe, so we don't lean out at WOT for longer periods of time.

The rest of our system is stock, minus the cat now. The check engine light is off and the entire engine management world is at peace with itself.

I am TOTALLY fine with this state of affairs. We have some other tuning options but we haven't pursued them primarily because of the time required to get them right. They also require defeating some stock inputs, which throws the system out of whack. I wholeheartedly agree with Cameron that sometimes racer hubris kicks in and we think we can engineer some clever stuff in our garage on a long Saturday in January, and do a better job than a million dollars worth of German engineers.

I am NOT a 10/10ths car kind of guy, primarily because I recognize the limitations imposed by being an 8/10ths kind of talent, so take this for what it's worth: If I had the opportunity to build a standalone system to replace what we're currently using, I probably wouldn't. Could we make a few more ponies with one of Bildon's trick tunes and some dyno time? I imagine so. But there's plenty of things slowing me down more than that missing power.

A "chip tune only" rule would only help me, relative to the potential that exists to get the last few percent out of this - or my competitors' - engine. It MIGHT be possible to write this rule in a sensible way, but at the end of the day we're still at the mercy of enforcement.

K

EDIT - we also get in a bind because the rule has to fit so many different designs. How can the spirit of the chip-tune-only approach be preserved for all makes (see Greg's example with the Nissans)? Both OBDI and OBDII Golf III's are socketed and there are options from multiple sources, even if the market doesn't make real "race" tunes readily available right now.

EDIT EDIT - we ALSO have to be attentive to the language we choose when we tackle something like this. It has to be precise, descriptive, and avoid lingo. Terms like "chip" and "reflashed" might seem simple but they can create problems if we just assume that "everyone knows what they mean."
 
Really, How much FI experience do you have? How about cold air bypass that 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? There are lots of gain for those that want to be creative and they will be impossible to polic with a free system. As stated earlier my current systemn in my RS car has traction control (effective) with out any additional sensor wires. No wheel speed inputs to the ecu. [/b]
Click to expand...



Joe, can this be accomplished with stock sensors and wiring harness too?



Be careful. Some cars this is true, but with others you open the door for some very creative work with cams, valves, and aux devices. If the car ran stock with the sensors it comes with it will run fine with those same sensors fed into a new ecu. Doesn't take much to pull the signal from the stock harness.

Joe, I just wish I had the torque to care about traction control. :lol: [/b]
Click to expand...



Steve, and you wondered how the Sunbelt 325 could pull you 6 cars @ the back straight @ VIR? :D



yes, thank you dan...nothing like a major controversy to kick start the itac newbies like me...

marshall
[/b]
Click to expand...



Welcome to the jungle :D
 
Not with an OE ecu. and not likely with out modifing the stock harness even with an aftermarket ecu. [/b]
Click to expand...



If this is the case, we either go back in time with the stock ecu's or go forward, allowing aftermarket ecu's and stay with the stock wiring harness. The current ecu rule should definately be shit canned.
 
Steve, and you wondered how the Sunbelt 325 could pull you 6 cars @ the back straight @ VIR? :D


I know exactly how and why it pulled me!! :D

My letter will support the open ECU through the unmodified stock harness with stock sensors. No additional inputs allowed.
PS. Still looking for this mythical $10,000 Motec. I will sell you one for a lot less. :rolleyes:

State of BS is more like it--Everything for everyone with our money--again.
 
I am in either of these two camps:
Back to completely stock ECU, no extra wires or sensors. I ran a stock ECU up until last year (when I installed a crappy JET chip), and I did pretty well stock for 4 years.
The other option is replace the EPROM chip or reflash the existing ECU. I can see this option for the speed governer problem, however, I never hit a speed cap (governer) in my Integra (could go 125mph), and I dealt with the 7100rpm rev limiter. Yeah, that sucked sometimes, but I dealt with it.

Either of these should be easy to enforce, just open the box and look for chip or extra wires, etc.
This way, we limit the money spent, back to 'cheap' racing.
just my .02

Victor
03 ITA Integra
 
Steve, and you wondered how the Sunbelt 325 could pull you 6 cars @ the back straight @ VIR? :D


I know exactly how and why it pulled me!! :D

My letter will support the open ECU through the unmodified stock harness with stock sensors. No additional inputs allowed.
PS. Still looking for this mythical $10,000 Motec. I will sell you one for a lot less. :rolleyes:

State of BS is more like it--Everything for everyone with our money--again. [/b]
Click to expand...



"PS. Still looking for this mythical $10,000 Motec."

Steve, this is a honest number that was being charged by shops to install the motec into the stock BMW ecu box and wire the internals of the motec ecu to the stock harness. I don't know what the Madza's guys were paying.
 
"PS. Still looking for this mythical $10,000 Motec."

Steve, this is a honest number that was being charged by shops to install the motec into the stock BMW ecu box and wire the internals of the motec ecu to the stock harness. I don't know what the Madza's guys were paying.

These cars must be the ones that arrive at the ARRC in 40ft NASCAR style trailers (there are many, if you've never been) My response to them is the same as what we used to see in fastrack: "Request denied, not in the spirit of club racing"! In 94 I drove my car to the ARRC. In 04 I flat towed. The revolution will not be televised! phil (watchin Bush radicalized me again)
 
My letter will support the open ECU through the unmodified stock harness with stock sensors. No additional inputs allowed.
PS. Still looking for this mythical $10,000 Motec. I will sell you one for a lot less. :rolleyes:

State of BS is more like it--Everything for everyone with our money--again. [/b]
Click to expand...

Steve, that is an exagerated number...the number I Was quoted was $9,950.00 . I rounded up...

And thats a real number that reflects what clients have paid for their ECU systems. Now, I also know guys who have done it for less, as they happen to be code writing engineers. As I was considering building the same car, I engaged that owner in some discussion about how to make the power, and the costs associated. The total number for that build was quated as "approaching $30K." Seperately, I spoke with the builder of that engine, who quoted his "basic" builds go out for $15K, and the full builds (not inclusive of the electronics) are "Just over $20K". Simple math tells me that theres about $7K in the ECU on that car.

But again, money isn't the ONLY issue. Parity is a goal as well. And the "in the box" clause has created huge inequities.

Phil (pfcs49) wants us all to go back to driving our car to the event and running stock or chipped ECUs, but what he isn't interested in is the fact that many examples won't support that concept. As pointed out, some cars aren't chippable, or flashable, without serious modifications. If you allow modification to the board to install non stock chips, exactly how do you draw the line????? Do yo say that you can add an auxiliary board as long as it fits in the box?? Ummmm thats where we are now........ And, what about functions that are currently illegal, but are fully entrenched in the ECU? Stability, ABS, TC, etc, etc. What about guys who spend a year driving in limp mode waiting for the ITAC/CRB to rewrite rules so that they can hook up ONE ABS sensor??

Each scenario comes back to the same conclusion: Stock ECus are becoming more and more intrusive, and if you want "club racing" to remain "Club" then allowing inexpensive open architecture electronics is really more in the original spirit than any other option.


These cars must be the ones that arrive at the ARRC in 40ft NASCAR style trailers (there are many, if you've never been) My response to them is the same as what we used to see in fastrack: "Request denied, not in the spirit of club racing"! In 94 I drove my car to the ARRC. In 04 I flat towed. The revolution will not be televised! phil (watchin Bush radicalized me again) [/b]
Click to expand...

But....thats the point!!!!!!! Right now these guys are perfectly legal! Running whatever sensor (BTW) they can get in the stock box, and going to town with full MOTEC.

By allowing inexpensive versions, and removig the "in the box rule", we allow kids with laptops to drive to the event and compete fairly....I would think you'd see THAT as a strike against the elite......


Really, How much FI experience do you have? How about cold air bypass that 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? There are lots of gain for those that want to be creative and they will be impossible to polic with a free system.. [/b]
Click to expand...

But Joe, thats being done NOW.

And if it happens downstream of the throttle plate, it's flat illegal.

How do we police ANYTHING?? We protest...we use our brains. But we rarely do. Thats our fault, and thats a seperate discussion.
 
Jake, It concerns me that you are in a position of decission making and seam to be pushing an agenda that will bring IT closer and closer to production type technology. You will not ever be able to justify the number of folks that you will loose by opening up these rules even further than they are. The loophole in the rule needs to be fixed and lets get back to realistic racing. I am not trying to take us back to driving old SS cars to the track but I am trying to make sure that we could if we wanted to. The push to bring more and more addons to IT will eventually have IT dieing the same miserable Production has for years. I would suggest that if you personally want a full on ECU and all the goodies that go with it then you should join me in the Prepared classes and leave IT at a level that allows a greater number of people a place to play at a much more resonable level of prep and expense. I would suggest to other Adhoc folks that you look seriously at closing up the loop holes that allow Motec in the box and look for solutions to the other issues on a model by model basis. We were told by Nissan that we would never crack the 350z codes when I started the T2 program and with in a month we reflashed,dynoed and reflashed again. That same program can be purchased from motorsports for about 500 bucks. Anything can be done if someone makes the effort. Just because it looks easier doesn't make it right.
 
Steve, that is an exagerated number...the number I Was quoted was $9,950.00 . I rounded up...

And thats a real number that reflects what clients have paid for their ECU systems. Now, I also know guys who have done it for less, as they happen to be code writing engineers. As I was considering building the same car, I engaged that owner in some discussion about how to make the power, and the costs associated. The total number for that build was quated as "approaching $30K." Seperately, I spoke with the builder of that engine, who quoted his "basic" builds go out for $15K, and the full builds (not inclusive of the electronics) are "Just over $20K". Simple math tells me that theres about $7K in the ECU on that car.

Each scenario comes back to the same conclusion: Stock ECus are becoming more and more intrusive, and if you want "club racing" to remain "Club" then allowing inexpensive open architecture electronics is really more in the original spirit than any other option.

But....thats the point!!!!!!! Right now these guys are perfectly legal! Running whatever sensor (BTW) they can get in the stock box, and going to town with full MOTEC.

By allowing inexpensive versions, and removig the "in the box rule", we allow kids with laptops to drive to the event and compete fairly....I would think you'd see THAT as a strike against the elite......

But Joe, thats being done NOW.

And if it happens downstream of the throttle plate, it's flat illegal.

How do we police ANYTHING?? We protest...we use our brains. But we rarely do. Thats our fault, and thats a seperate discussion.
[/b]
Click to expand...



QUOTE(Joe Harlan @ Jan 23 2007, 06:58 PM)
Really, How much FI experience do you have? How about cold air bypass that 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? There are lots of gain for those that want to be creative and they will be impossible to polic with a free system..



Jake, I want to admit I didn't know this could happen, no one I spoke to ever told me about this form of cheating. I agree with Jake and that it is time to move beyond and into the 21st century. Joe has said this cheat is undetecable and maybe eliminated if the stock wiring harness is used. Is there any other options to eliminating this cheat? Sure i'd like to see the open wiring harness, it would be less expensive to install the ems, but I don't want it at a cost of having people cheating with it. Were you aware of this cheat?Jake, this isn't a matter of striking out against the elite or anyone else, this is a matter of keeping the playing field even for everyone.BTW, no matter how you look at it, 7 to 10k is one hell of a lot of money when an open system can be had for 1 to 4k installed and tuned.
Dan
 
Each scenario comes back to the same conclusion: Stock ECus are becoming more and more intrusive, and if you want "club racing" to remain "Club" then allowing inexpensive open architecture electronics is really more in the original spirit than any other option.
....
By allowing inexpensive versions, and removig the "in the box rule", we allow kids with laptops to drive to the event and compete fairly....I would think you'd see THAT as a strike against the elite......[/b]
Click to expand...
Jake, the danger as I see it is that in the attempt to make it more affordable for some to have this technology we will at the same time be giving the guys with the budgets and/or skills yet another weapon to work with. How you ask; I have no idea, because I have neither the budget nor the experience to take advantage of the proposed new allowances. But it wouldn't suprise me to learn that when they were discussing the current ECU rule and someone asked "but isn't this going to allow the guys with the big bucks to gain an advantage?" the answer they got was "and just how are they gonna do that?".

If you want to eliminate the inequity in the rule, get rid of the restriction that makes it inequitable. In this case that's the "in the box" requirement. Get rid of that and everyone has the same opportunity to take advantage of the allowance. Forget about trying to make it cheap; as has been pointed out a million times in other discussions when you try to regulate costs through rules-making it invariably comes back to bite you in the ass.

If the only options presented to us are going to be the ones you outlined earlier (go back, status quo, or open it up - including adding sensors/wiring) my letter will go in support of the status quo.
 
Dan, I believe that this cheat is being done now with aftermarket ECU's. I think it would be very hard to program a stock unit to turn on and add fuel for the extra air and do it through a stock harness. 1 to 4K is a lot of money and you can bet that those numbers will be low. I charge 85 an hour for mapping work. That is above your dyno time. When you have a failure at the track and there are no codes to read where you gonna start? 1 to 4k may buy you a box but it does not buy you an expert to be at the track and fix it when you have a problem. Solution? Carry an extra ECU and complete harness extra injectors fuel pumps ect. Now your back to 10k with out even using some of the parts. Stock parts Bone yard spare ECU and a boneyard spare harness and a new set of extra injectors and your coverd for about five hundred bucks. Yeah this whole deal will be cheaper. OH and Motec charges a ton for an emerency overnight red lable so thats not a good option.
 
The past 3 years of watching how "stock" Spec Miata engines have evolved leads me to believe that an "open" ECU rule is probably the least expensive and simplest way to deal with reality. It is only "not stock" if you can prove it is "not stock" and I'll bet that can be very hard to do in regional club racing.

The vast majority of racers I know won't file an equipment related protest in any case. How on earth could we single out a non-stock ECU?

If a certain car type becomes an "overdog" consistently can't the club deal with the issue in more eforceable methods such as weight or restictors?
 
"undetectable" is a myth. Undetectable with the current stock of tools in the tech shed, but why shouldn't the tech shed and the protest process have to keep up with the technology in the same ways the rules do. This 3rd map air bypass issue would be easily detected with two tools, a test light and a dyno. Same with traction control, strap it on the rollers and try to induce wheel spin if the revs start breaking up, there is your TC.

Yeah, I know you guys are going to argue that the club can't spend the money, it's too expensive, and the witch hunt will continue. either open it all the way up, or shut it all the way down.
 
Dan, I believe that this cheat is being done now with aftermarket ECU's. I think it would be very hard to program a stock unit to turn on and add fuel for the extra air and do it through a stock harness. ....
[/b]
Click to expand...

And we're back to the idle control valve by-pass again. It's controled by the stock ecu, you can't just program the stock system to open it up? How could you not take advatage of it with a stock ecu and custom programming? You just need to know the right address to turn on and it's instantly wide open by passing the throttle valve. I thought we wen't round and round about this in the last thread?

James
 
James, You have to read all the information. I said the stock unit would be difficult of at all, but in a Motec,AEM,Haltech,ect. I could program that loop through software.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top