Ems Vs Edit

[Guest]

I’m glad to say I haven’t used a EMS for many years, as my experience with the early ones lead me to believe they had a lot of catching up to do when compared to MoTeC

dw....each to there own I'm happy to use both

Now I do have plenty of experience with MoTeC and for a number of years was the largest MoTeC dealer in Australia and their number one fan. Anyone that knows our history with the Barra 6 T will know that all our development engines and cars were run using MoTeC and almost all people out there would also agree that the MoTeC range of ECU’s are at the top of the after market tree. Now most including EMS and please Nick correct me if I’m wrong use a very similar strategy when it comes to the way the process their in coming signals. They count rpm vs either throttle position or manifold pressure and from there look up a 3D map to them determine pulse width in the fuelling side of thing or spark advance for ignition.

So for now forget cam control, boost control and Drive by wirer, lets just look at the first two, spark and fuel and I have some bad news for you. The majority of these system are very poor in comparison to the factory systems ,forget  narrow band close loop fuel control this is simply to keep the catalytic converter alight. The simple fact of the matter is the after market system lacks fuel control at different acceleration rate.

Example if you map the whole engine in steady state mode at lets say .86 Lambda  and then run the engine at a slow acceleration  rate lets say like a 5th gear pull down the  freeway the mixture will be .87 / 88, now do it at a very high rate like 1st gear and the mixture will be .91/92. The system will always be behind depending on acceleration rates. On the other side if you decelerate the engine,  like going up a super big hill the mixture will go rich .84/83. Guess what the spark does the same thing.

dw....maybe you dont use enough of your available load points  and when have you ever seen perfectly repeatable pcm results factory or edited?

The PID controls on boost, cam shaft control and boost and poor to say the least. The Motec hac no extra tables for cam control vs oil temperature/ pressure so it simple does not control camshaft position the same from cold to hot and don’t get me started on the Drive by wire control.

The factory system simply smashes the after market  systems for 6 in every area. I have also noticed a power increase at the same boost at the same engine speed with back to back testing. As you are proberly aware Brian's car once had a MoTeC and is now back to the factory system with Edit, it now starts perfectly hot and cold and is beautiful to drive, the same cant be said when the MoTeC was fitted and that was after 6 months of tuning, Idling was always a Hugh problem with hunting and stalling and in fact all three cars that were fitted with MoTeC ‘s have all now been removed. I have seen a Ba fitted with EMS and it too showed all the signs of the above.

These after market systems may be fine in fairly simple engines but as engine become more complex they simply struggle to cope well and deliver user friendliness when it comes to street manners. The after market simple have a different set of parameters to meet. They need a system that will run all styles of engine with different sensors. The Factory system is designed to run its one engine perfectly, given this and the fact its need to comply to emissions testing, the  sheer magnitude of research and moneys that can be poured into such a system is staggering and once guys like us have the software available to calibrate it for the mechanical changes we make to the engine it is a perfect answer to having your cake and eating it too.

It has trick features that can detect engine misfire by measuring the time it takes between cylinder fire events, self learning and mixture adjustment and of course Knock control.. Now I now that SCT is not a big fan of knock control and this is for a number of reasons. One being if they lead everyone to believe the knock control would save the engine beyond question, that would be very irresponsible and you would have destroyed engines all over the place. Two: the Knock control and all the difference aspects of its calibration along with the mechanical noise of each engine make it a very difficult area to control correctly. So in some regards it makes more sense for then to say leave it alone and don’t rely on it, but believe me it works well enough to make it worth having once correctly understood.

Anyway that’s me 100 bobs worth.

←

In an experimental or hybrid mode you no longer have the benefit of all the 1000's of hours in math's the factory spent on getting it right for emissions etc. and not for peak performance etc.

as such an adjustments we make are crude in comparison to an actual measurement as with a good ecu.

the factory relies on math's to use a narrow band sensor to do the job of a wide band sensor this is poor and if there were a single equation missed by the tuner the will render poor results

as such for example maybe we should all use desk top dyno and be done with actual testing for actual real life results!!!!!

better sell our dyno's as their no longer necesary we can do it virtually these days!!!!

basically theory is not always and hardly ever perfect in practice!!!!!

agreed if you do a kit and spend the necesary time 10,000 plus hours testing as the manufacturers do (remembering they have access to all parameters we dont vid block etc.) you cant go past the edit!

but if you have mister 1 off nocking on your door the quickest and most effective way to get safe results are aftermarket ecu's!!!

you know that by our conversation the other week I respect our relationship as peers and as such meen no disrespect in saying/relying like this!!!!!

[Guest]

lawsy the a3ya has

8x10=80 fuel loadpoints

9x11=99 ign loadpoints

ems stinger 32x96=3072 loadpoints fuel and ign.

as to data sheets get on the ems get on their site and download the software and play with it!!!!

←

It needs that many points becasuse its interpolation is crap and its a DUMB system, meaning it has no thermodynamic model of the actual cylinder mass within the chamber - unlike the factory system.

←

First of all, Dynowog,

I dont even know why you mentioned the fuel load points. In the ford system its totally irrelavent, its the Commanded Air Fuel. not the "milliseconds of injection".

The ford system calculates the required injection pulse. unlike most if not all aftermarket systems which you have to specify the fuel injection Millisecond period based on Load (map or tps) Vs Spark.

dw....exactly my point above at least you know what your getting not guestimating

This is why the ford system requires the "thermodynamic model of actual cylinder mass" as rob mentioned.

I would hate tuning a ECU with that many load points, it would be a upmost waste of time tuning every single point. if the aftermarket ecu had decent interpolation and accuracy, there would be no need for such a big table. That goes for Any aftermarket ecu.

dw....you choose the points you require and the fact that it has more points means better interpolation than one with less. thermo dynamics are used to guesstimate how much air is in the cylinder where as mapxtemp measures it no guess work = better.

whats better I guess you can run 11.9 or measuring it??????

Danny.

←

[Guest]

not getting into another debate I have no time for it!!!!

[rob82]

I’m glad to say I haven’t used a EMS for many years, as my experience with the early ones lead me to believe they had a lot of catching up to do when compared to MoTeC

dw....each to there own I'm happy to use both

Now I do have plenty of experience with MoTeC and for a number of years was the largest MoTeC dealer in Australia and their number one fan. Anyone that knows our history with the Barra 6 T will know that all our development engines and cars were run using MoTeC and almost all people out there would also agree that the MoTeC range of ECU’s are at the top of the after market tree. Now most including EMS and please Nick correct me if I’m wrong use a very similar strategy when it comes to the way the process their in coming signals. They count rpm vs either throttle position or manifold pressure and from there look up a 3D map to them determine pulse width in the fuelling side of thing or spark advance for ignition.

So for now forget cam control, boost control and Drive by wirer, lets just look at the first two, spark and fuel and I have some bad news for you. The majority of these system are very poor in comparison to the factory systems ,forget  narrow band close loop fuel control this is simply to keep the catalytic converter alight. The simple fact of the matter is the after market system lacks fuel control at different acceleration rate.

Example if you map the whole engine in steady state mode at lets say .86 Lambda   and then run the engine at a slow acceleration  rate lets say like a 5th gear pull down the  freeway the mixture will be .87 / 88, now do it at a very high rate like 1st gear and the mixture will be .91/92. The system will always be behind depending on acceleration rates. On the other side if you decelerate the engine,  like going up a super big hill the mixture will go rich .84/83. Guess what the spark does the same thing.

dw....maybe you dont use enough of your available load points  and when have you ever seen perfectly repeatable pcm results factory or edited?

The PID controls on boost, cam shaft control and boost and poor to say the least. The Motec hac no extra tables for cam control vs oil temperature/ pressure so it simple does not control camshaft position the same from cold to hot and don’t get me started on the Drive by wire control.

The factory system simply smashes the after market  systems for 6 in every area. I have also noticed a power increase at the same boost at the same engine speed with back to back testing. As you are proberly aware Brian's car once had a MoTeC and is now back to the factory system with Edit, it now starts perfectly hot and cold and is beautiful to drive, the same cant be said when the MoTeC was fitted and that was after 6 months of tuning, Idling was always a Hugh problem with hunting and stalling and in fact all three cars that were fitted with MoTeC ‘s have all now been removed. I have seen a Ba fitted with EMS and it too showed all the signs of the above.

These after market systems may be fine in fairly simple engines but as engine become more complex they simply struggle to cope well and deliver user friendliness when it comes to street manners. The after market simple have a different set of parameters to meet. They need a system that will run all styles of engine with different sensors. The Factory system is designed to run its one engine perfectly, given this and the fact its need to comply to emissions testing, the  sheer magnitude of research and moneys that can be poured into such a system is staggering and once guys like us have the software available to calibrate it for the mechanical changes we make to the engine it is a perfect answer to having your cake and eating it too.

It has trick features that can detect engine misfire by measuring the time it takes between cylinder fire events, self learning and mixture adjustment and of course Knock control.. Now I now that SCT is not a big fan of knock control and this is for a number of reasons. One being if they lead everyone to believe the knock control would save the engine beyond question, that would be very irresponsible and you would have destroyed engines all over the place. Two: the Knock control and all the difference aspects of its calibration along with the mechanical noise of each engine make it a very difficult area to control correctly. So in some regards it makes more sense for then to say leave it alone and don’t rely on it, but believe me it works well enough to make it worth having once correctly understood.

Anyway that’s me 100 bobs worth.

←

In an experimental or hybrid mode you no longer have the benefit of all the 1000's of hours in math's the factory spent on getting it right for emissions etc. and not for peak performance etc.

as such an adjustments we make are crude in comparison to an actual measurement as with a good ecu.

the factory relies on math's to use a narrow band sensor to do the job of a wide band sensor this is poor and if there were a single equation missed by the tuner the will render poor results

as such for example maybe we should all use desk top dyno and be done with actual testing for actual real life results!!!!!

better sell our dyno's as their no longer necesary we can do it virtually these days!!!!

basically theory is not always and hardly ever perfect in practice!!!!!

agreed if you do a kit and spend the necesary time 10,000 plus hours testing as the manufacturers do (remembering they have access to all parameters we dont vid block etc.) you cant go past the edit!

but if you have mister 1 off nocking on your door the quickest and most effective way to get safe results are aftermarket ecu's!!!

you know that by our conversation the other week I respect our relationship as peers and as such meen no disrespect in saying/relying like this!!!!!

←

The standard ECU never uses the narrow band sensor to determine operating mixtures other than that for closed loop control. It doesn't even apply the long term fuel trims like other manufactures do (GM, subaru) to open loop fuel mixtures.

Can you change injectors on an aftermarket ECU and change 4 numbers and arrive back at the same mixtures everywhere you where before the injector change? I know I can with the edit and I reckon the only aftermarket ECU that would go close is the autronic.

A detailed understanding of the mathematics behind the PID loops makes the power of the edit shine - this is how you save time on tuning.

Edited 11/08/06 11:37 AM by rob82

[phildub]

DW: In an experimental or hybrid mode you no longer have the benefit of all the 1000's of hours in math's the factory spent on getting it right for emissions etc. and not for peak performance etc.

I would think that when the mods to the car are fairly simple eg: extra boost,intercooler,cai, then the 1000s of hrs the factory spends would still be very relevant, even when injectors are changed, as long as the scaling is done correctly then the same would apply. Only if the cams were change would this then start to effect the major parts of the factory settings as the breathing of the engine would change and the VE tables would be incorrect.Put the Ford ecu on a Expensive Daewoo and then I would agree at this point a after market ecu would be faster.

I dont believe after reading nizdaves responce that it is a load site related problem but more a calculation problem in which the after market choose to calculate the pulse width and the factory system choose a different method that is far more accurate.

[Headsex]

Only if the cams were change would this then start to effect the major parts of the factory settings as the breathing of the engine would change and the VE tables would be incorrect.Put the Ford ecu on a Expensive Daewoo and then I would agree at this point a after market ecu would be faster.

←

Changing a Cam. I disagree, altering the tables to bring the mixtures back into line again is far easier than starting fresh on a new After market ecu.

As for putting the ford ECU onto another engine as a holden. Then yes, I agree, Aftermarket ecu will be heaps quicker to tune. But you wouldnt get no were near the same quality of tune. Manufactorers spend thousands of hours fine tuning things like cold starts etc. As Dave said, even after spending plenty of time on BCL's motec tuning, they still had problems. Stalling etc.

At the end of the day, I dont know why any tuner would take it upon himself to Fully tune a aftermarket ecu onto the ford when there is a editable computer sitting there saying Please, tune me..

Dynowog, The ford does not use Guestimations or Oxy sensors for fuel control. If you open your CAPA/SCT training manual, you will see the big formula on page 73 used for the fuel control..

Unless you fell asleep during the course @ Amberley's last September(I saw many get some Shutteye during the course, Where you one of them??), either way you should understand it quite well..

Using the table names in the SCT software, it looks like this

MAP -

(map_at_zero_aircharge * Y_Intercept_Corr_of_Map_vrs_Aircharge) * ((560/(act+460)) * voleff_corr_for_ECT&ACT)

----------------------------------------------------------------

slope_of_MAP_vrs_aircharge * (1 + egr_flow /100)

[tab]

Makes sense to me

[phildub]

HEADSEX:

Changing a Cam. I disagree, altering the tables to bring the mixtures back into line again is far easier than starting fresh on a new After market ecu.

I would agree, it would just seem at this point that a lot of the factory programing is starting to be lost once cam shaft profiles are altered and the tuners that dont understand this aera well may feel more at home with a simple after market unit.I would still perfer the factory system re programed.The fact that this ecu is used on the V8 Boss, the 3 valve v8 and the na/T 6cylinder engines, as well as countless others around the world would indicate that it will works perfertly well on all types of engines, so it can only be the misunderstanding of the system that gets you a poor result and makes some choose after market stuff,not the system itself.With this in mind and all the work that must be required to wirer and tune an after marked ecu I think the answer is very simple in which system to use.

Edited 12/08/06 03:21 AM by phildub

[Headsex]

yeah Phil, I'm with you on that.. It may be harder to adjust when cam changes.. But once you get it right again, its easy..

There's a excel spread sheet you can use, which you have "commanded A/F" vs "Actual Airfuel" you put the error in, and it tells you what numbers to replace it with..

Danny

[Guest]

the whole lot of you are missing the point totally!!!!!

and its obvious to me why you all dont catch up quick!!! you all know it all!!!!!

3 years ago I made over 300rwkw on std injectors at which time everyone else said no you need bigger at 230 - 240 rwkw 6 months ago nizpro did 290rwkw this is because they are getting the hang of the software better than most others

the fact that over 300 was acheived 3 years ago with 1 hrs tuning of an inferior after market system as you would say is proof you don't know wtf is going on!!!!!!

there aint many people that understand the factory system better than nizpro, hpf or I and that's why nizpro and I have gotten over 290rwkw

I have tuned programable ecu's since 1988 screwdriver adjustments through to now and mate I still learn from even a simple aprentice!!!!

I still cant get better than 312rwkw through these so much better pcm tables but have acheived over 350 with a ecu not so after all!!!!!

good luck in your chosen path as you know better!!!!!