ECU Upgrade discussion

[Guest]

Valmes - are you saying that the EMU can do all of the above? Sounds like the best way to go if that's the case - was it hard to wire into the VR4 ECU?

 

[Guest]

My reference to emanage was with the emanage blue, not the new ultimate. I have had nothing to do with the ultimate personally so can't comment on it.

You are correct the haltech doesn't do direct injector control, has 4 auxiliary inputs and other minor items like duel mapping tec, but it is only designed as a piggy back for minor correction. Certainly more advanced than a SAFC as it also has inbuilt eletronic boost control, speed limitir removal, boost cut limiter removal so a little more advanced than being implied.

A Haltech E8 / E11 plug and play is easy to do for the manuel model galants for sure.

We didn't bother with the emanage ultimate due to its cost seemed very high compared to other piggy backs, and was nearly the price of a haltech E6x which had more features for more advanced tuning. Also the ultimate had a lot of reliability and error problems, I figure they may have sorted most of those out by now.

At the end of the day, like anything, it comes down to cost V gain, and who your tuner is and how much time you want to spend V how much hp you want. Speak to different people, find out what other galant users have used and go from there.

Myself with my own future galant, it will be haltech E11 all the way. My magna makes marginally more horsepower V the emanage blue / factory ecu with the same bosot on the E11, but it now makes more torque, more reliable and better driveability - and no more MAF sensor.

 

[bradc]

And I fully recommend anyone to go with an Autronic SM4, they are very good ECU's and they are aussie made so you should be able to find lots of installers over there for them.

 

[Guest]

Yes it can do all of the above.
No it's not that hard of a job... although time consuming.

Blue is also quite good for what's it worth...

Look down the post... that car ran 11.5@126, on stock MAS and e-manage Blue:
http://www.3si.org/forum/showpost.php?p=3311700&postcount=326&highlight=e-manage

Here is EMU equipped car that ran 10.396@138.94 (in speed density mode - NO MAF):
http://www.3si.org/forum/showpost.php?p=3609953&postcount=2&highlight=Emanage+Ultimate

 

[Guest]

Myself with my own future galant, it will be haltech E11 all the way. My magna makes marginally more horsepower V the emanage blue / factory ecu with the same bosot on the E11, but it now makes more torque, more reliable and better driveability - and no more MAF sensor.

Agreed, a friend of mine with Mitsubishi Strada. The car is for daily driven and sometimes he takes it to speed off road event. he used the EMU and now switch to e11 with better engine peformance.

 

[Guest]

So be more elaborate on that one... How much benefit do you think the "standalone" by itself can give your car without touching anything else? What benefits does it provide over a combo of St.ECU+piggyback?

2galantvr4
How much better (engine performance)?

2 Mitsuman
Can you be more specific? You just swapped e-manage for Haltech E11 and Bingo you've got more power and torque!?!?!? How much difference in HP/TQ, 1/4 miles 0-60 times did it make? What other changes could've contributed to that rise in HP/TQ/numbers? The one I can see is MAF removal, that could easily count for some of the improvement. No long restrictive intake piping or MAF in the path of incoming air... I will, when time permits, make a comparison between using custom piping and "Mellon" mod on 6g72TT (GTO) MAF vs. just two Air filters on the turbos and MAP, but I don't need to go standalone for that... so what other benefits does standalone have?

I am not trying to pick a fight here I am just trying to get the facts straight... since everyone believes standalone IS MUCH better than playing with a piggyback, yet few people can give valid examples to show why it is better... I mean not in the "your tuner will be able to mess with it longer" way... More load points is ok of an argument, but can you benefit from that? Let's not forget price part and what I would call "hardware" limiting factor...

You think this Stealth RT/TT running 10.39 will benefit from changing over to standalone? BTW he holds a record for 2xe16G powered 6g72TT car... what, in the World??? You think he still has something left in there and can run even better numbers by switching to E11 for example? Is the cost of getting it, installing and tuning, justifiable in this case? Even if for some reason it will allow for few tenth of a second shaved off the ET (I doubt it will however)?

I am sure you can't beat standalone in a dedicated discipline... such as Rally, Drag Racing, Circuit Racing... where complete access to all parts of ECU can make a big difference, but for everyday road car it's an overkill. IMHO. It's like getting a TopFuel Dragster for a daily driver... I like my Legnum for versatility - it can haul 5 people and luggage, yet corner and accelerate like a sports car... Same thing goes for EMU piggyback, it allows me to control almost everything... without actually being a Mitsubishi ECU engineer.

 

[Guest]

the main area's that the Haltech E11 provided benefits was as follows

(A) I did pick up a minor hp increase of around 10 - 15hp, but this was mostly less restrictive intake system due to removal of MAF unit.

(B) Torque did increase a lot - this was the main reason I dropped from a 12.2 down to a 11.9 at the drag strip (Which on a FWD car is very tough to increase traction )

(C) Main benefit wsa more much more mapping points to start with - the haltech enabled me to map in 250 rpm intervals, on a 32 X 32 map. Compare this to an emanag eblue with a 16 X 12 map.

(D) The main benefit for me was much safer and consistant tune - this is where it gets difficult to explain, but in a nutshell, any piggy back which retains the use of the air flow meter has an immedietly inconsistancy with tuning. You are trying to tune for BOOST which is a MAP sensor / pressure sensor versus a vehicle trying to run with a system under a air flow / volume setup. This is made worse by the fact that piggy back system tune in a throttle position mode.

So example at 100% throttl eyou can get really good maps and fuel curves. But take the car round a circuit track and run under boost on say 50% throttle and you can see some horrible fuel curves. Problem is on the 16 x 16 map running in a TPS mode, you are too limited in your adjustment points, and you still have the inconsistancy of trying tune a pressure V volume setup which ready differently. You can have same pressure with less volume, more volume of air flow without pressure etc.

I found in the end, that piggy backs worked fine on mildly modified motors only. But I can do a far safer and better tune, more consistant tune with a full EMS system, almost regardless of brand to a degree, than with a piggy back on a turbo car specifically.

Naturally aspirated cars are a completely different scenario

In Summary for me - with the emanage seutp I blew up 2 motors with bad tuning - not that the tunig was bad on the dyno, but on the road I was hitting throttlle pos V boost pressur V MAF sensor volume scenarios that were just not able to be tuned out on a limited piggy back ecu setup.

With the Haltech system it is tuned in a MAP sensor mode only at 250 rpm intervals. No messy TPS tuning which should never used on a turbo car and no more variations in the baseline tuning.

The car now races regularly around wanneroo race track, drags and is just better across teh board. Since I have done the haltech, I have made a new PB at the drag track, at waneroo, raced the car at other events and have not had to touch the motor at all.

Thats why I will always do it this way i nthe future.

 

[Guest]

the main area's that the Haltech E11 provided benefits was as follows

(A) I did pick up a minor hp increase of around 10 - 15hp, but this was mostly less restrictive intake system due to removal of MAF unit.

(B) Torque did increase a lot - this was the main reason I dropped from a 12.2 down to a 11.9 at the drag strip (Which on a FWD car is very tough to increase traction )

(C) Main benefit wsa more much more mapping points to start with - the haltech enabled me to map in 250 rpm intervals, on a 32 X 32 map. Compare this to an emanag eblue with a 16 X 12 map.

(D) The main benefit for me was much safer and consistant tune - this is where it gets difficult to explain, but in a nutshell, any piggy back which retains the use of the air flow meter has an immedietly inconsistancy with tuning. You are trying to tune for BOOST which is a MAP sensor / pressure sensor versus a vehicle trying to run with a system under a air flow / volume setup. This is made worse by the fact that piggy back system tune in a throttle position mode.

So example at 100% throttl eyou can get really good maps and fuel curves. But take the car round a circuit track and run under boost on say 50% throttle and you can see some horrible fuel curves. Problem is on the 16 x 16 map running in a TPS mode, you are too limited in your adjustment points, and you still have the inconsistancy of trying tune a pressure V volume setup which ready differently. You can have same pressure with less volume, more volume of air flow without pressure etc.

I found in the end, that piggy backs worked fine on mildly modified motors only. But I can do a far safer and better tune, more consistant tune with a full EMS system, almost regardless of brand to a degree, than with a piggy back on a turbo car specifically.

Naturally aspirated cars are a completely different scenario

In Summary for me - with the emanage seutp I blew up 2 motors with bad tuning - not that the tunig was bad on the dyno, but on the road I was hitting throttlle pos V boost pressur V MAF sensor volume scenarios that were just not able to be tuned out on a limited piggy back ecu setup.

With the Haltech system it is tuned in a MAP sensor mode only at 250 rpm intervals. No messy TPS tuning which should never used on a turbo car and no more variations in the baseline tuning.

The car now races regularly around wanneroo race track, drags and is just better across teh board. Since I have done the haltech, I have made a new PB at the drag track, at waneroo, raced the car at other events and have not had to touch the motor at all.

Thats why I will always do it this way i nthe future.

A) Interesting... How restrictive was your MAF intake? Any pictures still remain of that? The reason I ask - I can remove all of that piping and go straight, the MAP route... Right now I have Twin Air Filters in a CAI Box going into GTO(3000GT VR-4) MAF with so called "Mellon mod" then 2,5 pipes into each turbo intake... eMU allows for a simple MAF swap and staying with that setup retains almost stock driveability, no issues here, but will it allow to flow as much air to the turbos as just straight on the Turbo Air Filters?

B) Has it all came from the tune?

С) For now this seems to be the major "selling" point... so to say.

To tell you the truth - I never thought of it... Is it really necessary? Stock ECU also has 15x15 maps (take a look at the second screen shot down the page), but plenty of them to cover for different situations.

Although EMU has only 16x16 maps... there are plenty of them too. I mean you can tune with just a single map enabled or you can stock pile them altogether. For example making EMU read from both fuel correction maps, will effectively double your map size...

I can use one fuel map in Hz vs RPM mode and the other is in TPS vs RPM mode. So EMU can constantly make adjustments by both Air Volume and TPS, to cover for any throttle situation and load.

D) Why did you have to tune by TPS? I am sure e-manage Blue also allowed to switch your load axis for either TPS(%), Boost(V) or Air Volume (Hz)...

EMU has it all (look at the first picture), plus it allows to tune by VE (%... never tried that one) and Relative pressure (Boost in a human friendly way - bar/psi/kgm).

There are also things like Greddy MAP, IAT, Baro, WT and a bunch of other maps and sensors that can allow for precise tuning... btw, don't forget that stock ECU also works with you.



I guess it is just a matter of personal preference. If you get better results with Haltech and have knowledge, time and money to spare on a more sophisticated system (which still, imho, might be an overkill) and it works - why not?

I just can't accept it, when somebody is saying "this thing is useless - go standalone" without backing up their statements. This is kinda misleading to those who are trying to make up their mind on the matter...

Emu screen:

ECUedit allows for better understanding of how stock ECU works.

 

[bradc]

First of all Valmes, someone defaced your start button!

Secondly, I notice two interesting things about that graph.

One - 10-20% throttle below 3000rpm is 14.1 AFR, while 30%-80% is 14.7 AFR. Thats strange, can anyone shed any light on why they tuned it like that rather than 14.7 all the way down to 10% load?

Two - At 100-140% load at high rpm it runs richer than at higher load levels. Why is this? And how exactly is it possible to have more than 100% load?

 

[Guest]

First of all Valmes, someone defaced your start button!

Secondly, I notice two interesting things about that graph.

One - 10-20% throttle below 3000rpm is 14.1 AFR, while 30%-80% is 14.7 AFR. Thats strange, can anyone shed any light on why they tuned it like that rather than 14.7 all the way down to 10% load?

Two - At 100-140% load at high rpm it runs richer than at higher load levels. Why is this? And how exactly is it possible to have more than 100% load?

A) It reads "Start" but in Russian...

B) That graph is stock Fuel Map (Rich) from a 97 Manual VR-4 ECU

1) That's not TPS you are referring to. It is called "Engine Load" and is actually very close to... PR (Pressure Ratio)... yes, the one you see on a Turbocharger Compressor Flow map will probably be the best bet to understand what those numbers represent.

So at 10-20 it's only 10-20% of atmospheric pressure, hence that's vacuum.
100 engine load points ~ normal atmosphere pressure ~ 0 on your boost gauge.
200 engine load points ~ 2xtimes atmosphere pressure(200kPa absolute pressure) ~ 100kPa/~1bar/14.7 psi on a boost gauge (relative pressure).

Although keep in mind that the Engine Load is calculated value from airflow... not a directly measured one. That's what factory boost gauge in GTO shows if anybody had a chance to look at it ...its a mess btw

I can only guess that going richer at vacuum can give you stable rpms... btw that's what I do too... a bit more fuel at idle.

2) That's probably what's called acceleration enrichment... since target boost for stock car is at around 160 engine load points... just imagine smashing your gas pedal at 6000rpm... sudden rush of air (with stock small turbos that will be in an instant) better be safe and get some "transit" enrichment in there, until turbos get to the preset 0,6 bars and ECU tries to keep it there at 10.x AFR...

PS: Don't take my word for it though... as I've said before I am not a Mitsubishi ECU Engineer

 

[bradc]

double post

 

[bradc]

ahh ok, it makes more sense now, to all intents and purposes it is a boost vs rpm = fuel graph. I thought it was throttle position, but if you think about it some more a turbo car can't use tps (as you guys were discussing a few posts above)

What does it do above 1 bar if there is no map? Also could you post up the other maps in the ecu?

 

[Guest]

It's not supposed to be above 1 bar...

You scale it...

Example.
At 5000RPM and 0,7 bar you have 2100Hz coming out of your MAF.
Engine load value is at 150.
Stock injectors DC is at 60%.
AF should be at 11.3

Now you have bigger injectors in there. If you leave everything as is, you will flood your engine with fuel...

So change your incoming value to 1400Hz... (just for example sake...)
So instead of going to 150 Engine Load it will only go to a 100...
Injector DC for the target AFR is only 40% now, but your injectors flow more, remember?
So if you did everything right you'll get the same AF at 11.3.
The problem with ECU going for 100LPX5000RPM ignition cell - you just retard your timing by the necessary amount.