Spec Miata Community   
search | help | calendar | games | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hello Spec Miata Community » SpecMiata.com » Spec Miata » Modified ECU/Computer (Page 9)

 - Email this page to someone! | Subscribe To Topic
Page 9 of 10 1  2  3  ...  6  7  8  9  10  next » 
 
Author Topic: Modified ECU/Computer
Drago Verified Driver Made Donation to Website Series Champ
MegaModerator

Region: mid south
Car #: 2
Year : 1999
Posts: 4275
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Drago   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Thanks for the call Kent
Jim

--------------------
Jim Drago
East Street Auto Salvage
jdrago1@aol.com
2006-2007 Mid-West Division
07,09 June Sprints Champion

EAST STREET RACING

Lance Snyder Made Donation to Website
Administrator

Region: Atlanta
Posts: 2470
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Lance Snyder     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

OK kids, simma down.

--------------------
All this has happened before, and will happen again

Keith in WA Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Pack Fodder

Region: NWR / Oregon
Car #: 88
Year : 95
Posts: 2000
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Keith in WA     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

shhhh.... This string of arguments is better than Jerry Springer.

--------------------
Keith Novak
(Will work for tires)

cnj
Member

Region: SW Division
Car #: 32
Year : 1999
Posts: 194
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for cnj     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Robert Fender:
quote:
Originally posted by Kent Carter:
Robert, those are good points, but you can't deny that the smart ones who want to run up front won't go the fuel pressure/timing fudge way, it's totally braindead.

I would say the point wasn't what the smart ones up front WOULD do ... the point was what should you, and the rulemakers, and the moral majority do to level the playing field for everyone *other than* the evil frontrunner.

The stock EFI is 6HP below "optimal". 4HP of that is in timing and moving the AFR curve up and down.

Yes, the remaining 2HP is available for piggybacks, homemade 6-pole relays [Wink] , etc.


2HP advantages are not problems worth solving in my opinion (and not a valid excuse for getting beat either).

OK, after reading 400 entertaining, educational and occasionally needlessly aggressive/personal posts, Robert Fender, aka singing Tony Bennet, has had it right all along in my opinion. Hereís why.

1. A tweaked 99 ECU will apparently only provide a maximum of 6hp gain. Adjustable FPR (within current GCR limits) and timing achieves 80% of this gain at lower cost with fewer variables.

2. Perhaps many (?) 99 front runners are running at the lower GCR rated FRP already thus this change will bring the midpack closer to the front (albeit only 99ís) without (arguably) changing the front runners parity with other years. Itís interesting to me that there has been such intense critique of SM builders taking advantage of the situation when in fact some (eg. Drago) appear to be advancing the idea of reducing the gap between their top shelf cars and the home built car.

3. Setting higher FPR levels by GCR mandate will allow those inclined to cheat electronically. Sad fact of life and better obviated by following Robert/Tony/Markís advice to diminish the incentive.

4. By establishing more clearly defined parity amongst all 99ís, fine tuning parity across ALL years will be easier to accomplish as time marches on.

On a separate note I agree completely with the concept proposed by others (Bruce, et el) that we move in a measured but parallel path of continuing to refine parity between all years, but also open up the rules to allow 1.6 owners to upgrade their cars to 1.8 at a time of their choosing. There is no need to set a time limit.

Craig J

David de Regt Verified Driver
Member

Region: NWR
Car #: 47/479
Year : 1992
Posts: 418
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for David de Regt   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

So, just out of curiosity, all the current plans seem to be aimed at the 99s. I understand this, but as a 1.6 owner, it sounds like:

1. There is no way to detect 1.6 cheater ECUs
2. There are no plans to work on a way to detect this (the effort is being focused on OBD2 scanning the 99+ cars)

This sounds a lot like all 1.6s might as well get the cheater ECUs. It's worth a great deal of midrange torque to us. As we discussed in the days of yore (3-5 pages ago), untechable items are basically spec items at any reasonable point in this game.

Discuss?

--------------------
My Spec Miata Build Sheet - Hope people find it useful
 -

kevin 22 Verified Driver
Member

Region: NYR
Car #: 22
Year : 1991
Posts: 270
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for kevin 22     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

From what I have been told is that there is no gain for the 1.6's. But the 99's the rewards are huge. I think simply that the 99 ECU is much more advanced and has more control over the engine.

--------------------
Kevin Anderson

pat slattery Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Region: cincy
Car #: 79
Year : 92
Posts: 1495
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for pat slattery     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

I am not trying to make the 99 faster by no way but I think the adjusting the AFM came about because people were cheating them up illegally, and the rule was opened up to allow all 1.6 cars to do it legally since it was hard to prove

Probably the same with the FPR on the 99 and timing situation.

Pat

--------------------
keeping the faith for the 1.6

Arrow Karts

Kent Carter Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Future Never Has Been

Region: Houston
Car #: 91
Year : 1991
Posts: 2171
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Kent Carter   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Craig,

Your analysis is very good, but the same thing could be accomplished with less risk for the amateur racer who doesn't have access to a dyno every month by having an optimized, sealed spec ECU as is the case in SpecRacer Ford. The ECU would give you the extra power that Mazda intentionally left on the table for reliability with the intelligence to pull timing if, for example, the temperature goes to 215F.

My gut feeling is that we will end up going that route in the end anyway. Let's just skip all the nonsense and make that leap.

Look forward to seeing you at TWS. We should talk a bit.

--------------------
Do I turn my 99 Hard S into a killerfast SM or seek a donor?

Dusty Bottoms Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
99 all the way!

Region: Lone Star
Year : 1990
Posts: 4253
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Dusty Bottoms     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by cnj:


4. By establishing more clearly defined parity amongst all 99ís, fine tuning parity across ALL years will be easier to accomplish as time marches on.[/QB]

This is an excellent point and one I was trying to make back when the 94-97s were seen as the overdogs (94 in particular). While everyone in the SMAC knew the top 94s probably had been leaned out in one way or another, everyone just kind of shoved their head in the sand.

Antonio--who thinks 94-97's will rule in 2010

--------------------
"Your victory is tainted! Asterisk! Asterisk!!!"--Lisa Simpson

B Wilson Verified Driver Series Champ
Gold Member

Region: Oregon
Car #: 68
Year : 91
Posts: 2359
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for B Wilson   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

And, eventually competition adjustments get made when enough folks start running the "hot" stuff and then the folks to lose are those that aren't trying to spend hours covering up funny solders. I believe that's what happened to parity with the 94s. Because a few people were doing it everyone in 94-97 group were subject to the competition adjustment. It is important for everyone that these problems are addressed.

-bw

--------------------
Bruce Wilson
2010 Oregon Region Champ
2010 Monte Shelton Driver of the Year
2010 25 Hours of Thunderhill E3 and Under 2 liter Overall Champion
Oregon Region SM Class Advisor

David de Regt Verified Driver
Member

Region: NWR
Car #: 47/479
Year : 1992
Posts: 418
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for David de Regt   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

1.6 ITA miata with AFM and timing tricks, compared to after switching to a megasquirtPnP:

 -

"No gain" indeed. [Smile]

--------------------
My Spec Miata Build Sheet - Hope people find it useful
 -

cnj
Member

Region: SW Division
Car #: 32
Year : 1999
Posts: 194
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for cnj     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Kent Carter:
Craig,


Look forward to seeing you at TWS. We should talk a bit.

Sounds good. I'll wait for you after the finish line. [Smile]

Craig J

Kent Carter Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Future Never Has Been

Region: Houston
Car #: 91
Year : 1991
Posts: 2171
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Kent Carter   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by cnj:
quote:
Originally posted by Kent Carter:
Craig,


Look forward to seeing you at TWS. We should talk a bit.

Sounds good. I'll wait for you after the finish line. [Smile]

Craig J

I believe you... you always drive well at TWS!

--------------------
Do I turn my 99 Hard S into a killerfast SM or seek a donor?

Jason Holland Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Mediocrity rules!

Region: SouthEast
Car #: 28
Year : 95
Posts: 3756
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Jason Holland   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Blake Clements:
quote:
Originally posted by PedalFaster:
quote:
Originally posted by Kent Carter:
There is still money to be made, parts to sell!

There are still baseless personal attacks to be made! Let's reward the efforts of those who volunteer countless hours of their time to help us by publicly questioning their integrity!

This forum needs an ignore button.

Please Mike and Jason!
I only wish we could...

--------------------
Jason Holland
Semi-interested civilian

Dwayne Hoover Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Posts: 3138
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Dwayne Hoover     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Kent Carter:
Craig,

Your analysis is very good, but the same thing could be accomplished with less risk for the amateur racer who doesn't have access to a dyno every month by having an optimized, sealed spec ECU as is the case in SpecRacer Ford. The ECU would give you the extra power that Mazda intentionally left on the table for reliability with the intelligence to pull timing if, for example, the temperature goes to 215F.

My gut feeling is that we will end up going that route in the end anyway. Let's just skip all the nonsense and make that leap.

Look forward to seeing you at TWS. We should talk a bit.

Your scenario:
1. Requires someone willing to do the R/D and supply all the boxes.
2. When will that be ready?
3. What will the cost be?
4. Now you get your sealed/spec'd and optimized box. WHICH FUEL PRESSURE DID THEY OPTIMIZE IT FOR?
5. What % oxygen of fuel did they optimize it for?
6. If your stock fuel pump, regulator, and fuel of choice, is not providing the "optimized" AFR by happenstance, what are you going to do about it? What will frontrunners do about it?
6. If, FOR WHATEVER REASON, your A/F is a little low or high, what are you going to do about it?

My point: Even with a spec and "optimized" ECU, there will be a day you will want to tweak the curve up or down.

I've already got a wall of regulators 50-62 psi ... but it would be nice not to take a bath in the fuel tank every time I want a legal tune-up.

--------------------
Visit the Midland City Arts Festival!

Dwayne Hoover Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Posts: 3138
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Dwayne Hoover     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by David de Regt:
1.6 ITA miata with AFM and timing tricks, compared to after switching to a megasquirtPnP:

 -

"No gain" indeed. [Smile]

1. We only care about 5500 rpm up, would you agree? So we can ignore the dramatic gains below that.

2. Is this same day testing, back-to-back, no other changes, etc? The relative humidity, temp, lambda, and other numbers concern me specifically. Are you presenting apples to apples here?

3. This is a ITA miata, not an SM? The stock AFM's ability to flow drops off dramatically once you get beyond its capability. I am concerned by using an ITA car for your test that it does not reflect the reality of an SM.

4. In general, can you perhaps do a little more to convice us the pre-MegaSquirt configuration was truly tuned correctly? No offense, but your past posts suggest to me you may not fully understand the AFM tuning, or may not have doe much of it.

Specifically, if you plotted the A/F curve for us, it would be helpful.

5. The "stock" baseline looks weird down low in general ... as if this run was "rolled into" at partial throttle. That doesn't mean the upper-RPM data isn't legit, but still a red flag to me about the validity and the repeatablity of the operator and his dyno.

My opinion is a MegaSquirt will give less than 2HP over a properly tuned 1.6. 2HP is simply not worth making the cost and effort of standalone ECUs legal.

--------------------
Visit the Midland City Arts Festival!

Kyle Freiheit
Member

Region: NWR
Car #: #78 sorry Terrell
Year : 1992
Posts: 270
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Kyle Freiheit     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Fendi,
David is instructing today, here is where that data point came from.

http://www.megasquirtpnp.com/models/mm9093/dyno_result...ey-ita16-dyno-comparo.htm

Kyle

Jamie Tucker Series Champ

ARRC 2010 Champ

Region: CFR
Car #: 97
Year : 1990/99
Posts: 788
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Jamie Tucker     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Its possible that a megasquirt would make 2hp over a properly tuned 1.6 but I doubt it. Either way I can guarantee you that a 10 hp increase is none sense; it just wont happen. Also those parameters on that graph are suspect to say the least.

--------------------
2010 ARRC Champion
2010 CFR Champion
2010 instigator of the year
2010/2011 Andrew Von C Wingman

Drago Verified Driver Made Donation to Website Series Champ
MegaModerator

Region: mid south
Car #: 2
Year : 1999
Posts: 4275
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Drago   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Jamie Tucker:
Its possible that a megasquirt would make 2hp over a properly tuned 1.6 but I doubt it. Either way I can guarantee you that a 10 hp increase is none sense; it just wont happen. Also those parameters on that graph are suspect to say the least.

Well, that chart was pulled off the site used to sell the product, I dont think I would put much faith in that chart.

--------------------
Jim Drago
East Street Auto Salvage
jdrago1@aol.com
2006-2007 Mid-West Division
07,09 June Sprints Champion

EAST STREET RACING

Kent Carter Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Future Never Has Been

Region: Houston
Car #: 91
Year : 1991
Posts: 2171
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Kent Carter   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

A small increase in HP usually doesn't matter as much as a small increase in torque. Torque always wins races unless you have long, wide-open straights where the top speed matters. The number that really matters is the 'area under the torque/rpm curve'. I doubt you'll ever see that number published for the 1.6 vs 1.8VICS motor.

The expansion of the torque curve below 5500 (if real) DOES matter. One of the things that makes the 99's so much easier to drive is the fat torque curve that allows you to drive out of mistakes.

The other reason a solution like the Megasquirt is superior to the 'tuned' AFM is that it adjusts for conditions, making it possible to get serious power when the conditions permit, but won't toast your motor as readily. It's the old Purolator slogan: pay me now or pay me later. The dicked-up AFM might be 'cheap' today, but it costs you more over the long haul. It's one of the genies we should stuff back in the bottle.

--------------------
Do I turn my 99 Hard S into a killerfast SM or seek a donor?

David de Regt Verified Driver
Member

Region: NWR
Car #: 47/479
Year : 1992
Posts: 418
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for David de Regt   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Looking at data from races this year, at least on our tracks up here, there's lots of mid-third-gear corners down below 5500, in the 5000 RPM range, and one corner that's a downshift-for-half-a-second-if-you-dare that's 4500ish rpms in 3rd gear if you hold it in 3rd. Torque down there is where you really notice the 1.8s just destroy you out of the low speed stuff.

--------------------
My Spec Miata Build Sheet - Hope people find it useful
 -

Niklas Falk
Member

Region: Sweden
Car #: 92
Year : 99
Posts: 32
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Niklas Falk   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Just enjoying the show (and learning at the same time) for across one of the ponds.

Just one note, adjusting the AFM and FP seems even cruder than when using carbs. A closed loop ECU will always enable a better tune. And as noted, peak values tells a very little (but are what engine builders, tuners, etc sells and we as racers bitch about [Smile] ).

Closed loop tuning with restrictors means just more torque down low (flat power curve as high as the restrictor allow).

Kent Carter Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Future Never Has Been

Region: Houston
Car #: 91
Year : 1991
Posts: 2171
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Kent Carter   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Niklas Falk:
Just enjoying the show (and learning at the same time) for across one of the ponds.

Just one note, adjusting the AFM and FP seems even cruder than when using carbs. A closed loop ECU will always enable a better tune. And as noted, peak values tells a very little (but are what engine builders, tuners, etc sells and we as racers bitch about [Smile] ).

Closed loop tuning with restrictors means just more torque down low (flat power curve as high as the restrictor allow).

You should see us race [Smile]

I agree that closed loop is preferable, but we don't get that with the OEM Miata ECU, we get a hybrid, which is why we tinker with fuel pressure and the AFM until the rules mature.

--------------------
Do I turn my 99 Hard S into a killerfast SM or seek a donor?

Dwayne Hoover Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Posts: 3138
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Dwayne Hoover     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by David de Regt:
Looking at data from races this year, at least on our tracks up here, there's lots of mid-third-gear corners down below 5500, in the 5000 RPM range, and one corner that's a downshift-for-half-a-second-if-you-dare that's 4500ish rpms in 3rd gear if you hold it in 3rd. Torque down there is where you really notice the 1.8s just destroy you out of the low speed stuff.

OK, fine, we'll consider consider the graphs down to 5000 rpm, and all my concerns and questions above still remain.

Are you going to address the other questions?

The site that was linked shows the graphs separately indicates the "stock" run had 15% more relative humidity, and says the ITA setup was flowing so much it needed "more fuel".

In short, I think it was misleading to post this graph as an indication of what gains could be had on an SM.

--------------------
Visit the Midland City Arts Festival!

Dwayne Hoover Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Posts: 3138
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Dwayne Hoover     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Kent Carter:
quote:
Originally posted by Niklas Falk:
Just enjoying the show (and learning at the same time) for across one of the ponds.

Just one note, adjusting the AFM and FP seems even cruder than when using carbs. A closed loop ECU will always enable a better tune. And as noted, peak values tells a very little (but are what engine builders, tuners, etc sells and we as racers bitch about [Smile] ).

Closed loop tuning with restrictors means just more torque down low (flat power curve as high as the restrictor allow).

You should see us race [Smile]

I agree that closed loop is preferable, but we don't get that with the OEM Miata ECU, we get a hybrid, which is why we tinker with fuel pressure and the AFM until the rules mature.

Be careful what you wish for ... closed loop control means YOU (or someone) has to tune the adaptive strategy ... slow adaption will leave you with less power at times and slow adaption to changing weather and changing loads .... fast adaption means you are one sensor or wiring failure from "Kerplooie!".

There's a reason teams in series using closed-loop fuel control have a full-time engine calibration man.

--------------------
Visit the Midland City Arts Festival!

Kent Carter Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Future Never Has Been

Region: Houston
Car #: 91
Year : 1991
Posts: 2171
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Kent Carter   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Robert Fender:
quote:
Originally posted by Kent Carter:
quote:
Originally posted by Niklas Falk:
Just enjoying the show (and learning at the same time) for across one of the ponds.

Just one note, adjusting the AFM and FP seems even cruder than when using carbs. A closed loop ECU will always enable a better tune. And as noted, peak values tells a very little (but are what engine builders, tuners, etc sells and we as racers bitch about [Smile] ).

Closed loop tuning with restrictors means just more torque down low (flat power curve as high as the restrictor allow).

You should see us race [Smile]

I agree that closed loop is preferable, but we don't get that with the OEM Miata ECU, we get a hybrid, which is why we tinker with fuel pressure and the AFM until the rules mature.

Be careful what you wish for ... closed loop control means YOU (or someone) has to tune the adaptive strategy ... slow adaption will leave you with less power at times and slow adaption to changing weather and changing loads .... fast adaption means you are one sensor or wiring failure from "Kerplooie!".

There's a reason teams in series using closed-loop fuel control have a full-time engine calibration man.

[Smile] Wishing for maturing of the rules doesn't mean I'm 'Waiting for Motec' but I do think it's inevitable under the current SCCA philosophy -- always marching forward on car prep. I'd be just as happy putting the adjustable AFM demongenie back in the bottle. We've tried that little experiment and it hasn't helped make the racing any better or cheaper. Just have SCCA Enterprises flow bench them and seal them. Just like ECU's. Problem solved.... at least one tiny one.

I do agree with your points about the dyno plots above. Highly suspect. The people I know who have used the MegaSquirt have liked it; I haven't tried it yet. Piggys are easier.

--------------------
Do I turn my 99 Hard S into a killerfast SM or seek a donor?

Rich Verified Driver
Oh, that's where that is.

Region: STL
Car #: 35
Year : #795 SRF
Posts: 1209
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Rich   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Yeah, 4500+ is the relevant RPM range for me at my tracks. 7000rpm in 2nd = 59mph = 4935 rpm in 3rd. Definitely don't want to be at 7k rpm in 2nd mid-corner so I'm down in the 4500 range in 3rd fairly frequently.

Sealed engines could work. Maybe.

Sealed, flowed AFM's? Not a chance unless you limit 1 per car and make sure the serial number on the seal matches the one you issued to that car. Otherwise it will just be more parts-binning, only the seal guy gets a bigger order from Enterprises every month. [Razz] Same problem Bubba Guitar is talking about with owning a couple dozen FPR's. Better to allow the modification and write the rules accordingly?

What about sidedraft carbs? That'll fix 'em.

--------------------
Rich Wiese

Spec Wrecker Ford

pat slattery Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Region: cincy
Car #: 79
Year : 92
Posts: 1495
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for pat slattery     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

I agree with Rich, we get to 4500 @ turn 4 at RA and at the Key hole @ Mid Ohio for sure going from my fading memory in our 1.6

Pat

--------------------
keeping the faith for the 1.6

Arrow Karts

Dwayne Hoover Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Posts: 3138
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Dwayne Hoover     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

OK, great, let's consider the completely invalid graph down to 4500 rpm ... now what?

--------------------
Visit the Midland City Arts Festival!

Jamie Tucker Series Champ

ARRC 2010 Champ

Region: CFR
Car #: 97
Year : 1990/99
Posts: 788
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Jamie Tucker     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Its a completely invalid graph at all RPM ranges. Its not even worth discussing a graph that uses the perimeters listed. On my dyno we have seen minimal gains using stand alone computers over what can be done legally to a 1.6 in SM. Of course a stand alone unit would hold a better tune but thats about it. I (and many others) can take an 1.6 ECU and in about 10 minutes make it have a flat A/F ratio at anywhere we would like. I have seen many hold a 13.0 from 3000 to 7000. The main gains are from the timing and once set it usually will stay pretty well. Even when you modify the 1.6 ECU the power and torque gains are very small (within 1/1) although it is reported that drivability is a little better.

--------------------
2010 ARRC Champion
2010 CFR Champion
2010 instigator of the year
2010/2011 Andrew Von C Wingman

Kent Carter Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Future Never Has Been

Region: Houston
Car #: 91
Year : 1991
Posts: 2171
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Kent Carter   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Jamie Tucker:
I (and many others) can take an 1.6 ECU and in about 10 minutes make it have a flat A/F ratio at anywhere we would like. I have seen many hold a 13.0 from 3000 to 7000.

Can you send me one of those AFM's? ART never could make me one that flat... legally.

--------------------
Do I turn my 99 Hard S into a killerfast SM or seek a donor?

Jamie Tucker Series Champ

ARRC 2010 Champ

Region: CFR
Car #: 97
Year : 1990/99
Posts: 788
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Jamie Tucker     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Its not an AFM; its an ECU. The difference is that messing with the AFM hurts drivability and does not hold the AF ratio as well. I am sure if you look around your region you will find plenty of both modifications. Of course neither are legal but thats what this thread was about in the first place. Drivers of every year car are using modifications to get an advantage (some legal, some not, others none tech able); it is not just the 99s. Its also not the reason that the vast majority of the people are not running up front in my opinion. You can give drivers that run mid pack 10 horsepower and they will still be mid pack!

--------------------
2010 ARRC Champion
2010 CFR Champion
2010 instigator of the year
2010/2011 Andrew Von C Wingman

George Munson Verified Driver
Member

Region: 83
Car #: 127
Year : 90
Posts: 284
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for George Munson     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

You can give drivers that run mid pack 10 horsepower and they will still be mid pack! [rolling on floor laughin] [rolling on floor laughin]

How True!

Muda Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
ComingToAMirrorNearYou

Region: WDC
Car #: #23
Year : 1991
Posts: 642
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Muda     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Jamie Tucker:
You can give drivers that run mid pack 10 horsepower and they will still be mid pack!

But, if you take that "extra" 10hp away from the top ten how many will still be there?

--------------------
Muda Motorsports
"We're all here 'cause we're not all there."

Chris Windsor Verified Driver Made Donation to Website Series Champ
windsorcustoms.com

Region: WDCR,
Car #: 38
Year : 1991
Posts: 841
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Chris Windsor   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Jamie Tucker:
Its also not the reason that the vast majority of the people are not running up front in my opinion. You can give drivers that run mid pack 10 horsepower and they will still be mid pack!

But what happens when you take the 10 hp from the top drivers? ...will they be mid pack? [Roll Eyes]

--------------------
2011 Season schedule coming soon
Support, sales, repair or rental
windsorcustoms.com

wheel Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Member

Region: kc
Car #: 20
Year : 92
Posts: 1801
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for wheel     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Everybody in SM is above average.

Jamie Tucker Series Champ

ARRC 2010 Champ

Region: CFR
Car #: 97
Year : 1990/99
Posts: 788
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Jamie Tucker     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Chris Windsor:
quote:
Originally posted by Jamie Tucker:
Its also not the reason that the vast majority of the people are not running up front in my opinion. You can give drivers that run mid pack 10 horsepower and they will still be mid pack!

But what happens when you take the 10 hp from the top drivers? ...will they be mid pack? [Roll Eyes]
IMHO I feel if you took the top ten drivers in our region and put them in a car with 10 hp less that they would still be in the front. Would they win against the other really good drivers with 10 hp? No but they would not be mid pack either. I have seen many good drivers run laps in the 2:40s at Sebring with crate or junk yard engines (1.6) while we see many others in the 44s (mid pack) with pro engines. I have never seen a mid pack driver get a pro engine and than start running up front! That also goes for people switching from a 1.6 to a 99 as well.

--------------------
2010 ARRC Champion
2010 CFR Champion
2010 instigator of the year
2010/2011 Andrew Von C Wingman

cintibob
Member

Region: cfr
Car #: 13
Year : 1990
Posts: 105
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for cintibob     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Mr Brown did a series of articles on a megasquirt install and tunning results in the CFR checker mag. It was on his itb VW jetta an OB11 car an how much megasquirt helped him. Several others also installed it because he is always at the top of the class. The 1.6 miata afm is the big restriction at top end but this fix is expensive. Mr Browns problem was the cars computer only let him go so far and no amount of pro help on the computer overcame the fuel curve from the factory.

jbenoit28 Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Member

Region: CFR
Car #: 28
SMIM: .
Posts: 249
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for jbenoit28     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

If I had an extra 10HP I could be at the pointy end of the midpack! [Smile]

My goals are low, what can I say.

Joe

--------------------
What does this button do??

Muda Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
ComingToAMirrorNearYou

Region: WDC
Car #: #23
Year : 1991
Posts: 642
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Muda     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by wheel:
Everybody in SM is above average.

...and all the drivers are good-looking.

Only in Minnesota. [Wink]

--------------------
Muda Motorsports
"We're all here 'cause we're not all there."

tony senese Verified Driver
Phew, that was close!

Car #: 99
Year : 1994
Posts: 836
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for tony senese   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Muda:
quote:
Originally posted by wheel:
Everybody in SM is above average.

...and all the drivers are good-looking.

Only in Minnesota. [Wink]

[thumbsup] [thumbsup]

--------------------
Tony Senese
SM#99
2008 NASA-NE SM Champion
NASA-NE SM Director
2008 PRO-IT SM 3rd place
http://www.nosenseyet.com/coppermine

Weekend Warrior Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Racing to Cure ALS (Lou Gehrig's Disease)

Region: WDCR
Car #: 56 "Earl"
Year : 1990, 1999 soon to be SM
Posts: 2947
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Weekend Warrior   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Robert Fender:
OK, great, let's consider the completely invalid graph down to 4500 rpm ... now what?

MBPPS

I can't believe someone didn't catch this one earlier.... [Big Grin]

--------------------
http://www.olsinvestfinancial.com
http://www.alsinfo.org
http://www.weekendwarriorracing.com

Kent Carter Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Future Never Has Been

Region: Houston
Car #: 91
Year : 1991
Posts: 2171
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Kent Carter   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by George Munson:
You can give drivers that run mid pack 10 horsepower and they will still be mid pack! [rolling on floor laughin] [rolling on floor laughin]

How True!

All I know is that days when I hit the A/F ratio just right, it's ALLL about the awesome driver. The motor was just along for the ride.

When I miss the tune for that combination of humidity/baro/temp... it's all about the motor. I was just along for the ride.

[rolling on floor laughin]

--------------------
Do I turn my 99 Hard S into a killerfast SM or seek a donor?

Dwayne Hoover Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Posts: 3138
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Dwayne Hoover     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Kent Carter:
A small increase in HP usually doesn't matter as much as a small increase in torque. Torque always wins races unless you have long, wide-open straights where the top speed matters. The number that really matters is the 'area under the torque/rpm curve'. I doubt you'll ever see that number published for the 1.6 vs 1.8VICS motor.

Uhh .... I have my 122/105 1.6 data and my 126/116 99 data, same dyno, same procedure, same fuel, same temps and humidity, and I have "published" it and my Traqmate data several times to my friendly SMAC member.

It may not be public, but nor are the parity and rulemaking decisions made in a dataless vacuum. You can ask about any dyno operator in the country (or one in particular that has been at several Runoffs and NASA Champs) what numbers you need to be making.

I have also plotted the RPM histogram many times from the Traqmate, and it will tell you exactly how many seconds out of 2:45 at Road America (or out of 1:43 at Mid Ohio) that you are spending at 4500, 5500, 6900, etc.

--------------------
Visit the Midland City Arts Festival!

davew Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Region: chicago
Car #: 72 and ?
Year : 90 and 90
Posts: 1051
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for davew   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Just a thought off the top of my head. Not that much thought, just a little food for thought.

We allow open ECU's. Or fuel pressure or timing or whatever.

I think it is safe to assume this will help the 99 cars the most and the 1.6 cars the least. Mid year 1.8 get a little help.

This will force the rules makers to make a parity adjustment. The consensus seems to be adjustment via restrictor plate and/or weight.

So the 1.6 stays the same. And the 99+ gets a really small restrictor. Lets say 24mm. Would that make anybody happy? If any car becomes a competitive overdog, it will get slowed down. PERIOD

The SMAC and CRB have agreed that competition adjustments may be made through out the year. Give us a chance to do our job. We just may get it right.

Just my 2 cents
Dave

--------------------
Advanced Autosports, The Midwests leader in Spec Miata Service, Parts and Rentals
608-313-1230
Authorised Spec Miata service center
www.advanced-autosports.com

soupy
Member

Region: Mohud
Car #: 98
Year : 1999
Posts: 915
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for soupy     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

But that would force the '99 owners who don't have the time or money to upgrade to the FPR and ECM, dyno time and all that, to run the smaller RP. Talk about an underdog!

--------------------
Charlie Campbell
Race Engineering
carbotech brakes

Jamie Tucker Series Champ

ARRC 2010 Champ

Region: CFR
Car #: 97
Year : 1990/99
Posts: 788
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Jamie Tucker     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

You guys are doing great!! The cars are close now but we can still get the 1.6s a little closer. Thanks again!

--------------------
2010 ARRC Champion
2010 CFR Champion
2010 instigator of the year
2010/2011 Andrew Von C Wingman

Dwayne Hoover Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Veteran Member

Posts: 3138
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Dwayne Hoover     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by davew:
Just a thought off the top of my head. Not that much thought, just a little food for thought.

We allow open ECU's. Or fuel pressure or timing or whatever.

I think it is safe to assume this will help the 99 cars the most and the 1.6 cars the least. Mid year 1.8 get a little help.

This will force the rules makers to make a parity adjustment. The consensus seems to be adjustment via restrictor plate and/or weight.

So the 1.6 stays the same. And the 99+ gets a really small restrictor. Lets say 24mm. Would that make anybody happy? If any car becomes a competitive overdog, it will get slowed down. PERIOD

The SMAC and CRB have agreed that competition adjustments may be made through out the year. Give us a chance to do our job. We just may get it right.

Just my 2 cents
Dave

I disagree with your assumption, unless you think the top 99s at the Runoffs have no fuel or timing prep above and beyond a bone stock car.

I think those cars were much closer to "optimal" than your assumption implies, because I know my own car is close as well.

However, if we decide parity is more important than helping the middle 80% of all drivers in all cars, I would understand ... honestly, I would. (Just don't blame me for the continued bad press generated by $650 ECUs, timing Tech (or not), squished FPRs (or not)).

The bad press of parity is comparatively innocent (and, frankly, I think some of the more vocal complainers have publically demonstrated they are disengenuous in their approach to the debate - always willing to question, never willing to answer).

If I recall, the last time I supported "rules improvement for all" I got boned too. [Wink]

--------------------
Visit the Midland City Arts Festival!

Kent Carter Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
Future Never Has Been

Region: Houston
Car #: 91
Year : 1991
Posts: 2171
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for Kent Carter   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

Dave,

I would be more in favor of a sealed ECU (and more parts even) through SCCA Enterprises and a minimum fuel pressure spec that is more like the average (60ish PSIG) versus the exception (54ish PSIG). These values are for the 99 but we must do the same for all the cars.

I know the FSM states the range can be as low as 54PSIG or so, but people I know who have tested literally dozens say the normal pressure is 60ish, just like the 99 in my driveway. Let's spec that! Let's take away 'prep' that requires the average Joe to buy a special FPR or get lucky rather than the average one from Mazda. There is almost zero downside to this approach.

Perhaps the same rule for timing: more restrictive within the FSM specifications perhaps?

Food for thought: should we ban WideBand O2 sensors in OBDII cars?

--------------------
Do I turn my 99 Hard S into a killerfast SM or seek a donor?

TimBuck Verified Driver Made Donation to Website
I'll believe it when I believe it.

Region: CalClub
Car #: 44
Year : 1992
Posts: 1364
Status: Offline
Icon 1 posted  Profile for TimBuck   Author's Homepage     Edit/Delete Post  Report this post to a Moderator

quote:
Originally posted by Kent Carter:
through SCCA Enterprises

Or how about through Mazda??? I'm not sayin...

--------------------
Tim Buck

MAZDASPEED Motorsports Development
Mazda North American Operations
phone (800) 435-2508
fax (949) 222-2650

zoom-zoom!

 
Page 9 of 10 1  2  3  ...  6  7  8  9  10  next » 
 

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic | Subscribe To Topic
Hop To: