Friday, December 15, 2006 - 02:18 pm, by: Tim Appleton(Timbo)
Does the MAP-ECU have an output dependant on throttle deflection? Or does it just rely on the MAP and rpm signals?
I'm wondering if it's possible to wire up the SMT6 as a similar unit, using MAP signal instead of throttle deflection. It seems like it may be possible, just not sure how far the SMT6 can alter the frequency signal if no actual frequency is present.
Friday, December 15, 2006 - 02:23 pm, by: Damien Smith(Damien)
The MAP-ECU doesn't use TPS at all, only MAP and RPM.
I also looked into doing that with the SMT6 but it can't take 1 form of input and output a different one. Eg. it can't take the voltage input from a MAP sensor and output a frequency for the AFM. It can only modify the input signal to then output to the ECU.
Friday, December 15, 2006 - 02:55 pm, by: Tim Appleton(Timbo)
I've thought about that. The deflection value for the fuel map could use a MAP signal instead of TPS signal. Now, you're modifying a frequency, I suppose it just depends if the SMT6 can increase from no frequency counts to a number that correlates to full throttle air flow. I understand what you're saying with the conversion from one type of signal to another, but if you're using the MAP signal as deflection and not the signal to be modified, and no input as the base signal, then i'm wondering if the SMT6 can output a frequency (if that makes any sense). You would be keeping the AFM connected but not in the inlet, simply to keep the ECU happy.
Thanks for the quick response.
EDIT: I haven't checked the specs for range of adjustment on the frequency output, so I may just be wasting time.
Friday, December 15, 2006 - 03:13 pm, by: Anish Varsani(Yomama)
The SMT6 will only modify what's coming in. If you want to do what you're suggesting, you'd have to feed a constant frequency signal into the SMT6.
Since you can modify your input +-100%, all you need to do is set the constant frequency generator at half of the maximum frequency output of the MAF sensor then modify the fuel map to get your tune. The tuning resolution isn't that great because the SMT6 only offers 8 deflection sites.
Friday, December 15, 2006 - 03:14 pm, by: Damien Smith(Damien)
If there was no air flowing through the AFM it wouldn't produce a signal at all but I think I know what you're getting at - do you mean you'd have a flat input frequency then use MAP to modify it? You'd need some kind of constant frequency generator as in input to mimic the airflow with the throttle off then you could probably use MAP for deflection to increase the frequency for the required output value.... it might work
Friday, December 15, 2006 - 03:40 pm, by: Tim Appleton(Timbo)
Yeah, that's close to what I was getting at. I'm no electronics guru, but I assumed that since it can add frequency to an existing frequency then it might be possible to add frequency to no signal, but a signal generator sounds much more feasible.
Interesting that you guys think it might work. Thanks heaps for your input.
And yes, resolution is a bit of a let-down. If only Emanage worked for us.
Friday, December 15, 2006 - 07:36 pm, by: Anish Varsani(Yomama)
If I had my time again with piggybacks, I wouldn't wast time with an interceptor. I'd just get a cheap standalone and wire the features I need.
A Haltech unit is only about $100 cheaper than an adaptronic so in that respect, it's not even worth looking at a haltech if you intend to install the unit your self. The haltecs are a lot more usefull than an SMT6 as they have more inputs and a boost map which can be used as an acceleration map for N/A cars.
Neil Griffiths Trader NSW 212Kw @ 8psi MANUAL Super Charged UZZ31
Friday, December 15, 2006 - 08:45 pm, by: Neil Griffiths(Aussiesc)
Brett,, Terry run for ages without it..He also only had a * stocking * over the throttle body..heheheh He had some fun like that,,BUT, he also occasionally went all strage and blinging him.
I personally would NOT disconnect it and try to drive around like that..
So as Damo's stated..use the MAP ECU and have a play
Friday, December 15, 2006 - 09:08 pm, by: Perry Morgan(Uzz32)
Took it off for the hell of it today to have a look see. Made no difference whatsoever to mine. Only thing I noticed was the the revs rose ever so slightly when I reconnected it.
Neil Griffiths Trader NSW 212Kw @ 8psi MANUAL Super Charged UZZ31
Sunday, December 17, 2006 - 08:00 pm, by: Luke Middleton(Spook)
I tried it last night. Definitely felt quicker of the mark and wanted to fire up the rears which it normally won't do. Seemed to kick down quicker also.
Neil Griffiths Trader NSW 212Kw @ 8psi MANUAL Super Charged UZZ31
Monday, December 18, 2006 - 11:20 am, by: Dan McColl(Hoon)
I tried it before, Felt a little faster off the line, but lost a bit up the top. It turned the TRC off (maybe that's why everyone (except me) is spinning their wheels?? and brought up 'engine electrical' error on the dash.
The gear changes were weird. It cut the spark completely, sounded like a manual changing gears.
Monday, December 18, 2006 - 09:08 pm, by: Phil Gibson(Sciflyer)
Ok i tried it out... car went like a cut snake!
Unfortunatly she also pinged her head off a bit, which kinda cut short teh test.... im guessing in limp-home mode it disregards the knock sensors...hmm i wonder if some racing fuel would cure that, would be nice to see what she does down the strip, then tell everyone that it was only in Limp-Home mode! hahaha
Friday, December 22, 2006 - 11:57 pm, by: Andrew Ferres(Peewee)
I decided to try it out today on my V8 Cressida (UZZ30 loom/ecu).
I could barely notice a difference. It seemed to be a little less silky smooth, and perhaps a little less top end, but that was it.
Definitely didn't unleash the beast within.
EDIT: I haven't had an ECU reset in probably well over a year, so perhaps this is why I didn't see a difference. Maybe the ECU remembers how much air the motor receives based on TPS and RPM, and then uses this to calculate what it should be getting in the event of an AFM failure. Just a random theory.
Phil Gibson Goo Roo WA '91 UZZ30, '91 manual UZZ31 track bunky, '94 blk/blk UZZ31
Friday, December 03, 2010 - 12:19 pm, by: Phil Gibson(Sciflyer)
Bringing this back from the dead....
Did another track night last night and as this will be the last time out before fitting the Adaptronic, for a bit of an experiment i disconnected the AFM for a run
Result was i dropped about a second off my lap time... car runs the way they shouldve for the factory... throttle response and low-mid range power is massively improved... doesnt ping, runs to the redline exactly the same as with it connected, the only difference as we already know is it uses a •••••••• more fuel
Now... engine is stock save for Rush headers and a catless exhaust. ECU had caps replaced about a year ago
SO
Either the factory ECU tune is even •••••••• than i thought possible (at least on the early cars, from a performance standpoint)
OR
There are a significant number of V8 Soarers going around with stuffed AFM's. Might get the multimeter on it to see if its within spec.
The supposed fixed timing is strange as you would expect hi-rpm performance to suffer but it doesnt.
I ran the car for the rest of the night with the AFM disconnected, no ill effects. That is foot to the floor, redline gear changes for dozens of laps. The car will easily bake the 275 KU36 tyres in second gear. As this is not a daily and i give no fark for fuel consumption im going to completely remove the AFM (it will be gone when the Adaptronic is fitted anyway)
If it wasnt for the horrible fuel consumption and the *possible* potential damaging cats or a cat fire i would love to run my daily like this, throttle response and off the line power is just massively improved
If the AFM is not at fault it underlines the truly crap factory tune for these engines... all about economy and zero performance (but we should expect that anyway)
Only Toyota could make an ECU that performs worse in normal operation than it does in "limp mode"...
Previous
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page
