7 replies to this topic

[pat slattery]

Reading the fastrack, it appears that SCCA supposedly has the ability to test ECU's and determine if they are compliant. Why isn't this technology used at major races such as the runoffs, or is this incorrect.

I was lead to believe there wasn't anyway to test and also no advantage with the timing and FP rules so why test or is there really some advantage?

Pat

[Jim Drago]

Pat
It is very easy to test the ECU"s, just not very practical. As far as timing, you can check OBD2 port and/or the timing advance on balancer pulley. If it is different than known stock ECU, you would be non compliant. The air:fuel curve is harder to to "prove", but also very obvious if flatter than stock. This continues to be a topic of discussion in regards to tech.

To clear it up for the XXX time A perfectly tuned ecu will perform marginally better than than FP regulator and timing wheel as timing and fuel can be adjusted at every 100-200 rpm. With FP reg and Timing wheel it is fixed number ( not adjustable by RPM). With a computer you should be able to tune the area under the curve better. Opening up the FP and timing took away 90-95% of those gains from the remapped ECUS. A computer will never be more than about 1/1 better than a properly tuned car on peaks, but will likely always be better under the curve.

So just like everything else that provides a benefit that is illegal, you can do it, but it is against the rules. Perhaps protesting the top 5 guys at January Nationals will determine if SCCA can tech or not?

[William Keeling]

I bet that a nicely tuning ECU really helps as the RP limits air and causes the mix to go rich on top end. Just a guess!

[Alex Bolanos]

I bet that a nicely tuning ECU really helps as the RP limits air and causes the mix to go rich on top end. Just a guess!

Here's an analogy. Flashed ECUs are like communism, on paper they should be a huge benefit but in practice they're hardly effective. Yes, being able to tune each cell (as some black and silver 99 primate cars were doing during the entire week at the runoffs) provides a dyno sheet benefit of a flatter A/F curve and a fatter midrange. The reality though is it's only 1/1 and only in some places on the dyno sheet, hardly worth it and not really measurable in lap times. As Drago stated, that was the whole point of introducing the fp/timing rule.

[William Keeling]

Sorry, Alex I was lead to believe that SG had his done by DDG and "ALL" the rest where done by JMc -- sorry my bad

[Jim Boemler]

The reality though is it's only 1/1 and only in some places on the dyno sheet, hardly worth it and not really measurable in lap times.

Racers do a LOT of things whose results are totally immeasurable, under the theory that it all mounts up. Whether it does or not is also immeasurable.

[FTodaro]

While a re flash may only give minor improvement on the A/F curve the benefit of raising the rev limiter is a bigger advantage in my book. I would love to get 200 or 300 more RPM out of my third gear at MO. So the re flashers do get that advantage. Something I would think is easy to check if they wanted too.

[Dynotronics1]

Pat
It is very easy to test the ECU"s, just not very practical. As far as timing, you can check OBD2 port and/or the timing advance on balancer pulley. If it is different than known stock ECU, you would be non compliant. The air:fuel curve is harder to to "prove", but also very obvious if flatter than stock. This continues to be a topic of discussion in regards to tech.

To clear it up for the XXX time A perfectly tuned ecu will perform marginally better than than FP regulator and timing wheel as timing and fuel can be adjusted at every 100-200 rpm. With FP reg and Timing wheel it is fixed number ( not adjustable by RPM). With a computer you should be able to tune the area under the curve better. Opening up the FP and timing took away 90-95% of those gains from the remapped ECUS. A computer will never be more than about 1/1 better than a properly tuned car on peaks, but will likely always be better under the curve.

So just like everything else that provides a benefit that is illegal, you can do it, but it is against the rules. Perhaps protesting the top 5 guys at January Nationals will determine if SCCA can tech or not?

For the most part, Drago is correct in this statement, however let me clear up a few misconseptions;

First, can it be tested for? Sure if you happen to have the right equipment, know what your looking for, and really want to spend the time to do it. Yes you can check the timing at the crank for total timing lead. You could also go to the other extreme and go so far as to check the file itself. Since there is no known "standard" when it comes to lambda on these cars, there is no way for you to say this car is illegal because it has a "flat" afr curve. Slippery slope

Second, does it make a difference? Well yes it does. If its a big enough difference from the timing wheel/FPR that you should try it is entirely up to the racer in question. I will give you a hint though, we have done more ecus in 2011 for the 1999-2005 spec Miatas than we did in 2009-2010. And we have done a whole lot more custom"tune to the car" ecus this year also. Think about it for a second; would you want more tq coming out of sat T5 at RA? Thats the area under the curve Jim is refering to. And while the HP figures on the two different tuning methods are close, as he pointed out, its that area under the curve that make all the difference.

Third, yes it is illegal. I know it, you know it, everyone knows it. But that does not stop it, and it never will. Be it shocks, REMing, ceramic wheel bearings, trick fuel, or "pro" engine builds, somebody will find a way to get the better out of something on the car to get an edge. Its the nature of the beast. Do I feel bad about it? Sometimes, but I did my part to try to regulate it, and was told "no thank you, we have a fool proof way to catch it". That was a year and a half ago, and you see where it is now, same song, different verse. So we have adopted the "catch me if you can attitude". The more the officials try to figure it out, the more ways we have of hiding it.

Fourth, I find it funny as hell that some of the folks that gripe the loudest about this issue are among my customer list. I will never disclose that list, but I do find it funny. DDG and a few others have had the balls to step up and tell the truth about this subject, and try to get the CRB to do something with it. We even offered a "sealed" ecu deal to the board last year for a very sweet price(125 to the racer, 25 for which went to the crb for"compliance fee") that would have solved this whole issue for you guys once and for all. Instead you get the wheel and the regulator. And the "built" ecu,,,,,,, still

Thank you for letting me thake the time to get a few facts straight here


Joe McClughan
Dynotronics,Inc