[ms2extra] Xu10j4rs Sequential Injection Setup

[[L'e$kro] 2]

Hi there

I have a v3.0 board with a MS2 ECU

 

Firmware is the Ms2 Extra release "alpha 3.0.3r" which allows to run full sequential ignition and injection, as does the original 1AP management from Magnetti Marelli as standard

 

I have 4 inj and ign outputs with the help of Jean Belanger's 4-Channel Ignition/Injection Driver Board

 

The Cam sensor on the Xu10j4RS engine seems to be a Hall effect sensor, so I installed a circuit for it as described here

 

Cam sensor signal goes to pin 3 on the DB37, and is also fed by the 5v TPS feed and a ground (as we can see in Autodata documentation)

 

Now that the hardware part seems to be OK, I'm stuck with the software config in Tuner Studio

 

What should I enter in the "Ignition" and "Trigger wheel" menus?

 

If I enter "toothed wheel", 60-2 and 114deg BTDC like I was using before, I have the signal in the car but it doesn't use the cam signal as I can't switch to COP ignition without having a config error (65535RPM or something)

 

If I select "Dual wheel" I don't have any RPM signal at all...

 

Is there any way to check if my cam sensor is working with my setup from Tuner Studio?

 

What would you fill in "Ignition" and "trigger wheel" menus? and what setup on the JimStim when I'm not in the car?

 

Don't hesitate if you have any questions or suggestions!

 

Nicolas

[wracing 19]

I think don't quote me, but if you use both a crank and a cam trigger then you need to have no missing teeth on the crank wheel. It may be why your not getting rpm calculation as the ms code is not able to "sync".

 

So to make this work i would guess you need to weld the 2 teeth back in .

 

I will say i have yet to use the new code.

 

thanks

 

james

[[L'e$kro] 2]

I think don't quote me, but if you use both a crank and a cam trigger then you need to have no missing teeth on the crank wheel. It may be why your not getting rpm calculation as the ms code is not able to "sync".

 

So to make this work i would guess you need to weld the 2 teeth back in .

 

I will say i have yet to use the new code.

 

thanks

 

james

 

Thank you for your answer James

I'd like to avoid having to " weld the 2 teeth back in"

I'll dig more tonight and will keep you updated...

 

Don't hesitate if you have anything to right

 

Nicolas

[wracing 19]

To test my theory just set the wheel setting to 62 teeth and set the cam phase and you shouldn't get a config error!

 

Thanks

 

James

[[L'e$kro] 2]

To test my theory just set the wheel setting to 62 teeth and set the cam phase and you shouldn't get a config error!

 

Thanks

 

James

 

Thanks James

I'm only getting the config error when selecting Coil On Plug ignition with a single wheel config

When I select "Dual Wheel" in the "Trigger Wheel" page I just don't get any RPM signal

I tried with 58 teeth and 62 teeth but didn't get any success (on the stim only, it's getting cold and dark outside:) )

 

I posted the MSQ:Xu10j4rs_sequential_test.msq.xml

(sorry my Mac added the xml extension to it, just rename it...)

 

I'll now email Jean Belanger to get infos about trigger wheel modes on the stim, to see if it can actually emulate my setup

 

Nicolas

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

This is precisely why MS gets such a bad rep.

 

In addition: it is commonly accepted that sequential injection and fuelling - as odd as it may seem - makes little to no difference in performance, so is hardly worth the effort.

Edited March 11, 2010 by DrSarty

[wracing 19]

Agreed sequential injection is rather over the top for our engines, the only real advantage i can see is a more stable fuel rail.

 

Surely it is exactly the same with any ecu? any ecu needs these parameters, its just the norm that you can pay some one to deal with these issues with another ecu

 

Thanks

 

James

Edited March 11, 2010 by wracing

[hcmini1989 16]

yeah it would be alot easier to pay some one to do it for you.

 

sorry mate i cant help this is out of my depth .but keep at it you`ll get there in the end mate.an im sure some one on the ms forums will be able to help out more than anyone on here so have you psted on them all

 

msefi.com

msextra.com

 

the ones i use when i get stuck with anything a ver helpful bunch of chaps

Edited March 11, 2010 by hcmini1989

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

Yes. My comments were aimed at the principle rather than the ECU.

 

I have nothing against the concept of MS. Just in practical applications, it is much better, and far more predictable and reliable to use a system that real engine tuners understand and can manipulate. MS has the tools, but not many people have the experience or patience to extract it.

[wracing 19]

I think thats a fair summation, rather than the usual "its sh*t" canvas.

 

Thanks

 

James

Edited March 11, 2010 by wracing

[[L'e$kro] 2]

In addition: it is commonly accepted that sequential injection and fuelling - as odd as it may seem - makes little to no difference in performance, so is hardly worth the effort.

 

I'm not particularly aiming at performance here, the sequential setup could mainly improve fuel consumption over a setup firing in batch.

The car is my daily driver, and I feel like I should have my bronze plate on the front of my local gaz station.

But there is more:

The gti-6 engine runs full sequential injection and ignition as standard and its quite well made, although it lacks the ability to be (easily) tuned

Fitting a coilpack from a 8v turbo is an option, but I don't really consider the addition of high voltage leads as an upgrade over Coil On Plugs.

Also I'd like to keep the ability to use the std management for troubleshooting purposes or just for going home in case of an issue with the MS, so I'd like to run my modified gti-6 loom, hem, unmodified.

I use a patch loom which allows me to use the megasquirt on a standard Bosch 55pin connector

To run the standard coil on plugs you need 4 ignition drivers, so I added the 4-channel board, but then why not using the latest features available and fire the injectors individually?

If nobody would dare try new stuff on their cars we would all be using DCOEs, and if you follow the process behind this we would'nt have DCOEs, we would ride tuned donkeys

 

Nicolas

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

I'm all for trying something new chief, but this isn't new.

 

I agree it's easier to use the existing set-up (coil on plug), but I'm saying I don't see there's any advantage, other than ease of installation. For the 0.3mpg it delivers when you're caning it everywhere, what is the real point?

 

If it's there, use it; but don't expect anything which changes your life.

[[L'e$kro] 2]

im sure some one on the ms forums will be able to help out more than anyone on here so have you psted on them all

 

msefi.com

msextra.com

 

the ones i use when i get stuck with anything a ver helpful bunch of chaps

I followed your advice and have found something interesting here

This is a bugfix release on the STABLE code stream. No new features were added.

 

http://www.msextra.com/doc/ms2extra/files/...se_20100123.zip

 

Fixes in this release over 2.1.0c

-fix wheel decoder initialisation. A certain tooth #1 angle used with 60-2 + cam + 4 cyl COP could cause miscalculated timing.

 

and

what tooth 1 angle? I can test for you... surely it has to be the *correct* tooth angle! I was getting problems at 114 degrees, also 117 infact it *NEVER* synced at all on 60-2 + cam + 4 COP

RB

 

I continue digging there and will keep you updated..

 

Nicolas

[paulpug 0]

Hi Nick

 

i am running the same setup as you ,but i have a problem ,

the wiring for the cam sensor i am not sure of ,there are three pins

1.pin # ?????(+ or -)

2.pin# the cam signal back to the ecu

3.pin # ?????(+ or -)

 

please tell me if you got your car running

 

Paul

[[L'e$kro] 2]

I replied you Paul, on this forum as well I dont receive notifications...

 

I resolved my issue a while ago selecting "dual wheel with missing tooth", as advised by Jean Belanger

 

Don't hesitate to contact me if you have a similar setup

 

Nicolas

[RossD 44]

I was talking to Dave Walker about sequential injection when I was up at Emerald last year and he was telling me his thoughts. He said he used to be of the view that it was a waste of time and all it offered was a slight fuel saving. This was, he said, until he tried it. He had a car come in that was mapped first in batch mode and then sequential. Not that much of a difference as he first suspected but then he started playing with the injection timing and picked up another 10bhp on top of the power from when it was mapped in batch mode. I think the gist of it is sequential injection allows much finer fuel control and control of when the fuel is injected over the rather crude batch mode.

 

I think he also wrote about it in his article in PPC. He is now of the opinion it's a good thing - Food for thought really.

Edited May 26, 2010 by RossD

[[L'e$kro] 2]

Thanks for this Ross

My car is running everyday with the sequential setup and its really a pleasure to drive, even smoother than on the standard ECU

 

It idles perfectly at less than 800rpm, although I'm using no ICV, 480cc injectors and 100% of e85 ethanol

This combination of big injectors, e85 fuel and the lack of ICV would probably make troubles at idle on similar batch setups..

 

Another thing: At first startup I had the injectors wired in the wrong order and it wouldn't idle at all, and after wiring them the correct way, it idled correctly (without tuning in between)

This little experience taught me that the injector firing order DOES matter as it made a huge difference wether the injector were firing in a close valve or not...

 

I'm now firing them 10deg before opening valve time all the rev range, didn't touch the timing yet but might tweak this later on once I'm completely done with leaning out my VE table in the low part

The car made 173bhp using the Dynolicious app last week end where it made 167ish on the standard ECU

 

Nicolas