How the Zchip works
Jan 6, 2009, 09:05 PM
#16
"The ZChip has multiple maps to custom tailor and process the MAP sensor's signal to tune the car into a custom load cell of fueling and ignition timing".
I think I agree with you but don't understand it completely. My understanding of these MAP signal modifiers are that they show a lower value reading when the stock ECU picks up the signal and forces the ECU to adjust the stock tables because it is reading a lower or out of sync signal. The description noted above seams to indicate that something else is going on or that additional tables or information is being sent to the stock ECU besides just the MAP sensor's signal. Can't get my head around it yet. But thanks for the explanation.
Jan 7, 2009, 05:44 AM
#17
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: michigan
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK. So what does this mean?:
"The ZChip has multiple maps to custom tailor and process the MAP sensor's signal to tune the car into a custom load cell of fueling and ignition timing".
I think I agree with you but don't understand it completely. My understanding of these MAP signal modifiers are that they show a lower value reading when the stock ECU picks up the signal and forces the ECU to adjust the stock tables because it is reading a lower or out of sync signal. The description noted above seams to indicate that something else is going on or that additional tables or information is being sent to the stock ECU besides just the MAP sensor's signal. Can't get my head around it yet. But thanks for the explanation.
"The ZChip has multiple maps to custom tailor and process the MAP sensor's signal to tune the car into a custom load cell of fueling and ignition timing".
I think I agree with you but don't understand it completely. My understanding of these MAP signal modifiers are that they show a lower value reading when the stock ECU picks up the signal and forces the ECU to adjust the stock tables because it is reading a lower or out of sync signal. The description noted above seams to indicate that something else is going on or that additional tables or information is being sent to the stock ECU besides just the MAP sensor's signal. Can't get my head around it yet. But thanks for the explanation.
Your understanding is correct. TTP can custom tailor their offset maps for the ZChip, so in a sense, it's also customizing what the ECU is doing. I really think what TTP was saying is more of marketing hype to make it sound like the zchip is doing more than it really is.
Jan 7, 2009, 08:20 AM
#18
1. TTP could simply say they don't want to release the information about how the product works as it is proprietary. I wouldn't blame them, it's their work, their product, and why should any of their competitors gain insight into the design of said product. That being said, there are many people (like me) who don't want to put things on their car that manipulate tuning without at least somewhat understanding how it works. It's their choice and we should respect that choice either way - but they need to declare it.
2. TTP could launch an in-depth discussion explaining all the components that go in to making the z-chip a great tuning option. It would clear up all the speculation and general confusion about their technology and probably stop a lot of the back and forth arguing about tuning methods.
Like I said, either decision should be respected, but I know I as a consumer would like a definitive standpoint from which to view the product in the future. Of course, controversy brings attention to the product and keeps it in the limelight, so maybe this is just a genius marketing angle and we're all suckers while that puppy is selling like hotcakes!
Jan 7, 2009, 08:35 AM
#19
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: michigan
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The biggest problem I see is that there is much speculation as to how the product works, and the creator/vendor only posts to tell everyone what's wrong with their speculation. I see two solutions to this:
1. TTP could simply say they don't want to release the information about how the product works as it is proprietary. I wouldn't blame them, it's their work, their product, and why should any of their competitors gain insight into the design of said product. That being said, there are many people (like me) who don't want to put things on their car that manipulate tuning without at least somewhat understanding how it works. It's their choice and we should respect that choice either way - but they need to declare it.
2. TTP could launch an in-depth discussion explaining all the components that go in to making the z-chip a great tuning option. It would clear up all the speculation and general confusion about their technology and probably stop a lot of the back and forth arguing about tuning methods.
Like I said, either decision should be respected, but I know I as a consumer would like a definitive standpoint from which to view the product in the future. Of course, controversy brings attention to the product and keeps it in the limelight, so maybe this is just a genius marketing angle and we're all suckers while that puppy is selling like hotcakes!
1. TTP could simply say they don't want to release the information about how the product works as it is proprietary. I wouldn't blame them, it's their work, their product, and why should any of their competitors gain insight into the design of said product. That being said, there are many people (like me) who don't want to put things on their car that manipulate tuning without at least somewhat understanding how it works. It's their choice and we should respect that choice either way - but they need to declare it.
2. TTP could launch an in-depth discussion explaining all the components that go in to making the z-chip a great tuning option. It would clear up all the speculation and general confusion about their technology and probably stop a lot of the back and forth arguing about tuning methods.
Like I said, either decision should be respected, but I know I as a consumer would like a definitive standpoint from which to view the product in the future. Of course, controversy brings attention to the product and keeps it in the limelight, so maybe this is just a genius marketing angle and we're all suckers while that puppy is selling like hotcakes!
Any electrical engineer can figure out what it does, so I don't see any point at trying to "hide" the technology. On top of that, anyone that's not into electronics won't build some home-brewed type, so I don't see why TTP beats around the bush. Then again, I guess from a business stand point, it's important to make your product look/sound as impressive as possible.
Jan 7, 2009, 08:47 AM
#21
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Smallville, KS
Posts: 1,070
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The biggest problem I see is that there is much speculation as to how the product works, and the creator/vendor only posts to tell everyone what's wrong with their speculation. I see two solutions to this:
1. TTP could simply say they don't want to release the information about how the product works as it is proprietary. I wouldn't blame them, it's their work, their product, and why should any of their competitors gain insight into the design of said product. That being said, there are many people (like me) who don't want to put things on their car that manipulate tuning without at least somewhat understanding how it works. It's their choice and we should respect that choice either way - but they need to declare it.
2. TTP could launch an in-depth discussion explaining all the components that go in to making the z-chip a great tuning option. It would clear up all the speculation and general confusion about their technology and probably stop a lot of the back and forth arguing about tuning methods.
Like I said, either decision should be respected, but I know I as a consumer would like a definitive standpoint from which to view the product in the future. Of course, controversy brings attention to the product and keeps it in the limelight, so maybe this is just a genius marketing angle and we're all suckers while that puppy is selling like hotcakes!
1. TTP could simply say they don't want to release the information about how the product works as it is proprietary. I wouldn't blame them, it's their work, their product, and why should any of their competitors gain insight into the design of said product. That being said, there are many people (like me) who don't want to put things on their car that manipulate tuning without at least somewhat understanding how it works. It's their choice and we should respect that choice either way - but they need to declare it.
2. TTP could launch an in-depth discussion explaining all the components that go in to making the z-chip a great tuning option. It would clear up all the speculation and general confusion about their technology and probably stop a lot of the back and forth arguing about tuning methods.
Like I said, either decision should be respected, but I know I as a consumer would like a definitive standpoint from which to view the product in the future. Of course, controversy brings attention to the product and keeps it in the limelight, so maybe this is just a genius marketing angle and we're all suckers while that puppy is selling like hotcakes!
Jan 7, 2009, 08:51 AM
#22
I think there is little speculation as to what it does considering it sits between the MAP sensor and the ecu, and intercepts the signal from the cam/crank(?). That means it can only do one thing - and that's to modify the signal the ecu receives from the MAP. What the ecu does from that point is pure magic (heh). I'm not saying the zchip is bad, or isn't a clever and effective product.
We urge you to cease spreading misinformation as it does nothing to build value in the wealth of information evolutionm.net provides the community.
Jan 7, 2009, 09:33 AM
#23
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: michigan
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is 90% speculation as you have demonstrated continuously to not have a clue what you are talking about as there is no signal from the crank or cam.
We urge you to cease spreading misinformation as it does nothing to build value in the wealth of information evolutionm.net provides the community.
We urge you to cease spreading misinformation as it does nothing to build value in the wealth of information evolutionm.net provides the community.
Ok, my mistake... It DOESN'T connect to the crank or cam angle sensor, instead it attaches to a tach wire which most likely generates it's signal based off a measurement of the crank/cam angle sensor. The end result is still the same.
So, then correct me if I'm wrong:
Based on the the RPM the zchip detects from the tach wire, it references some sort of value from a table that it uses to offset the signal from the MAP. That's the only thing it can possibly do.
Jan 7, 2009, 10:11 AM
#24
From the reading I did on the z-chip forumn on the installation instructions and looking at the program I downloaded from the forumn it appears to me it is a high resolution AFC. If you look at the program it has a **** load of points to adjust vs an AFC with 16 points. The installation is interceptor on the MAP sensor and RPM. So it alters the MAP readings like an AFC. I am sure TTP will say I am wrong and spreading false info, but he is yet to answer anybodies question as why it is better than any other tuning method or how it works. Used as an interceptor like the AFC is used you cannot directly control timing you make the ecu think it is running in a lower load so it raises timing indirectly.
So over another product, this costs half as much and makes power, enough said I guess.
Jan 7, 2009, 10:17 AM
#25
Ouch!
Ok, my mistake... It DOESN'T connect to the crank or cam angle sensor, instead it attaches to a tach wire which most likely generates it's signal based off a measurement of the crank/cam angle sensor. The end result is still the same.
So, then correct me if I'm wrong:
Based on the the RPM the zchip detects from the tach wire, it references some sort of value from a table that it uses to offset the signal from the MAP. That's the only thing it can possibly do.
Ok, my mistake... It DOESN'T connect to the crank or cam angle sensor, instead it attaches to a tach wire which most likely generates it's signal based off a measurement of the crank/cam angle sensor. The end result is still the same.
So, then correct me if I'm wrong:
Based on the the RPM the zchip detects from the tach wire, it references some sort of value from a table that it uses to offset the signal from the MAP. That's the only thing it can possibly do.
I just want to add that I appreciate everyones professional responses and the joint agreement to not have this thread closed or deleted by flaming any vendor. This topic is good discussion and informative, and its intent is to better understand a particular product in some detail.
No misinformation is being intentionally spread by anyone. We are trying to figure out how this product functions. If any vendor or manufacturer would like to contribute useful and factual data on how this product works, that would be greatly appreciated. Just stating that we are wrong is not very useful. Split Second was of great help to me when deciding to purchase various engine management products. Dinan was also extremely patient and helpful to the entire twin turbo product in answering various questions publicly and in special club presentations regarding the ECU tuning tool.
Jan 7, 2009, 04:49 PM
#26
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great questions and assumtions. I think I agree with you in concept but you have a better understanding than me. I also think you are correct without any additional information proving you incorrect.
I just want to add that I appreciate everyones professional responses and the joint agreement to not have this thread closed or deleted by flaming any vendor. This topic is good discussion and informative, and its intent is to better understand a particular product in some detail.
No misinformation is being intentionally spread by anyone. We are trying to figure out how this product functions. If any vendor or manufacturer would like to contribute useful and factual data on how this product works, that would be greatly appreciated. Just stating that we are wrong is not very useful. Split Second was of great help to me when deciding to purchase various engine management products. Dinan was also extremely patient and helpful to the entire twin turbo product in answering various questions publicly and in special club presentations regarding the ECU tuning tool.
I just want to add that I appreciate everyones professional responses and the joint agreement to not have this thread closed or deleted by flaming any vendor. This topic is good discussion and informative, and its intent is to better understand a particular product in some detail.
No misinformation is being intentionally spread by anyone. We are trying to figure out how this product functions. If any vendor or manufacturer would like to contribute useful and factual data on how this product works, that would be greatly appreciated. Just stating that we are wrong is not very useful. Split Second was of great help to me when deciding to purchase various engine management products. Dinan was also extremely patient and helpful to the entire twin turbo product in answering various questions publicly and in special club presentations regarding the ECU tuning tool.
I believe TTP has various screenshots of their tuning tool on the posted website..
That is how the signal is manipulated ..
The good thing about the airflow sensor is its dynamic .. it doesn't need to reference a table to find certain values and then converting it to fuel and ignition ..
MAP on the other hand requires the said tables to do conversions .. and that's what zchip manipulates .. the tables on the MAP ..
Does it cause conflict ?? strangely no but then I've gone thru the MAP tables as I was curious also how they did it .. and it's just that .. a reference table that points to the actual AFR and timing maps .. I have yet to fully understand the connections but slowly I guess
It IS a piggyback in semantic terms .. it requires the original ECU to work .. and it manipulates the signals from the original ECU to achieve the results ..
I believe the ends justify the means ..
Jan 7, 2009, 04:51 PM
#27
Evolving Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ya I believe you are correct the MAP will produce a voltage (1-5V or whatever the range is) based on the amount of boost, then using a table (map voltage and the rpm) the zchip will send out the altered voltage to the ecu thus making the car seem like there is less boost then there actually is therefore making the afr lower.
Jan 7, 2009, 04:57 PM
#28
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ya I believe you are correct the MAP will produce a voltage (1-5V or whatever the range is) based on the amount of boost, then using a table (map voltage and the rpm) the zchip will send out the altered voltage to the ecu thus making the car seem like there is less boost then there actually is therefore making the afr lower.
Jan 7, 2009, 06:22 PM
#29
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: michigan
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually madcows is wrong because there is no tach wire on the ecu
I believe TTP has various screenshots of their tuning tool on the posted website..
That is how the signal is manipulated ..
The good thing about the airflow sensor is its dynamic .. it doesn't need to reference a table to find certain values and then converting it to fuel and ignition ..
MAP on the other hand requires the said tables to do conversions .. and that's what zchip manipulates .. the tables on the MAP ..
Does it cause conflict ?? strangely no but then I've gone thru the MAP tables as I was curious also how they did it .. and it's just that .. a reference table that points to the actual AFR and timing maps .. I have yet to fully understand the connections but slowly I guess
It IS a piggyback in semantic terms .. it requires the original ECU to work .. and it manipulates the signals from the original ECU to achieve the results ..
I believe the ends justify the means ..
I believe TTP has various screenshots of their tuning tool on the posted website..
That is how the signal is manipulated ..
The good thing about the airflow sensor is its dynamic .. it doesn't need to reference a table to find certain values and then converting it to fuel and ignition ..
MAP on the other hand requires the said tables to do conversions .. and that's what zchip manipulates .. the tables on the MAP ..
Does it cause conflict ?? strangely no but then I've gone thru the MAP tables as I was curious also how they did it .. and it's just that .. a reference table that points to the actual AFR and timing maps .. I have yet to fully understand the connections but slowly I guess
It IS a piggyback in semantic terms .. it requires the original ECU to work .. and it manipulates the signals from the original ECU to achieve the results ..
I believe the ends justify the means ..
"Does it cause conflict ?"
It must when the CEL comes on every now and then.
" and it manipulates the signals from the original ECU to achieve the results .."
It manipulates the signal from the MAP which then gets interpreted by the ECU
The product definitely works. I was just trying to provide my best interpretation of the device to answer the initial question - since TTP doesn't want to.
Jan 7, 2009, 06:25 PM
#30
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: michigan
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any idea who might know for certain?