Any XEDE Converts??????? Some questions....
Jan 4, 2006, 06:59 PM
#16
Tom,
Using the clutch switch is fine as long as its used with input from the VSS. The XEDE does not factor in the VSS. Basically it would be great to say I want my launch limit to be 5500 until both the clutch is out and my speed is X mph. Then you could say I want my NLTS limit to be 6000 as long as my speed is above X mph. The XEDE only uses the clutch safety switch to control the RPM. Basically if I set my LC to 5k this is what my NLTS is also set at. This doesn't work because its actually lower than the RPM I enter the next gear.
A good shot of something that worked can be seen here:
Another nice feature would be to have a CEL illuminate when a knock limit is reached. Example: Your ECU sees 3 degrees of knock so a check engine light comes on allowing you to get off the throttle rather than possibly cause damage by staying in the throttle.
Using the clutch switch is fine as long as its used with input from the VSS. The XEDE does not factor in the VSS. Basically it would be great to say I want my launch limit to be 5500 until both the clutch is out and my speed is X mph. Then you could say I want my NLTS limit to be 6000 as long as my speed is above X mph. The XEDE only uses the clutch safety switch to control the RPM. Basically if I set my LC to 5k this is what my NLTS is also set at. This doesn't work because its actually lower than the RPM I enter the next gear.
A good shot of something that worked can be seen here:
Another nice feature would be to have a CEL illuminate when a knock limit is reached. Example: Your ECU sees 3 degrees of knock so a check engine light comes on allowing you to get off the throttle rather than possibly cause damage by staying in the throttle.
Last edited by Jeff_Jeske; Jan 4, 2006 at 08:47 PM.
Jan 4, 2006, 07:38 PM
#17
Originally Posted by Jeff_Jeske
Using the clutch switch is fine as long as its used with input from the VSS. The XEDE does not factor in the VSS. Basically it would be great to say I want my launch limit to be 5500 until both the clutch is out and my speed is X mph. Then you could say I want my NLTS limit to be 6000 as long as my speed is above X mph. The XEDE only uses the clutch safety switch to control the RPM. Basically if I set my LC to 5k this is what my NLTS is also set at. This doesn't work because its actually lower than the RPM I enter the next gear.
BTW, in limited testing, it seems to me like there's no real reason for me to allow the user to specify vehicle speeds for either of these parameters. It seems like "speed = 0" for LC and "speed != 0" for NLTS is right. I've noticed with LC, you launch with the car sitting still. Pretty much as soon as the car is moving you want the launch RPM disabled, and in fact what happens is that as soon as the clutch is let out a bit, the RPMs drop from the launch RPM and then climb back up.
Any thoughts as to a case where the speed would need to be considered for either LC or NLTS? Note that this isn't a technical issue - I can certainly provide that, but I'm generally against giving the end user a big alphabet soup of "who knows how to set this" options. *Cough*AEM EMS*Cough*
Another nice feature would be to have a CEL illuminate when a knock limit is reached. Example: Your ECU sees 3 degrees of knock so a check engine light comes on allowing you to get off the throttle rather than possibly cause damage by staying in the throttle.
Tom
Jan 4, 2006, 08:40 PM
#18
EDIT - The launch limit can not be effectively activated by the clutch switch. It takes too long for the clutch pedal to reach the switch while slipping it off line. However, you want that immediate fuel cut when pressing the clutch pedal during a shift with the throttle down. So to manage those two conditions, the launch limit should be activated by speed.
The XEDE doesnt read speed at all. If your LC is 6k your NTLS is 6k. That sucks! If it allowed me to say 5k LC and 6k NTLS I would be MUCH happier.
I would also like it to read speed for activating nitrous.
Example:
I dont want to spray until I'm above 50 MPH. I dont want to spray under 4k or over 7k. Lastly I dont want to spray while the clutch is engaged. Reading speed would make the use of nitrous idiot proof.
The XEDE doesnt read speed at all. If your LC is 6k your NTLS is 6k. That sucks! If it allowed me to say 5k LC and 6k NTLS I would be MUCH happier.
I would also like it to read speed for activating nitrous.
Example:
I dont want to spray until I'm above 50 MPH. I dont want to spray under 4k or over 7k. Lastly I dont want to spray while the clutch is engaged. Reading speed would make the use of nitrous idiot proof.
Last edited by Jeff_Jeske; Jan 5, 2006 at 08:43 AM.
Jan 4, 2006, 09:13 PM
#19
Originally Posted by Jeff_Jeske
For most people I doubt speed would be required......launching using LC often causes wheel spin. A speed input for LC can help prevent uncontrolled wheel spin. Example if speed < 20mph launch limit stays at 5500 and helps you recover traction instead of making it worse by bouncing off of redline. That being said a person who knows how to launch wont be spinning that bad. It could also be used on a rolling start.
The XEDE doesnt read speed at all. If your LC is 6k your NTLS is 6k. That sucks! If it allowed me to say 5k LC and 6k NTLS I would be MUCH happier.
I would also like it to read speed for activating nitrous.
Tom
Jan 5, 2006, 08:01 AM
#20
The NTLS could rely completely on speed being above the max configured for LC with the clutch switch = 1.
For what its worth LC and NTLS was good for a full half second and 2 mph on my GSX. Launching under boost is insane and well worth the invested time.
Nitrous should be completely separate from alchy....but as you stated that is something for another day.
EDIT: You know now that I think about it.....The launch rpm could be entirely speed activated. As long as you are going more than X mph it will rev to LC RPM only. The clutch switch could be used only nlts not the launch control.
If the ECU sees a speed below the configured Launch Spd, the launch rpm limit will be enforced. The Shift Limit will be enforced when the clutch pedal is depressed.
I believe one of the problems I have with LC on the XEDE is that it does use the clutch switch. The launch limit can not be effectively activated by the clutch switch. It takes too long for the clutch pedal to reach the switch while slipping it off line. However, you want that immediate fuel cut when pressing the clutch pedal during a shift with the throttle down. So to manage those two conditions, the launch limit should be activated by speed.
For what its worth LC and NTLS was good for a full half second and 2 mph on my GSX. Launching under boost is insane and well worth the invested time.
Nitrous should be completely separate from alchy....but as you stated that is something for another day.
EDIT: You know now that I think about it.....The launch rpm could be entirely speed activated. As long as you are going more than X mph it will rev to LC RPM only. The clutch switch could be used only nlts not the launch control.
If the ECU sees a speed below the configured Launch Spd, the launch rpm limit will be enforced. The Shift Limit will be enforced when the clutch pedal is depressed.
I believe one of the problems I have with LC on the XEDE is that it does use the clutch switch. The launch limit can not be effectively activated by the clutch switch. It takes too long for the clutch pedal to reach the switch while slipping it off line. However, you want that immediate fuel cut when pressing the clutch pedal during a shift with the throttle down. So to manage those two conditions, the launch limit should be activated by speed.
Last edited by Jeff_Jeske; Jan 5, 2006 at 08:42 AM.
Jan 5, 2006, 01:31 PM
#21
Jeff,
How's it going? Have you purchased an ECU+ yet or are you still deciding? I'm still deciding. I was going to do the DSMLink in the Evo, but I wanted a native Evo version. Since Tom (DSMLink Tom) and Dave aren't getting to that anytime soon, I am heavily considering the ECU+, since Tom (ECU+ Tom) has been adding some great features.
To add to this conversation a little bit, for NLTS rather than speed!=0, speed >'some limit' would be better, say like 7mph or something...whatever the upper limit of your launch control will be. (This LC limit was used more in DSMLink to control wheelspin in FWD cars and to make sure if you car started rolling just a bit on launch, your launch control would still work). Also, the condition would also have to be '...and clutch switch =1' or whatever value the upper clutch switch is at when clutch begins to be depressed. You want the fuel cut to occur as soon as possible.
Keeping the clutch switch for launch control wouldnt hurt anything. If it weren't used, then you would always have that launch limit active, even if your clutch wasn't depressed. I know it's no big deal, but maybe you may want to rev in neutral to troubleshoot something, etc, etc. If you use just the speed sensor, then that limit would be active whether the clutch was in or out.
Eric
How's it going? Have you purchased an ECU+ yet or are you still deciding? I'm still deciding. I was going to do the DSMLink in the Evo, but I wanted a native Evo version. Since Tom (DSMLink Tom) and Dave aren't getting to that anytime soon, I am heavily considering the ECU+, since Tom (ECU+ Tom) has been adding some great features.
To add to this conversation a little bit, for NLTS rather than speed!=0, speed >'some limit' would be better, say like 7mph or something...whatever the upper limit of your launch control will be. (This LC limit was used more in DSMLink to control wheelspin in FWD cars and to make sure if you car started rolling just a bit on launch, your launch control would still work). Also, the condition would also have to be '...and clutch switch =1' or whatever value the upper clutch switch is at when clutch begins to be depressed. You want the fuel cut to occur as soon as possible.
Keeping the clutch switch for launch control wouldnt hurt anything. If it weren't used, then you would always have that launch limit active, even if your clutch wasn't depressed. I know it's no big deal, but maybe you may want to rev in neutral to troubleshoot something, etc, etc. If you use just the speed sensor, then that limit would be active whether the clutch was in or out.
Eric
Jan 5, 2006, 02:24 PM
#22
Eric,
Good to see you over here! There's no doubt, we have been spoiled by DSMLink. I contacted DSMLink Tom as well and he said there is little or no hope for an EVOLink in the next year to year and a half. I like you dont want to run my new car on a 12 year old ECU thats not quite right at partial throttle.
I currently have a Vishnu Xede piggy back. It allows you to add/remove fuel, timing, boost, and load but its all on top of what the factory ECU thinks its doing. It does this with absolutely no feedback from the ECU. At best if you did something wrong you will get a CEL and not broken parts.
The XEDE route is fine for those that are willing to mod their car in a specific sequence and have faith in the philosophy of what worked for one will work for many. I think its more for people that dont want to understand what the black box is doing to their motor.
Personally I dont feel safe running a bleeding edge tune from some guys dyno run in Timbucktoo. I need to know what overall engine timing is. I need to know when timing is being pulled. I need to be able to datalog across RPM and not just a timeline.
I am seriously considering ECU+. I see much better vendor->customer communication and I also see a willingness to entertain function requests.
I've been lurking in this forum for a few weeks. So far I am happy with what I am hearing. I wish there was a thread like "what do you dislike about ECU+" because most of the issues I have with the XEDE you wouldn't know about until you've owned it for awhile and even then most people have no clue what's going on behind the scenes.
Glad you popped in. Always good to have a second and third opinion.
Respectfully,
Jeff Jeske
Good to see you over here! There's no doubt, we have been spoiled by DSMLink. I contacted DSMLink Tom as well and he said there is little or no hope for an EVOLink in the next year to year and a half. I like you dont want to run my new car on a 12 year old ECU thats not quite right at partial throttle.
I currently have a Vishnu Xede piggy back. It allows you to add/remove fuel, timing, boost, and load but its all on top of what the factory ECU thinks its doing. It does this with absolutely no feedback from the ECU. At best if you did something wrong you will get a CEL and not broken parts.
The XEDE route is fine for those that are willing to mod their car in a specific sequence and have faith in the philosophy of what worked for one will work for many. I think its more for people that dont want to understand what the black box is doing to their motor.
Personally I dont feel safe running a bleeding edge tune from some guys dyno run in Timbucktoo. I need to know what overall engine timing is. I need to know when timing is being pulled. I need to be able to datalog across RPM and not just a timeline.
I am seriously considering ECU+. I see much better vendor->customer communication and I also see a willingness to entertain function requests.
I've been lurking in this forum for a few weeks. So far I am happy with what I am hearing. I wish there was a thread like "what do you dislike about ECU+" because most of the issues I have with the XEDE you wouldn't know about until you've owned it for awhile and even then most people have no clue what's going on behind the scenes.
Glad you popped in. Always good to have a second and third opinion.
Respectfully,
Jeff Jeske
Jan 5, 2006, 04:03 PM
#23
Originally Posted by Jeff_Jeske
I've been lurking in this forum for a few weeks. So far I am happy with what I am hearing. I wish there was a thread like "what do you dislike about ECU+" because most of the issues I have with the XEDE you wouldn't know about until you've owned it for awhile and even then most people have no clue what's going on behind the scenes.
And I'm willing to talk about this because, hey, it ain't perfect and if anyone knows what people are complaining about, it's me. Also, I want to make clear that I'm not hiding anything. Here goes!1. P0300. Some people get it a lot. I've only seen it on my car once in the entire time I've had the car. Seems to be mostly on the 2003 EVOs, which are sometimes known to throw the code stock. I've been working on this for a long time, and it's a tough problem. Just recently I'm starting to get a handle on it, and I now have some new firmware that seems to pretty-much fix it for some folks. I'm certainly not done working on it.
2. About 3/4 of the support requests I get are from people with problems with a USB-to-serial adapter. Not my fault per se, but I thought I'd mention it.
3. The "decel smoothing" feature works technically, but just isn't useful. This needs some lovin'.
4. I can get the Windows software to crash sometimes, but it always happens when I'm in the middle of something else so I haven't debugged it yet. This is pretty rare, and starting to annoy *me*, so you know it's on my hit list.
5. People sometimes have to wait a while to get an ECU+ once they order it. Since I hand-build 'em, it's hard to keep them in stock, plus I'm always trying to balance e-mail, forums, development of new features, and building them.
6. Some folks say the MAP sensor readout is wrong. I'm going to get to the bottom of this this weekend at Mach V.
Beyond those, honestly I get very few complaints. Seems like the only thing people want from the ECU+ is more features.
If there's other stuff that people find is junk about the ECU+, I'd like to hear it. You know - the only way to get things fixed is to point 'em out. Feel free to start a new thread on this topic - maybe we can get some input and end up with a better product overall.
Tom
Jan 5, 2006, 06:05 PM
#26
Originally Posted by l2r99gst
To add to this conversation a little bit, for NLTS rather than speed!=0, speed >'some limit' would be better, say like 7mph or something...whatever the upper limit of your launch control will be. (This LC limit was used more in DSMLink to control wheelspin in FWD cars and to make sure if you car started rolling just a bit on launch, your launch control would still work). Also, the condition would also have to be '...and clutch switch =1' or whatever value the upper clutch switch is at when clutch begins to be depressed. You want the fuel cut to occur as soon as possible.
I was thinking about this, and I'll probably have an override in the NLTS code to the effect of vehicle speed > LC speed (assuming LC speed is specified). This is more of a "don't get confused and try to apply both the LC and NLTS RPM limits" than a feature. But tell me why else you might want to have a speed setting for NLTS. Right now I'm thinking of having a speed setting for LC, but none for NLTS.
Keeping the clutch switch for launch control wouldnt hurt anything. If it weren't used, then you would always have that launch limit active, even if your clutch wasn't depressed. I know it's no big deal, but maybe you may want to rev in neutral to troubleshoot something, etc, etc. If you use just the speed sensor, then that limit would be active whether the clutch was in or out.
Tom
Jan 5, 2006, 07:03 PM
#27
Tom,
Other than what you described you wouldn't need a speed input for NLTS. There just has to be a cut-off between LC and NLTS....below that speed LC is in effect and above that speed NLTS is in effect Whether that's user definable or hard-coded shouldn't really matter, although I always like user-definable variables.
The main input for NLTS is definitely the clutch switch.
Thanks for the great improvements with the ECU+. I think you're going to have to set one aside for me. Since it's winter here in Chicago, I think I will hold off until Spring to get going.
Eric
Other than what you described you wouldn't need a speed input for NLTS. There just has to be a cut-off between LC and NLTS....below that speed LC is in effect and above that speed NLTS is in effect Whether that's user definable or hard-coded shouldn't really matter, although I always like user-definable variables.
The main input for NLTS is definitely the clutch switch.
Thanks for the great improvements with the ECU+. I think you're going to have to set one aside for me. Since it's winter here in Chicago, I think I will hold off until Spring to get going.
Eric
Jan 5, 2006, 10:03 PM
#28
Originally Posted by l2r99gst
Other than what you described you wouldn't need a speed input for NLTS. There just has to be a cut-off between LC and NLTS....below that speed LC is in effect and above that speed NLTS is in effect Whether that's user definable or hard-coded shouldn't really matter, although I always like user-definable variables.
Thanks for the great improvements with the ECU+. I think you're going to have to set one aside for me. Since it's winter here in Chicago, I think I will hold off until Spring to get going.
Tom
Jan 8, 2006, 08:44 PM
#29
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sleepy Hollow
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been watching this thread, and I think I might have a very simple suggestion for a signal to the ECU+ as when to trigger a signal for NLTS...or rather another variable to add. Combined with speed, this could really give terrific control of the function.
Why not add a switch that either adds or drops a ground signal when the clutch is depressed? The swiitch would have to be mounted so that when the clutch pedal arm is not depressed at all the switch is closed. As soon as the pedal is moved the switch goes open (or closed...I don't know which condition is easier to deal with hardware/software-wise) and signal is sent to trigger NLTS.
I know this won't be a popular suggestion since it involves adding switch, mount, wiring instead of working purely with what's already there. May help to spark another idea for someone.
Why not add a switch that either adds or drops a ground signal when the clutch is depressed? The swiitch would have to be mounted so that when the clutch pedal arm is not depressed at all the switch is closed. As soon as the pedal is moved the switch goes open (or closed...I don't know which condition is easier to deal with hardware/software-wise) and signal is sent to trigger NLTS.
I know this won't be a popular suggestion since it involves adding switch, mount, wiring instead of working purely with what's already there. May help to spark another idea for someone.
Jan 8, 2006, 10:57 PM
#30
Originally Posted by WhiteEvo05
I know this won't be a popular suggestion since it involves adding switch, mount, wiring instead of working purely with what's already there. May help to spark another idea for someone.