Adaptronic Adaptronic Plug & Play Rotary Specific ECU S
03-22-13, 08:40 PM
#54
talking head
i put in for a adaptronic subforum back last year when they was contemplating the vipec forum addition,, and that took a very long time coming despite repeated requests
...no one wanted to believe that this was the dark horse worth backing.
. seems to me its now getting the credos deserved as the most powerful of the bang for buck ecu's
...no one wanted to believe that this was the dark horse worth backing.
. seems to me its now getting the credos deserved as the most powerful of the bang for buck ecu's
03-22-13, 09:49 PM
#56
talking head
suggest from now on,, everytime a new question pops up ,, start a new thread in this open part of the subforum
.. maybe when they see 20 different threads,,and thus it becomes an problem for them to manage.. then action may happen
.. meantime dont hold your breath.. history serves that for some reason this takes months and years
.. maybe when they see 20 different threads,,and thus it becomes an problem for them to manage.. then action may happen
.. meantime dont hold your breath.. history serves that for some reason this takes months and years
03-27-13, 07:47 AM
#59
Great video, thanks again Andy. All your support and involvement here is truly appreciated.
Got another question though....Is there a preferred MAP source when using this ECU? I know I can use the OEM Mazda sensor, an aftermarket sensor (say GM 3-bar), or the Adaptronic internal sensor...but which is the preferred sensor and why?
Got another question though....Is there a preferred MAP source when using this ECU? I know I can use the OEM Mazda sensor, an aftermarket sensor (say GM 3-bar), or the Adaptronic internal sensor...but which is the preferred sensor and why?
03-27-13, 04:10 PM
#60
Best... for what - is the real question! Everything in engineering is a tradeoff usually.
Our recommendation is to use either the factory one or the built-in sensor, but that's because the ECUs are already set up for those options so it means we don't need to support people in calibrating MAP sensors. We found that when were using the external Delco style sensors, even though the calibration procedure is explained in the manual and there are only 3 wires, people needed a lot of technical support to connect them and calibrate them. Originally I thought "Well, it's going to be a similar amount of work running a vacuum hose through the firewall as running wires for the MAP sensor through the firewall, so we may as well get the MAP sensor closer to the engine". But I didn't factor the setup time.
Going to the inbuilt MAP sensor was to get around this difficulty - basically anything that makes it easier for the user makes it easier on our support load as well, and it was definitely the right decision.
If I were designing my own ideal car where money and time were no object, I would use a sensor screwed or otherwise mounted to the manifold, the way OEM cars do it these days. If it were less than 25 psi of boost, I'd use a 3-bar TMAP sensor mounted into the manifold (would require machining of course), or higher than that I'd have one that screwed into the manifold (they are available in 5 bar and 7 bar).
There's some argument that longer hoses will delay the MAP signal getting to the ECU. I haven't measured this myself but I haven't noticed it to be a problem in practice; possibly because of the amount of filtering that must be done on the MAP signal to get it clean enough to use.
So my recommendation is to use the built-in MAP sensor; that's what I do on my Miata.
Our recommendation is to use either the factory one or the built-in sensor, but that's because the ECUs are already set up for those options so it means we don't need to support people in calibrating MAP sensors. We found that when were using the external Delco style sensors, even though the calibration procedure is explained in the manual and there are only 3 wires, people needed a lot of technical support to connect them and calibrate them. Originally I thought "Well, it's going to be a similar amount of work running a vacuum hose through the firewall as running wires for the MAP sensor through the firewall, so we may as well get the MAP sensor closer to the engine". But I didn't factor the setup time.
Going to the inbuilt MAP sensor was to get around this difficulty - basically anything that makes it easier for the user makes it easier on our support load as well, and it was definitely the right decision.
If I were designing my own ideal car where money and time were no object, I would use a sensor screwed or otherwise mounted to the manifold, the way OEM cars do it these days. If it were less than 25 psi of boost, I'd use a 3-bar TMAP sensor mounted into the manifold (would require machining of course), or higher than that I'd have one that screwed into the manifold (they are available in 5 bar and 7 bar).
There's some argument that longer hoses will delay the MAP signal getting to the ECU. I haven't measured this myself but I haven't noticed it to be a problem in practice; possibly because of the amount of filtering that must be done on the MAP signal to get it clean enough to use.
So my recommendation is to use the built-in MAP sensor; that's what I do on my Miata.
04-20-13, 04:13 PM
#61
Best... for what - is the real question! Everything in engineering is a tradeoff usually.
Our recommendation is to use either the factory one or the built-in sensor, but that's because the ECUs are already set up for those options so it means we don't need to support people in calibrating MAP sensors. We found that when were using the external Delco style sensors, even though the calibration procedure is explained in the manual and there are only 3 wires, people needed a lot of technical support to connect them and calibrate them. Originally I thought "Well, it's going to be a similar amount of work running a vacuum hose through the firewall as running wires for the MAP sensor through the firewall, so we may as well get the MAP sensor closer to the engine". But I didn't factor the setup time.
Going to the inbuilt MAP sensor was to get around this difficulty - basically anything that makes it easier for the user makes it easier on our support load as well, and it was definitely the right decision.
If I were designing my own ideal car where money and time were no object, I would use a sensor screwed or otherwise mounted to the manifold, the way OEM cars do it these days. If it were less than 25 psi of boost, I'd use a 3-bar TMAP sensor mounted into the manifold (would require machining of course), or higher than that I'd have one that screwed into the manifold (they are available in 5 bar and 7 bar).
There's some argument that longer hoses will delay the MAP signal getting to the ECU. I haven't measured this myself but I haven't noticed it to be a problem in practice; possibly because of the amount of filtering that must be done on the MAP signal to get it clean enough to use.
So my recommendation is to use the built-in MAP sensor; that's what I do on my Miata.
Our recommendation is to use either the factory one or the built-in sensor, but that's because the ECUs are already set up for those options so it means we don't need to support people in calibrating MAP sensors. We found that when were using the external Delco style sensors, even though the calibration procedure is explained in the manual and there are only 3 wires, people needed a lot of technical support to connect them and calibrate them. Originally I thought "Well, it's going to be a similar amount of work running a vacuum hose through the firewall as running wires for the MAP sensor through the firewall, so we may as well get the MAP sensor closer to the engine". But I didn't factor the setup time.
Going to the inbuilt MAP sensor was to get around this difficulty - basically anything that makes it easier for the user makes it easier on our support load as well, and it was definitely the right decision.
If I were designing my own ideal car where money and time were no object, I would use a sensor screwed or otherwise mounted to the manifold, the way OEM cars do it these days. If it were less than 25 psi of boost, I'd use a 3-bar TMAP sensor mounted into the manifold (would require machining of course), or higher than that I'd have one that screwed into the manifold (they are available in 5 bar and 7 bar).
There's some argument that longer hoses will delay the MAP signal getting to the ECU. I haven't measured this myself but I haven't noticed it to be a problem in practice; possibly because of the amount of filtering that must be done on the MAP signal to get it clean enough to use.
So my recommendation is to use the built-in MAP sensor; that's what I do on my Miata.
I've got the banzai 3 bar map sensor hooked up, but was getting a hell of a problem setting it up due to values needed were not provided by the seller/manufacturer. But even then, there were issues after I figured out those ADC values etc.
So I've switched it back to using the built-in ECU, and now the readings were dead on and it was a breeze!
-AzEKnightz
04-30-13, 11:34 PM
#63
So this ECU will control meth/water injection?
I have an S5 TII that I'm building. I should go with the FD kit and swap a few pins around?
I still need my stock harness? Or I can get a flying lead kit + wire it myself?
But if I wan traction control I need the E440? How much harder will that be to tune than the FD kit?
I have an S5 TII that I'm building. I should go with the FD kit and swap a few pins around?
I still need my stock harness? Or I can get a flying lead kit + wire it myself?
But if I wan traction control I need the E440? How much harder will that be to tune than the FD kit?
05-01-13, 07:42 AM
#64
So this ECU will control meth/water injection?
I have an S5 TII that I'm building. I should go with the FD kit and swap a few pins around?
I still need my stock harness? Or I can get a flying lead kit + wire it myself?
But if I wan traction control I need the E440? How much harder will that be to tune than the FD kit?
I have an S5 TII that I'm building. I should go with the FD kit and swap a few pins around?
I still need my stock harness? Or I can get a flying lead kit + wire it myself?
But if I wan traction control I need the E440? How much harder will that be to tune than the FD kit?
05-06-13, 01:07 AM
#66
We don't have a unit for the series 5 yet, so we would recommend doing that by using the series 6 ECU and swapping pins around.
The 440 is for wire-in applications.
Traction control doesn't use any outputs, so that's no problem - but you do need to wire in / add proper wheel speed sensors. I did try piggybacking off the series 5 ABS sensors, but I found that under about 20 mph the readings were very noisy so I wouldn't rely on them. On my car I added in GT101 hall effect sensors triggered off the backs of the wheel studs. This is also how Motec recommend to do it (ie don't piggyback off the ABS sensors) so I kind of take some cues from the market leader!
These 4 wires then need to be run into the ECU, if you're using the series 6 plug-in - there are no pins in the factory loom for these but there's a connector inside the ECU where you can wire them all in. This is what I've done on my car. I haven't set up TC yet but that's on my list to do as soon as I fix my exhaust leak (I fixed the main one, but it just made it quiet enough that I can now hear the other one I didn't know about!), get the bodykit on and retune it with the smaller turbine housing, so expect some results from that in a few weeks.
On the 440, all the pins are externally accessible, but to use the 440 with an oil metering pump you'd normally need an external stepper driver board because you'd otherwise run out of outputs.
We've set up the traction control on Lotuses with a workshop that specialises in Lotuses Elises / Exiges, and they also do a fair bit of Motec ECUs on their high budget track cars, and are a dealer for Race Logic (who make aftermarket traction control units). They really like the way the Motec works compared to the Race Logic, so we did lots of improvements to the Adaptronic traction control to get it up to the same performance as the Motec - and they're happy with it now so that's got to be a good sign. I'll let you know / do a video showing how it works on my car when I've set it up, as I said in a few weeks.
The 440 is for wire-in applications.
Traction control doesn't use any outputs, so that's no problem - but you do need to wire in / add proper wheel speed sensors. I did try piggybacking off the series 5 ABS sensors, but I found that under about 20 mph the readings were very noisy so I wouldn't rely on them. On my car I added in GT101 hall effect sensors triggered off the backs of the wheel studs. This is also how Motec recommend to do it (ie don't piggyback off the ABS sensors) so I kind of take some cues from the market leader!
These 4 wires then need to be run into the ECU, if you're using the series 6 plug-in - there are no pins in the factory loom for these but there's a connector inside the ECU where you can wire them all in. This is what I've done on my car. I haven't set up TC yet but that's on my list to do as soon as I fix my exhaust leak (I fixed the main one, but it just made it quiet enough that I can now hear the other one I didn't know about!), get the bodykit on and retune it with the smaller turbine housing, so expect some results from that in a few weeks.
On the 440, all the pins are externally accessible, but to use the 440 with an oil metering pump you'd normally need an external stepper driver board because you'd otherwise run out of outputs.
We've set up the traction control on Lotuses with a workshop that specialises in Lotuses Elises / Exiges, and they also do a fair bit of Motec ECUs on their high budget track cars, and are a dealer for Race Logic (who make aftermarket traction control units). They really like the way the Motec works compared to the Race Logic, so we did lots of improvements to the Adaptronic traction control to get it up to the same performance as the Motec - and they're happy with it now so that's got to be a good sign. I'll let you know / do a video showing how it works on my car when I've set it up, as I said in a few weeks.
05-28-13, 03:00 AM
#67
On the 440, all the pins are externally accessible, but to use the 440 with an oil metering pump you'd normally need an external stepper driver board because you'd otherwise run out of outputs.
I will be running a single turbo with the omp. If i go with the 440, i will also need the external stepper drive?
If i convert to direct fire, would i need an ignition amp for 400hp?
I will be running a single turbo with the omp. If i go with the 440, i will also need the external stepper drive?
If i convert to direct fire, would i need an ignition amp for 400hp?
05-30-13, 08:02 PM
#69
Junior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Regina,SK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So this ECU will control meth/water injection?
I have an S5 TII that I'm building. I should go with the FD kit and swap a few pins around?
I still need my stock harness? Or I can get a flying lead kit + wire it myself?
But if I wan traction control I need the E440? How much harder will that be to tune than the FD kit?
I have an S5 TII that I'm building. I should go with the FD kit and swap a few pins around?
I still need my stock harness? Or I can get a flying lead kit + wire it myself?
But if I wan traction control I need the E440? How much harder will that be to tune than the FD kit?
05-30-13, 09:28 PM
#70
05-31-13, 11:20 PM
#71
Full Member
This forum is for more then us users. If we don't talk about them here then where? Can you give me a link to them on your online store? I have looked and can only find s6 model
06-01-13, 02:43 AM
#72
Hi MPS, yes I'm sorry, just most of the users on here seem to be in the US!
At the moment we haven't put the series 8 on the online store but it's the same price as the series 6 and the other plug-in ECUs - I'll be putting that one up soon.
Thank you!
Andy
At the moment we haven't put the series 8 on the online store but it's the same price as the series 6 and the other plug-in ECUs - I'll be putting that one up soon.
Thank you!
Andy
