Haltech Crank Trigger Options and Why?
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,411
Likes: 6
From: D.R., USA, the world...
Crank Trigger Options and Why?
Hello All,
After a long time of being out of the forums im slowly working my way back in.
I wanted to start by asking everyone's opinion on the matter, but i want to keep things civil and if you have something to suggest please back it up with proper information.
I would like to know the reasons you guys have for wanting to swap out to a different crank sensor option. I would like opinions on the factory 2nd and 3rd gen oem options, as well as the renesis trigger wheel. Please, keep comments on why something works better, or why you would benefit from investing on a different than stock setup. Lets assume to keep things even and leveled that the 2nd/3rd gen crank strategies are using brand new sensors and wiring, age is not a factor.
Thank you for your feedback.
Let the debate begin.
After a long time of being out of the forums im slowly working my way back in.
I wanted to start by asking everyone's opinion on the matter, but i want to keep things civil and if you have something to suggest please back it up with proper information.
I would like to know the reasons you guys have for wanting to swap out to a different crank sensor option. I would like opinions on the factory 2nd and 3rd gen oem options, as well as the renesis trigger wheel. Please, keep comments on why something works better, or why you would benefit from investing on a different than stock setup. Lets assume to keep things even and leveled that the 2nd/3rd gen crank strategies are using brand new sensors and wiring, age is not a factor.
Thank you for your feedback.
Let the debate begin.
In my opinion, the 3rd gen setup is pretty good.
I haven't spent much time working with the 2nd gen CAS directly, but have seen similar setups (Honda and Toyota distributors) encounter significant amounts of ignition timing fluctuation when you set the ECU to a flat timing map and check with a timing light. The best explanation I can think of is gear lash in the components that are driving the CAS. In addition to that, the CAS is mounted pretty close to the spark plugs, which will make its sensors and wiring more susceptible to interference than the sensors and wiring of the 3rd gen setup.
I haven't spent much time working with the 2nd gen CAS directly, but have seen similar setups (Honda and Toyota distributors) encounter significant amounts of ignition timing fluctuation when you set the ECU to a flat timing map and check with a timing light. The best explanation I can think of is gear lash in the components that are driving the CAS. In addition to that, the CAS is mounted pretty close to the spark plugs, which will make its sensors and wiring more susceptible to interference than the sensors and wiring of the 3rd gen setup.
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,411
Likes: 6
From: D.R., USA, the world...
In my opinion, the 3rd gen setup is pretty good.
I haven't spent much time working with the 2nd gen CAS directly, but have seen similar setups (Honda and Toyota distributors) encounter significant amounts of ignition timing fluctuation when you set the ECU to a flat timing map and check with a timing light. The best explanation I can think of is gear lash in the components that are driving the CAS. In addition to that, the CAS is mounted pretty close to the spark plugs, which will make its sensors and wiring more susceptible to interference than the sensors and wiring of the 3rd gen setup.
I haven't spent much time working with the 2nd gen CAS directly, but have seen similar setups (Honda and Toyota distributors) encounter significant amounts of ignition timing fluctuation when you set the ECU to a flat timing map and check with a timing light. The best explanation I can think of is gear lash in the components that are driving the CAS. In addition to that, the CAS is mounted pretty close to the spark plugs, which will make its sensors and wiring more susceptible to interference than the sensors and wiring of the 3rd gen setup.
Personally i honestly think that the FD and Renesis trigger wheels are pretty good in their own right, and making sure the sensors are good and wired right is important. Also working with toyota and honda you do have to take care in making them perfect to have accurate timing thought the whole rev range.
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 434
Likes: 16
From: Manassas
Besides the aforementioned drift, VR sensors are also more susceptible to noise, and require some sort of processing for them to work.
As for trigger wheels, up to a point, more resolution is better. The stock FD wheel works, the Renesis wheel is marginally better, but the extra missing teeth are unnecessary and reduce resolution.
My current preference is a hall effect sensor, which outputs a more accurate digital signal, and a Renesis wheel because it's the best resolution that will work with a Haltech. I'd rather use a 36-1 or 60-2 tooth wheel, but they are not currently supported.
As for trigger wheels, up to a point, more resolution is better. The stock FD wheel works, the Renesis wheel is marginally better, but the extra missing teeth are unnecessary and reduce resolution.
My current preference is a hall effect sensor, which outputs a more accurate digital signal, and a Renesis wheel because it's the best resolution that will work with a Haltech. I'd rather use a 36-1 or 60-2 tooth wheel, but they are not currently supported.
I've never had any issues with the 2nd gen sensor? Or the 3rd gen sensors for that matter.
Maybe I don't know what i am missing out on since I have not really tried anything else?
Maybe I don't know what i am missing out on since I have not really tried anything else?
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 25,581
Likes: 136
From: Smiths Falls.(near Ottawa!.Mapquest IT!)
I basically went with the FFE Trigger setup as the Stock CAS was ..well stock and to me,primitive.
After reading about the shielding issues of the Cas wiring and the E6k's,I made up my mind to go with something a little more refined.
The PS1000 Harness that Chris made allows the wiring of the FFE Trigger to be far enough away from all the ignition wiring(spark plug wiring),so I have no doubt that I am assured a nice signal from the wheel to the ECU.
Also since the trigger wheel can only be bolted and installed One way,it alleviates the stabbing of the old Cas setup,where you can be one tooth out or not know where the damn timing is in reference to the Eshaft.
After reading about the shielding issues of the Cas wiring and the E6k's,I made up my mind to go with something a little more refined.
The PS1000 Harness that Chris made allows the wiring of the FFE Trigger to be far enough away from all the ignition wiring(spark plug wiring),so I have no doubt that I am assured a nice signal from the wheel to the ECU.
Also since the trigger wheel can only be bolted and installed One way,it alleviates the stabbing of the old Cas setup,where you can be one tooth out or not know where the damn timing is in reference to the Eshaft.
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,411
Likes: 6
From: D.R., USA, the world...
If theres something Haltech has done is make their systems compatible with as many triggers as they can get their hands on.
Trending Topics
I like to use the FFE kits on the FC and Cosmo engines in order to move to a true crank trigger. There is slop in the CAS drive. Do a lot of really high power rotarys run the CAS? Yep. Is a crank trigger a technically more accurate arrangement? Yep. There is a reason all the OEs have gone to relatively high tooth count crank triggers.
I don't feel swapping out the REW 12+1 is always a necessity. Some ECUs can take advantage of a higher tooth count. Some won't. With the Syvecs systems I've done, I've used 36-1 wheels because the way they process the teeth and calculate crank angle makes use of a higher resolution wheel. The lower end ECUs will dissolve a complex, high tooth count wheel down to a "standard" pattern. So the high tooth count is overkill. This is the reason I feel, with the Sport, Sprint and all earlier Haltech ECUs, anything other than the OE 12+1 trigger is not beneficial to timing accuracy. And again, a LOT of engines run successfully with that pattern and set records all the time. I haven't bothered to ask what strategy is being employed with the Elite. Perhaps Claudio can shed some light on that? Another example of this can be seen in the AEM software where you have the ability to define how a complex trigger is broken down and usually it's converted to a "standard" 12+1.
Now, as far as VR versus Hall sensors, VR gets an undeserved bad rap on this site and myself and Haltech are probably a bit to blame for that. The E6X was pretty much a punch in the crotch for anyone that's used one and it began my use of Hall sensors to replace the CAS. The reluctor converter in the E6X sucks. It was a newer version of the one in the E6K, which worked very well. In addition to the reluctor converter issues in the E6X, at the same time we had ignition accuracy issues with the E6X, E8 and E11. Ask anyone at Haltech now about a red box ECU and they'll try to run and hide. To be fair, the red box ECUs were inherited by the current Haltech ownership and engineering staff when the acquired the company and they moved fairly quickly to dump that architecture and move to the hugely improved Sport and Sprint replacements. But I digress. The Hall sensor became the attempt for everyone to fix what was wrong with the E-series boxes and the notion has stuck. In reality, a VR sensor can be superior to a Hall sensor, especially at high revs with a high resolution trigger where a Hall sensor may not even switch fast enough to register all the trigger teeth. We just produced a custom trigger wheel for a customer's SCCA GT-3 engine. We speced a VR sensor because the trigger frequency was well outside any Hall sensor we're familiar with. Is a Hall sensor more immune to RFI and EMI? Yep. Should your install be proper and not expose the system to those issues? Yep. With all the harnesses I build there is probably a pretty even split between OE triggers, FFE Hall, and FFE VR and they all work great when properly setup.
I don't feel swapping out the REW 12+1 is always a necessity. Some ECUs can take advantage of a higher tooth count. Some won't. With the Syvecs systems I've done, I've used 36-1 wheels because the way they process the teeth and calculate crank angle makes use of a higher resolution wheel. The lower end ECUs will dissolve a complex, high tooth count wheel down to a "standard" pattern. So the high tooth count is overkill. This is the reason I feel, with the Sport, Sprint and all earlier Haltech ECUs, anything other than the OE 12+1 trigger is not beneficial to timing accuracy. And again, a LOT of engines run successfully with that pattern and set records all the time. I haven't bothered to ask what strategy is being employed with the Elite. Perhaps Claudio can shed some light on that? Another example of this can be seen in the AEM software where you have the ability to define how a complex trigger is broken down and usually it's converted to a "standard" 12+1.
Now, as far as VR versus Hall sensors, VR gets an undeserved bad rap on this site and myself and Haltech are probably a bit to blame for that. The E6X was pretty much a punch in the crotch for anyone that's used one and it began my use of Hall sensors to replace the CAS. The reluctor converter in the E6X sucks. It was a newer version of the one in the E6K, which worked very well. In addition to the reluctor converter issues in the E6X, at the same time we had ignition accuracy issues with the E6X, E8 and E11. Ask anyone at Haltech now about a red box ECU and they'll try to run and hide. To be fair, the red box ECUs were inherited by the current Haltech ownership and engineering staff when the acquired the company and they moved fairly quickly to dump that architecture and move to the hugely improved Sport and Sprint replacements. But I digress. The Hall sensor became the attempt for everyone to fix what was wrong with the E-series boxes and the notion has stuck. In reality, a VR sensor can be superior to a Hall sensor, especially at high revs with a high resolution trigger where a Hall sensor may not even switch fast enough to register all the trigger teeth. We just produced a custom trigger wheel for a customer's SCCA GT-3 engine. We speced a VR sensor because the trigger frequency was well outside any Hall sensor we're familiar with. Is a Hall sensor more immune to RFI and EMI? Yep. Should your install be proper and not expose the system to those issues? Yep. With all the harnesses I build there is probably a pretty even split between OE triggers, FFE Hall, and FFE VR and they all work great when properly setup.
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,411
Likes: 6
From: D.R., USA, the world...
I like to use the FFE kits on the FC and Cosmo engines in order to move to a true crank trigger. There is slop in the CAS drive. Do a lot of really high power rotarys run the CAS? Yep. Is a crank trigger a technically more accurate arrangement? Yep. There is a reason all the OEs have gone to relatively high tooth count crank triggers.
I don't feel swapping out the REW 12+1 is always a necessity. Some ECUs can take advantage of a higher tooth count. Some won't. With the Syvecs systems I've done, I've used 36-1 wheels because the way they process the teeth and calculate crank angle makes use of a higher resolution wheel. The lower end ECUs will dissolve a complex, high tooth count wheel down to a "standard" pattern. So the high tooth count is overkill. This is the reason I feel, with the Sport, Sprint and all earlier Haltech ECUs, anything other than the OE 12+1 trigger is not beneficial to timing accuracy. And again, a LOT of engines run successfully with that pattern and set records all the time. I haven't bothered to ask what strategy is being employed with the Elite. Perhaps Claudio can shed some light on that? Another example of this can be seen in the AEM software where you have the ability to define how a complex trigger is broken down and usually it's converted to a "standard" 12+1.
Now, as far as VR versus Hall sensors, VR gets an undeserved bad rap on this site and myself and Haltech are probably a bit to blame for that. The E6X was pretty much a punch in the crotch for anyone that's used one and it began my use of Hall sensors to replace the CAS. The reluctor converter in the E6X sucks. It was a newer version of the one in the E6K, which worked very well. In addition to the reluctor converter issues in the E6X, at the same time we had ignition accuracy issues with the E6X, E8 and E11. Ask anyone at Haltech now about a red box ECU and they'll try to run and hide. To be fair, the red box ECUs were inherited by the current Haltech ownership and engineering staff when the acquired the company and they moved fairly quickly to dump that architecture and move to the hugely improved Sport and Sprint replacements. But I digress. The Hall sensor became the attempt for everyone to fix what was wrong with the E-series boxes and the notion has stuck. In reality, a VR sensor can be superior to a Hall sensor, especially at high revs with a high resolution trigger where a Hall sensor may not even switch fast enough to register all the trigger teeth. We just produced a custom trigger wheel for a customer's SCCA GT-3 engine. We speced a VR sensor because the trigger frequency was well outside any Hall sensor we're familiar with. Is a Hall sensor more immune to RFI and EMI? Yep. Should your install be proper and not expose the system to those issues? Yep. With all the harnesses I build there is probably a pretty even split between OE triggers, FFE Hall, and FFE VR and they all work great when properly setup.
I don't feel swapping out the REW 12+1 is always a necessity. Some ECUs can take advantage of a higher tooth count. Some won't. With the Syvecs systems I've done, I've used 36-1 wheels because the way they process the teeth and calculate crank angle makes use of a higher resolution wheel. The lower end ECUs will dissolve a complex, high tooth count wheel down to a "standard" pattern. So the high tooth count is overkill. This is the reason I feel, with the Sport, Sprint and all earlier Haltech ECUs, anything other than the OE 12+1 trigger is not beneficial to timing accuracy. And again, a LOT of engines run successfully with that pattern and set records all the time. I haven't bothered to ask what strategy is being employed with the Elite. Perhaps Claudio can shed some light on that? Another example of this can be seen in the AEM software where you have the ability to define how a complex trigger is broken down and usually it's converted to a "standard" 12+1.
Now, as far as VR versus Hall sensors, VR gets an undeserved bad rap on this site and myself and Haltech are probably a bit to blame for that. The E6X was pretty much a punch in the crotch for anyone that's used one and it began my use of Hall sensors to replace the CAS. The reluctor converter in the E6X sucks. It was a newer version of the one in the E6K, which worked very well. In addition to the reluctor converter issues in the E6X, at the same time we had ignition accuracy issues with the E6X, E8 and E11. Ask anyone at Haltech now about a red box ECU and they'll try to run and hide. To be fair, the red box ECUs were inherited by the current Haltech ownership and engineering staff when the acquired the company and they moved fairly quickly to dump that architecture and move to the hugely improved Sport and Sprint replacements. But I digress. The Hall sensor became the attempt for everyone to fix what was wrong with the E-series boxes and the notion has stuck. In reality, a VR sensor can be superior to a Hall sensor, especially at high revs with a high resolution trigger where a Hall sensor may not even switch fast enough to register all the trigger teeth. We just produced a custom trigger wheel for a customer's SCCA GT-3 engine. We speced a VR sensor because the trigger frequency was well outside any Hall sensor we're familiar with. Is a Hall sensor more immune to RFI and EMI? Yep. Should your install be proper and not expose the system to those issues? Yep. With all the harnesses I build there is probably a pretty even split between OE triggers, FFE Hall, and FFE VR and they all work great when properly setup.
With the new Elite hardware/software you will see a vastly improved trigger system where the ECU actually has the ability to discriminate from phantom or noise signals and actually look at the tooth edge to know when it needs to trigger. I got a brief explanation of this recently and it blew a fuse in my head. Trigger problems can be a thing of the past with this new gear we're getting. Also, the VR sensors will definitely be the better choice.
Ok guys I have just bought the Elite 2500 but won’t to use a 60/2 wheel along with Electromotives small magnetic trigger sensor. My Question, has anyone applied the Custom trigger configuration setup in the Elite software, and how do you pick which tooth to be used as TDC.
Why use a second home/ref if you're already running a missing tooth wheel? In fact, I don't even know if any ECU would be happy with that.
Either way you adjust the TDC offset angle to suit your needs. Each tooth should represent 6 degrees.
Either way you adjust the TDC offset angle to suit your needs. Each tooth should represent 6 degrees.
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,666
Likes: 88
From: San Jose, CA
Ok guys I have just bought the Elite 2500 but won’t to use a 60/2 wheel along with Electromotives small magnetic trigger sensor. My Question, has anyone applied the Custom trigger configuration setup in the Elite software, and how do you pick which tooth to be used as TDC.
At minimum, I would do -10, -5, 0, +5, and +10, and NOT have these land anywhere on the blank section of the "-2" wheel.
Your TDC Offset is then the degrees away from that blank section.
Thanks for the replies Guys. I have chickened out on the 60/2 wheel setup after reading some info in this Thread. Found a RX8 front pulley combo on eBay so that should make the ECU happy along with all the standard Timing marks. Now to make the sensor bracket. Wish FFE where still available as there trigger setup were of high Quality.
Thanks C. Ludwig. Yes they are still trading and sent a email to them yesterday. I see you were trying to buy a RX8 trigger wheel. Can I ask your thinking about that tooth count wheel. As it turned out I was able to buy the RX8 front pulley for $60 US +shipping. I might have to redrill the holes to bring the sensor to dead horizontal because I’m driving a Gilmore drive pump. That being said it might be easier to buy the FFE trigger.
Thanks again for your response
Thanks again for your response
Well I am sold, I don't have a high power rotary but I have been battling noise issues and CAS problems on my megasquirt so meanwhile I am hoarding haltech parts prior to install this will be one of them. Time is money and I spent enough time with this garbage.
Anybody know why on my Elite ESP software in the main setup if I try to setup a brand new map when I select the FD3S crank trigger wheel the boxes for tooth count and missing teeth are grayed out where I can’t change the value and it has the 60-2 values already there instead of 12-2? Now if I load a base map from the library when I go to main setup and it shows FD3S trigger selected the boxes for tooth count and missing teeth are still grayed out but they show the right values of 12 on tooth count and 2 in the missing teeth box. Any ideas?
Rotary Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 928
Likes: 1,060
From: Bangkok
How is the FFE kit supposed to wired into the ECU? I see it replaces both CAS 1 and CAS 2 (crank and "cam" sensors), but which one is it supposed to replace and which one gets ignored? Or am I supposed to split the signal for the ECU so it sees both a Crank and CAM input?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post