hi, im looking for a programable computer and i want to know whats the difference between the f10x and the e6x, they both are fuel and ignition but i want to know why the e6x is more expensive, what does it have that the f10x doesn't.

later

 

my bad, just figured the f10x is fuel only ecu.

 

So, you aswered your own question? the F10X and the E6X are identical in every aspect, including the wiring harness, BUT, F10X is fuel only, and for some reason that escapes me, the F10X cant do sequential fueling. I dont know why Haltech didnt put the complete trigger setup from the E6X so the F10X could do sequential fueling.

 

I'm building a megasquirt for a turbo project bike. I think the awser is that you need a fairly extensive trigger system to do sequential fueling. For batch or multipoint you just need rpm input. But don't need to know the actual position of the crank. Most people who are going to be running a fuel only computer are going to use a distributor so unless they have a second crank angle sensor there not going to be able to use sequential fueling anyways. And then theres the argument that sequential fueling isn't all that its cracked up to me in most applications.

 

Yes, you have a point, most fuel only installs have a locked ignition, or an ignition stand alone control. But, my comment was more directed at why doesnt the F10X have the hability to do sequential, if you take the time to feed it the proper triggers.

 

You will need to run a Hall Effect Sensor if you want to run sequentially. Basically you will need a trigger for each fuel event. So what that means for you, is a trigger wheel on the crank(eshaft) that has 2 magnets with one facing north the other south(as to get a proper HOME event) or 3 magnets if you are using a dual channel(seperate home from trigger)

But with a rotary, you basically are running a batch fire fuel system anyways and almost a multipoint at high RPM... so you don't really need to run sequentially. It is however, a nice feature if you need low rpm response.