All ECU data is stored in NV Ram. In other words you could put the ECU in a time caplsule and plug it in 100 years (give or take) from now and it will still have it's settings.

 

I put a cai and a fmic on my car with the s4 afm attached and it was very simple!

main ingrediant is emagination

 

i didnt have to much trouble either.. thought it would be nice to get rid of it..(afm)
i even have a 6port turbo...really tough to fit IC all on the same side...but it fit.

 

I know it's not difficult, I've put a very nice cai on my 86 N/A and will be fabing one for my 87 TII with a FMIC aswell, just I wish that our afm was one of a thinner version, this maybe something I'll have to mess around with.

 

Thank god we got rid of that damned thing during the MT install!

 

And how much is a MircoTech (never priced them), besides your $200 deal

 

LOL. I have a backburner project to one day if I ever get the time, to go through
everybodies "hey I gotta a <pick your favourite part> in trade for a half eaten
candy bar, so why do you guys pay more?" thread and see if I can build a
complete TII, surely it must be possible by now.

-Henrik

 

Probably, damn near 80% of my car was obtained that way, got a brand new GT35R in trade for a car I bought for $400, the MT was $100, injectors were free (swapped with my 550s, lol), LIM was free, A1000 pump was $10, all the stainless lines were free, TII driveline was free, oh god I could go on forever!

 

same here, always find great freebies, cheap cars cuz of dipstick owners , parts galore

 

I agree with HondaHater and may just upgrade my primaries to like 780s or somthing in that area, the more I look at this the more I think I should get it. Its pretty close in its fuel range already plus who knows if 15% is the same on this as it is on the SAFC. As far as the MAF I "think" I am right in the neighborhood of 350-400 HP since I got that street port. I think if this allows me to finer tune I could serioulsy be in that ball park and would really benifit from the absence of the MAF. However they say they are working on its deletion. Maybe by me buying this it would give me the $ they need for R&D to ditch the MAF. Or even if they kept a MAF but found a substiute that flowed more I would not really care.

 

ok a couple things about this statement is a) you got the s4 one to fit so I thought that was your problem but it looks like from what you said it's mearly a cosmetic issue as you would just rather the thinner version b) The thinner s5 version can be adapted to the s4 with little effort, so if you want the s5 afm on the s4 then be my guest and lastly c) the thinner s5 as you will find out from your searches, on how to adapt the s5 to the s4 afm, that the s5 does not flow as well as the s4 so there is no gain other than the fact it is smaller and a tad easier to deal with.

Yeah I was pretty happy about that i'm not going to lie but of course I'm going to be pushing the limmits of that afm so i'd rather not take a chance but again i'm running a bnr stage III with streetport, fmic, larger injectors etc.... etc... etc.... and plans for an even bigger turbo in the future so the 2.0 was not the way to go for me but for other people that are keeping thier stock turbos or even going up to the bnr stage I and II I would strongly suggest this.

hahaha, where are all the good deals when i get to the furum. I know they're like oh **** hondahater is comming on somone buy this **** up quick so i can delete this thread before he gets on. Quick Quick Quick! lol. *** holes and thier good deals!

hell yeah! I'm all about supporting them to see what they come up with next! would love to see them come out with something to remove it for people like you and me that are pushing that higher hp and getting outside the range of the stock afm so yes people buy this cool upgrade, don't worry about all the wirring crap that goes into mt, haltech, mega squirt and emanage this is a freakin plug and play thing that can only get better! as we've seen with the 2.0.

 

You're exactly right.
A good example is Haltech recent releases on their ECU's.
I've sat on the fence when the E6X first came out, and I'm glad I did.
I've sat on the fence when the E8 came out, and I'm confident that it's a competent ECU (for my needs).
Haltech is not know for making solid products on initial releases of their ECU's.
The E11V1 was a downright fiasco for them, and the E11V2 is a good indication that the earlier V1 was a big mistake.

But, my beef was to comments (actually I only found one) that this thing was going to replace a true stand-alone.


This is just downright wrong.

Just for the hell of it, I went through the entire thread again from the beginning, and the amount of misguided comments is scary...

Tuning an internal combustion engine is basically all the same.
With the Mazda rotary engine, it has it's own set of operation parameters that are slightly different, but once you know the BASICS, it's all still the same.

Too much fuel - bogs; supresses power; fouls spark plugs
Too little fuel - hesistates at low load; detonates at high load
Too little ignition advance - supresses power; in extreme cases fuel burns out the exhaust
Too much ignition advance - detonation at high load
EXTREME deviations in igntion advance is dangerous with the stock wastespark leadings, as it starts to fire at the wrong time in the other rotor.

So fuel is taken care of...ignition spark is taken care of.
All you gotta worry about is oxygen or air.
Since air intake is something you gotta work with given your engine set-up, it's mostly ignored.

So there is your THREE variables you need to worry about.
That's it.

There are several different tools easily available that can help you tune.
Wide-bands are popular for fuel tuning.
I use EGT gauges for tuning fuel and ignition timing.
Dyno time will give you instant monitoring on the power delivery.

The information is all out there how to do all of this.
I won't spoon-feed you.
I make money doing this for customers of mine.
Good luck.

As for the RTEK products, I wish them luck.
Catering to FC owners is a royal pain in the ***, cause they are mostly cheap-*** ****'s.
Having something under $200 is attractive, but once it gets over several hundred, most FC owners are not willing to spend that kinda money on their FC's.
The product has potential, but only time will tell if it's a good seller enough to sustain development and further sales.
Since it is a brand new product, I'll be sitting and watching it's developments from the side-lines...as with any new product.
I just wanted to address some of the misinformation that was going on in the thread as indicated above.


-Ted

 

don't they have a 1.5, 1.7, 1.8 and 2.0? I can see where your comming from with the 1.5 chip but I think henrick had enough time to R&D from that version to the new 2.0 grant it there are alot of updates with the new version. Sometimes I think alot of these manufacturers come out with new thing before they are tested just to make some cash to research the next version or even warrant the continuation of the product however with the 2.0 the deadline kept being pushed back further and further due to r&d and also the beta testers. Remember this product was beta tested from numberous differant fc people on this board and others and if there where issues i'm sure they have been fixed.

edit: I'm not sure if you took it that I think this is a replacement for a standalone witch it isn't and i'm sure henrick would tell you the same. Just wanted to clear that up for you.

 

I wonder if I got this and my 720/890 set up was still a little off with the 720/720 setting and the 15% correction was not enough correction (not enough fuel) if I changed the setting to 550/720 if that in turn would maybe add more fuel? Obvioulsy I would still be running 720/890. Like right now I am pretty close to being with in 15% most of the time I am under the 15% but when it gets real cold out like 20 degrees I somtime have added like 18% on the SAFC. The fall is a real Beeyatch as the temp can fluctuate so much up here. My SAFC settings I was running in the afternoon when its like 60 degrees change when it drops down to 20 degrees or colder in the evening. Then day to day changes pretty good to. Like I said most of the time 15% will cover it but there are times I have been over 15% on my SAFC. I guess I can just turn the boost down a tad to huh LOL. Well this thread has been very interesting. I plan on getting this with the next couple months. I hope people post about there experiences with this.

 

It's here! digital tuning, inc. is proud to announce the public release of the Rtek7 Stage 2 ECU Upgrade. The feature list includes

* All the features of Rtek v 1.7, plus:
* Datalogging of 16 different engine parameters
* Review saved datalogs
* 100 point AFC style fuel correction map
* 20x20 timing map editing for leading, trailing and split
* Presets for 550/550, 550/720, and 720/720 cc injectors
* Log wideband through the stock ECU
* View check codes
* User adjustable secondary staging RPM
* Palm OS PDA based interface software included

The Rtek Stage2 Upgrade has more features and is more flexible than an AFC and much easier to install and set up than a full standalone, all for under $400. If you would like more information or to order, please check out the webpage at
http://pocketlogger.com/?pid=rtek7

 

aww fack, just saw the other thread...sry delete this thread lol

 

lol.

 

well i got a question....will it display accurate AFR's? or would i still need to get a wideband

 

i think you need a wideband

 

you will need a wideband, unless its price is up 300 more at least.

 

of course you need a wide band, nothing can magically give you accurate afr numbers without one. You should see what my microtech shows, lol.

 

Alright... So I just read this whole thread (and thoroughly enjoyed it) and I've got several minor questions/topics of discussion.

Generally speaking, do you experienced tuners feel confident that the 2.0 will be accurate enough to safely support higher HP?

Personally, I've always been a bit wary about ditching the stock ECU setup because of the cost and knowledge necessary for the EMS upgrade... The whole enjoyment of a turbo FC (in my mind) is that I can personally create a fast and fun car for relatively cheap while doing all the work myself. If the 2.0 is set up so that even a "tuning n00b" such as myself can figure it out, I would REALLY consider buying it. Honestly I would have more peace of mind in learning to use a simple tuning tool that I can UNDERSTAND, than I would if I paid a professional to tune an EMS that I would have a difficult time understanding...

My goal is a reliable and daily driven 350whp and my current setup is thus:

~rebuilt and street-ported s4 motor
~9.4:1 N/A rotors
~Walbro 255 fuel-pump
~550/750cc injectors
~R-Tek 1.7 chip
~full exhaust/intake

I wonder if a BNR Stage III turbo paired with a 2.0 chip would be sufficient for reaching my goals? Obviously I'll need a FMIC, a wide-band, an EGT gauge and some bigger injectors, but...?

 

good question about if tuners feel this is a good thing etc.... like you where talking about. Maybe someone can pm this link to pluto (steve kahn) to see what he thinks. If i where you eriksseven I would get the thing tuned by a pro but then be watching him do it because you know this will be his first since it's such a new devise. Since he will be learning it right there then he won't be going all fast through the program and just doing what he does. Sorry for the crapy post I just woke up and my brain hasn't kicked in yet

 

Ive got a question that hasnt yet been answered. The fuel tables in the 2.0 are 10x10, which is 10 adjustmants from -15% - 0 - +15% for 10 different rpm points. So the boost level only goes up to 10psi at the upmost last 10th setting for a given rpm adjustmant. What happens if someone was running more than 10psi? Are the boost levels actually acurate? Do the settings in the, lets say 6psi boost row actually correspond to the adjustmant of fuel at 6psi? OR is it just a rough estimate? If i were to buy this 2.0 and run say 13lbs what would i do to adjust the 3psi above the 10psi limit on the tables? OR even if i were to run 7psi, what would i do with the 8,9,10psi adjustments?

Thanks for the response, im seriously considering this for my FC since i only plan on running the stock turbo for now. Megasquirt is definately tempting though, since im already familiar with it from running it on my KLZE mx-3

 

[QUOTE=T-Rose]Ive got a question that hasnt yet been answered. The fuel tables in the 2.0 are 10x10, which is 10 adjustmants from -15% - 0 - +15% for 10 different rpm points. So the boost level only goes up to 10psi at the upmost last 10th setting for a given rpm adjustmant. What happens if someone was running more than 10psi? Are the boost levels actually acurate? Do the settings in the, lets say 6psi boost row actually correspond to the adjustmant of fuel at 6psi? OR is it just a rough estimate? If i were to buy this 2.0 and run say 13lbs what would i do to adjust the 3psi above the 10psi limit on the tables? OR even if i were to run 7psi, what would i do with the 8,9,10psi adjustments?

Thanks for the response, im seriously considering this for my FC since i only plan on running the stock turbo for now. Megasquirt is definately tempting though, since im already familiar with it from running it on my KLZE mx-3[/QUOTE

from checking out the instructions from digital tuning that can be found on their website in PDF form , you input the amount of Boost in a table on an axis and on the other axis you have RPM . From there you make the fuel corrections -15%-0- +15% for the amount of boost you'll be running to achieve the correct afr . But im not positive b/c i don't have a 2.0 . If im wrong someone please correct me .

I just noticed you said you were gonna run the stock turbo , I don't think is wise to run it at 13psi . I have read on here that 12psi is the limit .