TwinCharged RX7

iTrader: (14)

Good to know. I won't be able to do that though. Already have PDM and DCT running off the same single CANbus, maxxecu warns of communication issues if you run the DCT on the same bus as other items.

arghx

iTrader: (3)

If you don't have a boost control type of controls for your E-gate, you're nullifying a lot of the benefit. You have a nice actuator that can do a lot of things (not constrained by spring pressures etc), but without closed loop control meant for actual boost control are you really better off than a $50 solenoid and standard actuator?

mr2peak

FuelTech will do auto-calibration and closed-loop boost control for electronic wastegates. I'm not leading the pack here, FT seems to have made it really simple.

I was going to tune the engine on the pneumatic gate, but I might just skip right to the e-gate..

Topolino

iTrader: (2)

Actuators are currently in short supply. It appears some may be available once again for the B1 EFR size but I have the EFR 8374 so I'm waiting for the B2 kit from either Full-Race or Turbosource. If looking to pair the actuator w the accompanying high amperage controller being offered by either supplier, is there a consensus on who has the better kit (I.e., controller capabilities)? I'm pretty sure that I can use the more affordable Haltech DCMD controller w my ECU but I was thinking the native controllers offered w either kit might offer a more seamless integration overall(?). In the end, I may just snag the first available kit as I'm currently on a potential time constraint unfortunately.

Note: I'm looking to take advantage of the inherent synergy between DBW/traction control/e-wastegate boost control, etc., via Syvecs ECU.

mr2peak

This is a question for your tuner, or for Syvecs if you are doing the tuning.

It comes down to: does your ECU have native E-Gate control software? If it doesn't, then you will need to use the Full Race controller. If you want to fully take advantage of the e-gate, you'll want an ECU with native gate control and a proper high speed / current relay.

I haven't installed mine yet, corner spring failed and we pulled the motor, still running the new build in on the known pneumatic gate. Once she's up running at full power on a good tune, I can take the risk of swapping to the E-gate.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (2)

thanks for bumping this, I had meant to check their website recently; because they were supposed to have notified me when the Garrett version was available, but apparently dropped the ball.

I ordered it and the controller today, but still likely a ways out before it’s operational.
.

Topolino

iTrader: (2)

Knowing there is already a suitable pairing w the Haltech DCMD (per my Syvecs tuner, Chris Ludwig), I am now hopeful to instead utilize the new-ish Syvecs WMI module as my high amp driver since it offers 4 half bridge channels vs 2 for the Haltech. My current WI setup is independent of the ECU, and I generally prefer this route overall. But it is good to have add'l capability options I suppose.

Note: The price of the Syvecs WMI module is 4x the cost of the Haltech DCMD, so there is that to consider. But it can also be utilized w or wout a Syvecs ECU.

mr2peak

That Syvecs module sure offers a lot more than the Haltech DCMD, very over-spec'd unless you're using it for Water Injection as intended. Great as an all-inclusive system. ECU capabilities are crazy these days.

The Haltech DCMD saves $40 over the Fueltech Dual Power Driver, which seems to be exactly the same thing.. not bad at all.

I can't wait to have an Open Wastegate button for DD use. Minimum boost, minimum heat, better milage, all from the press of a button and on the same tune..

Topolino

iTrader: (2)

^Appreciate the feedback & quick response! I, too, am pumped regarding the applicable tuning possibilities; especially considering the inherent synergy re: DBW & traction control. Since Chris will be doing the actual implementation, I will leave it to his discretion moving forward. But I am hopeful he gives me the green light on getting the Syvecs WMI module based on my previous comments.

mr2peak

Lol well, I'm just a dude with an internet connection and google. Chris will know the actual details, please let us know what he says!

Topolino

iTrader: (2)

Yes, definitely! Chris is currently converting my FD from a PowerFC to the Syvecs platform; fundamentally for DBW & traction control capabilities, and overall modernization of the FD to today's standards. When I inquired about e-gate options recently, he indicated the Haltech unit would suffice for my situation. But that was before he knew I might be persuaded to go w the Syvecs WMI module (previously told him my intentions to keep WI independent of the Syvecs ECU for other reasons). After subscribing to this thread, I did some additional research, and that is when I stumbled across the different high amp driver combos being offered. But if Chris prefers to utilize the Haltech DCMD over another potential option, that is the direction I will ultimately proceed. I'll definitely get him to chime in as we get close to the finish line.

mr2peak

Why would you want to keep the aux injection separate? I'm in the process of moving from the AEM MAP based controller to the AEM PWM controller just so I can link it to my ECU. This means I can run 51/49 methanol and tune for it much more precisely, have ECU triggers if the injection system has issues, and have the water injection information logged and displayed along with everything else. The Syvecs WMI unit sounds like a really nice full-integration option, along with the bonus of also driving your wastegate.

Topolino

iTrader: (2)

^Agree w all of this. The short answer of keeping WI control separate from the ECU is the mitigation of any FAV voltage spikes due to PWM control potentially frying the ECU or similarly wired components. But this was also before Syvecs came out w their stand-alone WMI module so I do find my concerns slowly being alleviated as time goes on. With the dual functionality of the WMI module to potentially drive the e-gate, and for the integration features you mention, I'm closer to getting fully onboard should my tuner give me the thumbs up for applicable integration.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (2)

going to call you out on the bold text by requesting an explanation on how it matters either way?

because your implication is that their controller doesn’t have a “proper” high speed / current relay.

I’d suggest that the average joe is setting their self up for a more likely possibility of making a costly mistake going the way you suggest. I’m not seeing how it can be any better than sending the same signal that would otherwise go to the pneumatic solenoid valve to the e-controller instead. From there it’s just a matter of commanding it when to be fully closed, fully open, and anywhere between those two points. Which is a separate process otherwise.

I don’t see how the motor driver power circuit itself otherwise contributes to any extra advantage as long as the proper power is being sent to the e-gate motor.
.

mr2peak

Their (the Full Race) controller does have a proper relay, but if you aren't also using the software in their relay and only using the relay function, why would you spend the extra money buying it? It costs more than the Haltech and FuelTech options. That seems like a costly mistake to me..

You can't use a normal relay either. It needs to be able to handle the variable signal. A standard (analogue?) relay won't work properly.

You can't send the same signal you'd send to a pneumatic gate because it behaves differently. You definitely need endpoint signals, I don't know the specifics but Full Race says sending the standard pneumatic Mac valve signal straight to the e-gate won't work, you're controlling exact gate position not air pulses, I'm taking them at their word. The Turbosmart gates have similar requirements.


Does that clear it up?


I've also got a FuelTech dual valve boost controller meant for use with a CO2 bottle or on-board air. Hard to find comparisons between the two systems, both should offer similar advantages in boost control. The CO2/OBA should offer faster response but has more potential points of failure, trying to move away from pressure and vacuum lines as much as possible. Is there anyone here who can shine some light on the advantages / disadvantages?

TeamRX8

iTrader: (2)

I suppose, was just thinking beyond those specific ECU options.

Not sure what exactly is being referenced by “their software” though. The ECU sends the PWM signal to their controller and it drives the e-gate position accordingly.
.

mr2peak

Doesn't matter what ECU, if it lacks native e-gate control, you will need the Full Race controller. Because it's not the same as driving a pneumatic gate. Feel like we are beating a dead horse here.

The Full Race box is a programmable box (along with having pre-sets). It converts the endpoint sensor info from the gate, mixes that with the ECU pneumatic gate commands and whatever software presets or custom profiles you have selected/created, and outputs a high/low H bridge command for the e-gate. That's what I'm referring to. That's the software. That's the difference. Please read this:

https://www.full-race.com/electronic-iwg-controller


If your ECU has native e-gate control, and a high enough current H bridge to directly control the e-gate directly, then you're a lucky SOB and you should fully rejoice in having superior hardware.

But humor me. What other ECU were you thinking about? Maybe you can do the research and present your findings on this other ECU?

mr2peak

I found the answer elsewhere. The CO2 / On Board Air is great for increasing dome pressure to hold much higher boost levels very precisely, but it can't go below the wastegate spring pressure to let you run a fully open gate.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (2)

yes, that’s what I’ve been saying, but your words don’t match up other than choosing to use the ecu specific version, which then has to setup compared to theirs which is already setup specifically for their e-gate. I read the entire user manual before posting here. You mechanically install it, wire it, calibrate it, and are off to tuning the pwm input …

but maybe it’s just me …


.

mr2peak

You seem to be the only one here struggling with this. It does seem to just be you. Topilino and I understood each other just fine.

But here goes again, because I actually do want you to be successful with this stuff:

First of all, your ECU choice has a direct impact on how to best set it up. No exceptions.

If you have Native E-Gate control built into your ECU, you might be able to do things with Boost / DBW / Traction Control / etc though software strategies that are built into your ECU, that you cannot do with just a PWM output. With native E-Gate control the ECU will see exact wastegate location though INPUT from E-Gate to ECU; but with the Full Race controller running the show, your ECU will not see the wastegate position, it will only send a PWM signal. Notice this loss of information? Look at the wiring diagram if you are struggling here. ECU and Full Race controller = 2 wires from the ECU; ECU and Native E-Gate control = 4 wires between ECU and E-Gate.

More INPUT information coming into your ECU allows more advanced software strategies that can be linked to the rest of your system. The Full Race controller cannot influence the rest of your system, it can only OUTPUT to the e-gate, nothing else.

If you looked at a basic wiring diagram for this stuff you'd have seen the INPUT / OUTPUT differences between the Full Race unit and (generic) high speed / current relay through native E-Gate control. This is in the manual.

So, if I (me, my car, with my ECU with native e-gate control) used the Full Race controller, it would cost me more money, AND I would ALSO be losing that INPUT wastegate location information that I can use to influence other aspects of the tune.


Do you understand now? Or do you want to try and insult me again with another weird-*** YouTube video?

Topolino

iTrader: (2)

Newb mechanical question so apologies in advance. I received my kit earlier this week; pretty basic stuff for the price. Kudos for coming up w the applicable mating bracket so I suppose someone deserves to get paid for that ingenuity. But does it make any sense to grab a backup actuator (just the actuator itself) in case of failure or premature lifespan? I'm aware these are stock/OEM items for some modern cars so I suppose reliability is somewhat proven overall. And perhaps availability (a previous concern) won't actually become a issue due to being Honda OEM status. But what happens in a failure mode? Does it close the WG leading to potential overboost issues or simply keep it open until the unit can be replaced? No buyers remorse. Just curious mostly.

mr2peak

I wouldn't worry about future availability, but it never hurts to have spares. As for failure mode, that's a really good question. Hopefully you have over-boost safety features enabled on your ECU? Definitely worth having a chat with your tuner.

This is another good reason to have the INPUT signals linked to your ECU, you can immediately see the reported vs actual wastegate position and troubleshoot more effectively

TeamRX8

iTrader: (2)

Honestly I think you understand this topic just as much when you started the billet differential housing thread. And what does the reference about myself possibly being the one not understanding where you were coming from have to do with “insulting” you? Unlike yourself, I leave open the possibility about being wrong, but now let me oblige you with something to be puffed up over: I’ve been on here long enough to understand that you’re not someone I think of when it comes to technical ability.

Here’s the thing; you *think* what you’re saying might be the case, when you really have no idea at all. That’s why you’ve switched to using words like might, maybe, etc. after being questioned about your full-on declaration. The only thing I’m even remotely struggling with is someone pretending to be more knowledgable than they are.

Just because somebody else possibly read your explanation and either agreed with it or accepted that they didn’t know enough to challenge the response is in no way a factor on whether it’s correct or not. The only difference I can see is it could save using a few inputs or outputs for other things if those are in limited supply. And if it’s cheaper then ok, my words never question that aspect. Yet you keep harping it.

Because here’s the thing; if you really knew, then specific examples could be provided rather than generic buzzwords and wishy-washy references. FWIW there’s a video from Rob Dahm using the FuelTech ecu with native egate control and Turbosmart egate and your words here don’t match what he shared as his direct experience with it.

According to his comments it wasn’t easy and he had some criticism for it. Notably that tuning it wasn’t intuitive at all, just the opposite. I believe he switched to Haltech after that. It was insinuated earlier in the thread that I didn’t elaborate because I couldn’t, but just as I had stated then, it was because I chose not to. Specifically trying to avoid this kind of back and forth pissy bs with someone who’s comment(s) demonstrate an incomplete understanding.

All that matters wrt the ecu for mine is that it has the closed loop PWM boost control strategies needed.
.

mr2peak

You still haven't told us what other ECU options you were contemplating. What were you thinking about?

mr2peak

You seem to just be attacking me. You haven't added anything new to the thread, you're doing your best to pick apart what I've added here, and generally being a jerk. FFS man, go back to the Politics forum if you want to insult me and take out personal grievances. You're doing what you did in the Diff thread, attacking me just because you want to, without adding anything useful.

Of course I used ECU specific examples. It's all different. Go read all the manuals and go play with all the different software if you want to fully understand it. I have to use "might" and "maybe" when talking general, because again, it's all different depending on your car's setup.