eManage Blue on closed/open loop?

[lamcote]

I'm not sure about that summary, it suggests the sequence is:

1. ECU calculates a value 2. Emanage modifies the value 3.engine uses what it's given 4. End of story
If this was right the Emanage would have the last say,  but

In fact it is

1. ECU provides a base value 2. Emanage modifies that value 3. Engine uses what it's given 4. ECU evaluates the exhaust (closed loop)  and may then modify the base value that it next supplies in step 1.
Thus the stock ECU actually gets the last say and that is the problem. If the Emanage is adding 10% fueling to the standard value, eventually the stock ECU will stop supplying the standard value and start supplying 10% less fuel so the 10% extra that the Emanage adds just brings the fuel back to the original standard AFR.

Further negative evidence is that if a mapper makes changes to the AFR in closed loop where the MOT test is applied, the car would inevitably fail it's MOT because the AFR MUST be at the standard stoichiometric value to pass, so any car that passes an MOT must be running stock settings under the MOT test conditions. If the mapper changed these, the ECU has most definitely overwritten them if you pass.

[shnazzle]

It does make sense. I would think that the eManage would (in closed loop) still intervene but when the ECU tries to get o2 feedback, the eManage manhandles that signal as well first.  But...how would it know how much to mandhandle it based on the inputs. If you could predict o2 levels you'd be a genius.

All very odd. I'm assuming people like Noble just don;t touch any areas that are in closed loop

[lamcote]

That's the conclusion I reached too.

[Davegtst]

I used the vtec output on the emb to switch a micro relay which in turn gives a false 80% throttle signal to the stock ecu instead of the real throttle input.  This fools the ecu into open loop.  I have programed the vtec output to go live at 0.5 psi as mine is turbo but you could easily change it so it goes live at say 4k revs.

[shnazzle]

I used the vtec output on the emb to switch a micro relay which in turn gives a false 80% throttle signal to the stock ecu instead of the real throttle input.  This fools the ecu into open loop.  I have programed the vtec output to go live at 0.5 psi as mine is turbo but you could easily change it so it goes live at say 4k revs.

I've seen that trick as well. It might very well be that mine is set up like this already. I have no idea what kind of trickery Noble unleashed on this thing.
Hence I'm quite keen to get a cable made and get the map off to see what's been done. See the lay of the land.

[Davegtst]

My original post.
http://www.mr2roc.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=54259

[shnazzle]

Good read that. Thanks! Now the question is... What about NA cars? Need a trigger to put it into open loop

Would it make sense to use the VTEC map to switch to ON (12v?) at say 4000rpm and at least 70% throttle, send that signal to a relay which then forces the voltage reducer to put out 3.93v (or whatever my WOT voltage is) to the TPS input for the stock ECU? And if VTEC is OFF, then the relay uses the actual TPS input?

[Davegtst]

I haven't tried it but have a read up on O2 input for the emb.  You will need to update to the latest 1.49 firmware first.   Apparently you can use the boost input to self tune to your own specs.  I can't really do it because I need the boost input but for an na it may be ideal.

[shnazzle]

Ah yes by using a wideband o2,which is definitely something I'm looking at doing long-term. I'm not sure I want it to always strive for a stoichiometric state. I'd definitely want to be running around 13.5-13.8 on load and potentially a bit lower fueling on cruise

[lamcote]

Don't forget the MOT, if you aren't at stoichiometric for the MOT you will fail on emissions. That's the reason closed loop exists. Also if you are mainly running richer than stoichiometric I think it will kill the cat.

[shnazzle]

Yes indeed. This is all so much easier when there's boost involved I have to say. Tuning for NA is a pain in the hoop  s:) s:)
I'm still confused about the actual capability differences between the EM-B and EM-U.
With the latest firmware updates etc, can you or can you not mess with timing on the EM-B?

[Davegtst]

You can change the ignition timing but I'm pretty sure you can only advance it.  You will need the extra ignition wiring harness for the ignition though.

[ChrisGB]

Can you advance it by just less that 360 degrees to program retard?

[Leethesparky]

You can retard the timing also, I can't remember exactly but I've got mine retried by around half a degree per lb of boost, I think.
Emb has 3 maps
Air
Fuel
timing

You can add fuel ( even with stock injectors by tricking the stock ecu into thinking they are smaller than what they actually are) but you can not reduce fueling, you have to use the air map to reduce fueling if you needed to by tricking the ecu into thinking there is less air passing by the maf.

Dave's vtec mod makes all the difference... I was resetting my ecu every couple days until I did the mod (stock ecu kept leaning out the mixture, not good under boost)

[maybeturbo]

I've wondered does the emanage affect idle? Anybody know? Im running a bit rich at idle, I removed my cat and it's since that I think. Just trying to figure out what's changed.

[shnazzle]

I've wondered does the emanage affect idle? Anybody know? I'm running a bit rich at idle, I removed my cat and it's since that I think. Just trying to figure out what's changed.

Have you removed the main cat? Or just pre-cats?

[maybeturbo]

The main cat. Removed and welded a pipe in place whilst it was all apart.  It will find its way to 14.7 -1 ish if it's left sitting to idle for ten or twenty seconds.
It also stumbles a little at 1500-1700 rpm. I'm not sure if it's a sensor or if the maps not great at that point (would the emanage map have an effect at that low an rpm? I'd imagine it does as it will generate positive boost at about 1300rpm) Fuels at a solid 11-1 ish under boost. Just has a spot at that point, it feels as though the fueling as it begins to generate boost isn't spot on. I'm just trying to make it perfect. Had a lot of things needed sorting when I bought it from a member on here.

[shnazzle]

MOT issues aside; yes, you will need to map the car to the (big) exhaust change you've done. The cat is by far the most restrictive part of the exhaust, so you've removed a lot of back pressure.
Also, the o2 readings will be through the roof of course. I'm surprised it hasn't thrown a code for your cat. If it senses o2 levels are the same on both ends of the sensor then it should conclude that the cat is knacked and throw a code.

I'm not sure if the car uses the o2 readings from the post-cat sensor in closed loop.

What kind of fuel management are you running now on your turbo?
Especially on a turbo I'd say a remap is required.

[maybeturbo]

Yeah, I knew it would need a remap and it may explain the rich idle, but the 1500 rpm stumble was there before I removed the cat. It's actually much less noticeable now.
It was throwing cat codes before I removed it. The cat was knackered, that's why I cut it out tbh. It's only throwing rich codes now. But it fuels as you'd expect under any throttle conditions. I just want to make sure everything is spot on before I pay out for a remap.
It's fuel and spark is controlled by a greddy emanage.  Any recommendations for a remap? I'm in Surrey.  This is Rogers car originally I believe.

[maybeturbo]

It's running a standard post cat sensor setup and the precat sensors are linked together.

[1979scotte]

Redline in Essex know mr2 turbos well not sure if they do emanage. They did all the SP turbo kits on unichip.
2 bar tunning are always highly recommended but I don't think they do piggybacks.
Austec in Crawley I think Josh took the car there once.
Abbey motorsport in Oxted again not sure if they do emanage. Do some good stuff for the gt86 and Nissan in general.
That's all off the top of my head.

[shnazzle]

Having driven it around for a while now I can conclude 2 things that back up everything said here:

1) The ECU does indeed compensate for the values the piggyback produces in closed loop. The car drives as it did stock now, in closed loop.
2) Open loop seems to start spot on at 4000 rpm. Either that, or it starts earlier and the eManage is mapped to increase power at 4000.

At 4000rpm, you'd swear the car had VTEC. It kicks in yo!! It's most enjoyable indeed and the rpm needle goes from 4k to 7k very quickly indeed.
As an example, I came onto the A189 in 4th at about 45. To get in before a big lorry, I put it into 3rd and put my foot down.... wheel spin...actual wheel spin at about 50mph...couldn't believe it.
Granted my rear tyres are barely legal (don't get excited Scotte).
I can see how this is going to be great fun on track (next summer!) or blast around the countryside.

So, I still need to pull the map and see what they've done. If there's nothing in the closed loop areas (changes I felt could have just been because the ECU was reset), then there's no point doing any mods using the tweak described via VTEC.
Frankly, I quite like it like this. Stock and fuel-efficient normally, but then unleash the beast at 4k.

[lamcote]

Very useful feedback. Sounds like you have got a nice setup there. It seems an increase to 155bhp makes a big difference compared to the standard power? Will you be tempted to go for more?

[shnazzle]

Very useful feedback. Sounds like you have got a nice setup there. It seems an increase to 155bhp makes a big difference compared to the standard power? Will you be tempted to go for more?

I definitely want to get some stage1 cams in there and possibly play with larger injectors if I can get the airflow right. I don't really know what the duty cycles are like on stock injectors, so bigger injectors may be totally unnecessary.
But that's not anytime soon. The cams will go in when I do an engine overhaul, and as I have yet to hit 70k...could be a while.

[lamcote]

My guesstimate is that the standard injectors could manage up to about 170bhp, although I have no direct experience of this so others might contradict this.