bike throttle bodies on vts engine

11th March 2010, 15:48

can bike throttle bodies run on standard managment on a vts?

If so which ones, and what gains would be seen,

11th March 2010, 16:29

Speak to Chipwizards - they have done it in the past

11th March 2010, 17:43

Yes but it's rubbish I ran r6 bodies on standard management waste of time effort and money. I went standalone very quickly

11th March 2010, 17:47

I was going to write a long reply about the topic but then run out of energy

11th March 2010, 17:50

I know that feeling so was I

11th March 2010, 18:19

i dont think standard managment is a good way to go with bobies or any tuning to the engine,

for a complete job i would always get an standalone ecu, might get alot of stick on here for say it, but i dnt care

it just the way i feel on this matter.

11th March 2010, 18:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndySAXO

i dont think standard managment is a good way to go with bobies or any tuning to the engine,

for a complete job i would always get an standalone ecu, might get alot of stick on here for say it, but i dnt care

it just the way i feel on this matter.

I agree 100%

11th March 2010, 18:55

Agreed

11th March 2010, 19:01

yes they can run on standard management.

11th March 2010, 19:03

Also Agree with raunchz. Even if you did wish to stick with the original ECU you would have to have it so extensive modified to work at all well I cant see why anyone would do it over a stand alone system. Standalone is simple and very easy to reprogram if ever required.

11th March 2010, 19:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by AXracing

Also Agree with raunchz. Even if you did wish to stick with the original ECU you would have to have it so extensive modified to work at all well I cant see why anyone would do it over a stand alone system. Standalone is simple and very easy to reprogram if ever required.

there is no extensive modification required when running OEM management on ITBS.

11th March 2010, 19:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by gouldy87

yes they can run on standard management.

Please tell me your taking the piss. It would not even idle let alone run well on a standard map.

11th March 2010, 19:10

Saw a saxo on bodies make over 200bhp on standard ecu.

Andy i doubt you will get stick for saying it tbh

11th March 2010, 19:13

Wayne at Chipwizards can map an oem Ecu for bodies.

IMO I'd rather go standalone so you can edit it yourself/take it to any rolling road you like.

11th March 2010, 19:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by AXracing

Please tell me your taking the piss. It would not even idle let alone run well on a standard map.

no im not;

11th March 2010, 19:15

This is mine 2k idle. Massive flat spot until 4k revs

11th March 2010, 19:18

2k idle?!

11th March 2010, 19:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by samueljonburgess

2k idle?!

i would guess its down to extremely lumpy cam profiles, like a ph4 newmans cam for example.

11th March 2010, 19:19

Yup, engine didnt last long

11th March 2010, 19:22

I don't know why you'd run an oem Ecu when the like of the PNP Ecu's are about now

11th March 2010, 19:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by raunchz

Wayne at Chipwizards can map an oem Ecu for bodies.

Very true and its not cheap and a long way from the standard item when he is finished

11th March 2010, 19:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by raunchz

I don't know why you'd run an oem Ecu when the like of the PNP Ecu's are about now

which ECU running plug and play set up?

11th March 2010, 19:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by AXracing

Very true and its not cheap and a long way from the standard item when he is finished

I agree - I'd opt for Standalone anyday, especially with the Predator being a plug and play Ecu.

So effectively the same as an oem Ecu wiring wise, but you can change bits yourself on it, get it mapped up anywhere, it'll do boost, bung in a lc-1 and map it yourself etc.

11th March 2010, 19:23

guna say f*ck that as an everyday drive haha

11th March 2010, 19:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by gouldy87

which ECU running plug and play set up?

Datashift Predator, I'm running one on my TB setup

11th March 2010, 19:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by AXracing

Very true and its not cheap and a long way from the standard item when he is finished

i can tell you the basics of how its done if you want to know?

11th March 2010, 19:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by raunchz

Datashift Predator, I'm running one on my TB setup

im not going to comment on this as it will cause unnecessary conflict

11th March 2010, 19:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by gouldy87

im not going to comment on this as it will cause unnecessary conflict

eh? no worries

11th March 2010, 19:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by gouldy87

im not going to comment on this as it will cause unnecessary conflict

You pretty much... just did!

11th March 2010, 19:33

I'm a bit curious now !

11th March 2010, 19:38

Got my popcorn at the ready for this one

But personally id not be running an OE ecu with my car and be limited to just one person being able to map it, and the joy of a decent standalone is you can save the map on to your pc so if you ever have any hardware faults you dont loose the map aswell.

11th March 2010, 19:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by gouldy87

i can tell you the basics of how its done if you want to know?

I am a bit confused as to where your coming from now. As my point was it will not run on a standard management as it has to be modified to work at a not so insignificant amount. When I was original quoted for the work I thought I may as well go stand alone as it did not work out much more, was much simpler to have mapped later down the line, could migrate to other engines if required and the options from stand alone units were far more comprehensive. The proof is in the pudding as it ended up the strongest engine on the track so was very happy with my decision.

11th March 2010, 19:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan

Got my popcorn at the ready for this one

But personally id not be running an OE ecu with my car and be limited to just one person being able to map it, and the joy of a decent standalone is you can save the map on to your pc so if you ever have any hardware faults you dont loose the map aswell.

hello stranger, long time no ban.

i do not wish to engage in any argument.

11th March 2010, 19:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by AXracing

I am a bit confused as to where your coming from now. As my point was it will not run on a standard management as it has to be modified to work at a not so insignificant amount. When I was original quoted for the work I thought I may as well go stand alone as it did not work out much more, was much simpler to have mapped later down the line, could migrate to other engines if required and the options from stand alone units were far more comprehensive. The proof is in the pudding as it ended up the strongest engine on the track so was very happy with my decision.

if your happy with it then fair play.

11th March 2010, 19:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by gouldy87

hello stranger, long time no ban.

i do not wish to engage in any argument.

Have a discussion if you want, just dont turn it into calling people cunts and accuse them of ganging up if they question what you say.

Questions and discussions are what make things fun

11th March 2010, 19:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan

Have a discussion if you want, just dont turn it into calling people cunts and accuse them of ganging up if they question what you say.

Questions and discussions are what make things fun

agreed

11th March 2010, 19:52

can of worms dont do it gouldy ,leave them to plug and play

11th March 2010, 19:52

So the Oem Ecu can be converted onto an Alpha-N method of mapping? Does it have a lot of load sites? 12x12? 16x16?

I think it would be an okay method of mapping up a Tb'd car if the owner of the car could access the 'map' themselves should they need to change any of the parameters - I don't know whether some sort or serial output could be setup on an OEM Ecu to do this, if so then it'd effectively be standalone if you could directly write to the chip?

I think it's harder to compare say an OMEX setup with an oem Ecu due to the wiring needed for the OMEX and the associated cost that goes with that.

But then comparing the Predator to the oem Ecu ? IMO the Predator surely has to win hands down? Say I live in Ireland, then I'd be stumped if I wanted to get the oem Ecu mapped for TB's, whereas the Predator doesn't have that geographical limitation?

11th March 2010, 19:53

coorr, Bodies on a daily drive... cant complain Tbh.

11th March 2010, 19:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by andywiddss1

can of worms dont do it gouldy ,leave them to plug and play

ok andy

11th March 2010, 19:59

handbags at dawn

Can i ask the advantage of a oem ecu map over easily re-programmable aftermarket Engine management.
Especially as oem ecu's are atleast 7 years old now.....Unless its a replacement unit. So effectively, is equal to s/h standalone unit, which generally are cheaper...

11th March 2010, 20:01

The only reason these questions keep getting asked and 'discussed' at length is because no-one really knows about the remapping of an oem Ecu - like how it's done, advantages, load sites etc.

11th March 2010, 20:02

its 16x16 ross. the geographical thing is an issue but with chipwizzards down the road from myself and seeing a car develop over 200bhp i would consider it if taking my car further. chipwizzards are even working with ricky-p to map a standard ecu for boost.

taken from what wayne said on here i personaly understand very little of though lol.

Someone did ask what the map resolution of the stock ECUs were, I suspect trying to imply that it was in some way inferior to a particular 'nameless' system. Well I can tell you that the main tables are 11(load)x24 or 20 speed sites, depending which system you pick and they ultimately have 16-bit value resolution (each step being finer than 1/65000th). This compares with 12 load and only 12 speed sites (not enough for a high-revving engine) at a miserable 8-bit resolution (with steps no finer than 1/256th) which is too clumsy to be acceptable for me, which is one of the reasons why I won't do the 'nameless' systems any more. That reason plus miserable reliability issues.

11th March 2010, 20:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by webby

its 16x16 ross. the geographical thing is an issue but with chipwizzards down the road from myself and seeing a car develop over 200bhp i would consider it if taking my car further. chipwizzards are even working with ricky-p to map a standard ecu for boost.

its already all been done.

11th March 2010, 20:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by webby

its 16x16 ross. the geographical thing is an issue but with chipwizzards down the road from myself and seeing a car develop over 200bhp i would consider it if taking my car further. chipwizzards are even working with ricky-p to map a standard ecu for boost.

Ah okay, if you're local to Chipwizards then it does seem like a good solution - any idea on a rough price ?

So effectively it does become a standalone Ecu, that's cool to learn !

I wander what sort of software is needed to do this sort of thing with the OEM Ecu? I would imagine you are effectively reading and overwriting some sort of chip in the Ecu with new parameters?

11th March 2010, 20:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by raunchz

Ah okay, if you're local to Chipwizards then it does seem like a good solution - any idea on a rough price ?

So effectively it does become a standalone Ecu, that's cool to learn !

I wander what sort of software is needed to do this sort of thing with the OEM Ecu? I would imagine you are effectively reading and overwriting some sort of chip in the Ecu with new parameters?

depends what you mapping the OE ECU for. i know the basics of mapping them to run bodies but i dont know how you would go about mapping them for boost if im honest.

11th March 2010, 20:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by gouldy87

depends what you mapping the OE ECU for. i know the basics of mapping them to run bodies but i dont know how you would go about mapping them for boost if im honest.

Sounds good mapping them for boost ! I presume you'd do away with the oem MAP sensor and just attach the oem loom wires to a 2.5Bar MAP sensor and use that.

Interesting though !

11th March 2010, 20:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by raunchz

Sounds good mapping them for boost ! I presume you'd do away with the oem MAP sensor and just attach the oem loom wires to a 2.5Bar MAP sensor and use that.

Interesting though !

for bodies you use the throttle position sensor and bin off the MAP sensor iirc

11th March 2010, 20:14

as much as i know you burn a new map onto the eprom chip in the ecu (single plug). wayne has a way of live mapping it and then import the new map onto the ecu.

gouldy has ricky car been done now??

11th March 2010, 20:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by webby

as much as i know you burn a new map onto the eprom chip in the ecu (single plug). wayne has a way of live mapping it and then import the new map onto the ecu.

gouldy has ricky car been done now??

i think so, not sure. the man has 24 cars so you need to be abit more specific.

11th March 2010, 20:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Olly

handbags at dawn

Can i ask the advantage of a oem ecu map over easily re-programmable aftermarket Engine management.
Especially as oem ecu's are atleast 7 years old now.....Unless its a replacement unit. So effectively, is equal to s/h standalone unit, which generally are cheaper...

firstly the oem ecu is at least 15year old design --nothing wrong with it.
but there is no way you can have the flexibility of a stand alone
you cannot remap an oem unit to do same job as a stand alone ,purely and simply because you cannot get at all the parameters in the oem ecu .
it is a half way house at best .
It can work fine on some limted conversion of the program it was fitted with from factory .
but it can in no way be considered a direct comparison to a stand alone ecu.
anybody that argues otherwise is flat out wrong .there is no other way to put it.
At some levels of tune --it may work out every bit as good as a stand alone ecu -but once you start changing components the advantages become disadvantages-so for any serious tuning its a poor choice due to its inherrant limitations,because it was designed for a specific car + state of tune

11th March 2010, 20:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by webby

its 16x16 ross. the geographical thing is an issue but with chipwizzards down the road from myself and seeing a car develop over 200bhp i would consider it if taking my car further. chipwizzards are even working with ricky-p to map a standard ecu for boost.

taken from what wayne said on here i personaly understand very little of though lol.

Someone did ask what the map resolution of the stock ECUs were, I suspect trying to imply that it was in some way inferior to a particular 'nameless' system. Well I can tell you that the main tables are 11(load)x24 or 20 speed sites, depending which system you pick and they ultimately have 16-bit value resolution (each step being finer than 1/65000th). This compares with 12 load and only 12 speed sites (not enough for a high-revving engine) at a miserable 8-bit resolution (with steps no finer than 1/256th) which is too clumsy to be acceptable for me, which is one of the reasons why I won't do the 'nameless' systems any more. That reason plus miserable reliability issues.

Can the ignition and injectors be that accurate to take advantage of the 1/65000th step? When compared to 1/256th it sounds hugely finer but would this give a 'better' quality map, and wouldn't mapping take a lot longer?

Not really aimed at you webby, just a general question, but I don't know how 'fine' a map the car can use and be advantageous over a 1/125th ecu resolution. Would the hardware (such as injectors, crank position sensor etc?) be the limitation to this?

Sounds very interesting though, is cool to find out some info about the oem Ecu !

11th March 2010, 20:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by axsaxoman

firstly the oem ecu is at least 15year old design --nothing wrong with it.
but there is no way you can have the flexibility of a stand alone
you cannot remap an oem unit to do same job as a stand alone ,purely and simply because you cannot get at all the parameters in the oem ecu .
it is a half way house at best .
It can work fine on some limted conversion of the program it was fitted with from factory .
but it can in no way be considered a direct comparison to a stand alone ecu.
anybody that argues otherwise is flat out wrong .there is no other way to put it.
At some levels of tune --it may work out every bit as good as a stand alone ecu -but once you start changing components the advantages become disadvantages-so for any serious tuning its a poor choice due to its inherrant limitations,because it was designed for a specific car + state of tune

very good point raised about the age of technology i agree. but i would not dismiss the possibilities of the OE ECU.

one of the bodied 16vs ive seen run on a dyno was 203hp and were the winner in its class 3 years running iirc.

11th March 2010, 20:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by gouldy87

i think so, not sure. the man has 24 cars so you need to be abit more specific.

the charged one that was at waynes.

11th March 2010, 20:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by raunchz

Can the ignition and injectors be that accurate to take advantage of the 1/65000th step? When compared to 1/256th it sounds hugely finer but would this give a 'better' quality map, and wouldn't mapping take a lot longer?

Not really aimed at you webby, just a general question, but I don't know how 'fine' a map the car can use and be advantageous over a 1/125th ecu resolution. Would the hardware (such as injectors, crank position sensor etc?) be the limitation to this?

Sounds very interesting though, is cool to find out some info about the oem Ecu !

i really dont know ross im afriad, i am putting in some time at uni with the racing team and i will be learning about mapping and ecu's ect as it really does interest me. so i will report back in a few year lol.

11th March 2010, 20:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by webby

the charged one that was at waynes.

he had it mapped that day.

11th March 2010, 20:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by webby

i really dont know ross im afriad, i am putting in some time at uni with the racing team and i will be learning about mapping and ecu's ect as it really does interest me. so i will report back in a few year lol.

lol, no worries !!

I agree about it being interesting !! Would love to learn more about it but there are only a few people really that know enough to really give any info in detail.

11th March 2010, 20:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by raunchz

lol, no worries !!

I agree about it being interesting !! Would love to learn more about it but there are only a few people really that know enough to really give any info in detail.

it is a very complex and expansive subject i agree.

11th March 2010, 20:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by gouldy87

very good point raised about the age of technology i agree. but i would not dismiss the possibilities of the OE ECU.

one of the bodied 16vs ive seen run on a dyno was 203hp and were the winner in its class 3 years running iirc.

you may not --may i ask what you do to make a living

11th March 2010, 20:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by axsaxoman

you may not --may i ask what you do to make a living

with the wheels on his golf is it not appartent lol messing gouldy

john can i come and do a weeks placement in the summer once i have finished uni? im quite serious btw.

11th March 2010, 20:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by axsaxoman

you may not --may i ask what you do to make a living

i work as a scrap man through the day and i run the waltzes on an evening.

11th March 2010, 21:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by gouldy87

i work as a scrap man through the day and i run the waltzes on an evening.

im sure iv seen u on the hook a duck aswell

11th March 2010, 21:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by andywiddss1

im sure iv seen u on the hook a duck aswell

every other wednesday.

12th March 2010, 06:55

There's just no way I would consider a re-mapped OE ECU on my engines. As John succinctly put it, changes are the main issue.

When I map a car, I do the best I can in the time available and most of the time that will be pretty good and will perform as people expect. But sometimes you do need to make changes. Cars mapped in the rollers will see different air supply on the road and even a good WB Lambda will struggle to keep up past part throttle. So there's always going to be scope for improving the map beyond what was set on the rollers. We frequently review the performance of the race/rally engines I build and work on and small changes can often be needed, that take moments with a standalone ECU.

DTA in particular has a good set of parameter recordings, that can help greatly to diagnose problems. From an engine builder's point of view, that can be very important! I looked at one of my TU5J4 race engine's ECU yesterday and found a peak of 9670rpm (with a 8500rpm limit, it was fine thankfully!) We frequently review the performance of the race/rally engines I build and work on and small changes can often be needed, that take moments with a standalone ECU.

Being able to hook up the lap top yourself can be very useful and interesting if you're into it. It's how I started mapping basically. You can play with things like shift lights, fan control, even launch control.

The initial cost of an aftermarket ECU (and loom in most cases) is higher, but as John says, over time and changes, it becomes less and the aftermarket ECU will usually be worth 80% or more of what you paid for it, when a re-mapped ECU won't be.

There's a strong case for re-mapping the standard ECU on a cam change etc, if it's likely to be a one off modification, but beyond that the balance swings IMO.

12th March 2010, 08:13

Where's my thanks button when I need it!!

12th March 2010, 08:49

I love the way this has gone round in one big circle.

So just to make clear and as per asked on the original post you can NOT run individual throttle bodies on the standard management. Any one who says it can is in a dream land.

You CAN however modify the standard management if you go to the likes of Chipwizards but you will always be limited by ECU.

You CAN go for a stand alone ECU that most have a advantages over modifying the original ECU the biggest being that you can simple pick the ECU that is best for your application so you are not restrained by hardware limitations.

12th March 2010, 09:30

Same old discussion that's happened a dozen times before - YES it can be done, why don't you go standalone, what standalone you got, Predator, oh I know some huge secret about them, let's keep the discussion polite, YES it can be done.

I wish I was in on the big secret!!

Andy

12th March 2010, 09:49

i knew me saying what i did would start this again, it was just my opoin on the matter,

what i think if you going to spend a good part of a 1000 quid on cams and bodies, why use a ecu that was only design to be use for the standard engine?

and also once you get the standard ecu map for the bodies then for any tweeks you have to go bk to the same place and limited, which is very good for chipwizapd business, which he knows!

andy

12th March 2010, 16:18

if you used bodies and standard mangement i wouldnt idle

. if it did it wiould be all over the place??

12th March 2010, 17:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxo0pko0xx

if you used bodies and standard mangement i wouldnt idle

. if it did it wiould be all over the place??

is that a question of a statement?

13th March 2010, 08:04

think it a question, it wil be mapped!

but it never was design to do the job!!

in my opion it not design to do the job!

if you listen to other people like gmc and sandy there a reason why they dnt map standard ecu on bodies!

i wouldnt do it lets put it that way!

i am aloud to have my opion!

andy

13th March 2010, 08:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by luthor1

Same old discussion that's happened a dozen times before - YES it can be done, why don't you go standalone, what standalone you got, Predator, oh I know some huge secret about them, let's keep the discussion polite, YES it can be done.

I wish I was in on the big secret!!

Andy

i was wondering what the mention of that 'secret' was about!?

13th March 2010, 08:41

Gotta love this, makes for an interesting read

13th March 2010, 12:04

its good to have a conversation about a subject rather than everyone going mad including myself.

if i still had my saxo this is how i would do it;

if the car was on bodies for example and it was a weekend car used mainly for b blasting and the odd RWYB day then i would get the standard management mapped.

if how ever the car was a proper serious track car competing every week in the race season i would go for an after market ECU.

this is because as someone mentioned, the technology in ECU design has moved on from wheh the saxo was designed a good few years ago now. then the technology stopped developing as the car ceased to be in production.

where as after market management continued to develope until present. i suppose it all boils down to what your car is going to be used for and if your happy with it thats all that matters.

i know pretty much everyone who has a predator ECU designed by andy is more than happy with it and give him consistently good reviews, and at the price they are they are worth every penny IMO.

also i think that the standard ECU is very good at being able to adapt to bodies for example for the age of the technology, so its not got to be massively expensive for you to run bodies.

obviously there are very very expensive ECUs out there that cost well into the £1000s but as i mentioned earlier it all boils down to what you personally are wanting the car for and what use its intended for.

13th March 2010, 12:21

Think you have hit the nail on the head there fella.

14th March 2010, 10:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by gouldy87

its good to have a conversation about a subject rather than everyone going mad including myself.

if i still had my saxo this is how i would do it;

if the car was on bodies for example and it was a weekend car used mainly for b blasting and the odd RWYB day then i would get the standard management mapped.

if how ever the car was a proper serious track car competing every week in the race season i would go for an after market ECU.

this is because as someone mentioned, the technology in ECU design has moved on from wheh the saxo was designed a good few years ago now. then the technology stopped developing as the car ceased to be in production.

where as after market management continued to develope until present. i suppose it all boils down to what your car is going to be used for and if your happy with it thats all that matters.

i know pretty much everyone who has a predator ECU designed by andy is more than happy with it and give him consistently good reviews, and at the price they are they are worth every penny IMO.

also i think that the standard ECU is very good at being able to adapt to bodies for example for the age of the technology, so its not got to be massively expensive for you to run bodies.

obviously there are very very expensive ECUs out there that cost well into the £1000s but as i mentioned earlier it all boils down to what you personally are wanting the car for and what use its intended for.

sorry you incorrect ,
the std ecu is in fact more advanced than all but the most expensive after market euc,s ,
the problem is that you can only get to a very small fraction of the functions to adjust them .
did you know there are over 100 maps in the std ecu ?
fuel + ignition+ air + water temp + pressure + cold start + idle correction maps that add corrections to other correction maps .

the later sngle plug ecus also have adaptive mappping built in to them .
the 3 plug ecus have a whole host of functions that the saxo does not use ,thats why there are so many pin connections not used.what price do you have to pay to get an aftermarket ecu that gives misfire detection ,can show you which cylinder is misfiring and can shut down the fuel to that cylinder only ,-as the 3 plug vtr ecu can do ?
the std ecu is great for what it was designed to do --modifying more than very slightly is not the best of ideas