Review of ECU+ from an XEDE perspective
Mar 25, 2006, 07:20 PM
#1
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Review of ECU+ from an XEDE perspective (Long)
Review of ECU+ from an XEDE perspective:
Introduction:
I have been a loyal XEDE user for over 3 years on my 2003 Evo 8. Overall, I have been pleased with the system and it has done what I originally needed it to do. However, I am an engineer and love to tinker with things and after 3 years, I have discovered weaknesses/idiosyncrasies in the system that grew tiresome. I had heard some great things about ECU+ and I had decided to give the system a try. My main reason for trying the system was the designer’s (Tom Collins) involvement in the community and his quick integration of features. Development speed has never been a strong suit of the XEDE system. I believe that Shiv and crew are busy and tend to “let the cat out of the bag” to early. This eventually leads to an over-promise and under-deliver situation, which can be extremely frustrating for a customer.
Engine Management Systems:
I want to be extremely clear with this review……..Every engine management system will have its strong suits and weaknesses. If it seems that I have been extremely critical of the XEDE, just wait. I will also let you know the weaknesses with ECU+. Even the great AEM EMS has some weaknesses in my opinion. The largest of its weakness its lack of adaptability with regards to changing elevations and weather conditions. The AEM is essentially and open loop system all the time. Some people will refute this opinion. However, it operates from maps that are relatively constant and compensates for temperature. However, it does not seem to utilize the O2 sensor to compensate for low load situations. If I am mistaken in this regard, please feel free to correct me. Additionally, the injector drivers seem to be somewhat questionable. They have to run much larger injectors to get the same horsepower as the stock ECU.
The stock ECU is very good. In fact, I would have to say that it is several light years ahead of the AEM system in adaptability, run ability and reliability. To me, the ideal system would be an inexpensive flash system for the stock ECU. Since the stock ECU has so many advantages over the stand alone market, I have decided that an interceptor system is the way that I would like to proceed. In my mind, the two obvious choices are the XEDE and ECU+. I have a unique perspective since I now have experience with both systems.
XEDE…….why change:
Over the past few years, a few issues have cropped up with the XEDE system that has made me less than happy with the system. Remember that I said that ALL EMS have weaknesses. Below are the issues that I have had:
1.The XEDE has a problem booting up sometimes (The dreaded orange flashing light). If you do not catch this when it happens, a turbo beetle will hand you your @ss and you will have to defend yourself over at Turbobeetle.com (I am being facetious, but you get my point). The fix is to cycle the ignition again and the problem resolves itself. The problem is just frequent enough to be an Achilles heel.
2.I purchased the XEDE because I wanted a system that would allow the user to modify ignition timing as well as fuel. However, if you try to add positive timing at idle, you will get the dreaded PO300….even if your car has never had an issue with it. Their answer to this problem is the C-reader. I believe that this is more of a band-aid for improper programming or hardware rather than a solution.
3.The SMART system is a great system. However, I was not enchanted with their decision to use the LC1 as the wideband sensor. I have never owned one, but I have heard many people say that the LC1 seems to need frequent calibrations. This is not something that I would like to deal with. As a controls engineer, I know that your control is only as good as the sensor that you use and this one is less than ideal.
4.In my mind, the hardware is aging or there is a problem in the firmware. I say this because advancing the timing would cause a miss or hesitation at cruising speeds. I am not sure if it is a firmware or hardware glitch, but it was annoying. Generally, it would clear it up is you let off the accelerator for just a second. It almost acted as though the XEDE is beginning to become hardware limited, but this just a hypothesis. There went my idea of optimizing the timing on the car.
5. The hardware and wiring is starting to remind me of an experiment gone wrong (Franken-XEDE.) They keep adding features, but the hardware has not changed. So, now you have a knock box, add a wideband add a wire for a clutch switch etc. etc. I really believe that the XEDE is due for a hardware revision in order to incorporate the advances into a neat hardware package and possibly upgrade the hardware to add new features later. Let me state…THIS IS MY OPINION ONLY.
6.The XEDE lacks true logging ability. It has the capability through commslog, but it does not work to my satisfaction. I still had to use pocket logger to get all of the information that I wanted. Then I had to try to match up the data to analyze it. This was not an easy task. PyXEDE is a great program, However, I still suffer from having to use Pocket logger and try to match the data streams.
7.Launch control and NLS had to be at the same RPM. This is less than ideal. What happens if you want to launch at 5000 RPM and shift at 6000 RPM……..You are out of luck.
8.Finally, the plug and play harness leaves a little to be desired. It is somewhat cheap and I believe it could have been done better. Is this nitpicking????? Probably
Why ECU+????
ECU+ had some features that really interested me. Below are the features that sold me:
1.Full logging capability through OBDII. No more pocket logger required. I could log at 25 samples per second per sensor monitored. Pocket logger could do 20 samples per second. However, if I monitored RPM and timing, I could only get 10 samples per second per sensor. ECU+ gives me 25 samples per second per sensor. This is a major advantage.
2.No separate hardware required to log knock. Thank you DSP chip in ECU+
3.The ECU+ uses two processors. One is a DSP (digital signal processor) and the other is a microprocessor. This allows the microprocessor to differ the numerical intensive DSP processes to a dedicated chip. Think of it as a math coprocessor for an engine management system. Believe it or not, this is quite powerful from an embedded controller perspective.
4.Development from Tom Collins is rather quick and sure. He listens to the customers and develops what the masses want. I read through a thread where there was a request for launch control and NLS. He implemented this in several nights…..I was dumfounded.
5.Ability to log boost with the addition of a GM, Motorola or AEM map sensor. Now you can log boost and MAF in order to determine if increasing boost is resulting in any more air mass into the motor. This is a great addition and Tom has found a way to do it inexpensively.
6.Complete idle fuel and timing control. You should be able to make your 272 or 280 cams idle much better and recover most of the vacuum that was lost with the cams.
7.Wideband logging integration with multiple manufacturers supported (AEM, PLX, Zeitronix, Innovative, etc.)
8.Adjustable knock correction. Allows the operator to subtract ignition advance and add fuel upon detection of knock. Also, the knock level detection is adjustable.
9.Ability to log and change parameters using a palm based PDA. Laptop not required and a refurbed PDA can be picked up on Ebay for $30.00.
10.ECU+ has built in dyno and dragstrip software. This software allows you to make decisions whether your changes had a favorable or non-favorable effect.
11.Finally, if you upgrade turbos and need a larger MAF sensor and need to replace your MAF with a larger GM unit, The ECU+ has a built in translator……..yes, you read that correctly. No more Franken-electronics.
These are just some of the reasons that I decided on ECU+. Was it a good decision? Please read on.
Using ECU+:
I purchased the ECU+ with the plug & play harness and this is what I would recommend for everyone. The harness is a full ECU extension harness and will make it much easier to add additional features in the future.
The software is pretty easy to use and understand. However, I read the detailed instructions (82 pages) before I even attempted the install. I would recommend that everyone do this. Tom has done a great job of providing detailed instructions regarding installation, tuning and insight into how the system works. Significant insight can be gained from just reading the directions. After all, it is not a hard read and there are pictures.
The Windows software is fairly intuitive and extremely easy to use. Tom has done a great job of making all of the information available in a tabular format. There is a fuel tab, a timing tab, knock tab, MAS tweaks tab. Everything is pretty self explanatory regarding the Fuel and timing maps. Therefore, I would like to focus on the MAS tweaks tab. As we all know, cams make the EVO sound mean. However, there is a difference between mean and barely running. Tom has added some things to help a person temper the mean with a steady idle. Before anyone uses these tweaks, I highly suggest that the fuel and timing be optimized at idle. Fuel can be optimized by watching the output of the front O2 sensor and watching your short term fuel trims. If the short term fuel trims are positive, add fuel. If they are negative, subtract fuel. Once the fuel trims are zero (or very close). Begin adding ignition timing in order to get the highest vacuum reading by boost gauge or MAP sensor. You will likely need to add 5-10 degrees of timing at idle. You will probably already notice an improvement in idle. If you have messed with your idle air bypass valve, you may need to adjust it at this point to reduce your idle speed. If you do, recheck your fuel and timing to make sure it is still optimized.
If your idle speed is still fluctuating more than you like, you can go to the MAS tweaks tab. At the top of the page you will notice low and high frequency clamps. Our attention will be focused on the low frequency clamp. Bring up the current engine parameters and note the MAS frequency in. Is it fluctuating greatly with your idle speed? If so, see if you can find the approximate average value and plug this into the low frequency clamp. You will likely find that the rolling idle has calmed down. Increasing this value will reduce the rolling idle further, but you may have to adjust your fuel and timing further to optimize your set up.
The timing and fuel maps are easy to use. Fuel can be trimmed up or down in 1% increments from -50% to +50%. Timing is adjustable 1 degree increments from -15 degrees to +15 degrees. My first reservation was that the each RPM point only had 4 load points, Low, Medium, High and WOT. Since I was used to the XEDE with 12 or more load points, I figured that this was a downgrade. However, I started to look closely at the XEDE off-the-shelf maps and I quickly realized that most adjacent cells contained the same information. Therefore I truly doubt that this will be any hindrance at all. Especially since I cannot recall every seeing over 50% load on the XEDE table. Additionally, Tom has given the user the ability to move these load points by allowing the transition points to be definable in terms of MAS frequency. Therefore, changing to a larger turbo and injectors is extremely easy as changing switch over points accordingly.
Oh yeah, remember that high frequency clamp. That is used to avoid fuel cut. You can run your car to fuel cut while logging, note the highest MAF frequency and place that number in the high frequency clamp. You just have to be careful and make sure that you are rich enough and timing is conservative enough to avoid the Boom. However, if you are using these features, I would think that you will know exactly what you are doing. You better!
Finally, I am not a big fan boy of VTA BOVs. However ECU+ does integrate a smoothening feature in order to allow people to operate well with a VTA BOV. My BOV is dual port (APS) and I have never had any runability issues. So, I did not investigate this feature.
ECU+…..What would I change?
As I stated earlier, every EMS has weaknesses. ECU+ is also subject to this rule of thumb. However, I think it is unbeatable for the price. I thought that I would offer some recommendations:
1.I would like to see a little more adjustability in timing. 1 degree increments are good, but I would love to see 0.2 increments. This is a preference because I know that timing is critical. One degree timing can mean 2-10 Hp. If one setting, say 5 degrees, cause knock and 4 degrees did not. How do I know that 4.5 degrees would not also be safe? I cannot find out….so; I end up running a little over conservative on the timing.
2.I would love to be able to modify a map on the computer without being hooked to the box. Currently this is not possible. However, you can save maps and upload them at will.
3.I would like to be able to right click on a log plot and immediately be taken to the appropriate timing and fuel cell associated with that plot. I would like to be able to change that cell at that point. This is just easier for tuning purposes.
4.Boost Control……..Does not have it, but it is in the works. Closed loop with separate psi set points per rpm would be great. Hint Hint
5.A high current output for alcohol or water injection. This could be used for a relay to turn on pumps/solenoids. I would like the output to be mapable like the timing/fuel. This way you also know what fuel cells need to be modified when it is on.
6.Addition of a knock light would be great, but not critical. However, knock adjustment is currently handled by exceeding a set voltage. Would it be possible to make a linear relationship to RPM? Ideally I would like to make a slight adjustment at a lower knock threshold than the ECU sees to avoid ECU over compensation.
7.Could the knock sensor be attenuated through ECU +? This could reduce the ECUs sensitivity to knock. Dangerous? Yes, but could be useful since the factory ECU seems to be very conservative.
Conclusion:
Is it perfect? ‘Fraid not. However, I believe that it is a better designed unit and will have a better life expectancy since it uses a little bit better embedded controller platform, well thought out design, better logging capabilities and a designer that is incredibly responsive to his customers. Sometimes service does make the sale, or at least it will not make you regret it.
To date, I have not gotten any MIL lights and the ECU+ system has worked exactly as advertised. To say that I was pleasantly surprised is an understatement. I truly believe that ECU+ was an upgrade to the XEDE. I know there will be a significant number of people that will proclaim, “What about SMART?” Well, I think that SMART needs some refining and XEDE needs to be updated hardware and or software to eliminate the PO300 problem and other issued that result from advanced timing. If you look at any XEDE map, you will notice that there are no timing changes until 3000 rpm. Why do you think that is? Especially since it can help with drivability, fuel economy and idle. I think that there have been issues from the start and they have addressed it with the C-reader band-aid. The C-reader does not really fix the problem it just eliminates the pending code before your MIL light comes on. I seriously doubt that it addresses the hesitation/missing that I experienced without it. Hey, I may be wrong. If I am, I am also sure that someone will let me know.
I am happy with my decision and I hope that the above information will allow more people to make an informed decision one way or the other. Both are great systems and far more refined than a SAFC and more adjustable than a flash.
Update:
After using the ECU+ for awhile, I am beginning to get a PO300 misfire code every once in awhile. It is still far better than the stuttering and codes that I was getting with the XEDE in advanced timing cells. I personally know that Tom is working on a fix. However, the solution seems to be somewhat evasive. He has a solution (Firmware 2.05) that seems to have worked for a number of people. However, it did not work for me. I know that he has a few things up his sleeve and I am sure that it will soon be a distant memory.
My problem might be related to my aggressive cam timing. I am currently running 2 degrees advanced on the intake and two degrees retarded on the exhaust cam. Anyone that has tried this combination will see that it will give you an idle that seems to hit every other revolution. I believe that I will try +1/-1 settings to see if it will eliminate the code issue.
If anyone has any questions or comments regarding this review, please feel free post a reply or contact me at gfenton@mailshack.com
HiVoltEVO8
Introduction:
I have been a loyal XEDE user for over 3 years on my 2003 Evo 8. Overall, I have been pleased with the system and it has done what I originally needed it to do. However, I am an engineer and love to tinker with things and after 3 years, I have discovered weaknesses/idiosyncrasies in the system that grew tiresome. I had heard some great things about ECU+ and I had decided to give the system a try. My main reason for trying the system was the designer’s (Tom Collins) involvement in the community and his quick integration of features. Development speed has never been a strong suit of the XEDE system. I believe that Shiv and crew are busy and tend to “let the cat out of the bag” to early. This eventually leads to an over-promise and under-deliver situation, which can be extremely frustrating for a customer.
Engine Management Systems:
I want to be extremely clear with this review……..Every engine management system will have its strong suits and weaknesses. If it seems that I have been extremely critical of the XEDE, just wait. I will also let you know the weaknesses with ECU+. Even the great AEM EMS has some weaknesses in my opinion. The largest of its weakness its lack of adaptability with regards to changing elevations and weather conditions. The AEM is essentially and open loop system all the time. Some people will refute this opinion. However, it operates from maps that are relatively constant and compensates for temperature. However, it does not seem to utilize the O2 sensor to compensate for low load situations. If I am mistaken in this regard, please feel free to correct me. Additionally, the injector drivers seem to be somewhat questionable. They have to run much larger injectors to get the same horsepower as the stock ECU.
The stock ECU is very good. In fact, I would have to say that it is several light years ahead of the AEM system in adaptability, run ability and reliability. To me, the ideal system would be an inexpensive flash system for the stock ECU. Since the stock ECU has so many advantages over the stand alone market, I have decided that an interceptor system is the way that I would like to proceed. In my mind, the two obvious choices are the XEDE and ECU+. I have a unique perspective since I now have experience with both systems.
XEDE…….why change:
Over the past few years, a few issues have cropped up with the XEDE system that has made me less than happy with the system. Remember that I said that ALL EMS have weaknesses. Below are the issues that I have had:
1.The XEDE has a problem booting up sometimes (The dreaded orange flashing light). If you do not catch this when it happens, a turbo beetle will hand you your @ss and you will have to defend yourself over at Turbobeetle.com (I am being facetious, but you get my point). The fix is to cycle the ignition again and the problem resolves itself. The problem is just frequent enough to be an Achilles heel.
2.I purchased the XEDE because I wanted a system that would allow the user to modify ignition timing as well as fuel. However, if you try to add positive timing at idle, you will get the dreaded PO300….even if your car has never had an issue with it. Their answer to this problem is the C-reader. I believe that this is more of a band-aid for improper programming or hardware rather than a solution.
3.The SMART system is a great system. However, I was not enchanted with their decision to use the LC1 as the wideband sensor. I have never owned one, but I have heard many people say that the LC1 seems to need frequent calibrations. This is not something that I would like to deal with. As a controls engineer, I know that your control is only as good as the sensor that you use and this one is less than ideal.
4.In my mind, the hardware is aging or there is a problem in the firmware. I say this because advancing the timing would cause a miss or hesitation at cruising speeds. I am not sure if it is a firmware or hardware glitch, but it was annoying. Generally, it would clear it up is you let off the accelerator for just a second. It almost acted as though the XEDE is beginning to become hardware limited, but this just a hypothesis. There went my idea of optimizing the timing on the car.
5. The hardware and wiring is starting to remind me of an experiment gone wrong (Franken-XEDE.) They keep adding features, but the hardware has not changed. So, now you have a knock box, add a wideband add a wire for a clutch switch etc. etc. I really believe that the XEDE is due for a hardware revision in order to incorporate the advances into a neat hardware package and possibly upgrade the hardware to add new features later. Let me state…THIS IS MY OPINION ONLY.
6.The XEDE lacks true logging ability. It has the capability through commslog, but it does not work to my satisfaction. I still had to use pocket logger to get all of the information that I wanted. Then I had to try to match up the data to analyze it. This was not an easy task. PyXEDE is a great program, However, I still suffer from having to use Pocket logger and try to match the data streams.
7.Launch control and NLS had to be at the same RPM. This is less than ideal. What happens if you want to launch at 5000 RPM and shift at 6000 RPM……..You are out of luck.
8.Finally, the plug and play harness leaves a little to be desired. It is somewhat cheap and I believe it could have been done better. Is this nitpicking????? Probably
Why ECU+????
ECU+ had some features that really interested me. Below are the features that sold me:
1.Full logging capability through OBDII. No more pocket logger required. I could log at 25 samples per second per sensor monitored. Pocket logger could do 20 samples per second. However, if I monitored RPM and timing, I could only get 10 samples per second per sensor. ECU+ gives me 25 samples per second per sensor. This is a major advantage.
2.No separate hardware required to log knock. Thank you DSP chip in ECU+
3.The ECU+ uses two processors. One is a DSP (digital signal processor) and the other is a microprocessor. This allows the microprocessor to differ the numerical intensive DSP processes to a dedicated chip. Think of it as a math coprocessor for an engine management system. Believe it or not, this is quite powerful from an embedded controller perspective.
4.Development from Tom Collins is rather quick and sure. He listens to the customers and develops what the masses want. I read through a thread where there was a request for launch control and NLS. He implemented this in several nights…..I was dumfounded.
5.Ability to log boost with the addition of a GM, Motorola or AEM map sensor. Now you can log boost and MAF in order to determine if increasing boost is resulting in any more air mass into the motor. This is a great addition and Tom has found a way to do it inexpensively.
6.Complete idle fuel and timing control. You should be able to make your 272 or 280 cams idle much better and recover most of the vacuum that was lost with the cams.
7.Wideband logging integration with multiple manufacturers supported (AEM, PLX, Zeitronix, Innovative, etc.)
8.Adjustable knock correction. Allows the operator to subtract ignition advance and add fuel upon detection of knock. Also, the knock level detection is adjustable.
9.Ability to log and change parameters using a palm based PDA. Laptop not required and a refurbed PDA can be picked up on Ebay for $30.00.
10.ECU+ has built in dyno and dragstrip software. This software allows you to make decisions whether your changes had a favorable or non-favorable effect.
11.Finally, if you upgrade turbos and need a larger MAF sensor and need to replace your MAF with a larger GM unit, The ECU+ has a built in translator……..yes, you read that correctly. No more Franken-electronics.
These are just some of the reasons that I decided on ECU+. Was it a good decision? Please read on.
Using ECU+:
I purchased the ECU+ with the plug & play harness and this is what I would recommend for everyone. The harness is a full ECU extension harness and will make it much easier to add additional features in the future.
The software is pretty easy to use and understand. However, I read the detailed instructions (82 pages) before I even attempted the install. I would recommend that everyone do this. Tom has done a great job of providing detailed instructions regarding installation, tuning and insight into how the system works. Significant insight can be gained from just reading the directions. After all, it is not a hard read and there are pictures.
The Windows software is fairly intuitive and extremely easy to use. Tom has done a great job of making all of the information available in a tabular format. There is a fuel tab, a timing tab, knock tab, MAS tweaks tab. Everything is pretty self explanatory regarding the Fuel and timing maps. Therefore, I would like to focus on the MAS tweaks tab. As we all know, cams make the EVO sound mean. However, there is a difference between mean and barely running. Tom has added some things to help a person temper the mean with a steady idle. Before anyone uses these tweaks, I highly suggest that the fuel and timing be optimized at idle. Fuel can be optimized by watching the output of the front O2 sensor and watching your short term fuel trims. If the short term fuel trims are positive, add fuel. If they are negative, subtract fuel. Once the fuel trims are zero (or very close). Begin adding ignition timing in order to get the highest vacuum reading by boost gauge or MAP sensor. You will likely need to add 5-10 degrees of timing at idle. You will probably already notice an improvement in idle. If you have messed with your idle air bypass valve, you may need to adjust it at this point to reduce your idle speed. If you do, recheck your fuel and timing to make sure it is still optimized.
If your idle speed is still fluctuating more than you like, you can go to the MAS tweaks tab. At the top of the page you will notice low and high frequency clamps. Our attention will be focused on the low frequency clamp. Bring up the current engine parameters and note the MAS frequency in. Is it fluctuating greatly with your idle speed? If so, see if you can find the approximate average value and plug this into the low frequency clamp. You will likely find that the rolling idle has calmed down. Increasing this value will reduce the rolling idle further, but you may have to adjust your fuel and timing further to optimize your set up.
The timing and fuel maps are easy to use. Fuel can be trimmed up or down in 1% increments from -50% to +50%. Timing is adjustable 1 degree increments from -15 degrees to +15 degrees. My first reservation was that the each RPM point only had 4 load points, Low, Medium, High and WOT. Since I was used to the XEDE with 12 or more load points, I figured that this was a downgrade. However, I started to look closely at the XEDE off-the-shelf maps and I quickly realized that most adjacent cells contained the same information. Therefore I truly doubt that this will be any hindrance at all. Especially since I cannot recall every seeing over 50% load on the XEDE table. Additionally, Tom has given the user the ability to move these load points by allowing the transition points to be definable in terms of MAS frequency. Therefore, changing to a larger turbo and injectors is extremely easy as changing switch over points accordingly.
Oh yeah, remember that high frequency clamp. That is used to avoid fuel cut. You can run your car to fuel cut while logging, note the highest MAF frequency and place that number in the high frequency clamp. You just have to be careful and make sure that you are rich enough and timing is conservative enough to avoid the Boom. However, if you are using these features, I would think that you will know exactly what you are doing. You better!
Finally, I am not a big fan boy of VTA BOVs. However ECU+ does integrate a smoothening feature in order to allow people to operate well with a VTA BOV. My BOV is dual port (APS) and I have never had any runability issues. So, I did not investigate this feature.
ECU+…..What would I change?
As I stated earlier, every EMS has weaknesses. ECU+ is also subject to this rule of thumb. However, I think it is unbeatable for the price. I thought that I would offer some recommendations:
1.I would like to see a little more adjustability in timing. 1 degree increments are good, but I would love to see 0.2 increments. This is a preference because I know that timing is critical. One degree timing can mean 2-10 Hp. If one setting, say 5 degrees, cause knock and 4 degrees did not. How do I know that 4.5 degrees would not also be safe? I cannot find out….so; I end up running a little over conservative on the timing.
2.I would love to be able to modify a map on the computer without being hooked to the box. Currently this is not possible. However, you can save maps and upload them at will.
3.I would like to be able to right click on a log plot and immediately be taken to the appropriate timing and fuel cell associated with that plot. I would like to be able to change that cell at that point. This is just easier for tuning purposes.
4.Boost Control……..Does not have it, but it is in the works. Closed loop with separate psi set points per rpm would be great. Hint Hint
5.A high current output for alcohol or water injection. This could be used for a relay to turn on pumps/solenoids. I would like the output to be mapable like the timing/fuel. This way you also know what fuel cells need to be modified when it is on.
6.Addition of a knock light would be great, but not critical. However, knock adjustment is currently handled by exceeding a set voltage. Would it be possible to make a linear relationship to RPM? Ideally I would like to make a slight adjustment at a lower knock threshold than the ECU sees to avoid ECU over compensation.
7.Could the knock sensor be attenuated through ECU +? This could reduce the ECUs sensitivity to knock. Dangerous? Yes, but could be useful since the factory ECU seems to be very conservative.
Conclusion:
Is it perfect? ‘Fraid not. However, I believe that it is a better designed unit and will have a better life expectancy since it uses a little bit better embedded controller platform, well thought out design, better logging capabilities and a designer that is incredibly responsive to his customers. Sometimes service does make the sale, or at least it will not make you regret it.
To date, I have not gotten any MIL lights and the ECU+ system has worked exactly as advertised. To say that I was pleasantly surprised is an understatement. I truly believe that ECU+ was an upgrade to the XEDE. I know there will be a significant number of people that will proclaim, “What about SMART?” Well, I think that SMART needs some refining and XEDE needs to be updated hardware and or software to eliminate the PO300 problem and other issued that result from advanced timing. If you look at any XEDE map, you will notice that there are no timing changes until 3000 rpm. Why do you think that is? Especially since it can help with drivability, fuel economy and idle. I think that there have been issues from the start and they have addressed it with the C-reader band-aid. The C-reader does not really fix the problem it just eliminates the pending code before your MIL light comes on. I seriously doubt that it addresses the hesitation/missing that I experienced without it. Hey, I may be wrong. If I am, I am also sure that someone will let me know.
I am happy with my decision and I hope that the above information will allow more people to make an informed decision one way or the other. Both are great systems and far more refined than a SAFC and more adjustable than a flash.
Update:
After using the ECU+ for awhile, I am beginning to get a PO300 misfire code every once in awhile. It is still far better than the stuttering and codes that I was getting with the XEDE in advanced timing cells. I personally know that Tom is working on a fix. However, the solution seems to be somewhat evasive. He has a solution (Firmware 2.05) that seems to have worked for a number of people. However, it did not work for me. I know that he has a few things up his sleeve and I am sure that it will soon be a distant memory.
My problem might be related to my aggressive cam timing. I am currently running 2 degrees advanced on the intake and two degrees retarded on the exhaust cam. Anyone that has tried this combination will see that it will give you an idle that seems to hit every other revolution. I believe that I will try +1/-1 settings to see if it will eliminate the code issue.
If anyone has any questions or comments regarding this review, please feel free post a reply or contact me at gfenton@mailshack.com
HiVoltEVO8
Last edited by HiVoltEVO8; Apr 3, 2006 at 11:43 AM.
Mar 25, 2006, 07:47 PM
#2
Very nice write up, all of those features that you mentioned are what have swayed me towards purchasing the ECU+. I got sick of getting flashed especially since I add parts all the time. I have debated between ECU+, Xede, and UTEC and will be going w/ ECU+. I surf www.ecuplus.com and find it very reassuring to see that the developer is actually listening to suggestions and working on improving the device. It appears very user friendly and offers all the features I am looking for datalogging, Fuel trim adjustments, and timing control. Hopefully more people hop onboard as I think this system is going to be the best bang for your buck for those who prefer to do their own tuning. 
Mar 25, 2006, 08:14 PM
#3
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks
Thanks Creamo3,
I just did not see much talk about the system here on Evom and I wanted to let people know that it had some real advantages. I appreciate the kudo and I hope other people decide to read the review.
HiVoltEVO8
I just did not see much talk about the system here on Evom and I wanted to let people know that it had some real advantages. I appreciate the kudo and I hope other people decide to read the review.
HiVoltEVO8
Mar 25, 2006, 08:16 PM
#4
Originally Posted by HiVoltEVO8
My problem might be related to my aggressive cam timing. I am currently running 2 degrees advanced on the intake and two degrees retarded on the exhaust cam. Anyone that has tried this combination will see that it will give you an idle that seems to hit every other revolution. I believe that I will try +1/-1 settings to see if it will eliminate the code issue.
First off, great review. I wish everyone wrote a review like this with new products.
I have been running the ECU+ for about 4 months now and I love it. I do however, agree and share the same thoughts you do on most of the things. We all have to remember this is a one man company, these fixes, solutions and new features will come, honestly I am amazed some of them happen as quick as they do.
I run +1/-1 and I get the P0300 code so don't hold your breath. However I have not tried the new firmware so YMMV.
Are you on the ECU+ boards? Would love to have you on there.
Mar 25, 2006, 08:21 PM
#5
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
razorlab,
I do cruise the ECU+ board quite frequently. I just recently installed it so I have not contributed yet, but I look forward to it. The boards were a major reason why I decided to give it a try.
I hope to see you over there.
HiVoltEVO8
I do cruise the ECU+ board quite frequently. I just recently installed it so I have not contributed yet, but I look forward to it. The boards were a major reason why I decided to give it a try.
I hope to see you over there.
HiVoltEVO8
Trending Topics
Mar 27, 2006, 03:37 AM
#9
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Creamo3
Just bought my ECU+ off of BADEVO, will be posting tuning logs on the forums once I get it installed
LOL!!!! I thought that you already had ECU+. I know that you will be pleased with it. However, I wonder why BADEVO sold his unit? He is/was a real proponent for the ECU+.
I was thinking of offering my maps (when finished) on Evom for other people/Vishnu converts. I will post my logs on the ECU+ forum on this web site as well as the ECU+ forums.
HiVoltEVO8
Mar 27, 2006, 06:54 AM
#10
Originally Posted by HiVoltEVO8
LOL!!!! I thought that you already had ECU+. I know that you will be pleased with it. However, I wonder why BADEVO sold his unit? He is/was a real proponent for the ECU+.
I was thinking of offering my maps (when finished) on Evom for other people/Vishnu converts. I will post my logs on the ECU+ forum on this web site as well as the ECU+ forums.
HiVoltEVO8
I was thinking of offering my maps (when finished) on Evom for other people/Vishnu converts. I will post my logs on the ECU+ forum on this web site as well as the ECU+ forums.
HiVoltEVO8
Didn't quite have it yet, now I do. Talked w/ BADEVO and said he was stepping up to a bigger setup aka AMS 2.3L, 37R, and AEM.
Mar 27, 2006, 04:43 PM
#11
Evolving Member
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by HiVoltEVO8
1.I would like to see a little more adjustability in timing. 1 degree increments are good, but I would love to see 0.2 increments. This is a preference because I know that timing is critical. One degree timing can mean 2-10 Hp. If one setting, say 5 degrees, cause knock and 4 degrees did not. How do I know that 4.5 degrees would not also be safe? I cannot find out….so; I end up running a little over conservative on the timing.
2.I would love to be able to modify a map on the computer without being hooked to the box. Currently this is not possible. However, you can save maps and upload them at will.
3.I would like to be able to right click on a log plot and immediately be taken to the appropriate timing and fuel cell associated with that plot. I would like to be able to change that cell at that point. This is just easier for tuning purposes.
4.Boost Control……..Does not have it, but it is in the works. Closed loop with separate psi set points per rpm would be great. Hint Hint
5.A high current output for alcohol or water injection. This could be used for a relay to turn on pumps/solenoids. I would like the output to be mapable like the timing/fuel. This way you also know what fuel cells need to be modified when it is on.
2.I would love to be able to modify a map on the computer without being hooked to the box. Currently this is not possible. However, you can save maps and upload them at will.
3.I would like to be able to right click on a log plot and immediately be taken to the appropriate timing and fuel cell associated with that plot. I would like to be able to change that cell at that point. This is just easier for tuning purposes.
4.Boost Control……..Does not have it, but it is in the works. Closed loop with separate psi set points per rpm would be great. Hint Hint
5.A high current output for alcohol or water injection. This could be used for a relay to turn on pumps/solenoids. I would like the output to be mapable like the timing/fuel. This way you also know what fuel cells need to be modified when it is on.
These are great "wish list" items. #1 would be awesome and I hope Tom does this in the future.
Mar 28, 2006, 10:38 AM
#12
If ECU+ had higher tuning resolution and boost control, it would be the clear victor and near perfect in my eyes and I would buy one. The ideal resolution would be the same resolution the factory ECU uses. Until that time, it's just tradeoffs, as stated by the original poster.
Apr 3, 2006, 01:14 AM
#14
Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hey this is a great write up but would you recommend this over the SAFC2 for engine tuning newbies?
would the documentation it comes with cover everything or at least the basics of tuning using his device?
would the documentation it comes with cover everything or at least the basics of tuning using his device?
Apr 3, 2006, 03:47 AM
#15
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by lagcisco
hey this is a great write up but would you recommend this over the SAFC2 for engine tuning newbies?
would the documentation it comes with cover everything or at least the basics of tuning using his device?
would the documentation it comes with cover everything or at least the basics of tuning using his device?
Lagisco,
I would recommend the ECU+ system by far above the SAFC2. The ECU+ does everything that the the SAFC2 can do, plus the following:
Full timing control
Full Logging capability with palm pilot or laptop
Far more adjustability by rpm and load
Ability to integrate wideband
Knock logging
Injector duty cycle
Frnt/rear O2 logging
There is more, but I have to say, for the price difference, you should really consider the ECU+
HiVoltEVO8