Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 234
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I remember 666Dan last time only used the injector harness and not the ignition, therefore he had no problem with the coil pack.

I was under the impression that the coil pack only goes with the ignition harness installed.

I think the fuel control is fine.

I also have heared from the Yahoo group that the 1.36 firmware have corrected this problem. Is this the new firmare you are talking about Abo Bob?

Last time I spoke to Dr_Drift, he mentioned something about signals interference somewhere from the ignition harness to the auto ecu and this was what causing the problem. I think that's what he said? It was a while ago :D

  • 1 month later...

Hey guys, no I'm still not using the ignition harness. BTW just for your information, GReddy are releasing car specific harnesses that just plug in, meaning no soldering required for the ignition and injector harness, as it's a premade unit that goes between the ECU and factory harness.

I just don't understand why it could be a problem to use fuel control but not ignition control.  Heaps of people use SAFC's on autos don't they?

I was sure I answered this a few posts ago ................

The big claim for e-manage is that they work for autos in piggy back with the standard ECU. This is OK for fuel, but the auto shift problem with ignition timing optimisation seems to have been ignored, or maybe it is simply too hard to program.

Yep, thought I did.

Maybe further explanation is required.

In the autos on gear changes the ecu retards the ignition, this both smooths out the gearchange and lightens the torque loading on the gearbox. If you put an ignition interceptor (e-manage) between the ecu and the igniters this means that the ignition won't be retarded on gear changes. So you will get flaring and damage to the gearbox over time.

In order to work on autos, the e-manage would have to have some extra logic in the software that worked out that a gearchange was happening. Then it would allow the ignition signal from the ecu to pass through without changing it.

Since Apexi haven't bothered (and/or been able) to program this logic into Power FC's (no PFC's for autos) I don't see it happening for e-manage any time soon. But maybe I am just being pessimistic. I hope so, ‘cause the Stagea will be here in 2 weeks.

Just thinking out loud.

As the emanage has no cas input it is really ony dependent on intercepting the outgoing signal from the ecu and delaying/advancing that (i assume to advance it actually is delaying the signal by almost one cycle). So when the auto shifts the stock ecu will retard the timing to waht it normally would plus the amount of advance the emanage is putting in so the timing is still being retarded to a certain extent.

Or no?

Just thinking out loud.

As the emanage has no cas input it is really ony dependent on intercepting the outgoing signal from the ecu and delaying/advancing that (i assume to advance it actually is delaying the signal by almost one cycle). So when the auto shifts the stock ecu will retard the timing to waht it normally would plus the amount of advance the emanage is putting in so the timing is still being retarded to a certain extent.

Or no?

Could be wrong, but I think not. I don't believe the E-manage adds X amount (of retard) to the standard ignition timing (as varied by rpm of course). I think it chooses the timing all on its own, as per the tuners input. Otherwise you could only have retarded timing, not advanced, as it wouldn't know when to fire because the ecu wouldn't have told it yet.

Did that make sense?

Otherwise you could only have retarded timing, not advanced, as it wouldn't know when to fire because the ecu wouldn't have told it yet.

Did that make sense?

Thats what i mean by firing late enough so it's actually early for the next firing stroke.

Say when you start the car piston 1 is on the firing stroke, ecu sends signal to fire the sparkplug but emanage intercepts it and does not send it until the next firing stroke on cylinder 1 but slightly earlier in the stroke so its effectively advanced. It's about the only way i can think of that the emanage can advance the timing because you are only adding advance to the standard timing, not re writing the entire ignition map.

Either that or it is using the signal of the first cylinder that fires to adjsut the advance on the next one that fires.

Trust actually state an error of +/-1 degree in their manual for ignition timing which i assume is because it is not using a cas but using the firing signal from the ecu as it's input.

This is why i think it should still be retarding on gear chang in autos. Or i'm completely wrong about the whole thing and it's actually really simple.

You'll have one in two weeks SK ;)

Good timing Bob, our Stagea arrives in two weeks, but it won't be complied until 10 days after that, plus a couple of days to get to Sydney and then it's rego time. :D

anyone interested in buying a Gtech, dont get ripped off and pay $399

can supply brand new in box including freight Australia wide for $160.

Call Darren on 0417898512  [email protected]

Is this a spam attempt? Or did you just forget to post in the forsale section.

  • 3 weeks later...

Hi all,

Been running an E-manage on a RB25DET for a couple of months without any problems. Got round to wiring in the ignition harness today and the engine runs fine, no E-manage fault codes but the ECU flashes 21 which is ignition related I believe. Tested for fault codes prior to fitting the harness and it read 55 - all clear.

Funnily enough I got this code on my CA after fitting the ignition harness too.

Does anybody else get the error code when using the ignition harness ?

Also is anybody using the new add on detonation sensor harness for the e-manage ?

  • 3 weeks later...

OK guys read something interesting relating to the use of the e-manage on the RX-8 apparently the OEM coils get fried by the e-manage as well...this can be countered by using what looks like a zener diode setup....see the link below. It prevents the continuous powering of the coil-pack.....so only the peak signal voltage will pass through the diode (firing signal)...the holding voltage is below that of the diode trigger so doesn't pass through and put the coil under continous load. The theory seems sound to me.

http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?s=&t...&threadid=17055

  • 3 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Have you put an aftermarket oil pressure gauge on and verified your oil pressure?   Noise being on the block, on exhaust side, how high up the block does it seem to be? It could be the VCT system getting cranky, especially if it's mainly at idle, and when warm, as that'll be your lowest point for oil pressure. Could be showing that oil passages / VCT solenoid are blocking.
    • Well, hydraulic lifters will get noisy if they are dirty/fouled in some way, and exactly how that manifests will depend on exactly what schmutz is where. There is a procedure on here somewhere for dismantling and soaking/cleaning them. Replacing them with new is about 50% of the work and about 5% of the money!
    • Thanks for the reply @GTSBoy this is is a hydraulic lifter engine. Yea right i did not realise the lifters were supposed to be compressible while installed. I could push them down but i had to lean almost my while body weight on them.  I have never heard of a lifter/ lifters ticking only at hot idle and getting worse the hotter it gets. I have owned a few jdm cars with noisy lifters. This noise is slightly more subtle, it is more of a sharp gentle metalic tic than the solid and more loud tapping I've heard on lifters. I have used a metal rod, alloy tube, hose and stethoscope and could not find the source of the tick. But it appears to be loudest on the actual engine block behind the exhaust cam gear and next to the oil filter. I had mate (40 year old mechanic) go over it with me and he couldn't find it either..  Could it be a cam seal issue of some sort?  Cheers  
    • This seems problematic and unlikely at the same time. Vanilla RB2Xs have hydraulic lifters. They do have "zero" clearance, but only when running with oil pressure inside them. When not running, you should be able to compress them and obtain heaps of clearance. RB26s and Neos have solid lifters. They should have ~0.3mm and ~0.5mm on the inlet and exhaust respectively. If they have zero clearance then bad things are happening. With nothing else being wrong, it would mean that the valves would be held slightly (ever so slightly) open when they are supposed to be closed and it should have all sorts of problems when running, caused by leakage in/out through the valves. Or, zero clearance can indicate severe valve seat recession. None of it is good. Have you used a piece of hose as a stethoscope to try to localise the noise?  
×
×
  • Create New...