Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Advanced Engine Management (Wolf) have a "black box" solution for this problem. Maybe Microtech have one too.

I'll try and remember to check mine out tonight and let you know how the Wolf box works.

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...

well after plugging in a manual RB20DET ECU into the original loom last weekend, the car spluttered and died, seemed to be the fact that its still all fully wired up, I am considering cutting all of the wires apart from the TPS and power wires, though I'd really like to not have to do that, so has anyone else found an alternative yet?

  • 3 months later...

ok well after Googling this problem, and coming back to a similar archived thread on here, I decided to link the throttle opening output and throttle sensor output signals together to try and get the TPS voltage to the ATTESA computer - when turned on, the light went out for one second and came back on.

Do I still need this buffer circuit as well, or should I try a diagnosis on the entire system in case there's something else wrong?

post-51653-1234085817_thumb.jpg

Edited by bozodos

well after several hours of digging around in the archives, I found this quote from TO4GTR in another ATTESSA thread regarding a Microtech.

"yes after many headsrcatching sessions.

hears what it was all about.

tps adjustment to get .4volts

hooking up the attessa throttle wire to the microtech throttle signal.

unplugging the f**king air bleed conector"

the TPS wires mentioned in the Microtech manual are grey and brown, and on the wiring diagram, it has TPS 5v and TPS Sig pinouts, though I'm not 100% on which to use, im guessing TPS Signal to TPS output on the original loom.

Edited by bozodos

Just attempted connecting TPS output from original loom to Microtech TPS Signal wires, STILL no luck!

can anyone PLEASE help me on this one - there must be at least one GT-R out there with both a working Microtech and ATTESSA system!

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello I am researching the same issue for an ECU install.

So Far I have;

The ATTESA requires 0.4V to 3.5V TPS signal

The factory ECU has an inbuilt amplifier that generates the required signal.

When using an aftermarket ECU, that does not offer TPS out, the RB26 wiring loom requires modification to the wire connected to pin 56 TPS output signal. The wire at pin 56 needs to be cut off and T connected to pin 38 TPS input signal.

The TPS sensor needs to be manually adjusted to provide 0.4V when idling with the throttle closed.

Your Microtech should have three wires connected to the TPS

Ground

5V power

TPS Signal (connect to Microtech and ATTESA)

I have not tested this option, but provided my research is correct, you need to connect the wire that was originally connected to pin 56 to the TPS Signal wire on the Microtech and adjust the tps until it reads 0.4V at idle with the throttle closed. I beleive the ATTESA also requires an RPM signal which is generated by the factory ECU at pin7.

I intend to build a simulation amplifier and will post the design once complete

Edited by bradkazz

Yeah I've already adjusted TPS at idle to exactly 0.4v with a multimeter, and then tried alternately connecting wires 56 and 38, then connecting wire 56 to the grey TPS signal wire on the Microtech - the other thing I should have done was pulled out my subs and amp and checked the error codes being thrown up by the ATTESSA computer to see if there was something else wrong with the system. The part I'm still unsure about is whether it definitely needs some sort of extra circuitry or whether joining the wires is enough.

(when I bought this car I was told that the standard computer need only be piggybacked onto the Microtech, stupid me for not getting the previous owner to test this out)

From what I have read, once the idle voltage is adjusted to 0.4v the Attesa will function, but becuase the ramp rate is not exactly as expected the system will apply more front bias at a lower throttle opening. An additional circuit should not be required, but it would make the system function exactly as intended.

Perhaps your issue is related to the tacho signal.

Some of the post I have read indicate that the ATTESA and ABS also use a tacho signal, the factory ECU outputs a tacho signal from pin7. I assume you will need to connect the Microtech tacho out to this same wire.

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

    • You're not wrong, but more than a few times I've heard of people running into issues where their injector characterization isn't quite right and that approach works for that specific configuration but once they switch over to a new set they discover a whole bunch of stuff wasn't set up correctly. It's slightly more annoying to reverse engineer the OEM MAF transfer function but you already have the sensor wired up to the factory harness so keeping it around for a few weeks more while you figure out the tune is easy enough. I've seen GM also use a combination of both MAF + MAP in their ECUs before, MAF is for steady state and a calculation of the cylinder VE to correct the base VE table, then in transients it uses that calculated VE + raw MAP to determine cylinder filling somehow.
    • I know this one’s the BB one. My tuner did make mention about the actuator. I am curious about the VCT as well
    • Might also needs a stronger actuator with the right preloading. With older 2019 built bush G3 units, BB upgrade or 21U housing down size makes a pretty decent gain in response as well. 
    • Hey lads  so im finally putting together my rb30 forged bottom end and ran into an issue. I measured my main bearing clearance with arp main studs torqued to 60 ft-lbs using ACL H series STD size bearings and standard, un-ground crank shaft journals and got an oil clearance reading of about 1.3 thou measuring straight up and down and about 2.8 thou measuring at a 45 degree angle (just above and below the parting line). My machine shop said they measured the main tunnel and it was all within spec (they didnt say the actual measurement) and to go with a standard size bearing, which i have done and the clearance is too tight, I'm guessing because of the extra clamping force from the arp studs distorting the main tunnel. I was wanting to run about 2.5 thou main bearing clearance.  My questions are: 1. could i just use the HX extra 1 thou clearance ACL bearings? that would fix my straight up and down clearance making it about 2.3 thou, but then would the side to side clearance be too big at around 3.8 thou? 2. what actually is the recommended main bearing clearance for measuring near the parting line / side to side. i know its supposed to be bigger as the bearing has some eccentricity built into it but how much more clearance should there be compared to the straight up and down measurement? at the moment there is about 1.5thou difference, is that acceptable or should it be less? 3. If i took the engine block + girdle back to the machine shop and got them to line bore the main tunnel (like i told them to do the first time, but they said it didnt need it) what bearing size would i buy? the STD size bearing shells already slide in fairly easily with no real resistance, some even falling out if i tip the girdle up-side-down. If im taking material out of the main tunnel would i need a bearing with extra material on the back side to make up for it? this is probably confusing af to read so if something doesn't make sense let me know and ill try explaining in a different way. My machine shop doesn't come back from christmas break until mid January, hence why i'm asking these questions here. TIA for any help or info 
    • I bought the model back in Japan in Feb. I realised I could never build it, looked around for people who could build it, turns out there's some very skilled people out there that will make copies of 1:1 cars or near enough. I'm not really a photo guy... but people were dragging me in a group chat for the choice of bumper as someone else saw the car before it was finished as they are also a customer of that shop. I took the photo in the above post because I was pretty confident that the lip would work wonders for it. Here's some more in-progress and almost-done pics. It gives a good enough idea as to what the rear looks like!   I have also booked in a track day at the end of January. Lets all hope that is nothing but pure fun and games. If it's not pure fun and games, well, I've already got half an engine spare in the cupboard 
×
×
  • Create New...