Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I'm pretty sure that you are unable to get your car engineered with an After Market ECU. (eg. Haltech, Wolf 3D, Microtech)

So how to people go about passing the engineer with the After Market ECU ?

I heard that you can get your aftermarket ECU tested for emissions, allowing you to pass it in engineering, but apparently this is very very expensive ($4,000)

I was thinking maybe to hide the After Market ECU somewhere else in the car, and go get the car engineered. Leaving the standard ECU in the foot well. And see if I get the car passed. Has anyone tried this ? did it work ?

If I can't get it passed. My Next question, do you think I will be able to start my car with the standard ECU with most of the sensors removed ?

As I'm in the process of putting a RB25 NEO into my VL, all the wiring hidden, and most of sensors will be removed, like the transaction control throttle body, boost control, knock sensor. It will still have the oil sensors, water temp, MAF sensor, OS sensor, just the bare basic's

Sorry about the long Thread, Thanks in advance

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/51121-engineering-with-aftermarket-ecu/
Share on other sites

I don't think they have an emmissions test cell in the Act. So I suspect that all they will do for an engine swap inspection is check the numbers and make sure that nothing is stolen. Since you are putting a much "cleaner" current generation 2.5 litre engine in car that came with a 1986 "dirtier" 3 litre engine, I don't think there will be a problem.

Best answer, ask the inspectors what they will be checking.

Talk to a signatory or the relevant inspector that passes this sort of thing.

I have heard various theories about engineering ECU's but i'm not going to repeat any because it's all heresay and therefore may be misleading.

In any case my recommendation is that you don't play swapsies to get through engineering. Personally I can't see why anyone would ever do this. If you are going to go to the effort and cost of having something engineered, you might as well get all the mods signed off then and there so its all above board and you minimise the risk of problems later on (eg insurance or defects). Otherwise my view is that you are leaving yourself open to be liable because the car you are driving is effectively not road legal.

I will be speaking to an engineer later this afternoon about getting my engine swap engineered and will ask him then. I have had an emissions test done on my last car before it was engineered, and the rta dude said that it would be fine once I get the car to pass the emissions test. However without the car actually passing an emissions test before I sold it, I can't confirm this.

However, would an engineer check for an aftermarket computer?? I have had my R34 fully engineered in the past and the engineer didn't even consider it!

I have recieved feedback from a Engineer in NSW, saying that they wont pass a aftermarket ECU.

I will contact some Engineer's in ACT and check with them

It's going in a VL Commondoor, so the "standard" VL ECU won't work. It's an RB25DET NEO engine, they were never emmisions tested here as they weren't sold here. So what isn't an "aftermarket" ECU in this case? The VL ECU is "aftermarket" to the engine and the RB25DET ECU is "aftermarket" to the VL.

So you have to ask the question of the engineer correctly, don't ask "is an aftermarket ECU OK?" Ask "which of the two ECU's do you suggest?" Since neither will work, then he has to say aftermarket is OK as long as it passes the emmmisions test.

Whether or not it passes the emmisions test is the real question, it shouldn't matter how you get there. :D

It's going in a VL Commondoor, so the "standard" VL ECU won't work. It's an RB25DET NEO engine, they were never emmisions tested here as they weren't sold here. So what isn't an "aftermarket" ECU in this case? The VL ECU is "aftermarket" to the engine and the RB25DET ECU is "aftermarket" to the VL.

The ECU is considered to be part of the engine, as is the exhaust, intake tract, fuel tank and any pollution devices. So the "standard" ECU is the one that comes with the engine from the factory.

Whether or not it passes the emmisions test is the real question, it shouldn't matter how you get there.

I agree but in reality it depends on the engineer and how they interpret the ADR's. I have heard the arguement that the adjustable nature of an aftermarket ECU means some engineers will never allow one to be passed because of the way they read the rules.

If he knows it's there he should be interested because the ECU impacts on emissions.

But an aftermarket ecu also tuned properly can pass emmision tests.

But i see your point as the tune can be easily altered after passing the test. So how does the engineering report cover this issue?

The ECU is considered to be part of the engine, as is the exhaust, intake tract, fuel tank and any pollution devices. So the "standard" ECU is the one that comes with the engine from the factory.

I agree but in reality it depends on the engineer and how they interpret the ADR's. I have heard the arguement that the adjustable nature of an aftermarket ECU means some engineers will never allow one to be passed because of the way they read the rules.

What if the RB25DET he is using is from an auto, then he can't use the "standard ECU". VL ECU's are tunable anyway, so if he could use one of those he would be able to tune it just like any aftermarket ECU. Even LS1 ECU's are tunable these days (via LS1 EDIT) , does that mean you can't engineer a Commondoor with a standard one of those?

You are right, it unltimately depends on the engineer. But it also depends on how you approach the problem with them as well. :D

But an aftermarket ecu also tuned properly can pass emmision tests.  

But i see your point as the tune can be easily altered after passing the test. So how does the engineering report cover this issue?

The engineering report is done as at the time the car was presented. It is exactly the same as turning up with standard wheels and then swapping then over later. When he checked it, it passed that's why the engineeering report is timed and dated. :D

So an engineers report is basically the same as a bodgy roadworthy!! :D

Well no, it is a little more detailed and requires considerably more knowledge and testing. But what else can the poor engineer be expected to do, follow you around and make sure you don't change anything? :headspin:

Disclaimer: I am just arguing here because i'm an engineer and I like to argue. What i'm actually saying might be completely incorrect.

What if the RB25DET he is using is from an auto, then he can't use the "standard ECU". VL ECU's are tunable anyway, so if he could use one of those he would be able to tune it just like any aftermarket ECU. Even LS1 ECU's are tunable these days (via LS1 EDIT) , does that mean you can't engineer a Commondoor with a standard one of those?

If I was a signatory I would argue thus...

If the RB25 he is using is an auto he needs to use the auto ECU. If he wants to use a manual he needs to use a manual ECU. Otherwise he could prove the auto and manual maps are identical and use either.

I would argue that it is not only the physical box that constitutes an ECU but also the factory maps. Therefore if you change the maps from factory, you are no longer emissions compliant until you prove otherwise.

I don't know anything about modern commodores, is LS1 EDIT released, supported and endorsed by Holden?

I will contact my local engineer to get another perspective.

SK do they have a prob with RB30DET's not being a factory option ? Most are probably not aware if it looks factory and evaprative , breather etc ancilliaries are connected and working . I doubt many engineers would witness the computer , if you tell them its factory that's what the report will state .

Cheers A .

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

    • The old manifold was quite under the GTR strut brace.  The new manifold is quite [unknown] the GTR strut brace. The GTR strut brace was needed to clear the bonnet vents. The Old strut brace will almost certainly clear the new manifold, but not the bonnet vents. The old strut brace will almost certainly clear the new manifold, and the new bonnet without vents. But I am hoping the GTR strut brace clears the new manifold :p
    • On the bright side, at least you knew that it happened and remedied before anything happened. A friend of mine just took his Fiat 124 to a shop for an oil change and they didn't tighten the oil filter housing properly. 4.5 quarts spewed out and even after refilling + tightening the cap the engine has a tick now.
    • So, more pain. The FAST manifold is a little larger than the stocker. This is problematic because there really wasn't much clearance to begin with, so going from 'barely enough' well into 'no' is sad based on the external dimensions of the thing, even though where it bolts to the head is the same. Result is the fuel rails sit a good 25mm higher, and this is a bit of an issue with the wiring that runs behind the motor, and the fuel lines, and everything else. When pushing the manifold on, it required a huge amount of force to crush wiring looms to fit it, sensors like the MAP sensor are about 1mm from the firewall, and the FPR just has to bend ABS lines to be forced into place. After some brainstorming and some sad drinking, the loom for some reason ran from the grommet behind the ABS sensor, then to the driver side head, then back to the passenger side head. So all of this was pulled back and stripped, a few wires cut and rejoined, so that the 'branch' was now on the passenger side's head as below: Before you basically couldn't see anything behind the driver head. This is much improved! The MAP sensor is now pointing up (instead of at the firewall) Brackets have been made up for the rail. The rails are for a LS1, the manifold is designed around a LS2 as it's base. Which of course has slightly different bracketry and water pump clearance, hence the mods people need to do. Should be hopefully mounted tonight. I spent money on a new FPR that is slightly more compact than my Turbosmart FPR1200. The gauge has also been moved to the rail. There's also apparently an ORB to AN Union instead of the adapter, because the ~25mm of the current adapter is going to make the difference. Provided this all goes together and arrives today, it'll be the totally not stressful attempt to start it.
    • This seems like a pointless exercise. There is no E30 availability. Ongoing availability of E85 should not be assumed. Flex-fuel is the only sensible approach, so you can use E85 when and where you can get it, 98 when that's al you can get, and anything in between as you fill it up and drain it down. And if that means replacing the pumps, fitting a flex capable sensor/ECU/whatever has to be done to these Renault shitboxen, then.....so be it?
×
×
  • Create New...