New to the tech end of this...

Your chance to introduce yourself and your vehicle
Post Reply
bluecollar
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2017 3:47 pm

New to the tech end of this...

Post by bluecollar »

In high school, I built and drove a 1950 Ford truck. It was high tech for the time, 5.0 MAF with a cam and a 5 speed. It was a stock EEC IV, so mostly a pruned harness, nothing as in depth as this. Fast forward 20 years...and I still play with cars. Now days, every hot rod has an LS based motor. Most of the people where I live leave them pretty stock. That isn't really my style! I have built a fair share of engines, I am pretty familiar with the internal aspects, and forced induction. I spent the better part of last night in these forums, reading...a lot. This looks promising.
Now for the first of many questions: From what I have read, this should support all hardware needed to run a high horsepower engine. Has anyone run any motors yet into the 600-700hp range and 8000rpm? I ask because, put simply, I am on the trailing edge of technology. I understand the maps, scaling for sensor and flow readings, and the general 5v reference systems...but the whole concept of code and coding scares the living hell out of me. I can build chassis, roll cages and fairly handy with a mill or lathe. The problem is, I have nothing to bring to the table as far as development is concerned. I have worked with both Haltech and MoTec units. I like them, they are very nice pieces and work well. They had been brought to me by customers to install. For my own personal projects, I could stretch that amount of money a long way. I have driven many vehicles that cost half of those units. Thus, my quest for options. Hopefully you don't boot me for my lack of technological prowess!
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3758
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: New to the tech end of this...

Post by kb1gtt »

Pleasure to meet you. Have you found the wiki? Just in case you have not, here's a link that might be of interest.
https://rusefi.com/wiki/index.php?title=Manual:Hardware_Frankenso_board

This one was up around +7k RPM.
https://rusefi.com//forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=396

We have run a V8, but I don't think we have gotten into the 600 to 700 HP range yet. We have had a couple people stop by and mention projects in this range, but I don't know if they made it very far. I have not done projects in this HP range, so I'm kind of ignorant about if this would be successful. From my knowledge of these things, I do not see any real problems. We have crank angle accuracy and the brain board is able to pump bits fast enough that it can handle all the processing that's needed with out problems. The software has been used on several engines, and seems to be in good order at these lower HP per pound ratios.
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)
bluecollar
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2017 3:47 pm

Re: New to the tech end of this...

Post by bluecollar »

If that two stroke could spin 7k, spinning a larger motor to a equivalent or higher should not be an issue. My logic, though probably flawed, is this: A two cycle usually climbs in rpm at a more rapid pace than an equivalent 4 cycle, and the coil saturation time is also cut in half as well. As it is, the sequence of events in an engine take place at a rapid pace...without the additional "thought" process of an ecu.
I looked at the various pics of the circuit boards and cases. I think I may be more of an assembled board kind of guy! Funny, I could see an entire 1940 59A flathead motor, or late model four cam blown apart in crates, but not be near as intimidated. I spent my late teens and early twenties participating in "non-sanctioned" drag racing. I cut my teeth on small block V8 Fords, usually with healthy amounts of nitrous oxide. There were some vertical learning curves, but you learn. I feel this will be much the same. Stupid hurts, but it's one hell of a teacher. I guess it's just time to learn some new skills. :geek:
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3758
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: New to the tech end of this...

Post by kb1gtt »

The assembly of the board is often under estimated. It appears that most kits don't actually make it to completion. The assembly is very time consuming and it's easy to mess it up. As well once you get over all the shipping costs, and increased component prices at low qty, you generally end up with a higher cost board. You can try to assemble a board if you want, but do't underestimate how hard it is to assemble the board. It seems that even many of the assembled boards don't make it into projects. Even wiring it up is a large daunting task.
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)
bluecollar
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2017 3:47 pm

Re: New to the tech end of this...

Post by bluecollar »

I completely understand how complex the assembly would be. That was why I was leaning towards an assembled unit. It was more of a morbid curiosity, looking at the assembly pics. I cannot understand why people would throw in the towel with the harness aspect. The empty circuit board...whole different story! That is a million little dots of solder, and each one must be put in the proper place with the correct piece. I have read some of the posts, and a couple of people have soldered things incorrectly. I know these people were probably much more capable than myself. I still think it's a good option. The part that are still new to me is the concept of the actual program. Changing a tune or various parameters on other systems is pretty easy. Never messed with the code...
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3758
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: New to the tech end of this...

Post by kb1gtt »

For most projects, this would be tuning with tuner studio, and no coding. While this is an open source project, and while you could get into coding, you typically do not need to get into coding.
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)
User avatar
V8Volvo245
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 2:29 pm

Re: New to the tech end of this...

Post by V8Volvo245 »

Hi Bluecollar.

I'm in the same boat as you. 30 years as a mechanic so the mechanical side of things doesn't faze me at all, but the electronics give me the hee-bee-gee-bees! I've successfully built a Jim Stim stimulator, but that's about as far as my electronics experience goes, as I still have a firm belief that electronics work by some bizarre mix of Voodoo and black magic!

However, as has been mentioned, you would be using the Tuner Studio interface, which is pretty user friendly. Fuel calculations are pretty easy to do and you can make a fuel map that is near enough to get the engine running safely using maths. The tuner's secrets are in getting the ignition timing right. My advice is to get it running first, and then take it to a rolling road with an operator who has Megasquirt experience (as that's what Tuner Studio was primarily developed for).

With regards to power outputs, the ECU doesn't care if you want to make 100bhp/litre (what I'm aiming for) or 300bhp/litre. It works just the same.

Anyway, the guys on here seem a pretty friendly bunch. Who knows? Maybe we can help them out on the mechanical side of things, such as sizing turbos correctly, etc.?
User avatar
kb1gtt
contributor
contributor
Posts: 3758
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:42 am
Location: ME of USA

Re: New to the tech end of this...

Post by kb1gtt »

V8Volvo245 wrote:I still have a firm belief that electronics work by some bizarre mix of Voodoo and black magic!
Don't forget the chicken bones, very important to not forget the chicken bones.
V8Volvo245 wrote:Anyway, the guys on here seem a pretty friendly bunch. Who knows? Maybe we can help them out on the mechanical side of things, such as sizing turbos correctly, etc.?
We try to be on the friendly side. The mechanical side is a key issue for us. The primary software developer @ has a limited amount of hardware to work with. When it comes to developing and debugging features, it is significantly hard and time consuming to develop a feature and rely on someone else to provide the feedback to make sure that feature is functioning properly. Getting someone who provides detailed feedback is very helpful. All to often we get feed back like it doesn't work. As well it's also common that we get people who think they can put on a turbine from Boeing and tune out it's issues. Getting someone who's knowledgeable and able to provide detailed feedback is very helpful. As well if there is a feature you want, and if you appear to be the kind of person who provides detailed feedback, it's more likely that we can successfully develop the feature.
Welcome to the friendlier side of internet crazy :)
Post Reply