"Forced" Hydra 2.7 upgrade
03-13-2013, 02:07 PM
#62
I've said before that i didn't build my car, i bought it the way it is. That said, it has a Hydra ECU that came with the FM kit. the guy I bought it from couldn't get the car to recognize the wideband using 2.5 and it boost surged like crazy.
Hydra wouldn't help until he upgraded to 2.7, which he did and then the wideband still didn't work. The automatic boost control in 2.7 also doesn't work. it hits the boost limit and shuts the works off each time you step on the gas. the solution was to not use it, i have a fancy boost control solenoid under the hood and use a low tech turbosmart controller because it never worked.
Hydra wouldn't help until he upgraded to 2.7, which he did and then the wideband still didn't work. The automatic boost control in 2.7 also doesn't work. it hits the boost limit and shuts the works off each time you step on the gas. the solution was to not use it, i have a fancy boost control solenoid under the hood and use a low tech turbosmart controller because it never worked.
Reply
0
0
03-13-2013, 02:56 PM
#63
I've said before that i didn't build my car, i bought it the way it is. That said, it has a Hydra ECU that came with the FM kit. the guy I bought it from couldn't get the car to recognize the wideband using 2.5 and it boost surged like crazy.
Hydra wouldn't help until he upgraded to 2.7, which he did and then the wideband still didn't work. The automatic boost control in 2.7 also doesn't work. it hits the boost limit and shuts the works off each time you step on the gas. the solution was to not use it, i have a fancy boost control solenoid under the hood and use a low tech turbosmart controller because it never worked.
Hydra wouldn't help until he upgraded to 2.7, which he did and then the wideband still didn't work. The automatic boost control in 2.7 also doesn't work. it hits the boost limit and shuts the works off each time you step on the gas. the solution was to not use it, i have a fancy boost control solenoid under the hood and use a low tech turbosmart controller because it never worked.
Oh. Wait....
Reply
0
0
03-13-2013, 03:37 PM
#64
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,490
Total Cats: 4,079
I worked with a speed shop to help clear the name of MS. It didn't help there was an issue with the build and he had to send it back to me. 
But I believe he was impressed with my support.
The best solution is: stop being an ignorant ******* and learn how to push the Autotune button.
But I believe he was impressed with my support.The best solution is: stop being an ignorant ******* and learn how to push the Autotune button.
Reply
0
0
03-13-2013, 03:49 PM
#65
It still blows my mind that people are willing to shell out 2k for that crap
Even more so when they're willing to shell out an additional 600 on top of the 2k for a newer version that is STILL just barely on par with MS.
How does that saying go? "If you're gonna be dumb, you best be tough"?
It should say " If you're gonna be dumb you best be rich "
Even more so when they're willing to shell out an additional 600 on top of the 2k for a newer version that is STILL just barely on par with MS.
How does that saying go? "If you're gonna be dumb, you best be tough"?
It should say " If you're gonna be dumb you best be rich "
Reply
0
0
03-14-2013, 12:13 PM
#67
I know I'm jumping in a little late, but I want to offer up some information from someone with a slightly different perspective. Full disclosure, I am a former FM employee from the Link ECU era. FM picked up the Hydra about 1 year after I left when the Link went away. Since leaving FM, I have been tuning ECUs on the side since 2005. I mainly support FM customers with Link and Hydra ECUs. I also work with AEM and Xede.
I was disappointed with the Hydra 2.5 came out. I felt the set up time and difficulties with boost control, idle, and starting were unacceptable in an ECU with a $2000 price tag. Still, I set up about 10 or 12 customers with 2.5s and they continue to drive the cars with no further adjustments necessary. Likewise, with 2.6. I felt it was no better then 2.5 and I could only get fuel autotuning to work about 10% of the time. At least with 2.5, auto tuning worked, it was just a little cumbersome. I did a lot of fuel tuning on 2.6s by hand. Regardelss, once set up, the ECU performed well with no further adjustments necessary. With the 2.5 I gave up early on using the EBC function. After much discussion with Jeremy about this, I like to think I conviced him to give up on it as well, but this is purly speculation on my part to boost my ego.
However, 2.7 is a different story. For about the past year all the cars I have set up (about 8) have worked very, very well. The fuel auto tuning is excellent. Starting and idle is as good as OEM. I can not comment of boost control because all my customers are happy with a $100 manual controller.
During all this time, I have been running my 2002 with an older FMII turbo kit with an AEM FIC6 replacing the Link Piggy back. I have never been inclined to install a Hydra because I could not justify the price. I am a husband and father with a mortgage, $2000 is a lot of money for me. However, I made the upgrade this winter based on the performance of my customer's cars. My wife is still angry I spent the money.
To the OP, I fully understand your frustration. Hydra upgrades are very expensive, and you guys who bought in early truley have been screwed. However, if you do upgrade to the 2.7 I can assure you the car will run better. The fuel auto tuning is very easy and effective so you could do it yourself. If you chose to have someone tune it for you, they should be able to set up the car in a few hours and you will never have to touch it again.
I own 2 laptops running Windows XP so I will be able to support older versions of Hydra ECUs for a long time to come.
I was disappointed with the Hydra 2.5 came out. I felt the set up time and difficulties with boost control, idle, and starting were unacceptable in an ECU with a $2000 price tag. Still, I set up about 10 or 12 customers with 2.5s and they continue to drive the cars with no further adjustments necessary. Likewise, with 2.6. I felt it was no better then 2.5 and I could only get fuel autotuning to work about 10% of the time. At least with 2.5, auto tuning worked, it was just a little cumbersome. I did a lot of fuel tuning on 2.6s by hand. Regardelss, once set up, the ECU performed well with no further adjustments necessary. With the 2.5 I gave up early on using the EBC function. After much discussion with Jeremy about this, I like to think I conviced him to give up on it as well, but this is purly speculation on my part to boost my ego.
However, 2.7 is a different story. For about the past year all the cars I have set up (about 8) have worked very, very well. The fuel auto tuning is excellent. Starting and idle is as good as OEM. I can not comment of boost control because all my customers are happy with a $100 manual controller.
During all this time, I have been running my 2002 with an older FMII turbo kit with an AEM FIC6 replacing the Link Piggy back. I have never been inclined to install a Hydra because I could not justify the price. I am a husband and father with a mortgage, $2000 is a lot of money for me. However, I made the upgrade this winter based on the performance of my customer's cars. My wife is still angry I spent the money.
To the OP, I fully understand your frustration. Hydra upgrades are very expensive, and you guys who bought in early truley have been screwed. However, if you do upgrade to the 2.7 I can assure you the car will run better. The fuel auto tuning is very easy and effective so you could do it yourself. If you chose to have someone tune it for you, they should be able to set up the car in a few hours and you will never have to touch it again.
I own 2 laptops running Windows XP so I will be able to support older versions of Hydra ECUs for a long time to come.
Reply
0
0
03-14-2013, 04:53 PM
#68
Everything I keep hearing or reading about the Hydra makes me happy I'm still running the old Link. It just works. Of course, I also like the KISS method for things. Mechanical idle, mechanical boost, always on fan.
Of course, it makes me sad too. I have a 2.17 Hydra on the shelf that I probably should either use or unload.
Of course, it makes me sad too. I have a 2.17 Hydra on the shelf that I probably should either use or unload.
Reply
0
0
03-14-2013, 05:33 PM
#69
Everything I keep hearing or reading about the Hydra makes me happy I'm still running the old Link. It just works. Of course, I also like the KISS method for things. Mechanical idle, mechanical boost, always on fan.
Of course, it makes me sad too. I have a 2.17 Hydra on the shelf that I probably should either use or unload.
Of course, it makes me sad too. I have a 2.17 Hydra on the shelf that I probably should either use or unload.
Reply
0
0
03-14-2013, 06:34 PM
#70
Wow. Just. Wow. There's some horror stories in here.
It all seems to boil down to
DIY - MS3x
HSDIFY - AEM EMS4 from TSE?
Keep one thing in mind, though. Just because someone *says* they can install and tune an AEM, doesn't make it so. I have a buddy who just sold his built Supra, because no one down here can tune it. The first shop had it wired in wrong, according to the second shop, and the third shop said the second shop only said that to get extra labor. The third shop had it hooked up wrong, as it reset his tables to base every time the car was turned off (ign+ instead of 12v+?). I was going to help him tackle the install, but decided to bug out as soon as I found wire nuts splicing not the same color wires on his ECU harness. Poor bastard.
It all seems to boil down to
DIY - MS3x
HSDIFY - AEM EMS4 from TSE?
Keep one thing in mind, though. Just because someone *says* they can install and tune an AEM, doesn't make it so. I have a buddy who just sold his built Supra, because no one down here can tune it. The first shop had it wired in wrong, according to the second shop, and the third shop said the second shop only said that to get extra labor. The third shop had it hooked up wrong, as it reset his tables to base every time the car was turned off (ign+ instead of 12v+?). I was going to help him tackle the install, but decided to bug out as soon as I found wire nuts splicing not the same color wires on his ECU harness. Poor bastard.
Reply
0
0
03-14-2013, 07:53 PM
#71
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Reading PA
Posts: 165
Total Cats: 56
If your looking for a plug and play standalone for an 01' to 05' the Hydra is the only option that will control the VVT. I looked at all the available ECUs last summer before deciding on the Hydra.
Reply
0
0
03-14-2013, 10:36 PM
#76
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Reading PA
Posts: 165
Total Cats: 56
For the Megasquirt options I went to this website, MegaSquirtPNP Plug-and-Play MegaSquirt Engine Management Systems by DIYAutoTune Megasquirt Kits / Assembled Engine Management Systems, Wideband o2 Sensor Systems and tuning products - DIYAutoTune.com I did not find a plug and play unit for a 2002 car last summer and I do not see one now.
Yes the AEM EMS4 is out there, but it is not a plug in and I did not want to make a harness for it. My car is a daily driver. I expect it to start and idle perfectly with the AC on. I did not get the feeling the the EMS 4 is up to the task of giving me OEM performance. AEM support is good, but not Miata specific.
I have set up 24 customer cars with Hydra ECUs. Its a known qunatity for me. Like I said above, I was very impressed by the performance of my customer cars running 2.7 ECUs so I decided it was the best option for me.
Yes the AEM EMS4 is out there, but it is not a plug in and I did not want to make a harness for it. My car is a daily driver. I expect it to start and idle perfectly with the AC on. I did not get the feeling the the EMS 4 is up to the task of giving me OEM performance. AEM support is good, but not Miata specific.
I have set up 24 customer cars with Hydra ECUs. Its a known qunatity for me. Like I said above, I was very impressed by the performance of my customer cars running 2.7 ECUs so I decided it was the best option for me.
Reply
0
0
