Megasquirt on a 99 (work safe again.)
08-26-2008, 10:00 AM
#181
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
I'd still attempt a parallel install. I had a nearly flawless setup with the Tec3 in my 01 but it just didn't do as much as the hydra. I was 98% check engine light free too. 
Reply
0
0
08-26-2008, 12:32 PM
#182
Mine's 100% CEL free, I didn't have to buy tons of extra connectors, run wires I didn't know why I had them, or wonder 'what the hell that clicking sound is' every time something isn't 100% understood.
I've had zero issues with everything working since I went stand alone - at least stuff related to the OEM ecu. Plus the extra foot space and weight savings is awesome.
I've had zero issues with everything working since I went stand alone - at least stuff related to the OEM ecu. Plus the extra foot space and weight savings is awesome.
Reply
0
0
08-26-2008, 05:53 PM
#185
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,022
Total Cats: 6,589
Abe, you know what he means... Many folks with '96+ cars (including most Californians, ahem) need a functioning CEL and a working, fault-free OBDII port in order to pass their emissions check.
Reply
0
0
08-26-2008, 05:54 PM
#186
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
emissions inspections.
OBDII plug-in.
maybe in CA you need a visual, but other places just plug in and read codes.
no codes = you pass.
I suppose it would work in CA too if the test guy was blind.
airflow meters dont belong on performance cars. remove it and replace it with a mapped output that is proportional (ish) to airflow. that's how i got around it.
the only reason I got the CEL was, yes, the airflow over range--my airflow output map had too high a value for 0 rpm. the CEL came on when I stalled the car.
OBDII plug-in.
maybe in CA you need a visual, but other places just plug in and read codes.
no codes = you pass.
I suppose it would work in CA too if the test guy was blind.
airflow meters dont belong on performance cars. remove it and replace it with a mapped output that is proportional (ish) to airflow. that's how i got around it.
the only reason I got the CEL was, yes, the airflow over range--my airflow output map had too high a value for 0 rpm. the CEL came on when I stalled the car.
Reply
0
0
08-26-2008, 06:10 PM
#187
I'm not about to argue that parallel is better. I run the MSI with a 1.8 CAS. It works great, takes about 6 hours to build and 30-45 minutes to install and it works correctly with OBDII compliance unless they care about the extra CAS.
I still would like to try a standalone install with the stock sensors though. It's just hard to give up a car that runs perfectly.
I still would like to try a standalone install with the stock sensors though. It's just hard to give up a car that runs perfectly.
Reply
0
0
08-26-2008, 06:47 PM
#188
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,022
Total Cats: 6,589
'96+ cars get the plugin test in CA as well- the visual is an additional test, basically one extra opportunity for the tech to fail a car that passed otherwise. Under normal circumstances, Abe would be worried about this, being a CA resident and all. But his circumstances are, well, abnormal...
Reply
0
0
08-26-2008, 07:52 PM
#189
Matt: Interestingly, no, I got air flow over range when I was on my piggyback, and just running WOT sometimes, especially when it's cold out, freeway pulls where I'd stay in it a while, it would kick a CEL.
Anyway, to pass inspection, sure - although you'd think a decent PnP set up you could just pull the computer, put in the stocker, test, then go back.
Here, yeah, it's:
1) a visual test
2) An OBD-II code read test
3) A dyno-loaded, multi-speed sniffer test
Pretty hard to get through with a faked set up. And, to make matters worse, to allow for the natural aging process of an old car, the limits get TIGHTER the older the car gets, the better it has to run.
Awesome, eh?
Anyway, given all that, you pretty much need to have the entire car working as stock, I would think - better reason to just swap it out on test day. Maybe put the ECU on a battery during the years you're not testing, so the only driving it sees is to and from the testing site. :-)
One last thing, then I'll let it go: The MS (esp the MS-II?) is pretty limited on I/O, so running another thing off a generic output gets to be quite a load.
Still, like I was saying, if someone has a proven, fully functioning, well understood parallel install for a '99+, with no real issues, I'd love to come up with something to support it, in a much more sPnP solution.
Well, let's see how Serper's goes. Honestly, it was just my best guess. I'm pretty confident in what I did, but maybe it's all a bunch of hooey.
If it works, then it was built totally blind and just plugged in and worked on another car hundreds of miles away. And you could go back pretty quick. And actually, there's not a lot you'd have to tweak to go from MS-I to MS-II. There's a +12V feed to the processor (which you could likely skip). If I made this interposer board, you could likely use it with the MS mainboard you have. Still working out the details.
Still both jealous and unjealous of the hydra. :-)
Anyway, to pass inspection, sure - although you'd think a decent PnP set up you could just pull the computer, put in the stocker, test, then go back.
Here, yeah, it's:
1) a visual test
2) An OBD-II code read test
3) A dyno-loaded, multi-speed sniffer test
Pretty hard to get through with a faked set up. And, to make matters worse, to allow for the natural aging process of an old car, the limits get TIGHTER the older the car gets, the better it has to run.
Awesome, eh?
Anyway, given all that, you pretty much need to have the entire car working as stock, I would think - better reason to just swap it out on test day. Maybe put the ECU on a battery during the years you're not testing, so the only driving it sees is to and from the testing site. :-)
One last thing, then I'll let it go: The MS (esp the MS-II?) is pretty limited on I/O, so running another thing off a generic output gets to be quite a load.
Still, like I was saying, if someone has a proven, fully functioning, well understood parallel install for a '99+, with no real issues, I'd love to come up with something to support it, in a much more sPnP solution.
I'm not about to argue that parallel is better. I run the MSI with a 1.8 CAS. It works great, takes about 6 hours to build and 30-45 minutes to install and it works correctly with OBDII compliance unless they care about the extra CAS.
I still would like to try a standalone install with the stock sensors though. It's just hard to give up a car that runs perfectly.
I still would like to try a standalone install with the stock sensors though. It's just hard to give up a car that runs perfectly.
If it works, then it was built totally blind and just plugged in and worked on another car hundreds of miles away. And you could go back pretty quick. And actually, there's not a lot you'd have to tweak to go from MS-I to MS-II. There's a +12V feed to the processor (which you could likely skip). If I made this interposer board, you could likely use it with the MS mainboard you have. Still working out the details.
Still both jealous and unjealous of the hydra. :-)
Reply
0
0
08-26-2008, 11:33 PM
#191
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
you guys know i spent the first 30 yrs of my life in california, right? However, I never had to smog my car because the new car exemption switched to 6 years right as I was about to do it. wasn't due til 07 and by then I was getting it done in DC. and they plug in.
and so does VA where I live now.
and so does VA where I live now.
Reply
0
0
09-02-2008, 07:26 PM
#194
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Ft Walton Beach, FL
Posts: 46
Total Cats: 0
first half of the OEM crank and cam circuit
http://www.picoodle.com/view.php?img...jpg&srv=img34]
[/URL]IT IS MESSY AND UGLY, but hopefully will work. I had to solder resistors in serial to acquired desired amount of ohms
Last edited by etnad; 09-03-2008 at 10:45 AM.
Reply
0
0
09-02-2008, 08:40 PM
#195
Looks ok so far - aside from the bigger cap we talked about. :-) Interesting you'd build one side first, I built them symetrically. Don't forget to run power to the chip, and you should be fine. Good move using a socket, I never do, but I sent one to serper in case he redoes his. :-P
Reply
0
0
09-05-2008, 12:52 PM
#196
Serper:
No problem - I should be on IM this morning, at least, most of it. :-) Lots of meetings.
Glad you got it basically working/talking. So, the first thing is to do two things:
1) Note what the pulse widths are on while cranking (should see it on your MT screen)
2) Check the timing. A motor sparking at the wrong time is like opening a door you're about to walk through at the wrong time. It certainly don't work, and you could hurt yourself!
-Abe.
P.S. Were all the TPS, MAP, etc working right? Are they all reading sane values? You should get us a report of everything on the realtime tuning display.
AND STOP TRYING TO START IT BEFORE YOU CHECK THIS.
We don't want to talk you through how to change your rods.
No problem - I should be on IM this morning, at least, most of it. :-) Lots of meetings.
Glad you got it basically working/talking. So, the first thing is to do two things:
1) Note what the pulse widths are on while cranking (should see it on your MT screen)
2) Check the timing. A motor sparking at the wrong time is like opening a door you're about to walk through at the wrong time. It certainly don't work, and you could hurt yourself!
-Abe.
P.S. Were all the TPS, MAP, etc working right? Are they all reading sane values? You should get us a report of everything on the realtime tuning display.
AND STOP TRYING TO START IT BEFORE YOU CHECK THIS.
We don't want to talk you through how to change your rods.
Reply
0
0
09-05-2008, 07:34 PM
#197
Serper:
Do not spray starting fluid in the car. CHECK THE TIMING
Check the pulse widths.
It's your motor, you're free to blow it up if you want, but the 15th time you ask me what to do when everyone tells you the same thing gets old. CHECK THE TIMING.
As to the fuel pump thing, it could be I left that off - I know I ran the wire, so listening for the pump should be the best test. Also, are the plugs wet? And, like I said, the pulse widths would help
Do not spray starting fluid in the car. CHECK THE TIMING
Check the pulse widths.
It's your motor, you're free to blow it up if you want, but the 15th time you ask me what to do when everyone tells you the same thing gets old. CHECK THE TIMING.
As to the fuel pump thing, it could be I left that off - I know I ran the wire, so listening for the pump should be the best test. Also, are the plugs wet? And, like I said, the pulse widths would help
Last edited by AbeFM; 09-05-2008 at 07:50 PM.
Reply
0
0
09-06-2008, 05:42 PM
#198
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Ft Walton Beach, FL
Posts: 46
Total Cats: 0
Abe
What is the simplest way to test the OEM cranck and Cam circuit?
I am moving along, slowly but moving. I already have a good idea how to avoid the intercooling piping maze and hopefuly get bosted before christmass, LOL.
What is the simplest way to test the OEM cranck and Cam circuit?
I am moving along, slowly but moving. I already have a good idea how to avoid the intercooling piping maze and hopefuly get bosted before christmass, LOL.
Reply
0
0
