Learning your EMU is number 1. You're much better off with a computer and learning how to make it wok than ANYTHING else.

I mentioned it in PM, I'll reitterate here: If not for VVT, Ms is the way to go. With VVT... You have compramises. I don't know if the adapt does it and does it well. if it does, no contest. If it doesn't, and you don't mind getting your hands very dirty, try the MS. You can write your own code and build your own circuits for it, which makes it fun.

I put an MS on my friend's car, no turbo, replaces the whole intake with just an air cleaner on the throttle body and it was tons of fun. More responsive, etc. Spent a while tuning it (don't worry about the "tables" - if you're sure you're going FI later, just set it for your intended boost and only tune the half of the table you're using NA).

The DIYPnP is, as they said, far from PnP. the name is pretty misleading if you asked me. It's a nice kit, I'm not bagging on it, but it's not anymore PnP than a straight MS, nearly. My board would be awesome, but for a 2001, you'll have the same issue - not PnP, and you'll be doing wiring.

I'd say, much as it seems a waste right now - buy the best computer you can, or find a stand alone VVT controller and get a standard MS. DON'T RUN IN PARALLEL. The absolutely trivial stuff is the fans and VICS and what not - people who tell you otherwise are pretty clueless. MS idle is workable, depends what you're going to do with it (PLEASE DON'T START ANOTHER MS-idle-is-great-just-everyone-uses-it-wrong thread here. The overwhelming statistical results are that it doesn't work quite right and you're going to make it sound worse by calling us all idiots. PWM warmup works fine and I'm not even responding if someone says otherwise).

Doing a CAS is a totally bad idea, don't do it. My answer would be if you're ok with using VVT in RPM switch mode for a while (maybe months, maybe years) go MS. If not, and adaptronic supports PID cam phase control, do that. Otherwise, find a stand alone controller.

Personally, I enjoy building it myself. From your comment of "can someone just build it for me", the answer is yes - braineak will, and the other answer is "no, you won't be happy with it". Buy a Hydra. :-)

Do you have any info on the adaptronic's VVT options?

Adap does control vvt. Y8s and Prospero will have to chime in on how well, but from what I gather its fairly good.

i let the stock ECU control it.

btw, this guy is lazy. i explained a basic install and it's so easy a caveman could do it and he's whining about making someone else do it.

la-hoo-zer.

I have a 2004. DIY Auto Tune built my parallel MS-I 3.57 with the required accessories and modifications for a total of $537.

Additional costs were a Boomslang, NA CAS, and indentured servitude to Paul for customizing the harness.

I'm not counting the cost of a wideband because that is necessary for any ECU.

I'm curious as to what makes you say the code is better.

Ken

Nobody ever called you an idiot. I just said that you never followed the advice I gave you to get it working. I also never said that everyone uses it wrong; in fact the vast majority get it right after following my advice! The overwhelming statistical results are that for most engines/cars/people it works fine. There just have not (yet) been any miatas that have it working perfectly. I believe Marc D is probably close, but he's not yet called me so I can help him fine-tune it. I only respond every time you say something about it because you are one of the few who has not been able to get it working, and you don't seem willing to try the advice I have given you. Because of that I feel like what you're saying is false. You (falsely) saying it doesn't work is likely to keep people from trying it. Regardless of how it works, if people don't try it and give me their feedback, I can't improve it! (As evidence I call out the recent improvements I made at Una's request on the msextra forums. He's now using it with no issues along with me (on both of my MSed cars), eage8, Phil Lochner, Peter Florance, Jerry@DIYAutoTune (on a miata!) and a whole lot of others whose names are escaping me at the moment). It works.

If someone gives me the specs for the miata's VVT, and better, lives near me so I can test it, I'll make the MS support it (The miata will be the first to get support in that case). I'll write it first on the MS3, and backport to MS2 if there's space to do a good job of it.

EDIT: Actually, that leads me to one of the advantages of MS. Most of the time if you ask for a feature and it's a reasonable one that people will use, James or I will write it. It's how most of our features get added actually.

Ken

I'm going off what I saw/read in lengthy discussions comparing the two on this forum.
Brainiak as well as a few others have pointed out in a few threads. Too tired to search now, but if you ask around more knowledgeable people than myself (that are familiar with both) will confirm this.

Hopefully those people will respond here themselves. If I have that info I can improve our code.

Ken

I'm surprised nobody posted this link yet: We did the second known install of a DIYPNP on a '99 in-house (with a big thanks to Ben for letting us know how the alternator control worked!), and posted a how-to guide here.

:)
And I've built another one, so there's at least 3 known 99/00, but this guy has a 01+.

Then it should have been added five or ten years ago when people wanted to control VVT. I wouldn't call it an advantage if it lags behind almost every other manufacturer of engine management that has been controlling VVT for a while now.

Here's your description:

crank wheel rotates with the crank
intake (VVT) cam has unevenly spaced pulses (one, then two) about 180deg out of phase.
at the extremes of cam phase, some of the edges (rising or falling--i forget) cross a crank sensor pulse and that is no good.

the cam actuates by using a spool valve.
to lock the cam in place, a constant current is applied to the valve to hold it in the middle position (oil does not flow past into either advance or retard port).
current applied will cause oil to flow into the advance port
no current will cause the spring to retract and open the retard port.
I think the full range is 25 degrees.

i do not have the current or voltage requirements though, sorry.

My point was not specific to VVT, I was saying that you have access to one of the core developers (me) and can ask me for stuff, and I'll write it (assuming you won't be the only one using it).

10 years ago there was no megasquirt, and 5 years ago we were just getting started with ms2... We're catching up though.

Regardless nobody started asking us to control the continuously variable systems until fairly recently.

Unfortunately there's nothing here that I didn't already know.

I need at least pictures of the cam trigger, and technical specs for what duty cycles do what for control of the spool valve. Unfortunately I do not have the budget (since we do this open source in our spare time) to go buy one of these miatas to write the code for it, so if anyone has actual specs for it all in a factory service manual or any other form, that would help.

I notice that you're not too far from me. If you didn't mind me poking around your engine bay a bit, or maybe taking a look at the cam trigger wheel, that would give me a very good start.

Ken

i let the stock ECU control it.

btw, this guy is lazy. i explained a basic install and it's so easy a caveman could do it and he's whining about making someone else do it.

la-hoo-zer.

I'm still learning about all this and yes easy and cheap would be nice so having it done for me would be the lazy way I suppose.

The car is my DD and in winter I'd like to have minimun downtime. I'm not too confident with my wiring. I'm feeling all this out to see what when and how I'm going to do this as it's my first time doing more with wiring than HId's with relays, stereo's and so forth. I dont want to screw up my motor or and expensive ECU.

I'm not sure who I can go to for help when the time comes if comments like la-hoo-zer are being thrown around so easily. I had heard the site was known for great technical knowledge with Miata Turbos but that it came with some baggage. I didnt see any of that until now, but its the exception not the rule as far as I see it. I still recommend this site for sure.

I am definately learning as I search, read and then post some beginner questions. Every day I understand more about the world of FI. Thanks to those that have helped so far - this is great.

I'm going to keep following this learn more and see how bad I want to save money and go MS or save up and jump on the Adaptronic .

you can poke around sure. i'm actually very impressed with how hydra controls it (reminder: I now have an adaptronic). seems to be straightforward from a user standpoint.

there are scope traces of the triggers around somewhere. the "cam wheel" is actually the cam itself. hard to show you. oh wait. i saved those images. see attachments. i dont have the PWM output to the oil control valve.


Fine I'll be nice and helpful if only to keep miataturbo's reputation. Search for "adaptronic parallel" and my username. There's a pretty detailed thread on the subject. but seriously, my short and dirty description above is way easier.

That helps, I can see the cam one there. I'll need to get the crank angle of the first crank tooth that occurs after the single tooth part of the cam from somewhere then I think I have enough to start on implementation (and then of course I'll have to test it somewhere).

Also, since you like how the hydra works... for example, how does it allow you to tune the cam profiles? How many cam profiles does it let you select? Does it require a completely separate VE table for each cam timing selected?

For those using the MAF it's very easy... just tell it what cam timing you want in a table, and that's it; the MAF reading goes higher/lower with cam timing so we get the right amount of fuel.

For speed density, most of the aftermarket ECUs I've seen let you choose from a set number of cam timings, (6 or so seems to be the magic number), then for each cam timing, you tune a separate VE table. Then when you're done, you make the engine run with one of the timings selected depending on load, rpm, etc...

Writing continuously variable VVT code has been on my list since mid-summer... and I'd already decided how to do it with MAF... I was just trying to come up with a way to do it with speed density that wouldn't require a VE table for each cam timing.

Ken

https://www.miataturbo.net/forum/t33862/

Thanks - found it.

I will read and re-read it at home and see if I have what it takes to do it.

I'm way over to the Adaptronic side now - time to skip some meals and hock old goods and save for it.....

The vvt map on the hydra is a 3d map (map/rpm) and it's fixed. you put in the angle (advance or retard) and it does the hard work. note that the hydra doesn't use VE, the fuel map uses milliseconds of pulse directly.

and like changing any other ve-changer, you just re-tune the fuel map after you're done monkeying your vvt settings. really that's not a big deal--just watch those AFRs. what i noticed doing a "quick-n-dirty" tune is that the VVT really only needs to be RPM based on a turbo car since you dont spend much time below 100kPa at WOT. and that's easy to tune consistently.

I also dont know the angles of the pulses, but I do know that the adaptronic trigger settings are something to the effect of:
trigger 1: 720 degree cycle, first tooth at 79 BTDC, second tooth at 10.
trigger 2: 360 degree cycle, "reset"
both "rising edge".

Everything's gotta turn into an arguement, huh Ken?

At least with full access to scopes, spare vehicles, and the ability to take apart my car and gather information (which I've posted all over the place) things seem to get ignored until its somehow public enough.

The point is, stop arguing over the idle thing, and I'd be willing to help with the VVT project.

http://abefm.smugmug.com/Miata/Heads...73_9qNr3-M.jpg
You can see the single pulse at the top, and the doublete at the bottom.

more pictures here:
Checking out the VVT mechanism - AbeFM's Photos

To the original poster - *until* VVT gets working, yes, adaptronic is probably the easiest way to go. If you're willing to hang in there (either with a parallel install or an RPM switch) for MS to develop something - it'll probably pay off. If you really want something very straightforward, listen to what people are saying they have trouble with - regardless of if its possible, if its harder than the average person here can do, do you want to try it?

Matt: Why don't you let the adapt control VVT?

Anyone: Who's used both systems and can compare the software? It'd be unfair to compare MS-I to adapt, but MS-II... certainly can be overwhelming for someone new... I'd love to hear a comment from someone who actually knows both. So far, it's been "I know this about X and heard that about Y"

Ken,
You'll want to see this thread, there's info here. But, give me a bit more info about what you're looking for (perhaps make a thread on MS-IIe forums?) and I'll gather up what data dumps I can.

https://www.miataturbo.net/forum/t27030/

VE vs using milliseconds is a preference thing really. We like VE because you can make a lot of other changes without having to retune as much (like changing injector size for example... most times you reset your req_fuel and your dead-time, and you are pretty close).

Alright, I'll have to mess with it a bit once I get some code written and in a car. I REALLY didn't want to do what some of them did and create a bunch of tables.

[/quote]
I also dont know the angles of the pulses, but I do know that the adaptronic trigger settings are something to the effect of:
trigger 1: 720 degree cycle, first tooth at 79 BTDC, second tooth at 10.
trigger 2: 360 degree cycle, "reset"
both "rising edge".[/QUOTE]

I'll have to see if I can get their tuning software from somewhere and play with it a bit to see how their settings are used/set up.

Ken