Megasquirt vs 14CUX

[WernerVC]

I am in the process of converting my Rover 3.5 L to FI. I have build a megasquirt ECU  V2.2 system a few years ago. I am not sure how to start with the installation. Should I first try the 14CUX original Rover system to see it the engine runs fine or immediately run with the Megasquirt system ?
Anybody experienced with the megasquirt set-up ? need some help.
Werner

[NCtim]

Hi Werner,

There are so many geniuses here when it comes to this but when they schooled me, I learned that the 14CUX system is self-adapting and runs all on its own. The MS system allows you to fine tune your Fuel Injection and the newer MS systems will run sequential injection and ignition management for a more advanced ignition system. You can rid of the antique distributor.

Cheers,
NCtim

[DiDueColpi]

Hi Werner,
If the ultimate goal is to run the megasquirt then I would start with it.
The time spent setting up the Rover injection and then replacing it,
Would be better spent tuning the megasquirt.
If you are really concerned about your engine build, fire it up on a carb first to break it in and then mount the fuel injection.
Once you get comfortable with the megasquirt you will wonder why you were worried about it at all.
Down load a couple of the tuning programs and play around with them offline.
One I use is "Tuner Studio", which is one of the easier programs to use. And it offers a self tuning option that is really usefull
But I find that I use "Mega Tune" more often as it makes more sense to the old school me.
Cheers
Fred

[NCtim]

Hi Fred,

I've been reading all the MS and Mega Tune manuals and I have a headache now. I truly know now that you guys are geniuses if this is simple stuff to accomplish for you all.

Cheers,
NCtim

[WernerVC]

Fred,
The only reason I am worried about the engine rebuild is the proload on the rockers. The deck is shaved by 0.030 but ran well with the carb.before the rebuild. Now I want to make sure that the preload is right. I need some info on this so I'll start a new tread or find the "How to" in older forums.
I think I start with the older version of MS V2.2 with distributor and switch over to MS 3 later so I can get rid of the dizzy and have 8 individual coils or 2 banks of 4.
Werner

[Moderator]

Werner, this might be the preload thread you're looking for: http://forum.britishv8.org/read.php?6,8887

Please post lots of photos and notes as you come along with your EFI installation! I hope to follow in your footsteps soon. My scheme is to use the Rover intake manifold, but custom fab a plenum top that will aim a throttle body straight back toward my existing cowl-mounted air filter... and since there's no room to package a hot-wire sensor in that space, I'm planning on using Megasquirt. If I had room to package a hot wire sensor, I'd just stick with the Rover control system. I'm not convinced Megasquirt is necessarily better in the end, and I'm not looking forward to the tuning phase of Megasquirt installation development.

[WernerVC]

Curtis,
I'll give you all the info with pictures I have so far.
I do not look forward to upload and fine tune the megasquirt files either but maybe with some help from friends that have done it before it might not be all that bad. I am planning on starting with the MS1 version first and when the engine runs fine I will upgrade to MS3 so I can get rid of the dizzy. Glad to see that there is lots of interest for the MS system.
BTW, how do you like my powder coating . It has the color and texture from the Ferrari valve covers. Not easy to do but for our first time it looked pretty good.
We are working on a banner.
Need to find some help with the replacement of the door sills. Hope to find it in the forums.
Werner

[Moderator]

Nice valve covers, Werner!



If our Megasquirt enthusiasts will indulge me, I have a couple quick questions:

1) am I correct to assume that Megasquirt is equally happy with just about any OEM throttle position sensor? (If not, what should one look for in a throttle position sensor?)

2) given that the 14CUX-generation Rover throttle butterflies measured 65mm in diameter and were sized for the 3.9L engines, if you were considering using an entirely different throttle body assembly on a 3.5L Buick/Rover V8 what diameter throttle body would you look for?


Rover integrated plenum cover and throttle body assembly:

[DiDueColpi]

The megasquirt will work with just about any TPS. But it must be a linear type sensor for best results. Some TPS are sloped, and while usable, they make tuning harder.
Sensors for some vehicles such as BMW, Volvo,VW etc won't work as they are actually idle and WOT switches and not a true position sensor.
Port type EFI really doesn't care what size the throttle body is. Technically you can't go too big. The consideration is more about throttle control and charge tuning. An oversized opening causes the throttle to be very hard to modulate. Many manufacturers use a progressive opening linkage just to allow a larger throttle body to be driven smoothly. Such as the later Land Rover v8's. That's why the first 1/2 of the throttle feels so dead. Interestingly most OEMs with electronic throttle control exaggerate the throttle control to make a small motor feel bigger.  
You also lose any tuning advantage that a well sized throttle body would have given you towards a ram air effect.
For a mildy built 3.5 the 65mm throttle valve should be more than enough.
An easy way to find out would be to measure manifold vacuum at WOT and maximum torque.
Cheers
Fred

[NigelB]

Hiya

Hope this isn't classed as me spamming - although I do run a small company specialising in Megasquirt and Rover V8s in particular, the linky below will help you a lot - irrespective of if you buy anytghing from me !

I would suggest EDIS vs Direct Coil Drivers, MS1 and also that you use a Hotwire Injector system vs the Flapper one.

Look at www.megasquirt-v8.co.uk

If I can help just ask, but as others have said it will transform the engine, I run twin MSQs (Programs" 1 x for max power (and fuel !) and another as a "Economy" Map for just driving about, you can swap between them either via loading via a laptop or build the ecu right and have a dashboard switch :O)

MS1 will do all you need and then some, use latest version MS1 V3.57, MS3 is frankly for what you engine is far too OTT and expensive, you'll gain 1/32 of F all :O). Use MS1 get it running then spend the saving on a rolling road session with someone who knows not just about tunning but who is also familair with tunuing MS. You can do the fuel side yourself, the spark is the trickier one to sort. If you get stuck let me know and I can send you a suitable spark table

Never forget the engine you have there is basically a 50s Buick engine, simple and MS3 is just not going to give you any gains over a well set up MS1

Hope this helps

Nige

[socorob]

I have a question maybe you could answer. I have a FAST efi throttle body. It's basically a 4 bbl carb body with 4 injectors in it if you're not familiar with it. It's going to go on a ford cologne V6. I have a dual plane manifold. With the carb when cruising, the primaries feed only the longer intake runners but under more throttle the secondaries open up and the short runners get fed at the same time. With  MS2, should I try to set it up like a progressive carb, with only the 1st bank of injectors working, then under more throttle have the secondaries open and the second bank of injectors kick in? Or should I set it up like up double pumper and have all 4 opening with all 4 injectors working. I would also like 2 maps, one for performance, 1 for economy.

[BlownMGB-V8]

You'll need an IAC valve, MS-I might have some limitations there, and that is something to be very particular about. Just a solenoid valve can work, but basically if you want to run EDIS you can't do IAC.

The simpler MS systems are good, and inexpensive, so they make a lot of sense. But it's really all in what you want out of the system. The engine may be 50s technology but that is not so far removed from today. It's still pistons running up and down, and everything else is peripheral and can be updated. You've seen the build details on my Buick 340 for instance. It's a '67 engine but is fitted with neoprene seals, crank trigger, port injectors, etc. Ultimately individual egt's and COP, and then there is the transmission control. MS-1 is hopelessly inadequate for that task, but MS-3 is not. There is however a new board on the scene, called the Qorivva:

http://blogs.freescale.com/2011/06/07/calling-all-petrolheads-configurable-aftermarket-ecus-for-sale/
I know very little about it at this point but it seems interesting. One thing I like very much is the sealed case and connector.

On the throttle body, you get some progressive action by the way you connect the linkage. On mine I'll be using a bellcrank to double that action for smooth off idle performance. A small car with a big engine does not need much throttle most of the time.

On the dual injectors, most of those are set up with some overlap so that the secondaries begin to come in before the primaries saturate.

Jim

[NigelB]

I am thinking that what you call IAC is what I know as "Extra Air Valve" or of the Rover V8s the "Stepper Motor" in which case you are correct in that MS1 will not control the 4 wire RR Stepper motor. However, MS1 will control the simpler and more relaible Bosch 2 wire Air Valve, and offer the ability to program it in terms of the "Autochoke" as to how much to lift the RPM to on cold start ups, and then lower the rpm bit by bit down to "Off" at another set RPM at a set temperature when reached. It will also control the tickover and give a rock solid one via closed loop settings

I actually don't like the RR stepper motor, they are reknowned for sticking, and being a PITA !

Control of a gearbox linking to the Engine ECU then yes MS3, but for engine control MS1 is more than enough, I have customers using highly tuned and rather exotic Rover V8s, dyno'd and set up spot on, a MS2 or MS3 would stuggle to give "More" BHP & Torque.  

Too many people think that £s more = must be better, and to some degree that is true, but MS1 is a whole load easier to get to grips with and set up and get good than MS2 and 3 which are a huge step up in complexity. A spot on MS1 will and does often beat MS2s, I have lost count on how many poor MS2 set ups I have seen over the years !.

Ms2 basically gives a Bigger tune table than a MS1, will run a Steeper Motor, and allows the owner to rewrite and tweak the code it is written in, other than that MS1 will do everything MS2 does.

I have a lot of customers who have started with MS1 with the intention of going MS2 and never have, also people who have tried starting on MS3 and given up with a non runner. MS3 is superbly designed but you do have to know what you are doing to build and tune up the unit, more so than with say MS1.

Viva L Difference !

One thing is for sure, MS in any config set up properly knocks spots of  "Lucas Prince of Darkness"

I even ended up selling these for those who wnated a coffe table talking point :



:O)

Nige

[MG four six eight]

Here is a link to a handy dandy chart that shows the different features of the various versions of Mega-Squirt.
http://ms3efi.com/feature-xref.html
I'm a big believer in using MS3! Its faster, smarter and you can do more with it. Even if you don't use all of the features of MS3,  the fuel tuning down to one tenth of a percent can make a big difference when tuning low load drivability conditions ie.city driving.
When I was running MS2 there were times when 1% of fuel trim was either to rich or lean. With 1/10 % of adjustment, it makes it easier to tune for both fuel mileage and power!
1/10% fuel adjustment also makes auto-tune work much better as well! There much less "hunting/surging" during the auto-tune phase of setting up your VE table, due to the faster processor and finer adjustments. This is important for first time users.
Even though it is more complex then MS1/MS2, MS3 combined with Tuner Studio is actually easier to use for a "car guy" like myself.
I like to compare the various versions of Mega-Squirt to a PC computer. You can have a PC that was designed a couple of years ago, or you can have one that was designed 10 years ago! Both will work, but which one would you rather have?!!

Bill

[Moderator]

Mac?

[BlownMGB-V8]

That business about the air valve... how are you going to get different steps and different flow volumes from a solenoid air valve? Isn't it going to be either open or shut? If you could step it down... well, wasn't that what the stepper motor was designed to do?

I actually prefer the Ford IAC which is PWM controlled and needs only 2 wires. I like the configuration and mounting better too.

Jim

[Moderator]

In all the commotion, we almost forgot to welcome a new member to the forum.

Glad to have you here, Nigel!

[MG four six eight]

Re: Megasquirt vs 14CUX

Posted by: Moderator
Date: April 24, 2012 04:09PM


Mac?
 

Sure! :-)

[Dan B]

I have been using Tuner Studio on my mac some, but using Parallels and running it through windows.  It will run on the Mac, but i have not worked out the connections there yet..

[NCtim]

Yes,

Welcome Nigel! I suspect that I'll have loads of questions for you. Also, thanks for the link. On the MS version 1, I didn't think this system could control sequential spark, only wasted spark technology. Am I incorrect?

Cheers,
NCtim

[NigelB]

MS1 is Wasted spark, not sequential.

As I said in my email to you yes MS3 is very very nice, but OTT for any Rover V8, some here use MS2 on TVRs etc for track days, but I have a customer with a MS1 power tweaked TVR and he outperforms so many "High Spec" Others - mainly due to it being set up spot on via Megaalogviwer / tuner studio AND a healthy time with a Rolling road to get spark map spot on. MS1 is easier to work with if complexity is not an attraction for you.

The Bosch 2 wire Air Valve I use is a PWM unit, hence "Tunable"

You can put stockings, high heels and lipstick on a Pig - but its still a pig

If others think MS3 is the answer to a Rover V8 then fine for them, the final result is only as good as the set up and tuning, I have even helped with a V12 1959s Meteor Tank - now on MS1 !

I have also (as I had to for my current own project, had to make VR sensor brackets and Trigger wheels for the 4.0 unit (as my 5.2 has this as a front end on it :O( I don't like th factory units as they are in the bellhousing, and do fail - particularly with what I do with them :LOL:






The VR Bracket has slots to allow adjustment to the timing, and also to get the correct Air Gap,
I think this proved to be a solidworks and Prototype nightmare to get spot on :O)

Hope this is of interest

Nige

[NCtim]

Thanks again, Nigel. This is all good info.

Cheers,
NCtim

[BlownMGB-V8]

Very nice sensor mount. There is a large market for those and the matching trigger wheel, especially if it will fit all of the Rovers, 215's, 300's, 340's, 350's and Buick V6's. In which case it may also work on the big block Buicks. (Can it be used with the stock mechanical fuel pump in place?) I think your development efforts could pay off nicely. The nicest design I've built so far  bolts to the fuel pump boss and won't work if a mechanical pump is needed.

I'm with Bill on this one, the ability to independently tailor fuel and spark to each cylinder and set up auto-tune to let the controller optimize each one as opposed to batch fire of both fuel and spark with a one-size fits all approach has big potential payoffs. You let the MS3 vehicle spend the same time on the dyno as that MS1 and I think you'll see the difference.

But it isn't all about the Hp figures, driveability, or even economy and there can be no doubt that added complexity can take you into the realm of diminishing returns. For some, such as Bill and myself, the individual cylinder tuning is needed. Both of us run superchargers on one-of-a-kind custom intake manifolds. Without the uber budget to endlessly develop and test it is highly unlikely that you can get perfectly even intake distribution with such a design on the first prototype no matter how good you are. So while the MS1 will work, it may be very far from optimal. This is not an issue that the average builder has to deal with, but even so, the unequal length headers we are stuck with means uneven cylinder conditions, and any uneven cylinder condition is fertile ground for individual tuning.

In regards to your IAC solution, that sounds quite creative but the issue I ran into with MS1 was an inability to both control idle air and provide a timing advance output (SAW signal) for the EDIS. Even with the 2 wire Ford PWM IAC I wasn't able to run both. The best I was ever able to do was to use a solenoid for fast idle and even then (going from memory here) I think it was an either/or situation where I could have EDIS advance OR fast idle but not both. I do remember feeling very frustrated with this limitation which I considered short sighted, and it led in short order to an upgrade to the first MS-II beta daughterboard, and then the newer (current) MS-II configuration. (anybody want to buy a beta1 MS-II?) If you have solved this dilemma I applaud your accomplishment, and wish I'd known about it 8 or 9 years ago. Even now I would like to know more of the details.

So all I'm saying is that it's a real good idea to make sure you have a clear upgrade path, and if you might need the higher features it is cheaper in the long run to provide for it at the beginning rather than later. The v3.57 MS board is a good piece. The MS-II or MS-III cards plug right in for ease of upgrade and there is an MSX expander for more inputs and outputs (need the bigger enclosure), plus the GPIO which uses a separate enclosure and can serve many functions including transmission controller. Most of us go more complex because of a need. I don't know very many people who want to go more complex simply for the sake of complexity. OTOH, I DO know people who will go high tech for bragging rights, and that is a legitimate excuse.

Jim

[NigelB]

I agree, The MS3 is a great solution for what you are doing, as you are pushing the options of what you can do waaay
over standard. The problem is that for some MS is just a "Small Part" of their hobby, and more than often <sigh> they haven't got a ****ing clue when it comes to ECUs tuning, making a wiring loom, etc etc. I have had emails saying ....

"Like the sound of your MS1 system - can you do me one with the correct plug for my Lucas harness" <WTF ?>

"Will this run my x y z enghine without major modifications"

"Can you build me a wiring loom and get it switched completely to Megasquirt if I bring it over 1 afternnon and wait ?" <you'll have a Kin long wait Matey .....

And the best email yet

" I am not exactly sure which engine I have, but am interested in your kit, can you advise on what else I need other than your ful kit" <please just go away pleassse ....>

So, faced with this, a MS3 would baffle them. Actually on rethinking what I have typed the MS1 would baffle them. In fact its possible if you shuffled their left and right shoes around it woulod puzzle them, thankfully I don't get that many of the "I am a Muppet" Clan, though some do make me blink at the monitor ....

Most peps I deal with have some knowledge of most things, but are only "Good" at a few. Some can Tig weld "Unobtainium" with ease, but not build a ECU to save their lives, some can wire but not weld, some can't weld wire or do much else, but, with detailed instructions and some support want to have a go, I try to cover all.

I did have a "Proper Job" after I found out that this well paid "Proper Job" was likely to end up with me in a box underground quite shortly I was luckily "Let Go" and wondered what to do, I had friends literlaly begging me to megasquirt their trucks, and after a while I thought "What if I could make a complete kit that even some of the muppets could actually follow with ease and megasquirt their V8s ?"

I love my V8s, I do get involved with other engines (aparrently there are oter engines out there than V8s) and I love what I do

I tinker, make up brackets and solutions to problems, I am amazingly getting known in the UK as a guy to buy stuff from becuase I will help when stuck, the winner than near beat me was the "Chap" who said he couldn't get his engine to run. after WEEKS of calls I ended up at his 4x4 racer and tried to find the fault. As an autoelectrician by trade the install was perfect, a beautifull job.....

After 6 hours I was stumped, NOTHING and I mean NOTHING mad it run, I checked everything - several times - you know the I have looked in here once but I will just lok again in desperation that the f up fairy may have visited and swapped it sinmce I looked last time sort of look at ....

I sat in the corner on a tarpalin and drank a coffee, I was uncomforatble, lifted up the tarp to see what I was sitting on, its was a 300 TDi LR engine - Whats this for I asked ?

"That mate was the old F engine which I F wished I havd never F removed for the F Poxy F V8 and your bl**dy megasquirt........"



















And tell me, what exactly is the fuel in the Tank"

:O)

Prob sorted

MS3, please ........................ :O)

With my Kits of MS1 the majority of customers are "LR Challenge" Motors, V8s and water don't mix, as I am sure many here will know.......heres why I love MS ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GP29tqQcgMY

Then the TVR Boys found me, there old Lucarse ECU are dying, some want MS2, many go MS1, easy to help

MS3 ius superb, no Q, its just the "Main Market" I operate in has peeps with little / no / none skill :O) and all plead proverty
and many just wnat a simple relaible foolproof <cough> system that they can sort out and get to grips with

Supplying them with MS3 would see the remainder of what hair I have fall out and the Will to Live prob slip away from me ....

Hence my Love of MS1

MS2 I think is more / was / a stop gap for MS3. Ms3 is a world apart from MS1, and I still think there is a market for all.

ALL MSs are a vast jump in terms of qulaity relaiblity and user freiendlyness vs Lucarse prince of Darkness stuff, if ever you wnat a shock, unwrap a Lucas V8 Harness and "Admire" and gasp at the "Quality" especioally around the joins ......

Not sure what the prob was with PWM etc but I have no probs with it working with everything else...Odd

But then again so am I :O) ...........

Nige

[roverman]

Case in point, Mopar Gen 3 hemi, you can use Mega 3 to run everything, try to limp along, bound and gaged with the factory set-up or spend thou$ands, with some aftermarket sharks. A few folks cave in to anti-tech sentiment and spring big buck$ for carb and distributor adaptions. This would be a thoughrougly well engineered engine, fed and controlled, from the dark ages. IMHO, why bother with a modern design at all ? Cheers, roverman.