Man, if this really does work, imagine the reduction in associated hardware cost if this really does "do what it do!" My Challenge budget loves this!
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1029808658/macchina-the-ultimate-tool-for-taking-control-of-y?token=e40d156d
OEM ECU tuning, not at all. DIY car electronics development, maybe. This is really just an Arduino with some automotive-oriented interfaces built in. It won't help you tune an OEM ECU.
The only real barriers to OEM ECU tuning are "DRM" and proprietary information. Manufacturers don't document how factory ECUs work, leaving it up to DIYers and tuning shops to reverse-engineer it themselves, and if someone with a commercial interest cracks it they're going to keep it secret and milk it for all it's worth. Then the manufacturers add "DRM" to their ECUs in the form of reflash limitations (real or artificial) or anti-tampering measures to make it trickier to modify the ECU - at least without turning it into a brick.
Damned you, GameboyRMH, DAMNED YOOOOU! 
The good news is, aything running a Ford EEC-V is very easily tuned with any of the usual sources and doesn't suffer any reflashing limitations. So, build an EEC-V managed Ford for your Challenge car
WildScotsRacing wrote: The good news is, aything running a Ford EEC-V is very easily tuned with any of the usual sources and doesn't suffer any reflashing limitations. So, build an EEC-V managed Ford for your Challenge car
Came close to doing that. But went with Electromotive instead...
It would be great if OEM ecu's were that simple- but so you know- even for actual production tuning- we have quite a few different kinds of software that is used to do the tuning- and it's not really cross functional. This is within just one OEM, too.
Also- the later you get in terms of code- the more massively complex it is. So a 2017 Focus is WAY more complicated than a 2010 Focus. Which is more complicated than a 2005 Focus, which is more complicated than the EEC V 1999 Focus (I think that's what it had- that was a long time ago). Names have changed, functions have changed, how basic things are run have changed, all multiple times. So you know.
I'm missing the tuning portion of this. It appears to be sniffer which identifies the info being passed over the CAN-bus for monitoring or use (we had a very interesting and enlightening discussion about this with Flyin' Miata a few weeks back.) Then it allows you to potentially modify some items to be passed back in the same format, say push to start when using the FM LS conversation.
It doesn't seem to be on the same level as Cobb's Accessport or Versatunes software which directly modifies the ECU software. It's more a piggyback with the functionality to modify some signals, which would be great for an old car with a new engine but falls short of true ECU tuning.
Neat trick though. If the price is right I'd consider picking one up.
WildScotsRacing wrote: The good news is, aything running a Ford EEC-V is very easily tuned with any of the usual sources and doesn't suffer any reflashing limitations. So, build an EEC-V managed Ford for your Challenge car
Oh do tell - seriously. Please.
Or build a car using Saab trionic 5, 7, or 8. That's all freeware tuneable.
Get TunerPro/TunerCat and see what definition files are available...
The0retical wrote: It doesn't seem to be on the same level as Cobb's Accessport or Versatunes software which directly modifies the ECU software. It's more a piggyback with the functionality to modify some signals, which would be great for an old car with a new engine but falls short of true ECU tuning. Neat trick though. If the price is right I'd consider picking one up.
I wouldn't even say it's a piggyback, but it could be programmed (from scratch) to act as one.
Is it weird I would rather still rewire the whole engine and use something that I know works?
Paul_VR6 wrote: Is it weird I would rather still rewire the whole engine and use something that I know works?
Nope, I was kind of thinking the same thing BUT this is still VERY interesting. I think this is more of a freeware version of the Verizon Humm thing they are pushing at the moment but maybe with a bit more latitude
Paul_VR6 wrote: Is it weird I would rather still rewire the whole engine and use something that I know works?
It's not weird, but if one knows what is what, you can use the hours and hours of dyno time that the OEM did to tune it better.
On the VWs I just get people to log cars with VCDS and make some scatter plots to get me close. That's gotten me lambda targets, vvt angles, timing strategy, etc. Not sure how this would be any different from that perspective.
Usually with what I get to work on the factory ECU has lost one war or another.. lately it's been boost/traction control and on board data logging.
In reply to Paul_VR6:
That's only how the car currently run.
In a lot of systems, there's even deeper data- so if you wanted to run E85, and didn't know the best of the best spark- it's in most OEM calibrations- if you know where to look. Just like LBT fuel- most of the times when a powertrain goes rich, it's in component protection, not best fuel for best torque.
Basically, there's a lot more in a OEM calibration than just making a car run, that's all I'm saying. And knowing how they work- it's much easier to re-calibrate a handful of things than going with a custom ECU.
That, and the OEM calibration is robust from -20 to +130 ambient. As well as robust to about 15 different blends of gas that is available nationwide. It will start and warm up better, transients will be better, etc.
BUT- and this is always my important warning- it's important that the re-calibrator really knows what they are doing. There are many ways to make run a little leaner at WOT, but there are only a few really safe ways that don't have major side effects.
Good points as usual, thank you.
You'll need to log in to post.
