Which path to take OBDII "Compliant" EMS option
#1
Which path to take OBDII "Compliant" EMS option
I'm in the planning stages of building a low to moderate power ( sub 200whp ) 2002 NB
I understand that MS is the first choice however I want it to remain OBDII "Compliant" I don't want the hassle of swapping stuff out once a year for inspection.
the plan so far is
-GT2560-ish sized turbo (maybe a 13t or 14b)
-Sch40 Log-ish manifold
-Injectors ? not sure yet 450cc+?
-Intercooler..yes just not sure what yet..
what are my options ?
-MS side by side with the factory ecu (Seems Like a pain)
-E Manage (outdated?)
-F/IC-6 (Works but quirky)
-FM VooDoo box (no tunability ?)
-TDR Fuel and timing cards ?
Something else ?
I understand that MS is the first choice however I want it to remain OBDII "Compliant" I don't want the hassle of swapping stuff out once a year for inspection.
the plan so far is
-GT2560-ish sized turbo (maybe a 13t or 14b)
-Sch40 Log-ish manifold
-Injectors ? not sure yet 450cc+?
-Intercooler..yes just not sure what yet..
what are my options ?
-MS side by side with the factory ecu (Seems Like a pain)
-E Manage (outdated?)
-F/IC-6 (Works but quirky)
-FM VooDoo box (no tunability ?)
-TDR Fuel and timing cards ?
Something else ?
#4
Maybe "Compliant" isn't the best description
Thats why I was looking at the injector signal modifyers my thought as foolish as it maybe is let the OEM computer take care of everything out of boost and the doohickie to handle in boost signal modification
I understand that is not the optimal setup but a safe workable option is what Im look at
If said doohickie has no effect (save for injector scaling correction) out of boost the car shouldn't have any issues with TX DPS inspection or the like .
or am I missing something else
Thats why I was looking at the injector signal modifyers my thought as foolish as it maybe is let the OEM computer take care of everything out of boost and the doohickie to handle in boost signal modification
I understand that is not the optimal setup but a safe workable option is what Im look at
If said doohickie has no effect (save for injector scaling correction) out of boost the car shouldn't have any issues with TX DPS inspection or the like .
or am I missing something else
#7
mkturbo.com
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Charleston SC
Posts: 15,189
Total Cats: 1,685
I mean if you want to deal with a project that Shiv gave up on without finishing, and then rely on Stephanie@Bell Tuning then sure the Xede is an option. I can say back in 2009/2010 when I was trying to help a friend out with it in MD it was complete trash. He ended up swapping to a MS and was much happier over all.
I would bet you invest less time swapping back to stock once a year and then back to boost, then trying to get a Xede to work without throwing CEL's or any other parallel ecu.
SonoftheHill can convert from 300whp MKTurbo setup back to stock in about 2 hours, and then another 2 hours back to boosted.
I would bet you invest less time swapping back to stock once a year and then back to boost, then trying to get a Xede to work without throwing CEL's or any other parallel ecu.
SonoftheHill can convert from 300whp MKTurbo setup back to stock in about 2 hours, and then another 2 hours back to boosted.
#8
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 1,552
Total Cats: 196
I mean if you want to deal with a project that Shiv gave up on without finishing, and then rely on Stephanie@Bell Tuning then sure the Xede is an option. I can say back in 2009/2010 when I was trying to help a friend out with it in MD it was complete trash. He ended up swapping to a MS and was much happier over all.
I would bet you invest less time swapping back to stock once a year and then back to boost, then trying to get a Xede to work without throwing CEL's or any other parallel ecu.
SonoftheHill can convert from 300whp MKTurbo setup back to stock in about 2 hours, and then another 2 hours back to boosted.
I would bet you invest less time swapping back to stock once a year and then back to boost, then trying to get a Xede to work without throwing CEL's or any other parallel ecu.
SonoftheHill can convert from 300whp MKTurbo setup back to stock in about 2 hours, and then another 2 hours back to boosted.
I got rid of that car in a hurry, for the above and some other issues it had.
Out of boost was oem silky smooth though.
#9
I run a speeduino in parallel with the factory ECU on a 98 F150. Works just fine on there. If I had to keep OBD on my miata I would go parallel with MS3.
The only significant downside I see is the lack of documentation when compared to standalone setups.
I still haven't figured out why everyone hates on the parallel arrangement.
The only significant downside I see is the lack of documentation when compared to standalone setups.
I still haven't figured out why everyone hates on the parallel arrangement.
#14
What does the law say about an ECU swap to one from another car that supports OBD codes - eg. find a factory ECU from a 4 cyl turbo car that can be reflashed to do whatever like some of the more modern mitsubish / subaru ECUs?
I would guess it's not legal, but would return the relevant OBD codes when queried?
I would guess it's not legal, but would return the relevant OBD codes when queried?
#15
here in CA, where it's probably the strictest, it says you cant modify anything at all, ever, for any reason. even if you set it up such that the car ran cleaner, more environmentally friendly, and returned all smog compliance protocols, they are by law required to fail you and deem you a "gross polluter" if they see anything other than OEM or CARB EO certified components.
I'll save everyone some time here: it's all about the laws, which exist primarily to make more money. no one actually cares about the environment or even safety for that matter
I'll save everyone some time here: it's all about the laws, which exist primarily to make more money. no one actually cares about the environment or even safety for that matter
#16
0 previous posts and your first thread deals with gathering information about what ECU or what methods can be used to defeat EPA mandates.
Believe it or not, they do things like this.
*dons tinfoil hat and stares at sky looking for black helicopters*
My simple advice: Move to a state that encroaches upon your freedoms less. Vote with your tax dollars. Actually voting doesn't do **** anymore.
#17
Good to hear.
0 previous posts and your first thread deals with gathering information about what ECU or what methods can be used to defeat EPA mandates.
Believe it or not, they do things like this.
*dons tinfoil hat and stares at sky looking for black helicopters*
My simple advice: Move to a state that encroaches upon your freedoms less. Vote with your tax dollars. Actually voting doesn't do **** anymore.
0 previous posts and your first thread deals with gathering information about what ECU or what methods can be used to defeat EPA mandates.
Believe it or not, they do things like this.
*dons tinfoil hat and stares at sky looking for black helicopters*
My simple advice: Move to a state that encroaches upon your freedoms less. Vote with your tax dollars. Actually voting doesn't do **** anymore.
its just that this is the part of this project that had me wondering the most
The parts and fab side of things are trivial , its the making it run and stay in one piece
as far s moving to a free state ...90+% of Texas has no emission testing I am just lucky enough to live in part that does
#18
I haven't done a miata in parallel but from what I've seen it would have been even easier. I haven't done it though so it's entirely possible for me to be wrong.
I'll leave it at that.
#19
mkturbo.com
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Charleston SC
Posts: 15,189
Total Cats: 1,685
I run a speeduino in parallel with the factory ECU on a 98 F150. Works just fine on there. If I had to keep OBD on my miata I would go parallel with MS3.
The only significant downside I see is the lack of documentation when compared to standalone setups.
I still haven't figured out why everyone hates on the parallel arrangement.
The only significant downside I see is the lack of documentation when compared to standalone setups.
I still haven't figured out why everyone hates on the parallel arrangement.