MS3Pro users?
#8
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,455
Total Cats: 6,874
Haha.
Yeah, I've been running it in the car since last November- so far as I know, mine was the first Miata with the MS3P installed. And it's a great box.
This was also my first MS3 in general, so a bit of a learning curve there. I'm still coming up to speed on some things, and the fact that the code is still changing makes life interesting. I recently upgraded from the pre-1.2 alpha 2 code to the "stable" 1.2.0 release, and as soon as I did, my idle (which had been rock-solid) started oscillating just a bit. So little **** like that is still cropping up, but on the whole, I have no complaints.
Yeah, I've been running it in the car since last November- so far as I know, mine was the first Miata with the MS3P installed. And it's a great box.
This was also my first MS3 in general, so a bit of a learning curve there. I'm still coming up to speed on some things, and the fact that the code is still changing makes life interesting. I recently upgraded from the pre-1.2 alpha 2 code to the "stable" 1.2.0 release, and as soon as I did, my idle (which had been rock-solid) started oscillating just a bit. So little **** like that is still cropping up, but on the whole, I have no complaints.
#10
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,455
Total Cats: 6,874
Nope, that's one thing they really got right on the MS3P. It uses a MAX9926 IC as the signal conditioner for the crank / cam, similar to what I built several years ago with my crankwheel setup. It's been rock-solid for me thus far.
#14
What I want to know if there is a significant advantage or benefit between them.
I got the standard MS3+MS3X box and besides adjusting the pots and the pullup resistor at first, so far no issues of sync loss all the way to 8000 RPM.
I was considering to sell my MS that I got to buy the MS3Pro. But unless is there a real advantage to justify the switch (besides the AMP connectors).
#15
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,455
Total Cats: 6,874
2: The 9924/9926, in general, seem to have better immunity to false-triggering. This is contingent, in part, on the design of the filter circuit which is implemented by the board designer around the IC.
3: The 9924/9926 are inherently auto-setting for threshold and hysteresis, rather than requiring fixed values to be set via resistors or trimpots.
All in all, if you already have an MS3/X, and it is working reliably for you, it is probably not worth spending the money to upgrade to the MS3P. If you are building a new car, or have been experiencing chronic problems with the MS2/3/X inputs circuits (as 949 Racing had been when using NB sensors) then the MS3P is a very nice box if you can afford it.
#16
1: The MAX9924/9926 chip (used on the MS3Pro) has a differential input(s), rather than a single-ended (unbalanced) input on the VR circuit of the regular mainboard. This is of interest only to those using actual VR sensors (which tend to have balanced outputs), an in those cases it significantly increases immunity to common-mode noise.
2: The 9924/9926, in general, seem to have better immunity to false-triggering. This is contingent, in part, on the design of the filter circuit which is implemented by the board designer around the IC.
3: The 9924/9926 are inherently auto-setting for threshold and hysteresis, rather than requiring fixed values to be set via resistors or trimpots.
All in all, if you already have an MS3/X, and it is working reliably for you, it is probably not worth spending the money to upgrade to the MS3P. If you are building a new car, or have been experiencing chronic problems with the MS2/3/X inputs circuits (as 949 Racing had been when using NB sensors) then the MS3P is a very nice box if you can afford it.
2: The 9924/9926, in general, seem to have better immunity to false-triggering. This is contingent, in part, on the design of the filter circuit which is implemented by the board designer around the IC.
3: The 9924/9926 are inherently auto-setting for threshold and hysteresis, rather than requiring fixed values to be set via resistors or trimpots.
All in all, if you already have an MS3/X, and it is working reliably for you, it is probably not worth spending the money to upgrade to the MS3P. If you are building a new car, or have been experiencing chronic problems with the MS2/3/X inputs circuits (as 949 Racing had been when using NB sensors) then the MS3P is a very nice box if you can afford it.
But I was reading in the MS3 pro manual that you have still to put a pull up resistor in the CKP cable if you want to use the OEM CAS or any other hall effect sensor.
I though that with the MS3Pro you can setup the pull up via software like Haltech. I was guessing with that new VR board on the MS3Pro will be the same but it is not.
Thanks for the clarification.
#17
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,455
Total Cats: 6,874
But I was reading in the MS3 pro manual that you have still to put a pull up resistor in the CKP cable if you want to use the OEM CAS or any other hall effect sensor. I though that with the MS3Pro you can setup the pull up via software like Haltech. I was guessing with that new VR board on the MS3Pro will be the same but it is not.
They certainly could have implemented a soft pullup, by using one of the MS3's general-purpose output pins to drive a pair of transistors to gate the pullup voltages. I think they made a better decision by not wasting an I/O pin for this. It's something that only needs to be touched once, at the same time that you are assembling the rest of the harness.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post