Sequential injection is primarily used for mileage. I have heard claims of engine response improvement, but I have yet to see or experience quantified proof. If the proof does exist, the difference is very livable.

As for 2-step, I don't see the functionality in the E6. I honestly haven't played with it in the Haltech realm. You know how it works, right? Cut spark for turbo, cut fuel for engine revs.

I can think of using alternate maps with carefully chosen breakpoints to do 2-step stuff. This would be a creative way around this issue.

So if you are doing track racing and you want antilag instead of 2-step, this would be quite easy. Setup a clutch switch to call alternate maps. Any tuner should be able to deliver this. I don't recommend using the built-in antilag feature. Use alternate fuel and spark maps for this.

As for logging time, with the laptop connected, I suppose it depends on hard drive space. The logging rate will be slower, as serial connectivity offers limited bandwidth. Alternatively, you have a finite amount of memory for onboard logging in the E8. This is faster, but finite in its capacity.

As for other differences, the E8 has a ton of drivability features the E6 simply does not. This will yield much better drivability out of an E8, but that doesn't mean the E6 won't be drivable at all. Little things like idle control and enrichment coming out of fuel cut to avoid the pops are what I'm talking about.

As for what I need, if you already have an E6 with the wiring harness, let's setup what you need in the way of outputs and inputs.

Also realize I don't have a base map for the E6 that I trust. I do for the E8. You are somewhat on your own there. If you want me to talk you through initial tuning to get the car running and mostly drivable to get to the dyno, I would be happy to help.

Feel free to email me. damon.becker (at) comcast (dot) net. It's fine if you want to continue the conversation in the thread, too. Makes no difference to me.

 

Please don't quote the post above yours. Use ^^^ to refer to the last post, or just POST, everyone knows who you are answering. cool.gif

The "Add Reply" button at the bottom of the page will help you out here.

Also, I put spaces in around your @ symbol in your email address, this keeps the search spiders from grabbing your email and putting it into the spam system, and keeps you from having to get 1000 viagra emails a day.

 

Wow, what great admins! Thank you for watching my back.

Sorry for the unnecessary quote.

 

No problem. And no biggie man, it just confuses some folks and takes up a bunch of extra space.

 

Under what conditions do you purge, and what output type is it configured as?

 

I wrote a 3D map for a PWM output that controls this valve. It gives the valve varying duty based on the engnie speed and load. It shuts off the valve entirely when the manifold pressure reaches ambient pressure at 14,000 feet (the tallest spot in Colorado, where I live). This is to prevent pressurization of the tank from the manifold (although I'm sure the system has a check valve anyway). I was surprised to find I didn't even need to shut it off while idling.

I suppose I could "dumb down" the control of the valve with the E6, but I wouldn't have confidence in that, as I spent quite a bit of time testing Tommy's setup making sure the purge worked as advertised.

I have an oscilloscope (as you can see) and I pulled a bunch of purge valve traces so I could figure out how the stock ECU was controlling it.

No, I can't provide the "canister leak test" portion of the control algorithm, but that isn't necessary for emissions testing anyway.

 

Thats OK i'm only interested in the purge conditions.
I've not purged my canister for a couple of years and it doesnt build pressure in the tank.
If you loop the two tank feeds back to eachother, it does build tank pressure. There is a vent to atmo on my model which keeps the tank pressure under control, but since its a non-US version it has a not so strict emissions setup.

I use an E11 so I was considering working on a map for this but honestly its not worth the trouble IMHO.

 

No mechanical engineer in the world would design a purge system without a way to overcome a valve malfunction. There's a relief valve plumbed into the system that releases gasoline vapors to the atmosphere.

As for your purposes, if you can live with the pollution issues this creates (I myself am quite green), there would also be a small mileage hit.

 

having a turbo kinda negates the vapour and mileage issues

i aint raining on your parade, cudos for getting it working, i was just curious how you implemented it, sounds like it works well.

 

Actually, no it doesn't. Tommy is getting factory mileage, as are many of the turbo installations I do. I have experimented with lean-burn motors in mine and a few customer's cars that get better than factory mileage.

When you add a turbo to a factory MAF car, your mileage goes to hell because of the issues with MAF control. That doesn't mean you can't retune it to get back to factory.

As always, mileage is heavily dependant on what you do with your right foot.