I think the Pro versions of MS3 are amazing compared to the other things on the market at double the price. But... it won't do what you want to do. It can do 12 injectors but I don't think 12 ignition outputs at the same time. It doesn't have onboard wideband which worked AMAZING with the FAST XFi systems I worked with. And it definitely won't do 12 individual drive by wire throttle bodies.
Yea 12/12 is pushing past the limits for sure. Can do dbw W add ons but needs something like the e46 actuator to manage the throttles.
I don't have 12 TB actuators....just 1 big BWM actuator . So its that most HW isn't setup for the current draw, nothing with the ecu code. I currently run an external h-bridge from pololu with plenty of capacity, but the inputs are PWM and direction (high/low) but most ECUs don't have those outputs. With a maxxecu I'm pretty sure I can get them as optional outputs but I'm also pretty sure I can convert the normal outputs from any ECU into the right format with about $5 worth of HW bits....throttle isn't a real problem, just an annoyance.
The issue with all the MS flavors is they are OLD processor families so 16 bit and limited ram. That means the main tables are just too small and that is a deal breaker. On a tame engine or a full race engine I'm sure they are fine, but taming a race engine is another matter. The data logging is just plain sad as well (again the processor) so I'd need to live with it or include the cost of a stand-alone logging system.
The rusEFI stuff is WAY cheaper than MS, you can have 8 spark/6fuel dual DBW, dual onboard WBO2 starting at $250! Or 6fuel/6spark from $175! It uses a fast 32bit with decent table sizes, I have no doubt it can run my engine just fine. It uses TS though so it ends up stuck to MS limits on so things like logging (the best I can tell). But buy an ECU, load TS, it should work. No reason in the world to even consider an MS anything IMO.
Where I get hung up with rusEFI is they are trying to make it more flexible which is great but not so user friendly. Its by programmers, for programmers so almost nothing about the extended functionality is documented in a very non-programmer usable way and support has become all but non-existent. So I'm not sure I could make the extra features work. This is kind of a non-issue on the smaller more normal versions that don't have tons of extra I/O but on the big unit I was eying you need to to access like 3/4 of the output I/O and even then you can't get to all the I/O so the HW seems to be ahead of the SW a bit or this particular unit.
I could buy a pair of the 6 cyl unit but they have only 4 additional outputs each, not enough. A pair of the $250 units ($375ea in a nice case with connectors) would do me fine as each would have 8 or 9 outputs. I think with the only issue running my oil pressure gage without figuring out the Lua scripting (aka programming) feature....and if I could figure that out I could buy the the $825 unit and not have to tune 2 ECUs. Either way I know I could get it up and running.
There is a buy 3 get 4 deal on the rusEFI ecus so even cheaper if I found 2 takers and we could agree on configuration.
.....or I pay more have buy the maxxecu pro and have a hopeful wonderful setup and tuning experience with a single pretty easy to use software.
Yesterday with my 2-stroke setup the not running great included detonation the plug say. I've reset stuff so try again tonight.
This is probably ridiculous but I'm going to ask anyway. Could you use 1 or some Aduros to parse and sort info and then send it to the ecu?
In reply to NermalSnert (Forum Supporter) :
Help me with what you're thinking?
There is a fuel timing and spark timing table and I've discovered they have to match or it sparks exactly 1 time. So I put the channels with spark on the nominal angle, and matched their fuel channels. Then the non-connected spark channels are offset 10 degrees which is as far as I was comfortable mismatching fuel timing. It runs pretty good but was wanting to drop cylinders.
I let it cool and pulled the plugs and average spark plug colors seem to match what lambda is saying. I have a few plug that are darker and a 3 pretty white which checks out with the lambda reading with the rear bank wanting to go 30% lean and the front 15% lean so I'm pretty sure those are the ones that were dropping. Sync is a little messed up and I have the cylinder Map fuel correct off. I'm thinking I'll through some fuel at the lean ones so they stay running and resync the TBs.
The in-line zener fixed the rear axle speed sensor so that reads correctly now....although as I type I'm realizing I didn't confirm the factory speedo is still reading as-was, on the tomorrow list.
The temp gauge wasn't reading, but the ECU was reading CLT temp from the engine. not sure what that's about, hopefully not another dead ECU output.
I was looking at a way to consolidate some of the functions you need to free up space at the ecu. I'm wayyyy outa my league here.
NermalSnert (Forum Supporter) said:I was looking at a way to consolidate some of the functions you need to free up space at the ecu. I'm wayyyy outa my league here.
You're not wrong. A powerful ECU (like the one I have) is more a Vehicle Management Unit then engine control Unit and lets me input and output all kinds ot things that don't have a whole lot to do with controlling the engine. The less expensive ECUs as for the engine and do a fine job running but don't have anyway to handle other needs so additional HW is needed. An arduino with some I/O channels could be the additional HW.
My oil pressure sending unit died and they are LNA. With the ecu I have (and maxxecu or haltech) I can read a standard pressure transducer in the the ECU and kill the engine if there is an oil pressure issue, as well as controlling the factory gauge and warning lights. With rusEFI or MS the standard setup doesn't read oil pressure I'm not sure there is a way to to link it to an output but there is a company that make a little box that reads a transducer like I have and runs the factory gauge, or as you suggest I could do it with an ardiono.
This is where the cost comes back around. The ECU I have I paid I think $1100 second hand and it does, or did, everything. If I buy a rusEFI for $825 it might do everything if I can figure out how or spend $100-$200 for external HW like an ardiono. Well, other than good logging but I could probably live with slow low channel count logging.....or pay $500-$5k for good logging. The $2500 maxxecu doesn't need external HW and has pretty good logging so depending what all I decide I have to have it might be cheaper and neater to buy it and have everything covered in 1 box......but its easier budget wise to spread out the pain and buy 1 piece at a time.
The maxx is definitely the easy button.
Don't be off put by small tables. If you can move the breakpoints tuning is a touch harder if you have never mapped but you get away with a much smaller table. I hve a jmp script written to analyze tables to optimize breakpoints and table size and most engines can get away with some tiny, tiny tables. 6x6 afr and 12x12 fuel and timing are plenty. Itb could need more but you could still blend two small tables in most ecus.
Current MS3Pro firmware will do 12 ignition outputs and it does have an oil pressure warning function, although I'd use an Ultimate to get enough I/O to have functions left over. I've run gauges with a generic PWM output too.
In reply to Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) :
Have you looked at the fuel stuff in the maxx....I was pretty disappointed. There are user functions and flexibility on table axis function 9which I've not seen before) so it can be fixed, but it definitely needs to be user fixed.
The tables....I know less points can be made to work. Yes with good VE mapping the AFR (if used) table can be fairly small....the issue I've always run into it the VE mapping. In a perfect (32bit) world there should be enough rpm points to allow to allow a good approximation or the torque curve shape plus crank, just coming off the starter to help it catch, just below idle to prevent stall, idle, warm idle, so 5 plus the torque curve shape. With a mild cam and normal exhaust the curve is pretty smooth....another 7 to make it 12 is okish, and 16 is plenty fine. With cams, intake, fancy headers ther can be 2, 3, 4 inflection point int he torques curve......12 is a stretch even if you move the crank and idle to separate table, which then have to be blended somehow which is a struggle with any engine that wants to explode off idle. So its not that it can't work I guess, it that is that I haven't had to deal with that for...25 year? and I truly don't miss it....right click, add column is REALLY easy to get used to 
The ITBs make idle harder I guess....or just how big the ITBs I used on the thing are. I've done ITBs in the past and not had to pull timing to make it idle, to help it idle smooth yes but not to make the revs drop to idle. Also right now I'm second guessing my decision to make them adjustable and thinking I might just set them with a feeler gauge and lock them and even the mixture with cylinder trim so there is only 1 knob to turn. I'll see how the weekend goes now that I know lambda and mechanically everything seems to be functioning correctly.
FWIW, I drive the oil pressure, and coolant temp gauges off of a Microsquirt, over CAN from my MS3 Pro.
https://youtu.be/cwEE4juNEsk?si=SyhhiKRYEDvTHqKS
you can also setup low oil pressure trips to kill the engine on a loss of oil pressure.
there's also the table switching features which can effectively double the size of your main spark and fuel tables, you can set them to switch manually, by KPA, or by RPM, being N/A, I think RPM would be the smarter option for you. As far as IO goes, you can link a few microquirts to the MS3 over CAN, and then expand IO, and have remote IO as well.
All that said, I currently have an MS3 Pro Ultimate in my car, for your car, I think you should have nothing less than the MS3 Pro Ultimate. You have big plans, which include lots of IO. I also don't think my next ECU will be part of the MS Family, I feel like support and development has dwindled significantly, probably at least in part to the super user friendly holley lines that have been made available.
Ok, I know there is a big following for MS...but h3ll will freeze before any of that E36 M3 is installed on any car I own. IMO its very not good nor is it a very good $$ deal. Lets move on
Not getting into the discussion of whatever flavor of ecu you want, what is the issue with running non-speed/timing critical functions on an aux CAN box? Oil pressure is important but realistically is the system (ecu shutdown function killing injector power, ignition power, etc) going to be able to respond faster than your CAN network can give you critical information? Specifically, will the CAN polling rate limitation make any difference at all in an engine safety scenario?
If so, couldn't you run the oil pressure sensor on a direct i/o line to the ecu and move something like coolant temp to an aux box where realistically a 1hz signal will not make any difference. It might take some fiddling with the config files but i/o is i/o for the most part.
Sean
In reply to smokeysevin :
I agree with your thinking. Currently I read the CAN buss every 10ms, it's on the same ecu thread at other critical stuff. ....but the only thing I currently read is the cylinder MAP values, the primary MAP comes directly to the ecu on an analog pin. My thinking is critical stuff are direct inputs, so losing CAN is annoying not dangerous. I read it fast so I can log it fast when needed and have no real processor imposed limits so no harm.
I would have no issue running gauges via CAN.....cooling fans maybe? I guess it's as much as cost and bother issue, I'm lazy and cheap but lazy usually wins
Doing CAN pdm can be less expensive than you think.
It's still expensive but not too bad.
https://www.micropdm.com/getting-started
You can run these in the GEP fuse boxes for a sealed setup.
For CAN i/o, adafruit has some feather setups that run native CAN and if you do an i2c level shift board from 3.3v on the controller side to 5v on the analog in board you can add all kinds of cool stuff for almost no money.
Sean
In reply to smokeysevin :
Not doing CAN is free and SOOOO much simpler to setup....I can't even read your last post much less comprehend it 
....no I require a bit more "finished and packaged" in anything I use. Also I really doubt its not cheaper to go that path anyway vs stepping up to the next larger ECU. If you already have a system and decide to add, well that is probably the only path but my stomach is turning just thinking about it.
Call me funny, but I don't trust CAN very much for mission critical data. I'd rather have everything all in one place. It can be laggy as different messages fight for priority unless it's really well engineered.
For a real headshaker, I had a belt fall off of my all CAN car. Five miles later the alternator light came on. That's not as critical as, say, RPM/load messages from the ECM to the TCM so it got waylaid a while.
Ok, I added 20% more fuel to 1, 2, 9 and did the TB sync. At shut down 1, 9 to about the expected color, 2 needs more....something is wrong. 9 has been a problem child all along and all the injectors other than #7 moved to different cylinder so its not that but it does trim.
I have a much bigger issue though, detonation. It runs fine for maybe 15 minutes then it doesn't. It seems to idle fine but with random misfires but rev it and well it doesn't rev. Plug gaps not where I set them. ECU is now officially ready for the trash.
Now do I save money and brush up on my C and learn Lua so I can make rusEFI do what I want or save my money until a maxxecu is in reach?
On to wheel wells I guess, that should be time not money.
In reply to mke :
I agree with skipping MS on your application. my opinion, save your money, get the ECU you want to run that you know will do everything you want. From the small amount of reading I've done on MAXXecu, I would lean heavily towards one of them, they support a ton of functionality, and get closer to the idea of a "Vehicle control module".
I do think it would be a worthwhile endevour to carefully disect your old ECU and try and figure out what caused the failures, if it's something in your wiring or auxillery hardware, it would suck so much to trash another high $$$ ECU.
Whats your tb diameter vs cyl size? I run 60mm on 0.6l and its not too tricky. Doing low load steady state afr tuning first then adding accel helps make it consistent.
In reply to Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) :
54mm on 458cc, so 18% more area/cc? I think the bigger factor might be cams and flow. I use the multiMAP and see idle right around 45kPa which isn't terrible, but on the individual sensors I see about more like 75kPA average which isn't a lot. The cams I have give right around 20% reversion at idle.....but its idling quite well and push-button start would work.
I've got it a bit rich while I trouble shoot so accel hasn't been needed yet, idle timing is 6 degrees which lets me crack the throttle just a touch so throttle position sets idle.
I'm getting pretty sure my ECU has been buggering the cylinder mixtures for a while for whatever reason but with all the other issues along the way I just couldn't see it. Now I can.
I don't know how i got it in my head (old forum posts maybe? that rus EFI had 32x32 tables, they are 16x16 just like MS so the plan I was forming to just order a pair of the cheap $175 6/6 units seems like less of a good idea unless I want to go in and alter the code....I MIGHT be able to do that? I'm only using 10 load values so I'm pretty sure I could pop into the code and change it to 10x25 or 12x21 and have no issues memory wise. I need to think about that. I have all winter to get it sorted I suppose.
More seriously looking at the maxx though. I was emailing with a dealer who has the pro listed at $2450 and confirmed its correct. He's going to get me the connector set pricing Monday.
I need to spend a bit more time with both options.
Whats the cam spec? Mine are 298 adv 12mm decent overlap unless i turn the vvt on. For map I only use cyl1 and use timed sampling and blend with tps for load.
Paul_VR6 (Forum Supporter) said:Whats the cam spec? Mine are 298 adv 12mm decent overlap unless i turn the vvt on. For map I only use cyl1 and use timed sampling and blend with tps for load.
The timed MAP reading is the 1 MS thing I really like for a setup like ITBs (not sure it serves a purpose on any other setup?)....what do you see as a MAP reading?
At the cylinder I'm seeing like 72kPa idle (5%TPS reading, but that is about closer, going to 4 drops idle, 3 nothing changes which is why I picked 6deg timing), 85kPa@22% TPS and on the multiMAP 45/55kPa so vacuum reading wise its 2x at idle, 3x @22% TPS cylinder v multiMAP
Cams I'm not sure what number you gave me. Mine at the lobe for 0.006"lift I336/E308 and 0.050" I247/E251 but my intake cam in particular has long ramps on it so I run fairly high lash to minimize it give 0.006 valve of 275/280 and 0.050 valve 241/245. Gross lift is 11.5/10.6mm, valve lift after lash is 11.3/10.3mm. The cams are installed at 104/110, so a 107LSA
The valves matter nearly as much as cams. I run 34/28.5. Google tells me a VR6 is either 12V 39mm which gives me about double the valve perimeter/cc (at low lifts the flow area is seat perimeter x lift) or there is a 24 valve version with 31mm? giving me about 45% more.
One thing I should check as I don't recall actually checking is the TBs ave bleed air screws for setting idle. I run them closed but I don't recall actually checking to confirm screw in seals them.
Tables. I set up the enginelab with 24x32 tables for VE, spark, lambda (I don't thing there is a hard limit, but this seemed like plenty). I was using 10x14 (the rest are hidden and available for add row/column). I do an added when needed approach so 4-10k was 2k steps as I really hadn't done any tuning up there. I would expect to have a point about every 500 so add another 9 rpm points to end at 23 maybe? Load my min was 40, but 30/35 would probably help on decel and up top it was every 10kPa....maybe ok? hard to say but I don't think I've ever wanted more than 16 for load.
Anyway, I was looking at it as I played with the maxx software trying to figureout how things would translate. They allow 32x32 for every table and you can add another I think 32 point 4D axis so the 1 32x32 table becomes 32 32x32 tables which is kind of nuts. I guess I could have done this in the enginelab too now that I think about it. I was saying the maxx engine control stuff is a bit odd and I wasn't seeing functions I wanted but because the tables are so flexible I think I can get it to do what I want. Things like VE, spark, lambda are rpm v MAP (or TPS).....but I much prefer MAP/Baro. There are user math functions so I created Load % and than the table axis can be replaced to make it load v rpm. Same for fuel pressure v flow for injectors when differential pressure v flow is much better, again user math functions to create differential pres and change the tables. Spark I can add a 4D axis to change timing with throttle pedal to blend idle timing into main timing smoothly....kind of a waste of memory vs a logic function but easy enough to setup and should work fine. I think the maxx would work fine.
mke said:Cams I'm not sure what number you gave me. Mine at the lobe for 0.006"lift I336/E308 and 0.050" I247/E251 but my intake cam in particular has long ramps on it so I run fairly high lash to minimize it give 0.006 valve of 275/280 and 0.050 valve 241/245. Gross lift is 11.5/10.6mm, valve lift after lash is 11.3/10.3mm. The cams are installed at 104/110, so a 107LSA
The valves matter nearly as much as cams. I run 34/28.5. Google tells me a VR6 is either 12V 39mm which gives me about double the valve perimeter/cc (at low lifts the flow area is seat perimeter x lift) or there is a 24 valve version with 31mm? giving me about 45% more.
It maybe wasn't clear what I was on about here. US standard for cam specs is seat to seat given at 0.006" lift, then the 0.050" duration spec is comparison value . The Euro cam companies seem to use 0.1mm (.004") and 1mm (0.040")....so euro cams look "bigger" The .004 or .006 numbers are supposed to represent where the valve is open enough to have meaningful flow and this is the number that among other things is supposed to tell you how it will idle. But if an engine has double the valve sive, 0.003" lift will behave similar to 0.006" on the smaller valve engine so the 2 go together. This is a huge part of what drove the switch to 4 or 5 valve designs (before direct injection), performance wise the 4V can act like a 2v the has 10-15 more degrees duration without taking to emissions hit the longer duration causes. But it not as simple as 2V or 4V its the total valve perimeter so bigger valves need less duration for an given performance level and bigger (or more) valves are harder to manage than smaller valves at any give cam duration. Its hard to talk about 1 without talking about the other because they have very similar effects.
You'll need to log in to post.
