So who wants their ECU's "Chromed"?

[Greg E]

I've got the 99 clone ECU and a harness ordered. How is Chrome V2.0 coming along? I want all the emissions stuff on the 95 to work like stock.

I turned 30 this month and have spent more time partying and going to gatherings than doing disassembly work.

It's my goal to be finished by NG.

[awdonly]

http://www.3sgto.org/f2/disassembly-...nsor-8260.html

Looks like you posted in this thread too.

I thought that thread dealt with the EGR functionality - does it also address the evap purge valve clicking issue? I thought that had to be disabled in the peripheries even with a MAP sensor and I don't see directions to disable in that thread either.

[Greg E]

Yes the purge system uses the MDP as well.

[Stealth_RT]

Just finished reading this whole thread and WHEW my brain hurts Awesome work done by everyone involved with getting this project going! I currently have an AEM EMS Ver.2 sitting in its box on a shelf and was planning on using it when all the other mechanical issues/upgrades/fixes are done on my car, but now......I'm wondering if that's the best option. Sounds like using a '98 ECU and EVOScan is a lot easier to deal with for a mediocre tuner like myself, compared to an AEM. I like the descriptions of stock driveability with the 98 ECU. Not sure an AEM will give me that, and remain stable over long periods of time without constant tune tweaking. Not to mention the cost of having an expert like Ray P install and tune an AEM. That alone will cost me more than a full 98 ecu/evoscan/adapter cable/tactrix cable setup will cost. Not real enthusiastic to run a MAF again, I've had a MAFT Pro installed for a few years, running in speed density, and all the IC piping is set up for that. Maybe I'll keep the MAFT Pro running in speed density, zero out the afr correction tables, and feed the karman freq. output into the 98 ecu. How well does the Chrome ROM deal with fixed intake temp and baro values that the MAFT devices send to the ECU?

[99 vr4]

Just finished reading this whole thread and WHEW my brain hurts Awesome work done by everyone involved with getting this project going! I currently have an AEM EMS Ver.2 sitting in its box on a shelf and was planning on using it when all the other mechanical issues/upgrades/fixes are done on my car, but now......I'm wondering if that's the best option. Sounds like using a '98 ECU and EVOScan is a lot easier to deal with for a mediocre tuner like myself, compared to an AEM. I like the descriptions of stock driveability with the 98 ECU. Not sure an AEM will give me that, and remain stable over long periods of time without constant tune tweaking. Not to mention the cost of having an expert like Ray P install and tune an AEM. That alone will cost me more than a full 98 ecu/evoscan/adapter cable/tactrix cable setup will cost. Not real enthusiastic to run a MAF again, I've had a MAFT Pro installed for a few years, running in speed density, and all the IC piping is set up for that. Maybe I'll keep the MAFT Pro running in speed density, zero out the afr correction tables, and feed the karman freq. output into the 98 ecu. How well does the Chrome ROM deal with fixed intake temp and baro values that the MAFT devices send to the ECU?

Actually there may be a work around for that... Sorta a plug in baro and temp sensor... I am working on that.

[99 vr4]

@Greg - did some testing today.

EVAP purge draws ~360 mA @ 12.6 vdc
Fuel pressure draws ~308 mA @ 12.6 vdc
Wastegate draws ~173 mA @ 12.6 vdc

All three use the same driver circuit. AND OBVIOUSLY the fuel pressure solenoid is beefier. And the fuel pressure solenoid is the same as the EGR (no I didn't test that one) and available at Advance Auto for about $50. I am guessing that as long as you stay below 400 mA your good for whatever you choose to use as the wastegate solenoid.

[Toni]

Anyone running PTE/Lucas 550cc injectors and have good scaling and latency values?

Actually, would it be good to get a table together similar to the Injector Scaling and Latency link for known injectors that people have?

[Chris@Rvengeperformance]

Anyone running PTE/Lucas 550cc injectors and have good scaling and latency values?

Actually, would it be good to get a table together similar to the Injector Scaling and Latency link for known injectors that people have?

A bit back i posted some in the ballpark.

[Greg E]

Anyone running PTE/Lucas 550cc injectors and have good scaling and latency values?

Actually, would it be good to get a table together similar to the Injector Scaling and Latency link for known injectors that people have?

I've got a good scaling/latency values but theres a bit more to it than that.

The more cars I tune the more I am realizing that you can be really far off with the values and the car will still start, run and drive. The fine tuning is just a matter of watching your trims and you have about 3 different options for that (injector tables, fuel map and MAF tables).

No lie, I had a customer try to run his car with stock injectors and the 660 scaling. Amazingly it start, ran and drove just fine. Didn't accelerate for shit but I was amazed at how well the car ran.

[Toni]

A bit back i posted some in the ballpark.

Thanks, I was able to find it.

I've got a good scaling/latency values but theres a bit more to it than that.

The more cars I tune the more I am realizing that you can be really far off with the values and the car will still start, run and drive. The fine tuning is just a matter of watching your trims and you have about 3 different options for that (injector tables, fuel map and MAF tables).

No lie, I had a customer try to run his car with stock injectors and the 660 scaling. Amazingly it start, ran and drove just fine. Didn't accelerate for shit but I was amazed at how well the car ran.

Interesting. So there is definitely some work to be done after starting in the "ballpark".