ECU Rule Change Poll
- Thread starter erlrich
- Start date
Andy Bettencourt
Super Moderator
My thoughts are rediculous on this...I would like either to jam the Genie back in the bottle and seal the lid - or set her free entirely.
I don't think it was the intent of the rulesmakers to allow MoTec-type stuff, I think they wanted to allow chips and flashing...are we too far gone?
Decoded: I would rather we had NO allowances or full lattitude to do what we wanted provided you didn't violate other rules (traction control etc.) I voted to allow only stock.
AB
I don't think it was the intent of the rulesmakers to allow MoTec-type stuff, I think they wanted to allow chips and flashing...are we too far gone?
Decoded: I would rather we had NO allowances or full lattitude to do what we wanted provided you didn't violate other rules (traction control etc.) I voted to allow only stock.
AB
The only thing that would be nice to change would be some wording that allows piggy back wiring at the ECU for data aquisition. As it stands now, you can't legally jam a wire in the backside of the ECU plug to pick up information, you have to go all the way out to the other end of said wire and get it there. I am guilty of viloating this rule for an air/fuel ratio meter, but I haven't see to many protests getting written so far.
I understand it can be tough to tell what's being done by that little black box that has wiring hooked up to the ECU. The wording that requires the plug at the ECU to be left alone is intended to prevent systems that simply interrupt the wiring if they can't fit the new ECU parts into the existing ECU box.
Matt
I understand it can be tough to tell what's being done by that little black box that has wiring hooked up to the ECU. The wording that requires the plug at the ECU to be left alone is intended to prevent systems that simply interrupt the wiring if they can't fit the new ECU parts into the existing ECU box.
Matt
Eagle7
New member
I'm definitely in favor of aftermarket ECU's, either in the stock box or an unrestricted box. But the ECU should only connect to the stock harness with no changes to sensors. I really think tweaking an aftermarket ECU can be cheaper and easier than trying to sort out the stock ECU. If you want to throw money at it the sky's the limit, but I think the incremental benefits are marginal.
I'd love to throw a complete Hondata S200 piggy back system at my car but I'm ok with the current rule. Honestly though, with the Honda's now there's enough information out there and DIY software that you can pretty much replicate many of the Hondata's advantages with time, knowledge, a computer, and a chip burner. But that being said, I still never gained more than about 1.5whp out of my Integra's computer.
I think just opening it all up would be a bad idea. I think that's something that would create a good sized increase in the money needed to build/run an IT car.
I think just opening it all up would be a bad idea. I think that's something that would create a good sized increase in the money needed to build/run an IT car.
Bill Miller
New member
I agree w/ Andy on this. Either stuff the genie back in the bottle, and weld the lid shut, or just open it up. If it's all stock, that's what it is. Tech finds a doctored ECU, you get tossed. Saying that this is unpolicable is really tacit acknowledgement of what people have been saying for years, everybody in IT cheats. Cheaters will find a way to get around the rules, period. Put them back to stock, and go w/ the assumption that people will be honest, and play w/in the rules. Don't make everyone pony up more money, just because you can't catch the cheaters.
On the other end of the spectrum, open it up completely. But with a catch. You want to run an aftermarket EMS system, w/ all the wizz-bang sensors you want, traction control, etc. That's all well and good. But you're going to pay a 10% weight penalty.
I think it's a pretty safe bet that someone has figured out how to use MoTeC traction control, and has used it to gain an advantage. A tenth of a second a lap may not seem like much, but that translates to 1.5 seconds at the end of a 15 lap race.
On the other end of the spectrum, open it up completely. But with a catch. You want to run an aftermarket EMS system, w/ all the wizz-bang sensors you want, traction control, etc. That's all well and good. But you're going to pay a 10% weight penalty.
I think it's a pretty safe bet that someone has figured out how to use MoTeC traction control, and has used it to gain an advantage. A tenth of a second a lap may not seem like much, but that translates to 1.5 seconds at the end of a 15 lap race.
Eagle7
New member
Anybody who wants to throw money at their car is going to make it faster than the guy on a budget. There are hundreds of ways to accomplish this. If somebody wants to put $20K into an ECU to pick up 0.1 seconds per lap, I say go to it. Have a blast. He'll probably put another $20K into his shocks and pick up 0.2 seconds per lap. Maybe another $10K on special aero paint for another 0.05 seconds. That guy's still going home with a 2nd place trophy if a better driver shows up in a well-prepped car.
Bill Miller
New member
That's the point Marty, that's not necessarily true. Extra speed will make up for poorer skills. Problem is, it's usually the guys that can really drive AND have the money, that up the ante for everyone else.
m glassburner
New member
Ok guys I have a question....What's the main difference between "totally stock" and" mother board only" mods? Go easy on me I really don't know much about computers.....and how will we police it ? :119:
Eagle7
New member
I think the problem is that it's very difficult to allow any modifications while preventing the very clever and very rich from doing just what they can do today. I can rechip the board? OK, I replace not just the data memory (fuel tables, etc) but also the program memory (logic). Lots of money can yield tangible results. Can't rechip but can reflash? Doesn't sound equitable to me. Got a rev limiter or a speed limiter? Is it OK to change it? Might require modifications to the board.
For any restrictions you put inside the box, cheaters will cheat and never get caught. Don't write an unenforcable rule.
erlrich
Super Moderator
Well, I guess that settles that 
Geez, I didn't expect there to be any single strong preference, but I also didn't expect a virtual 5-way tie! I guess this issue is really all over the map. It would be interesting to know if there is any correlation between the way people voted and the type of car they race.
Geez, I didn't expect there to be any single strong preference, but I also didn't expect a virtual 5-way tie! I guess this issue is really all over the map. It would be interesting to know if there is any correlation between the way people voted and the type of car they race.
I voted to have the ECU open with the stock harness. The stock harness will help prevent the traction control issue. I have one question for the older guys of the group. When your car still had carbs I know the carb is dictated but were the jets?? The reason I bring this up is as follows: Many people are scared of letting the genie out of the box and that ECU tuning is "black magic" so they squash what they don't understand. I don't see how this is any different than tuning the SU's or recurving the dist. on that old Brit lump.
The argument that someone will out spend me and win all the races..... I don't see that happeneing. There is just not enough glory in this form of racing. The person that wants to spend the big bucks will also want the glory that goes with it and move to a "bigger and better" form of racing. Now I do admit that I have not been at this for 20 years but, these are my views based on watching customers go from DE cars to USTCC cars. As the money goes up they want to return to go up and that little trophy with no check attached to it just doesn't work for them.
My two pennies.......
The argument that someone will out spend me and win all the races..... I don't see that happeneing. There is just not enough glory in this form of racing. The person that wants to spend the big bucks will also want the glory that goes with it and move to a "bigger and better" form of racing. Now I do admit that I have not been at this for 20 years but, these are my views based on watching customers go from DE cars to USTCC cars. As the money goes up they want to return to go up and that little trophy with no check attached to it just doesn't work for them.
My two pennies.......
zracre
New member
Can you say big fish little pond? there are plenty of wealthy individuals that will spend whatever it takes...and businesses that thrive on winning...there will always be cars built to the limit. I do agree on your choice for the ecu rule...technology is growing fast and that rule would probably open up more cars possibilities to upgrade in a cost effective manner (not having to stuff 10# of s#!t in a 5 # box) for the future...
and another 2 cents added
Joe Harlan
New member
You can bet this is not a lack of understanding deal for most people here. Don't give me the old reject and recurve the dist argument, You know you have to ability to refine the fuel and timing curves well beyond anything a carb can do. Comparing a toilet bowl with jets to fuel injection if not a good argument. Using the factory harness will not limit the use of traction control. I am currently running an AEM unit in my RS car with the stock harness and the control system works just fine.