So tomorrow i go in to get inspected. I keep getting code 62 - map sensor malfunctioning and have determined it is because of the Emanage. I have gone through 2 new map sensors, checked all wiring, tried two different emanage settings, and even had the emanage zero'ed out for any map sensor adjustment.
So i unhooked the map sensor hookup for the emanage and let the stock ecu read directly from the map sensor. And the emanage works just fine!
I have 270cc/min injectors as my main injectors and I have 4 440cc/min injectors which I am wiring up to use as my 4 addl injectors for a 8 inj. setup BUT use the emanage to control the additional injectors.
The way to do this is the following: The emanage has 2 channels to control 2 additional injectors (in addition to the 4 it already controls)
I am going to be wiring 2 high-impedance injectors to each channel on the emanage in parallel and make sure that the are matching the 1-3-4-2 firing order.
Then using a ballast resistor, let say 2 high impedance injectors in parallel on the positive wire from the ECU you add a NON-INDUCTIVE resistor (a carbon type resistor and not a wire-wound one) of around 4 ohms the impedance of such a setup would be from 10-11.5 ohms and on the safe side for the emanage.
The resistor would possibly be at least or around 5 watts value or maybe around 10 watts.
Has anyone given thought to this? With the capability now of taking up to 6 inputs for the profec e-01 which directly controls and interacts with the emanage, it is more and more becoming a very strong contender in the piggy-back management system.
What are you guys' opinion?
PS> Kudos to Alain from ASOG for actually much of the information above!!! I'm not THAT smart
On the topic of why the Emanage keeps throwing a map sensor code (at least for 97 ecus - jamesman doesnt have this problem on the same setup but on 95 ecu), I was discussing with Armond that this only happens during firing up the car...not during the engine being on. He suggested that this may be attributed to voltage interruption to the emanage.
To test if this is the case, I was going to wire the emanage power directly to the battery but use a cutoff switch which i can turn on/off as a "theft prevention" which will also cut power to the fuel pump (this is something i've been wanting to do for a long time).
What are you opinions on this?
Ok sorry for the long post.... _________________ Vinnie Lima vinnie.lima@jvllogistics.com AIM: Kiku888 1997 Chrysler Sebring "Silver XTC" I4 420a w/ HRC Stage 2.45 w/ FMIC 14.7@97 mph@6psi Proud member of the ASOG BoOsT JuNkIe Crew
#48760, "RE: Interesting discoveries with E-manage" In response to Reply # 0
Hmmm...I guess I misunderstood how e-manage worked with the injectors. I thought that if you had the injector harness, then you could run whatever size injectors you wanted to. More specifically, I thought that the e-manage fed the actual MAP reading to the ECU and allowed control of injector pulsewidth through it's own harness. Is e-manage just a MAP modifier(like the SAFC) for the injector sizing?
And that anti-theft hookup sounds like a good idea to me.
#48769, "RE: Interesting discoveries with E-manage" In response to Reply # 1
No the emanage can modify the map sensor just like the safc does but it does have its own control of injector pulsewidth independent to the map sensor adjustments.
Basically you use the map sensor table to lean your car out. And the additional injector table to add fuel.
_________________ Vinnie Lima vinnie.lima@jvllogistics.com AIM: Kiku888 1997 Chrysler Sebring "Silver XTC" I4 420a w/ HRC Stage 2.45 w/ FMIC 14.7@97 mph@6psi Proud member of the ASOG BoOsT JuNkIe Crew
#48782, "RE: Interesting discoveries with E-manage" In response to Reply # 2
So you can't subtract fuel?
Its just that I thought it gave you full pulsewidth control - the ability to increase OR decrease pulsewidth. Basically I thought you could use whatever size injectors you wanted, 1000cc for example, by just trimming the pulsewidth down. Can't do it?
hmmm...after writing this question and thinking about it a little, I can see where it would be difficult to trim pulsewidth down, cause the actual pulsewidth is determined by SOO many inputs - rpm, o2, MAP, and so on. Actually It's starting to make a bit of sense in another respect - full pulsewidth control is usually relegated to standalone fuel or engine management systems NOT piggyback systems.
Ok, as long as I have it correct now(can't decrease pulsewidth), then running a secondary rail from the e-manage is a great idea. I wish I could help with the ohmage and amperage and whatnot. It sounds like it's possible. I guess it goes without saying, but be sure as to what it is that you need to to in order to NOT blow up the injector driver. You should definately go for it. Its a shame they don't support 4 extra injectors out of the box with that thing. If you could get it working then it would most absolutely be a KILLER piggy. I thought it was already(cause of the full pulsewidth control thing)...but I guess I was wrong.
#48783, "RE: Interesting discoveries with E-manage" In response to Reply # 0 Apr-10-03 09:19 AM by thedawg
I was thinking about this too, but here's the thing... you only have 2 extra channels. You need 8 total channels to time 8 injectors. Even if you wire them in and match the impedance for the injector driver (the easy part) you have timing issues. It seems impossible to "match the 1342 order" The best you could do is: 1-3-4-2 / 555-666 or... 1-3-4-2 / 5-666-5 etc
So no matter what, half the injectors will be getting the injection pulse right, but the intake valve will be closed/partial for the other valve. You'll basically have atomized fuel sitting in a closed chamber for a few milliseconds. My concern was, if this is enough time for the fuel to condense/evaporate/de-atomize. If it is -ever- you blow those two cylinders that weren't open at the right time.
UNLESS the e01 can be configured to fire TWICE for the right pulse length, AND the injector can open and close that fast. Then you'd get 1&5 - 3&6 - 4&5 - 2&6. You'd still have the problem of dead fuel sitting in the odd cylinder until the next valve opening, but you at least wouldn't detonate from lack of fuel- just backfire because of too much.
My opinion is that the e01 is designed for 4 and 6 cylinder cars... the "extra injector" marketing term really isn't practical. The e01 IS still cool enough to make buying a standalone 4-injector EIC to work WITH it a decent proposal.
>I am going to be wiring 2 high-impedance injectors to each >channel on the emanage in parallel and make sure that the are >matching the 1-3-4-2 firing order.
#48870, "RE: Interesting discoveries with E-manage" In response to Reply # 4
C'mon now. The 034 is not a valve-timed driver. It works on 2 injector drivers...you can hook 5 injectors to each driver for a total of 10 injectors, and it batch fires the injectors. Also, it has a parameters that you can set that gives you control over how many injector phases there are. It's exactly what Vinnie is trying to get the e-manage to do.
Even the DFI supports a descent array of non-valve-timed injector modes: batch, staged-batch, bank-to-bank. It will also support true sequential-timing - if you feed it the cam position signal.
The valve-timed injection you're talkin about gets you better gas mileage. Yeehaw. It is a bit more state of the art - I'll give it that, but it is most definately not nessicary for pushin fuel. On top of all of that, it's really not that big of a difference with this kind of application - boosting only(higher RPM). Maybe it saves a few pennies at the pump when it's used closer to idle, but not up high - so it doesn't matter for what we're doing here. We're letting the stock ECU run the show till we build some pressure. At least, that's what the 034 is gonna let me do. I also think that's what Vinnie is going for here with the e-manage.
Here's a good question - Does our stock ECU perform true sequential injector timing full time? I don't know if it can or can't. But just because it's wired to support it, doesn't mean that it actually does run true sequential timing through the whole RPM range. My guess is that it might do in the lower RRM range, but at some point kicks over to batch firing them. Who knows?
#48881, "RE: Interesting discoveries with E-manage" In response to Reply # 5
That is what i am suspecting. Boost in my car doesnt kick in until about 3000 rpm. I am not worried about gas mileage, what i am worried is about puddling of fuel while the valves are closed. But at 3k-up rpm, i doubt any puddling is goign to be substantious (sp?) to cause a problem.
So this tentative setup with the emanage will be firing two injectors at each firing cylinder.
_________________ Vinnie Lima vinnie.lima@jvllogistics.com AIM: Kiku888 1997 Chrysler Sebring "Silver XTC" I4 420a w/ HRC Stage 2.45 w/ FMIC 14.7@97 mph@6psi Proud member of the ASOG BoOsT JuNkIe Crew
Search
Printer-friendly copy
5 Users in Chat
