Competition for TCD.................another M30 turbo kit.

T_C_D · Post by **T_C_D** » Dec 19, 2006 2:18 PM

rundatrack wrote:regarding megasquirt...

is there a reason why ya using it besides the price. I mean there are a lot of other proven systems that are out there. Kinda have a lot of money invested in a motor...turbo system....fuel system....all the things to get your system..then go cheap on the thing that if it goes incorrectly can blow everything up..

Before ya get ya draws in a bunch...this is not to cut anyone but quite honestly it just doesnt make any sense to me..

I know ya wanna create something but doesnt it just cause my headaches than if you went with a provent foundation and built of of that.

I mean how many hours does it take to get the megasquirt up to speed? If you calcuate your TCO....it may seem to not be as cheap as it seems...

Peter please handle this since my draws are in a bunch already.

rundatrack · Post by **rundatrack** » Dec 19, 2006 2:38 PM

T_C_D wrote:
rundatrack wrote:regarding megasquirt...

is there a reason why ya using it besides the price. I mean there are a lot of other proven systems that are out there. Kinda have a lot of money invested in a motor...turbo system....fuel system....all the things to get your system..then go cheap on the thing that if it goes incorrectly can blow everything up..

Before ya get ya draws in a bunch...this is not to cut anyone but quite honestly it just doesnt make any sense to me..

I know ya wanna create something but doesnt it just cause my headaches than if you went with a provent foundation and built of of that.

I mean how many hours does it take to get the megasquirt up to speed? If you calcuate your TCO....it may seem to not be as cheap as it seems...
Peter please handle this since my draws are in a bunch already.

glad I put that disclaimer in....

russc · Post by **russc** » Dec 19, 2006 2:40 PM

Ill do it,
MS is fine system. Don't let the price fool you. As you can see the functionality is all there, and the system is very robust. You don't need to spend $2k to do this job. Especially with Todd and Peter getting the stuff out.

RussC

Boru · Post by **Boru** » Dec 19, 2006 2:49 PM

rundatrack wrote:regarding megasquirt...

is there a reason why ya using it besides the price. I mean there are a lot of other proven systems that are out there. Kinda have a lot of money invested in a motor...turbo system....fuel system....all the things to get your system..then go cheap on the thing that if it goes incorrectly can blow everything up..

Before ya get ya draws in a bunch...this is not to cut anyone but quite honestly it just doesnt make any sense to me..

I know ya wanna create something but doesnt it just cause my headaches than if you went with a provent foundation and built of of that.

I mean how many hours does it take to get the megasquirt up to speed? If you calcuate your TCO....it may seem to not be as cheap as it seems...

It's about having a complete system taylor made for these cars, delivered with a nearly complete, proper tune, all needed sensors, harnass, etc. for a reasonable cost to the consumer. The SEM system isn't being forced on anyone. Feel free to buy what you want.
Perhaps the other "proven" systems are over priced and incomplete instead of the SEM being "cheap" , as you put it.

rundatrack · Post by **rundatrack** » Dec 19, 2006 3:00 PM

Sweeney wrote:
rundatrack wrote:regarding megasquirt...

is there a reason why ya using it besides the price. I mean there are a lot of other proven systems that are out there. Kinda have a lot of money invested in a motor...turbo system....fuel system....all the things to get your system..then go cheap on the thing that if it goes incorrectly can blow everything up..

Before ya get ya draws in a bunch...this is not to cut anyone but quite honestly it just doesnt make any sense to me..

I know ya wanna create something but doesnt it just cause my headaches than if you went with a provent foundation and built of of that.

I mean how many hours does it take to get the megasquirt up to speed? If you calcuate your TCO....it may seem to not be as cheap as it seems...
It's about having a complete system taylor made for these cars, delivered with a nearly complete, proper tune, all needed sensors, etc. for a reasonable cost to the consumer. The SEM system isn't being forced on anyone. Feel free to buy what you want.
Perhaps the other "proven" systems are over priced and incomplete instead of the SEM being "cheap" , as you put it.

So comparing to the other systems... the most popular being Electromotive and autronic....

Autronic seems to be the favorite with the swedish builders...which are PPF and VSmotors....

ICS and others seem to prefer the TecIII solution even though there is a lot of buzz regarding them not even doing the tuning but that is another story.

The swedish tuners use the m20 and m30 platform so its not a case of them going with a different motor....

Just dont understand why you wouldnt want to mirror those that are successful...

just questions..

wjones · Post by **wjones** » Dec 19, 2006 3:14 PM

T_C_D wrote:
Matt wrote:Is the S3 kit MS1 hardware with MSnSE firmware, or MS2 hardware with native spark control? Is it 60-2 wheel?

The amount of awesome involved in the approach TCD is taking with this cannot be stated enough. The E28 M30 crowd has it easy, comparatively.

The other old niche car market i'm a part of is the Audi TYP89 platform. The big name in audi standalone work is Javad from 034. The 034 stuff to get fuel and spark control is easily over 2k.. just for the brain. That doesn't include turbo, wiring harness ($500+) and everything else.

The difference is that building and tuning an 034 system is a damn sight easier than an MS system... especially on an I5 audi engine (which is the 034 bread and butter). A lot of people will go through the 034 tuning wizard and get the engine to light off and idle on their first try. That's amazing given that they're doing this on engines that never had EFI injectors to begin with..

The sweet spot of an MS system is getting someone else to tune it for you and build you a wiring harness, all while staying more in the megasquirt price point as opposed to the TEC or 034 price ranges. Tune once, install many is the way to make these things affordable and profitable.

I've got a built MS2 brain and relay box, and the MS2 labeled wiring harness, a billet fuel rail, and 7a tps-enabled throttle, etc for my Audi MS2 install. And it _still_ isn't done.. and probably never will be. Getting a plug-n-play standalone system where someone else has worked out the bugs and provided a good tune for your application is huge.
Matt,

Here are the specs and a picture.

SPECS:

MS1 V3.0
Proprietary hardware interface to run BMW single coil distributor.
Proprietary hardware interface to run Bosch knock sensor.
Proprietary hardware interface and software to allow electronic. solenoid boost control.
Proprietary hardware interface to run Bosch ICV.
Proprietary hardware interface to run stock tachometer.

Kits include Bosch knock sensor and Ingersoll Rand Solenoid Valve and LC-1 Wideband Kit.

The really big deal is the brand new wiring harness. The harness is totally terminated with labels on each wire.

The harness looks great.

OTOH, the "proprietary" add-ons to an open source ECU seems a little lame.

Boru · Post by **Boru** » Dec 19, 2006 3:37 PM

rundatrack wrote: Just dont understand why you wouldnt want to mirror those that are successful...

Correct.

rundatrack · Post by **rundatrack** » Dec 19, 2006 3:44 PM

Sweeney wrote:
rundatrack wrote: Just dont understand why you wouldnt want to mirror those that are successful...
Correct.

different equates to better then...

Velocewest · Post by **Velocewest** » Dec 19, 2006 4:58 PM

Sweeney wrote: It's about having a complete system taylor made for these cars

Wait a minute -- who's Taylor?

I can't keep up with all the characters in this soap opera...

Matt · Post by **Matt** » Dec 19, 2006 5:07 PM

rundatrack wrote: So comparing to the other systems... the most popular being Electromotive and autronic....

Just dont understand why you wouldnt want to mirror those that are successful...

just questions..

I'm not going to speak for Todd & Crew

There are 2 big things to like about MS
- it's cheap
- its adaptable

It's cheap for Peter/Todd to acquire/build standalone systems that are "good enough" for MS. Where Todd/TCD/Peter "Add value" is by the plug-n-play product they create, and the tuning that goes into the box.

Why pay for a TEC box when the TCD MS box will be a drop-in install and come pre-tuned for your TCD kit? You can tune/expand it later if you like, but i cannot overstate the niceness of a turn-key standalone kit (i don't know how close to turn-key this S3 setup will be, but juding from the wiring harness and the extra onboard circuits on the MS board.. i bet its pretty damn close).

I think most people are familiar with the limitations of the MS approach - you can't do coil-on-plug, and you can't do sequential injection. You'll probably be able to do those in about 18 months with MS2 hardware + Router boards. At that point, i think MS2 (or 3 or whatever they call it) will ahve really surpassed a lot of the other guys. The distributed CAN architecture is a big deal.

For now, the MS hardware is cheap for TCD to acquire and customize to their exact needs, letting them build a great drop-in system with good integration to the specific application. Guys I know with MS installs they've done themselves are constantly screwing with them. Standalone management was obviously the next place to go with the bolt-on turbo kits, and MS is the easiest way to get there (IMO).

I think to build an 800hp M30 you're going to need sequential injection and coil-on-plug ignition, as well as electronic boost control + water injection. I don't think you'll get there on MS hardware - at least in the short term. But then, that's not something TCD is offering as a turn key kit either. You're clearly in one-off territory at that power level and TEC or 034 makes more sense at that point.

Matt · Post by **Matt** » Dec 19, 2006 5:23 PM

Also Peter,

would the custom hardware you're adding be easier to do on daughter boards based on the MS2 platform, communicating via the CAN bus? When/if you do 4hp22 auto tranny controllers, will that be via GPIO or custom board, and in either case, wouldn't lining it up via the CAN expansion be kick ass? That way the same base board could be use for any customers install, and if they need auto tranny control, they get the auto tranny controller and just add the CAN wiring?

I want CAN on everything in my car. On new Audis, the lightswitch is on the CAN bus. The radio for instance reads the illumination signal from the CAN bus, not by passing all lighting current through the switch

wjones · Post by **wjones** » Dec 19, 2006 5:37 PM

Matt wrote: At that point, i think MS2 (or 3 or whatever they call it) will ahve really surpassed a lot of the other guys. The distributed CAN architecture is a big deal.

MS2 doesn't have near the processor speed of "real" (expensive) ECUs -> [not refering to a TEC3]. Therefore, map size/resolution suffers as well as the ability to tune it to the absolute edge.

That being said, I'm installing MS2 on my car because it's sure good enough for what I'll need.

russc · Post by **russc** » Dec 19, 2006 5:46 PM

Matt wrote:Also Peter,

would the custom hardware you're adding be easier to do on daughter boards based on the MS2 platform, communicating via the CAN bus? When/if you do 4hp22 auto tranny controllers, will that be via GPIO or custom board, and in either case, wouldn't lining it up via the CAN expansion be kick ass? That way the same base board could be use for any customers install, and if they need auto tranny control, they get the auto tranny controller and just add the CAN wiring?

I want CAN on everything in my car. On new Audis, the lightswitch is on the CAN bus. The radio for instance reads the illumination signal from the CAN bus, not by passing all lighting current through the switch

How much tranny control due you need, full, as in a manual trans mode that the ECU controls, or just the basic interface that is in the currect DME? The later would be easier as all you need is the Fuel Consumption output from the MS to the trans ECU so it wont throw error codes and limp mode.

RussC

Flip_Side_the_Pint · Post by **Flip_Side_the_Pint** » Dec 19, 2006 5:48 PM

That "s3" harness looks really nice. My e30s ms harness could take a few key pointers after looking at that.

rundatrack · Post by **rundatrack** » Dec 19, 2006 6:09 PM

Matt wrote:
rundatrack wrote: So comparing to the other systems... the most popular being Electromotive and autronic....

Just dont understand why you wouldnt want to mirror those that are successful...

just questions..
I'm not going to speak for Todd & Crew

There are 2 big things to like about MS
- it's cheap
- its adaptable

It's cheap for Peter/Todd to acquire/build standalone systems that are "good enough" for MS. Where Todd/TCD/Peter "Add value" is by the plug-n-play product they create, and the tuning that goes into the box.

Why pay for a TEC box when the TCD MS box will be a drop-in install and come pre-tuned for your TCD kit? You can tune/expand it later if you like, but i cannot overstate the niceness of a turn-key standalone kit (i don't know how close to turn-key this S3 setup will be, but juding from the wiring harness and the extra onboard circuits on the MS board.. i bet its pretty damn close).

I think most people are familiar with the limitations of the MS approach - you can't do coil-on-plug, and you can't do sequential injection. You'll probably be able to do those in about 18 months with MS2 hardware + Router boards. At that point, i think MS2 (or 3 or whatever they call it) will ahve really surpassed a lot of the other guys. The distributed CAN architecture is a big deal.

For now, the MS hardware is cheap for TCD to acquire and customize to their exact needs, letting them build a great drop-in system with good integration to the specific application. Guys I know with MS installs they've done themselves are constantly screwing with them. Standalone management was obviously the next place to go with the bolt-on turbo kits, and MS is the easiest way to get there (IMO).

I think to build an 800hp M30 you're going to need sequential injection and coil-on-plug ignition, as well as electronic boost control + water injection. I don't think you'll get there on MS hardware - at least in the short term. But then, that's not something TCD is offering as a turn key kit either. You're clearly in one-off territory at that power level and TEC or 034 makes more sense at that point.

I thought it was something that was going to be for different applications including there own..

But that is probably coming down the pipe really soon seeing that they are in development regarding other bmw platforms...

Boru · Post by **Boru** » Dec 19, 2006 7:55 PM

Velocewest wrote:
Sweeney wrote: It's about having a complete system taylor made for these cars
Wait a minute -- who's Taylor?

I can't keep up with all the characters in this soap opera...

Sorry Tony, my work computer ran out of "i" so I had to improvise.

DMNaskale · Post by **DMNaskale** » Dec 20, 2006 4:42 AM

MS2 doesn't have near the processor speed of "real" (expensive) ECUs -> [not refering to a TEC3]. Therefore, map size/resolution suffers as well as the ability to tune it to the absolute edge.

The MS1 runs an 8 bit CPU at 8MHz, and there are a whole bunch of them out there happily purring away. The MS2 runs a 24 bit CPU at 24 MHz with much more core memory, that is a huge increase in processor speed. Do you have any info on how the commercial competition compares?

Also, I think MS-II doesn't support the 60-2 wheel either(yet).

The most current code, very recently upgraded from the longstanding Beta code, does the 60-2 wheel. Assuming I am reading the MS2 message board correctly. I will find out soon enough. If I ever have enough time to get more than one car running at a time, I will be able to do a direct comparison of MS2 to Tec-3R.

There is some interesting stuff going on around here these days. I'm not sure how deep I want to be in the fray, however. You dudes love the drama. It is very entertaining but it makes my bullshit filters load up and I fear I miss some of the good information. Someone needs to build an ego powered car, but it would probably be impossible to get it to hook up.

FirstFives Dictator · Post by **FirstFives Dictator** » Dec 20, 2006 7:43 AM

wjones wrote:
Matt wrote: At that point, i think MS2 (or 3 or whatever they call it) will ahve really surpassed a lot of the other guys. The distributed CAN architecture is a big deal.
MS2 doesn't have near the processor speed of "real" (expensive) ECUs -> [not refering to a TEC3]. Therefore, map size/resolution suffers as well as the ability to tune it to the absolute edge.

That being said, I'm installing MS2 on my car because it's sure good enough for what I'll need.

I suspect that the difference in most installations will be the level of installation and execution much more than the processor speed.
My orginal fuel-only installation was using B&G MS1 code. Everyone whined about 8x8 tables. Sharp guy on the board pointed out that the RPM and MAP values of the where the tables lay was variable and that MS interpolated between the table entries.
Most car's fuel consumption can be 'linearlized' into a series of straight lines with more changes in slope at off-idle end and less towards red-line. I took advantage of that and placed my bins carefully and was able to perform a very driveable tune.
Car was daily driver with that code base for over 2 years. Ran a lot better than a lot of Motronic cars I've seen at 5er Fests. Of course not the first day I installed it.

The MS demands more mental energy from the application engineer/installer/tuner but the payback is there.
SEM takes over a lot of the application responsbility, making MS more do-able for folks with limited time or resources.

And our harness-builder is pretty amazing....

Post by **Shawn D.** » Dec 20, 2006 7:56 AM

Hey Peter,

Your company applies animal skin conditions to engines?

-Shawn

FirstFives Dictator · Post by **FirstFives Dictator** » Dec 20, 2006 8:01 AM

Shawn D. wrote:Hey Peter,

Your company applies animal skin conditions to engines?

-Shawn

(wondering what spelling/grammar gaffe remains still unseen to him...)

Post by **Shawn D.** » Dec 20, 2006 8:45 AM

FirstFives Dictator wrote:
Shawn D. wrote:Hey Peter,

Your company applies animal skin conditions to engines?

-Shawn

(wondering what spelling/grammar gaff remains still unseen to him...)

OK, I'll give you a hint: you need to add an "a" somewhere to the "Seaboard Engine Mangement" in your signature. BTW, you missed an "e" at the end of "gaffe."

vance · Post by **vance** » Dec 20, 2006 9:18 AM

DMNaskale wrote: Someone needs to build an ego powered car, but it would probably be impossible to get it to hook up.

a · Post by a » Dec 20, 2006 9:35 AM

I'm totally impressed by TCD's hand wrought mods. To build something that works is one thing. To have it look beautiful as well is art. That harness is awesome!

T_C_D · Post by **T_C_D** » Dec 20, 2006 9:48 AM

DMNaskale wrote: There is some interesting stuff going on around here these days. I'm not sure how deep I want to be in the fray, however. You dudes love the drama. It is very entertaining but it makes my bullshit filters load up and I fear I miss some of the good information. Someone needs to build an ego powered car, but it would probably be impossible to get it to hook up.

I agree, it's ridiculous. I won't be a participant in this nonsense any longer. You think I would be mature enough at this point to just ignore coments that annoy me.

Todd

russc · Post by **russc** » Dec 20, 2006 10:35 AM

T_C_D wrote:
DMNaskale wrote: There is some interesting stuff going on around here these days. I'm not sure how deep I want to be in the fray, however. You dudes love the drama. It is very entertaining but it makes my bullshit filters load up and I fear I miss some of the good information. Someone needs to build an ego powered car, but it would probably be impossible to get it to hook up.
I agree, it's ridiculous. I won't be a participant in this nonsense any longer. You think I would be mature enough at this point to just ignore coments that annoy me.

Todd

Umm,
While thats a worth while endevour, you end up with more headache than you may want. Look at Dinan. They ignored the internet critisism for years, and decided enough was enough. This I believe as it started to hurt their business. Or at least that was the perception. Especially with the E39 ///M5 and Z8 header fiasco and hp claims.

You may want to stay "plugged" in, but maybe not so much as its been. The other side is whether you feel this is "your forum" or "your turf" as it was put earlier. It you don't give a more than token effort here, then that will change.

RussC

wjones · Post by **wjones** » Dec 20, 2006 1:32 PM

DMNaskale wrote: The MS1 runs an 8 bit CPU at 8MHz, and there are a whole bunch of them out there happily purring away. The MS2 runs a 24 bit CPU at 24 MHz with much more core memory, that is a huge increase in processor speed. Do you have any info on how the commercial competition compares?

I had comparisions to EFI and AEM boxes. I'll have to see if I can find it.

I see Megasquirt's competition more as VEMS and TEC3. DTA, EFI, Motec etc. are at another level and another price point.

SilverBullet · Post by **SilverBullet** » Dec 22, 2006 8:51 PM

Will there be a harness for RHD cars as well? Isnt the ecu on the LHD cars on the right side of the car and RHD ecu on the left?

russc · Post by **russc** » Dec 22, 2006 10:27 PM

SilverBullet wrote:Will there be a harness for RHD cars as well? Isnt the ecu on the LHD cars on the right side of the car and RHD ecu on the left?

I believe the ECU moves with the glovebox.

RussC

Skeen · Post by **Skeen** » Dec 22, 2006 10:47 PM

SilverBullet wrote:Will there be a harness for RHD cars as well? Isnt the ecu on the LHD cars on the right side of the car and RHD ecu on the left?

I would guess the harness wouldn't need to change for a RHD car. Just flip it over.

FirstFives Dictator · Post by **FirstFives Dictator** » Dec 22, 2006 10:53 PM

RussC wrote:
I believe the ECU moves with the glovebox.

Skeen wrote: I would guess the harness wouldn't need to change for a RHD car. Just flip it over.

So it appears you are both correct.

Skeen, when you coming back this way?

MyE28.com

MyE28.com

Competition for TCD.................another M30 turbo kit.