-= Ultimate Emanage Tuning Thread =-

[VR4neophyte]

Originally Posted by Racer_X

Other than that, I have 0 complaints. seems to do everything right.

My old EMU car was a 93 VR4, and I loved my earlier-version EMU. It did almost eveything I wanted it to do, and I was one of the early users of features several people have had trouble using...

Autotune ROCKS! I had great success using this to make adjustments to my airflow output map. And the 2-step launch control was just amazing too, though really hard on any tranny, as expected. (Unfortunately, I couldn't get Autotune and 2-step to work at the same time as they each seemed to like different RPM sources to work best.) And I loved the logger too.

So much that I may get the EMU on my '95 just to get the 2-step, the timing control, and the logger, and allow my existing ARC2 do the fuel management. That's why I want to know if the logger is worthwhile for knock - if so, I don't need another logger to have the complete solution.

Side benefit: I could use the stock setup, ARC2 setup, or EMU setup depending upon my mood to tinker. If I manage the wiring right, I can switch between these setups with about 15 minutes of effort for only a few hundred dollars one time.

[Racer_X]

If you are thinking about keeping the ARC-2 because of the funkyness you get when trying to read RPM from the cam sensor, don't worry about that. They fixed that problem too. now, you can pick up RPM from "ignition signal" and the rpm graph is perfectly smooth, the 2 step works fine, the fuel control works fine, and everything's all good. No point in having the arc-2 once the EMU is installed. You can even run the car with the arc-2 and record the frequency output from the ARC-2 on a map, and then use that map for speed / density fuel control. Knock input works, but unless you plan on riding around with the laptop open at all times, it's still best to have a palm logger with a warning buzzer. I would trust the "log" more from the EMU, but for instant warning, the palm logger works best.

[stealthystu]

I'm thinking about switching from the Maft-Pro to EMU. I have a couple of questions about it. I have a 91 TT with evo 16g's and 680 cc injectors. I'm right now running speed density on the Maft Pro, so I would plan on continuing that.

1) How does it log when there's no laptop in the car? Is there just a push button to start and end the capturing phase?

2) Does it log knock for a first gen?

3) Are there any issues with the tune for warm start ups? If the engine is warm, does it have a hard time starting, or does it work no problem?

4) Have you ever run into an issue where your tune seems to go everywhere and you don't have your laptop? Is it really consistent, even during weather changes?

5) What features does it have that are really nice and work flawlessly?

6) Do I need anything else if I get the EMU, assuming my IAT and MAP sensors work with it?

Thanks guys

[2root4u]

Originally Posted by 2root4u

I may change over to a static reading as well after my recent experience with the weather getting cold. I had a decent tune up to 20psi, but on my latest runs with the cold weather in VA, I hit the 100% IDC problem at only 2100hz! That totally screws up my map. In summer weather, the 100% occurs at 2400hz.

Nobody else ever had this issue?

[VR4neophyte]

Originally Posted by Racer_X

If you are thinking about keeping the ARC-2 because of the funkyness you get when trying to read RPM from the cam sensor, don't worry about that. They fixed that problem too. now, you can pick up RPM from "ignition signal" and the rpm graph is perfectly smooth, the 2 step works fine, the fuel control works fine, and everything's all good. No point in having the arc-2 once the EMU is installed. You can even run the car with the arc-2 and record the frequency output from the ARC-2 on a map, and then use that map for speed / density fuel control. Knock input works, but unless you plan on riding around with the laptop open at all times, it's still best to have a palm logger with a warning buzzer. I would trust the "log" more from the EMU, but for instant warning, the palm logger works best.

Thanks. Actually, I like the ARC2 just because I prefer the simplicity of 4-knob tuning.

If the EMU knock logging isn't as good as pocketlogger or MMCD, then this may not be a good solution for me. I didn't like using the EMU logger and the Pocketlogger for knock like last time around. I just want a single logger that does it all.

[BlackStealth]

At my low sea level elevation I reach 100% IDC at 1850Hz@7000rpms. With cold weather, your ECU has calculated that you need more fuel which explains why your 100% IDC target HZ range has moved. I'd suggest adjusting your map for this cold weather, so you'll be good when warmer weather arrives again.

[2root4u]

Originally Posted by BlackStealth

At my low sea level elevation I reach 100% IDC at 1850Hz@7000rpms. With cold weather, your ECU has calculated that you need more fuel which explains why your 100% IDC target HZ range has moved. I'd suggest adjusting your map for this cold weather, so you'll be good when warmer weather arrives again.

Yeah, I understand what is going on, but I'm just disappointed that I'm going to have to make a drastic new map for cold weather and worry about temps in between.

Do you run multiple maps for the different seasons?

Also, it seems that it might help to shift i/j adjustments into airflow hz values and then use the temperature duty cycle adjustments. However, this gets back into the timing issues due to adjusting airflow to compensate for bigger injectors.

[BlackStealth]

2root4: After examining your EMU map I've found some things interesting that you've done. First you're starting off with higher airflow HZ signal than gray haze's stock 360cc airflow output map and using the I/J map to do all of your fuel correction. This probably improves lean throttle tip in, but you can accomplish the same thing by modifying your acceleration map from 2% to 30% or whatever the correct number is for your car. Nevertheless an interesting idea of feeding a higher HZ signal to the ECU than it would normally see at low engine loads.

As you gradually work up to full load (high PSI), you're reducing the airflow signal (subtracting more fuel) and using less and less of the I/J map to do correction for you. Basically at WOT and high PSI loads, your airflow map is doing bulk of your fuel correction, and some of the fuel correction is done by I/J, an interesting blend of two maps.

Now I understand your earlier comments better. Since you're not comfortable in using boost cut limiter, or introducing a fixed max HZ level into your airflow map to prevent 100% IDC and let the I/J map & AF Target map to do the work for you, the only solution for you is to subtract more fuel out with your airflow map.

[BlackStealth]

Originally Posted by VR4neophyte

If the EMU knock logging isn't as good as pocketlogger or MMCD, then this may not be a good solution for me. I didn't like using the EMU logger and the Pocketlogger for knock like last time around. I just want a single logger that does it all.

In the newer software you can now step through the logs using your left and right arrow keys. This improvement is important to me as I can now review logs more easily. Knocksum produced by the OBD dataloggers are easier to interpret compared to a raw knock voltage spike. What we need is greddy is to include a knock filter, like they use on the AEM EMS and it would be useful. Anything below the line is not knock, anything above it is.

[2root4u]

Originally Posted by BlackStealth

2root4: After examining your EMU map I've found some things interesting that you've done. First you're starting off with higher airflow HZ signal than gray haze's stock 360cc airflow output map and using the I/J map to do all of your fuel correction. This probably improves lean throttle tip in, but you can accomplish the same thing by modifying your acceleration map from 2% to 30% or whatever the correct number is for your car. Nevertheless an interesting idea of feeding a higher HZ signal to the ECU than it would normally see at low engine loads.

As you gradually work up to full load (high PSI), you're reducing the airflow signal (subtracting more fuel) and using less and less of the I/J map to do correction for you. Basically at WOT and high PSI loads, your airflow map is doing bulk of your fuel correction, and some of the fuel correction is done by I/J, an interesting blend of two maps.

Now I understand your earlier comments better. Since you're not comfortable in using boost cut limiter, or introducing a fixed max HZ level into your airflow map to prevent 100% IDC and let the I/J map & AF Target map to do the work for you, the only solution for you is to subtract more fuel out with your airflow map.

The blend between the airflow map and i/j map wasn't really intentional. It just happened to get the afr right. Obviously just airflow differences between my car and how Trevor's runs.

To stick with this setup, I'm obviously going to have to shift the fuel subtraction from the i/j map over to the airflow map at the expense of getting into timing issues.

I'm not 100% against using the hz clamp especially if it would help this 100% idc issue. With these latest issues, I'd be tempted to put the clamp at 2000hz and tune from there to avoid this cold weather issue. In my existing approach, I was just aiming for an approach that gets the tune 75% of the way there with adjustments in the i/j map vs using the hz clamp and making up i/j values to extend beyond.

Maybe after winter, I'll start up a second map using the hz clamp method. Unfortunately, I'm starting to lose interest in this car. Street tuning sucks and dyno tuning is crazy expensive. I'm starting to miss the simplicity of my old ARC2/SITC setup even if it did require occasional tweaks.