Computer tuning in CMC

[snakebit]

As stated in a previous thread....I'm asking the question. If it's been hashed at before, and it ain't gonna happen....no need for a lengthy discussion. I'm new here and just curious as to why it's taboo.

John

[Keith]

I believe it is taboo because one can get creative and fiddle the torque curve by fiddling the computer. I believe what you are going to hear from the leadership is that if you can make power within the existing rules without ECU mods, then why allow ECU mods?

 

I've always felt that with dynos at events, this would be OK but I also have been around long enough to know that if it ain't in the rules then it is not allowed.

[snakebit]

Isn't that what the carb'd guys are doing with metering rods, jets, timing, and carb spacers? So there hasn't been a carbed car on a dyno, tuning for maximum hp and torque?

 

If computer tuning would be legal, I don't see that it would open a major can of worms. But, I know the powers that be are much wiser than I.

 

John

[King Matt1548534716]

I'll give you one reason, the ease of teching a carb compared to an ECU. The dyno form requires you to state the jets used to make the given power on that sheet and they are easily verified in tech. That's not so easy with a computer. ECU tuning also allows a lot more control over the spark and fuel table that is not attainable with a carb and the stock ignitions we are required to use. You can very easily take an engine, like an LT-1 for example, that would be far over the limits of HP and TQ unrestricted and truncate those curves with spark tuning to maximize area under the curve. With the restricter plates you typically have to compromise one area for the other, so allowing ECU tuning would be a huge advantage for computer controlled engines. It would also raise costs across the board by encouraging a lot of people to buy a chip and spend a lot of time on the dyno.

[Keith]

Isn't that what the carb'd guys are doing with metering rods, jets, timing, and carb spacers? So there hasn't been a carbed car on a dyno, tuning for maximum hp and torque?

 

If computer tuning would be legal, I don't see that it would open a major can of worms. But, I know the powers that be are much wiser than I.

 

John

 

Maybe this didn't come across in my original reply - I am not defending the current ruling about ECU mods, I am only telling you what you are likely going to hear.

[snakebit]

I understand that this is probably a dead issue. We're all in the same boat, and if I feel that carbed cars have an advantage, than that is what I need to run.

But I will end up spending just as much money on the dyno, tuning my car with exhaust mods, instead of a restrictor plate.....

In reality, a few hp or ft lbs. of torque, isn't going to make any difference in this series...I know that it comes down to the nut behind the wheel.

 

John

[nasa-rm]

.....if you can make power within the existing rules without ECU mods, then why allow ECU mods?

 

Bizzare thought (and completely backwards from what the rest of the world thinks ), but why doesn't anybody use ECU tuning to back off on the tuning and keep their max HP/TQ under the maximum? Why screw around making 13 different restrictor plates, 6 different exhaust systems, 3 intakes, etc to make sure you aren't over power. Save gas, go green, make 230/300 by detuning the ECU .

[Glenn]

i'll post here what i posted in the other thread.

 

since no region i know of including Nats has no way of checking it, there is no way of policing it.

 

isn't that the very reason max camber was removed from the rules?

 

 

I'm w/ Dave on this one. removal of emissions should include the disabling those items in the PCM.

 

allot of our rules rely on the honor system. there is a certain amount of faith placed on fellow racers that none of us have billet cranks, H beam rods, forged pistons, so on and so on. there is also faith that guys like me haven't reprogrammed their PCM's. so the same faith can be placed upon me that's already there that i will only disable the emissions in the PCM and not alter the fuel/timing maps.

[TurboShortBus]

I'm w/ Dave on this one. removal of emissions should include the disabling those items in the PCM.

 

+1 from me on this as well.

 

With the Ford 4.6L, when you remove the catalytic converters, the "check engine" light turns on. Sure, you can buy $60 worth of MIL eliminators (dummy O2 sensors that trick the ECU into thinking everything's kosher), but you can also flash the ECU with a quick program that turns off the pair of post-cat O2 sensors. The same goes if the EGR is yanked; ECU trickery is needed to turn off the check engine light.

 

Also, with EEC-V Fords, there is the sweet little PATS anti-theft system that gets in the way. You must have the key to start the car, and if you yank the stock gauge cluster to install aftermarket gauges, then the car won't start at all. This, also, can be turned off with a quick ECU flash. But, if you want to reduce the car to the bare minimum of wiring (just a master power switch and a starter button, etc.), then the car won't start without the PATS being disabled, which isn't possible without messing with the ECU, which is verboten.

 

Now, fortunately for me, I have a local buddy who has the software to quickly turn off the PATS and emissions gear, and probably won't charge me a dime...so, that addresses the cost issue. However, if I was so inclined, I could strap the car down to his dyno and spend a full day there trying to max out the power curves (while staying below 230/300 peak), and he would also probably charge me next to nothing (good for cost, bad for honesty). Then, I'll have my dumb ass behind the wheel, and all of that power fiddling goes out the window.

 

But yes, how does one prove (at Nationals or wherever) that all you did in the ECU is turn off the emissions equipment and anti-theft? You're right when you say that it's all based on the honor system. Maybe some people have already spent a ton of time with a tuner on the dyno, and aren't saying anything. Maybe some download a "junk" program and hit the NASA dyno, then download a "power" program and hit the track. Then again, one could also hit the dyno with one carburetor, then roll the car back into the trailer and swap for another pre-tuned carb and then hit the track, blah blah blah. There are probably a million ways to be dishonest and, unfortunately, the people with good intentions will be penalized.

 

Mark

[mitchntx1548534714]

But yes, how does one prove (at Nationals or wherever) that all you did in the ECU is turn off the emissions equipment and anti-theft?

 

1 tuner, NASA approved alteration, lock the PCM.

[TurboShortBus]

Or, have NASA-issued ECUs at large events, such as Nationals (although this could be a logistical headache). Push car to grid, receive NASA-issued ECU, install ECU, race, report to impound, remove and return ECU, push car to pits. I think the ASA series did this a few years ago when they went to spec LS1 engines.

 

Mark

[Glenn]

w/ just the LT1 there is 3 different ECU's. the LS1 has 3 different ones. 3rd gens have a couple i'm sure.

so w/ just the GM camp we are at 8 PCM's w/ no duplicates for folks who may have the same PCM. add Ford to that and its not a smart way to do it.

ASA guys all ran the same ones. so they only had to have enough of them for all the racers.

[TurboShortBus]

w/ just the LT1 there is 3 different ECU's. the LS1 has 3 different ones. 3rd gens have a couple i'm sure.

so w/ just the GM camp we are at 8 PCM's w/ no duplicates for folks who may have the same PCM. add Ford to that and its not a smart way to do it.

ASA guys all ran the same ones. so they only had to have enough of them for all the racers.

 

Hence the words "logistical headache" in my post. I never said it was a perfect idea, but it is probably the best way to eliminate electronic shenanigans, if that's what you're trying to accomplish.

 

Mark

[ls168camaro]

I am all for computer tuning and really don't understand why it isn't allowed.

At the very least emissions tuning should be allowed since all emissions removal is allowed.

I haven't been around here long enough to understand why it isn't allowed. I can understand why it may not have been allowed 10 years ago but it has become so commonplace that it should be allowed.

I don't know if it could be changed by enough people requesting it or if it requires someone in charge of the rules who wants to change it.

I do know that at the end of the year you can submit rule change suggestions to some committee to be reviewed before the release of next years rules. I will certainly be submitting my request that computer tuning be allowed.

Bryan

[TurboShortBus]

A few years ago, how did CART (before becoming a spec engine series) and F1 address the issues of "cheating" by teams fiddling with the computers to have undetectable traction control programs? By telling them to go ahead and use traction control. If a sanctioning body can't effectively enforce a rule, and people are breaking it anyway, then maybe they should just allow it and move on. Same but different with pot. LOL j/k

 

Mark

[mitchntx1548534714]

I am all for computer tuning

 

I'm re-reading these threads and posts and maybe the term "tuning" is tripping the Chicken Little's offline.

 

There is no "tuning" involved, just removal of codes caused by allowed modifications.

 

And looking at the big picture, these rules were written before OBD cars were as common as they are now.

[TurboShortBus]

And looking at the big picture, these rules were written before OBD cars were as common as they are now.

 

Likely so. And what are the chances that these rules were also written by somebody with a carbureted car? lol

 

Mark

[Alien]

I think these threads are now talking of 2 totally different topics, tuning and removal of non-performace 'stuff' (PATS/VATS security and emissions) in the ecms.

 

Me personally run with no cats/smog pump but still retain the ERG (simply because I'm lazy). I currently don't have a SES light on due to emissions, but it has come on during a session. It's a very nice "hey dummy, look at me, sumthin ain't right" Having it always on is the same as removing the bulb completely. I still have the VATS in with the resistor trick also. I wouldn't be sad to toss that out the car.

 

Whether or not this rule is changed, the cheaters will still cheat no matter how it gets policed.

 

Now as far as the tuning aspect, I see why that is dissallowed. It would then require you to stend time/money on the dyno getting the optimum curve etc. Back to the whole... if one guy does it and wins, then everyone does it. It was stated that if you're at max limits already, it won't really help you much. For me at 209/276, it would be an easy way to bump up my numbers, but I am still not for tuning, it's just another can of worms.

[mitchntx1548534714]

but I am still not for tuning, it's just another can of worms.

 

Me neither ....

[Dave Schotz]

I don't care whether we are or are not...

 

I just want scan readers... 'real ones'... so that the top 5 cars or so... get downloaded... HP Tuners can do it in minutes... and tell all variables.

 

Or... Have a 'series' sponsor... that everyone sends their ecu off to... removes the smog stuff... and seals the tune w/ encryption to stay stock.

 

They all make sense to me... but are meaningless without enforcement.

 

Since so simple to enforce,

 

My .02

 

Dave

[Keith]

Whether or not this rule is changed, the cheaters will still cheat no matter how it gets policed.

 

I think that this is probably a true statement.

 

I don't care either way - legal, illegal whatever. When I am in a position to race again it will be interesting to see where this ends up.

 

I left my old LT1 car in a state where the SES light worked and ran a restrictor plate. However, the car was never close to minimum weight. One man's way to deal with it; may not be for everyone.

[ls168camaro]

I am all for computer tuning

 

I'm re-reading these threads and posts and maybe the term "tuning" is tripping the Chicken Little's offline.

 

There is no "tuning" involved, just removal of codes caused by allowed modifications.

 

And looking at the big picture, these rules were written before OBD cars were as common as they are now.

 

Good points Mitch. There is a big difference in a performance tune and simply removing the codes caused by legal mods.

I'm with Dave that all of this doesn't matter unless enforced. However I just feel that the dyno is the enforcement.

When it comes to a performance tune I think its just the same as trying different restrictors, air lids/filters, exhuast systems etc. Its actually easier and cheaper.

[mitchntx1548534714]

Its actually easier and cheaper.

 

I think you will come to find that in this CMC world, neither of those parameters matter ... till of course a select few have an issue.

 

Then it's a great idea! (caliper spread )

[ls168camaro]

Its actually easier and cheaper.

 

I think you will come to find that in this CMC world, neither of those parameters matter ... till of course a select few have an issue.

 

Then it's a great idea! (caliper spread )

 

HAH. I think I have come to that understanding with the allowance of all the ridiculously huge wings. CMC is starting to look like an Import Tuner car show. Its also funny hearing spectators ask why a car running AI is so slow with that big honking wing only to tell them that it is a CMC car.

But you gotta love it at TWS!

[doug1548534725]

Wings are hard and expensive? I've seen some that look to be about $5 of plastic held on with about $.25 in rivets.