Yes I was using his cast offs!!

Well that just show your knowledge! But aren't you the one who asks where are the high boost heroes... I mean why build a 400+ hp machine and then use it like a street car. It should be used properly to its limits on the track. Being that quartermille or even better on trackdays. Its obvious that you have the knowledge, why not use it for futher development into areas where std ECU cant go..
But I guess thats a discusion for an another topic.

Nice work with this!

I think you have misunderstood Daeron. I track my car regularly (it has the bruises to show!) and I have done the best part of a 100 drag runs, competed at TOTB the last three years and against other "supercars" over a 1 mile drag run (doing rather well I might add ). Of course, if someone chooses to run a 400bhp as a street car then why not? It is surely no different to owning a Porsche, Ferrari etc.

I have absolutely no good reason to use any other engine management system...

No no.. I havent misunderstood.. I wanted to say, that in your hands that Coop with Motec, LC, TC, antilag etc.. could go better

Well, as long as we can obtain the maximum from the standard ECU, why not use it.

For example, I'm abroad and intending to use the FC Performance chip and I hope it works fine with me (even if it is going to be trial and error). Motec and other standalone ECUs are familiar here but at this time (and simply), I can't afford them.

You can chack my intended setup in my signature. I'm expecting (and hoping) to see 400hp and I'm not intending to use the Coupe for drag and track only. I need it to be a street car as well (in fact for street racing )




Back to the MAF

Is it going to 4" size from both ends?

If it is 4", and I'm going to use the 3" TI SIP and 3" APEXi air filter, I think I'll need 2 transition hoses (4" X 3") between the MAF and the air filter and between the MAF and the SIP.

I don't like to use transition hoses but it seems to be the only valid solution.

Isn't it better to make a 4" SIP?

No it’s not, OMEX 710 ECU with standard loom is £805 all in. Pre-assembled kit for plug and play is an extra £50. It comes with a base map. Then full mapping is £300. So you looking at about £1200 fully mapped.


I have to disagree with you there, it’s not the ECU’s fault it’s poor it’s because the mapper is cutting corners. Car companies spend months developing OE maps under loads of conditions making sure everything is right. To get a proper polished map for an aftermarket ECU will take ages and cost a bomb so quite frankly they never bother to polish it up. If somebody put in a load of time to the cold start on aftermarket it will be just as good as OE.

Right, I have spoken to Leighton and he know's his stuff when it comes to re-programming the std ecu, I would also expect that given the same amount of time in the learning process that the same or slightly better results could be achieved using any number of aftermarket ECU's.
I work with motec nearly everyday, and I've seen alot of supposedly set-up bikes that don't start poor running etc and like leighton I know how to achieve good cold starting using motec.
Anyway enough, My point is it's not what you've got it's how you use it and how good the person is who set it up.
Oh and motec do make OEM ecu's, ok mainly for small manufactures. Ascari A10 anyone?

Leighton, Keep up the good work and if I keep the coupe I'll be seeing you shortly.

Cheers Tim

I think you may have missed the point here. Using a larger housing means that the same output voltage span from the MAF now represents a higher air flow. Since this voltage is quantised to a fixed number of bits by the ADC within the ECU, this means each step represents a larger change in airflow, so at low air flows your resolution is degraded.

I haven't missed the point at all, in absolute terms yes that is what happens, but TurboJ asked whether it affected idle or light cruise. The straight answer is no it doesn't. While 0-5v is covering a greater mass air flow range, in real terms there is no significant degradation in resolution at lower air flows if calibrated correctly.

and you have to consider that what we're getting now is higher resolution until about 4,000rpm (on my car), after which the MAF is giving 5v and we're onto pure maps to fuel the car - I'd much rather have correct fuelling at different boost levels, rather than perfect fuelling off-boost - I accept that the bigger MAF may have some tiny drawbacks because of less points, but as long as Leighton calibrates it correctly, I doubt if I'd ever notice

OK let me explain in more detail what I was trying to ask originally.

Ok, for example lets say the scalar of the standard AFM is 0-5V and for this range you have 10 points which are set at 0.5 intervals. If you change to a bigger MAF each point will now represent a "new" airflow which can simply be incorporated by adapting the maps. However my questions are:

Are the 10 points fixed at 0.5 intervals or can they be moved around?

Can more points be added if needed or is it fixed at 10?

If the 10 points can only be moved then will some parts of the range have fewer points than others?

If the scalar cannot be changed is there still a smooth transition between points as some parts of the rev/boost range may jump a significant amount of airflow?

It's ok Jason I knew what you meant. I'm sure you know that MAF conversions are not new, the VAG tuners use them a lot as do many other marques. The reality is at low loads fueling is relatively static so we don't need huge resolution, indeed many load points are rarely used but they are there regardless. The biggest problem for a boosted car is that it has a profound impact on air flow therefore it is at the top end we need this extra resolution.

Suffice to say, I'm not theorising here. While I welcome the questioning, it is the results that determine the litmus test. This has all been tested over the last couple of months on my own car, a useful platform for such developments! The reality is it complicates matters considerably, but the results speak for themselves.

The other point is, at lower revs and throttle openings, won't it doing the fueling of the lambda sensor a lot of the time anyway? Or have I lost the plot?

If you believe you can get all the features of an ECU in a form that a normal punter can program then you are sadly mistaken. Aftermarket ECUs are all constrained to a point because otherwise your average user could not use them. It is not just the time, it is the access to a full programming language that you need to make it perfect. How many people who buy and use aftermarket ECUs can do procedural programming let alone declarative programming which it is naturally more akin to.

This is true of my ECU as much as any other. The Motec has got better in some ways as you can now put a compensation map onto any number of ranges of parameters etc. in the v3 software, but in previous versions it was only what the manufacturer gave you access to.

John I’m not saying that at all. I am saying that the cold start maps etc... can be perfect if the time is put in on a standalone unit without having the need for any full programming language. If you need to have full programming language to get the cold start right then quite frankly you have the wrong ECU.

“The Motec has got better in some ways as you can now put a compensation map onto any number of ranges of parameters etc.”

I’m sorry but that’s hardly cutting edge technology in fact that’s well dated. If I was to show you what we play with you will be amazed.