Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: JamesM Apr 12 2010, 08:15 PM

For my most recent Megasquirt install i went a different route and had some mini-MS boards produced. It did not make a lot of sense to just have one PCB printed so needless to say i have more then a few empty boards laying around. Now i am trying to decide if it is worth my time and money to build these boards out and sell them as a plug n play solution for d-jet cars.

For those who don't know, mini-ms is electronically compatible with megasquirt 2.2 however the components are arranged tighter on the board and it integrates the relay board all on a form factor smaller then the original MS. My first couple of installs i used a standard megasquirt 2.2 with relay board and DB-37 cable but the mini-ms seemed like the better way to go so that is what i am playing with now.

The setup i a running right now looks almost stock, the mini-ms is enclosed completely in a gutted d-jet brain and plugs directly into the d-jet harness. the only difference from stock is a MAP line running to the brain and the 2 injector ground wires being run back as well. You have to look close to tell its not stock, however i have a feeling i could make it even more stealth by hiding the MAP sensor in an old MPS in order to get rid of the vac line to the ECU. I just have not cared enough to cut up an MPS yet.

The great part about this system is it makes troubleshooting way easier and eliminates the need for stock trigger points, MPS. ECU, decell valve, and cold start injector, though they can all be left in place if desired in order to appear stock. It also allows for cool things if you desire like closed loop operation with a wideband O2 sensor, spark control, rev limiters, traction control, and a bunch of other stuff depending on how far you want to take it. It can be tuned around just about anything, so its great if you want to change cams or go bigger on your motor and still look stock.

So is there any interest out there for this sort of thing or should i just dump the empty boards on ebay or something?

Posted by: mightyohm Apr 12 2010, 08:38 PM

Can you post some pictures of the boards?

I'm not in the market but as a fellow electronics guy I'd like to see what they look like.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 12 2010, 08:42 PM

I will see about posting some pics when i get home...

Posted by: underthetire Apr 12 2010, 08:43 PM

I had often though about it myself. I'm not in the market, running MS now. But it would be cool for smog cars. Think Bluetooth for the communications. That would make it even nicer.

Posted by: quadracerx Apr 12 2010, 08:52 PM

Im sure there is a market for this....although since I am a complete "idiot" when it comes to FI....the more complete you can make it the better it would sell....Im sure there are quite a few guys that would love a true stock appearing but modern system that could be "really plug and play" so that if you wanted to replace your existing stock system or convert back from carbs you could get the parts in one shot....

Posted by: JimN73 Apr 12 2010, 08:53 PM

I know very little about MS or other aftermarket systems, so, I hope you don't mind a coupla questions.

What can I expect to gain from an MS install? What's going to be involved in the installation/set up? Can a not-technical person do it?

thanks for your help.

Jim

Posted by: Lennies914 Apr 12 2010, 09:14 PM

Sounds like it would pay for itself the first time you needed to replace a NLA componant that failed.

Posted by: Gint Apr 12 2010, 09:23 PM

Sure.

• Price?
• Instructions for the average DIY'er?
• Support? Not just stock but varying configurations and complexity.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 12 2010, 11:55 PM

Ill post some pics of what i am playing around with and then get to peoples questions...


none of these pics are by any means a finished product, still experimenting with different ways of mounting/insulating the board. If i do decied to actually sell these as a completed product I want to be sure they are as bullet proof and prettied up as possible.

The d-jet brain i used in the pics was a pretty nasty one, I hate cutting up nice ones. It will be blasted and repainted before the board is installed.

Bare boards front and back


Spares


Completed board during testing -not yet mounted
wiring here is temporary for testing


Compared with an early djet board


Blank board in djet case



My testbeds...

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 12:16 AM

The idea is to make it as simple as possible, basically get it as close as i can to just swapping out the d-jet ecu. I have done a couple standard megasquirt installs into 914's and this has always been an idea in the back of my mind. The standard MS setup always had some short comings and complexities that i was not happy with and would not have been comfortable handing over to your everyday user. Pending a lot more testing, this may solve those problems.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 12:38 AM

That was another one of my motivating factors to go MS in the first place. I have owned 914s for 12 years now and i always insisted my cars have the original injection. The problem now is that new d-jet parts are not as easy to come by as they were 12 years ago. This system takes the place of the most expensive ones.

Being able to tune around cam and displacement changes is nice too. I have always liked a stock motor, but a motor that passes for stock while pushing out an extra 30 hp is nice too.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 01:44 AM

The more questions the better, it gives me an idea of where people are at on this.

If you have a perfectly running fuel injected stock motor, I can not say you will gain much at all beyond the geek factor of being able to plug a laptop or palm pilot into a 40 year old car and do some data logging. If you have a good running stock setup and are not looking to tweak anything I say stick with the stock setup.

HOWEVER
Should one of the stock components start acting up this might become an option for you as it takes the place of the majority of d-jet components, while still allowing you to leave them in place to retain a stock look. For people looking to modify their motors while retaining a stock apperance an MS setup offers a lot of advantages.

in my experience with Megasquirt systems some of the bigger "pros" i have encountered:

MUCH easier to diagnose problems - the main reason i first installed one, just plug in your laptop and you can get a sanity check on the whole system

MUCH easier to get a decent tune over the stock system - especally if you use a wideband O2 sensor

It replaces some really expensive and sometimes hard to come by parts.

It allows you to run pretty much any fuel injector you want. - I had a problem with a sticky 2L injector the day before an autox so i swaped them with a set off a 1.7, changed a single variable in the system and was good to go.

It allows tuning for modified engines/cams/exhaust/ whatever

And then there are the options once you have the system installed. They make it less plug and play but they are there if you want them. To many to list here but i will say the biggest gain i got out of my car was locking my advance weights and letting MS handle ignition control. The stock 40 year old dizzy was leaving power on the table for sure.

As far as a non technical person being able to do it, that is what i am aiming for as a stock d-jet replacement. If you wanted to do some of the more advanced things with you would probably want a little more technical ability or someone helping you out. On a technical level, if you can replace parts of your existing d-jet system, you could install this MS setup.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 03:09 AM

Price, if i decied to sell them is still to be determined and i dont want to quote anything to soon. There are a lot of factors I am still looking into, one of the bigger ones being...the level of support offered.

Support, I would need to do some testing with an average user to get an idea of the level of support that would be needed for most users, this is partly why a price has yet to be determined as i dont know exactly how much time each customer would require. Ideally I am designing the setup to be as easy as possible but until i have a test customer do an install i wont know for sure.

Support for varying configurations, for a stock d-jet replacement there should only be 2 different configurations, 1.7 and 2.0, and the only real difference between the two as far as MS is concerned is the constants and fuel map. this would be setup before being shipped but could be easily changed later. Ideally i would like to build a collection of fuel maps for common engine configs 1911, 2056, different cams etc, to ease installation there, but that might take some time.

Support for various hardware mods/add ons/upgrades. I already have a small list of things i will include documentation/support on that go beyond a basic d-jet replacement. Some of them i even highly recomend, like a wideband 02 sensor... I think everyone should have one of those anyways reguardless of the fuel system they use. Come to think of it I might even add all the connections you need to install an LC-1 right on the ECU to simplify and clean up the installation of one. there will be documentation and support for a few other common mods that i already have. I am undecided if i will personally support ignition control, the system will be set up for it however anyone that wants to do it may be on their own. System complexity goes up real fast when you thow ignition into the mix and thats getting pretty far from plug and play. Also with ignition control there is a much greater chance of someone frying their motor. I do run it on my autox car and i love it but i would rather not have the liability involved with setting it up on someone elses car, especally if i did not personally install it.


First things first though, I have a background working in hardware/software QA for computer peripherals. At this point it is in my nature to try and find everyway a product could fail or a customer could break something. That being said, before i ever sell one of these I want a bit of time to beat the crap out of it. I have ran for years on a standard MS, but as this is a different board layout I really want to put it through it paces. My current plan is to first install the testing design into my autox car and race it this summer. If the hardware survives autocrossing in august in Utah I will consider it good enough to in the 1.7 car i am building for my wife. I figure if it is relaiable in a car for her good chance it will be for everyone else. Then it goes on a road trip to cali for long distance testing and low altitude fuel map work. Once that is done then i will find a test customer and see how it goes.

If i am to have a product go out under my name, it is going to be as bullet proof and idiot proof as i can get it.

Posted by: Mark Henry Apr 13 2010, 05:13 AM

Cool stuff but I'm not in the market...I might be looking at a megajolt though.

Posted by: Gint Apr 13 2010, 05:40 AM

That's the biggest reason I asked. I'd want to use an an wideband O2 regardless.

Posted by: DBCooper Apr 13 2010, 07:21 AM

I think you're on to something, especially for those guys who still need to pass the "visual" smog inspection. I also think you're going to need to show people that it's viable for them to buy in. Do you have photos and a description of the system installed on your car? I know it will look just like a stock car, but it would help if you could pointing out exactly what needs to be done and what changes. That will help a lot of people visualize what you're offering, and once they understand that I don't think anyone will have issues with having a modern injection system.

I doubt you're going to run into an avalanche of people buying, but it will be a steadily increasing flow. In addition to those with OEM component failures I think everyone with a stock injection system who has rebuilt his motor has asked if he can put more cam or displacement into it, and has always been told no, not with the stock injection. Every one of those folks would be interested, especially if you can keep it at a reasonable price point.

Posted by: type47 Apr 13 2010, 08:06 AM

I'm very interested in this. I'd like to do a modern EFI system on a 914 engine.

Posted by: biosurfer1 Apr 13 2010, 08:36 AM

As far as support goes, I would buy a website domain and get a support forum setup ASAP. I know there are already MS forums out there, but this one you could control and it would hopefully reduce the # of questions asked over and over.

If you buy through godaddy, they have a free forum app that was very easy to setup.

Posted by: tradisrad Apr 13 2010, 09:01 AM

I have thought about aftermarket FI, but I also don't know too much about it.
I will read through this a bit later and ask more Q's if I need to.

Posted by: Smitty911 Apr 13 2010, 10:42 AM

I'd be intrested, I'd also like the Spark Control.

I've been looking at the SDSEFI and at $1,750 for everything needed.

I already have the ITB from Extrudbody.

If your looking for a IDIOT to do some testing, I think I qualify.

I'm in SoCal so thats close to sea level.

Posted by: Jake Raby Apr 13 2010, 10:43 AM

I hope you like providing support and holding people's hands.... Lots of that lies in your future by offering this, and the worst part is people expect way more than they should.

Been there.

Posted by: tat2dphreak Apr 13 2010, 10:51 AM

it would have to be plug-and play for the most part, to switch back from carbs.. not just the ECU, a complete "kit"

but compared to used dells, or new empi carbs, $500 for a modern FI setup would be almost a dream for a carb replacement... personally, I think the more refined the kit, the less after-support would be needed

Posted by: Smitty911 Apr 13 2010, 11:02 AM

I don't know about that, Ttat2dphreak.

Jake sells a lot of parts as well as the SDSEFI and I'm sure he get lots of questions.

The SDSEFI is the most user Friendly one I've seen, IMHO.

Posted by: BiG bOgGs Apr 13 2010, 11:37 AM

I would love a preconfigured fi system that could replace the stock system. Then having the ability to upgrade the system piece by piece would be awesome. I would be in for the basic system plus the O2 sensor. Having the extra feedback for the fi is what really makes a fi system manage an engine better.

Posted by: McMark Apr 13 2010, 12:02 PM

You're talking about a nice looking brain installation, but having already been through the trouble of building a PnP MegaSquirt installation there are a few details that I see. Those little piece parts really start to add up. I can detail all the parts, if you want, but I don't want to seem like I on your thread.



The boards do look nice though.

Posted by: Jake Raby Apr 13 2010, 12:11 PM

PNP really doesn't exist...
Too many variables in operating conditions, fuel grade and fuel specifics and even differences in stock engines.

Tuning and fiddling will always be necessary.

Posted by: McMark Apr 13 2010, 12:15 PM

True, but hardware that's PnP does exist. That's the common problem with MS. You have to spend a ton of time actually building your conversion (and I'm not even talking about soldering the brain here) then you have to take the time to tune it.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 12:53 PM

Running spark control and ITBs would definitely be getting away from the plug n play and stealth aspects of what I am going for. Sure it is doable, but the only thing resembling d-jet at that point is the case I stuff the ECU into. I would say if you are going that route just use a regular MS/mini-ms setup with your own wiring because there is no point in trying to pretend it is stock. I have thought about making a bolt on kit along those lines however it would be $$$ due to the ITB’s and custom wiring harness, and I feel might have less appeal. I imagine fuel maps would be pretty different on a car running ITBs as well. If you want I could make an ECU in the standard mini-ms case using the Ampseal 23 connector and perhaps you could get Jeff Bowlsby or someone to make a custom wiring harness for you. You would be on your own as far as tuning goes though.

I would like find out what the advantages of ITBs on an otherwise stock motor would be though. If anyone has any input on this I would love to hear it. To me it seems like it might be more trouble then it is worth on a street car.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 01:23 PM

I was not thinking so much along the lines of switching back from carbs as i was just modernizing the d-jet system on existing cars. I have done one install already on my friends 914 switching back from carbs and you wind up with a lot more to deal with, including possibly pulling your fuel tank to unplug and replace missing fuel return lines, changing back to a high pressure pump, hoping that the used d-jet system you picked up has useable parts and injectors that are not leaking from the body. Plus with carbs there is a much greater chance that engine internals have been changed so any pre made fuel map goes right out the window. Doable yes, but much more involved

That being said though, the d-jet parts required to make this work are usually not that expensive and are relatively easy to come by, so it might be an option for a carb conversion kit. I am not sure I would want to be the one supporting it though.

I totally agree that a more refined kit would need less support, that is why I plan on a lot of testing and development based towards a specific applications. There are WAY to many options available for me to even attempt to support them all. I am just aiming for the most common and useable ones.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 01:28 PM

Data logging and closed loop wideband O2 operation with programmable AFR target tables is REALLY REALLY nice to have.

Posted by: Jeff Bowlsby Apr 13 2010, 01:30 PM

One of your big hurdles will be the harness as with all PEFI. The notion of reusing the original D-Jet FI harnesses is not possible or realistic, they are not wired the same as you would need for the MS or any PEFI and there is the very real issue of EMI shielding that the original harnesses do not have. In addition to being old and frail and brittle and corroded and broken and...

Another fundamental concern about MS is that it is experimental. Its ok for those that like to tinker and control their own destiny, but not a good commodity solution for the masses.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 01:51 PM

I would love to hear your experience with it. Of the couple that I have done the biggest issue I came across was sourcing a d-jet brain that I did not mind destroying. Each one I have done a little different, simplifying and improving my design each time. I would like to see how you approached it.

My first MS install definitely had more little bits and pieces inside the brain, injector resistors similar to the SDS ones, plates to mount things on, extra connectors and such, but by my second install I was able to eliminate most of this. What I am working on now is figuring out the best way to mount this new board as it is a different form factor. I have tried a few things, just trying to decide what I like best.

After my first install I would not have considered something like this, but the more of these I do the more it seems to all come together.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 02:02 PM

I agree, to a point anyways, however d-jet needs tuning and fiddling to run perfect as well. The goal is to make a modern brain that can be swapped with a d-jet one, in the same way that similar part # d-jet brains could be swapped with each other.

Yes, any given motor will need final tweaking to get it perfect, but no more then a d-jet system does and in my opinion it is much easier to tweak on the setup i run.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 02:22 PM

That is the common problem i am trying to solve. My thoughts on it are that if you have a standard set of hardware you are adapting to say an existing 1.7 or 2.0 d-jet system, then you pretty much know what to expect during the install. If you can prepare all the adaptation ahead of time inside the ecu, then the hardware at least is plug and play.

use it with a fuel map setup for for the same spec motor and you are going to be pretty darn close, at least as close as d-jet would be.

...and here is where modern fuel injection wins out in my opinion.

From a close map megasquirt can use a wideband sensor with target AFR tables to put your mixture where ever you want it on the fly, this will handle engine wear and other environmental situations that d-jet can not. Just one of the advantages that i see.

Posted by: underthetire Apr 13 2010, 02:28 PM

The biggest PIA that I had with the MS2 install, was getting the new TPS on the old throttle body. It was difficult to get it sealed and orientated the correct way, with the shaft adapter and all. The 1.7 and 2.0 location is different as well, so that would need to be considered.

Posted by: 904svo Apr 13 2010, 02:55 PM

I will agree with Jake, I am trying to install MS1 on a 1.7 ltr test engine. Tuning
and fiddling with it all the time I just can't get MS to hold a tune for me the VE
tables and timing tables have to be changed ever time I run the engine.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 03:02 PM

I would assume the same thing however i have already done this on multiple cars with no permanent modification to the wiring harnesses. One of my requirements when I built my original system was to not modify in any way the stock wiring harness as I had a really nice R.E.S. wiring harness that I paid to much money for many years ago.

d-jet triggers the injectors on the hot side with a fixed ground, megasquirt is the opposite and uses fixed power while switching the ground. The only problem is that the d-jet injector grounds terminate at the engine case and not at the ECU. The solution I came up with was to just run the ground wires from the 2 injector banks back to the ECU. This is probably the most non-stock aspect of the system but still really simple and does not modify the stock harness. My return wires are hidden under my harness but for someone really worried about a stealth install these could be run in the harness as well. EMI shielding may be an issue in some cars but it is not one I have came across yet and I have not seen any megasquirt installs that address this. I do shield the wire that gets the tach signal from the coil however I have not noticed a difference with or without the shielding on my installs.

I have seen your work though and believe your electrical engineering experience most likely goes WAY beyond mine, so I would appreciate any input on the mater.


As far as MS being experimental, I consider it experimental only due to the fact that you can experiment with it as it is an open project. In many ways I see this as a good thing as it allows for wider development and problem identification. The 2.2 boards have been “experimental” for almost 10 years now, and despite the fact that it was intended to be a DIY system, it was still designed by professionals. Is any other PEFI system on a 914 less experimental?

Even with all the real world megasquirt installs that have been done, as this board is a variation of a 2.2 board it will receive a LOT of testing before I would be comfortable releasing it to anyone.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 03:04 PM

That is strange, I have not had that issue with my cars. could you give me more details on your setup?

Posted by: underthetire Apr 13 2010, 03:09 PM

I had a similar problem at first. Was the Baro set up in my case. Too much change day to day until I narrowed it down. High impedance injectors will also cause this till the transistors fail.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 03:18 PM

The TPS i used on my car had the same throttle shaft shape/size, i just used an old djet TPS as an adapter plate to attach it, i will have to find the part#. HOWEVER I think the aftermarket TPS will only be an option with any system i produce in order to keep a more stock appearance and easier install. Accel enrichment will use MAPdot rather then TPSdot.

Posted by: underthetire Apr 13 2010, 03:23 PM

That would work, but I think you could get a small GM style or whatever one under the stock TPS cover and just use 3 of the 4 pins on the connector. I find the MS a little more "snappy" using the TPS set up.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 03:24 PM

What code variant are you running? You should be getting baro correction on startup.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 03:30 PM

I used a bosch part, I could probably have fit it under the TPS cover but was not to worried about it at the time. This was wired through the stock harness as well. Honestly, the difference i have felt from running accel enrichment and NO enrichment on these cars has been minor. I was not able to tell a difference between TPSdot and MAPdot in terms of feel.

I do however really like having a TPS in the datalogs.

Posted by: Mark Henry Apr 13 2010, 05:10 PM

My SDS TPS install

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 06:25 PM

That is very similar to how i set mine up, though i kept the stock d-jet connector on the adaptor plate in order to plug directly into the stock harness. Not exactly the easiest thing to produce. Still exploring options as far as the TPS goes.

Posted by: underthetire Apr 13 2010, 07:22 PM

2.88, and yes i do, it was just set for too much change. Knocked the amount down and it seems ok now, but don't know for sure. I notice the accel with the TPS, not major at all, but just seems snappier. I run a mix of accel between map and TPS, about 70% tps.

Posted by: zx-niner Apr 13 2010, 07:42 PM

I see I'm still the only one voting in the "cost is no object" category. Let me clarify.

I am assuming this would be a full bolt-on replacement of carbs. With new carbs running, what, $750? it would be worth at least $1,000 maybe $1,500 to have a fully tuneable FI to accomodate my Raby engine. With Jake's alternative FI adding $4k to an already healthy investment I wasn't quite ready to make that leap when I got the engine. Maybe at the required 60,000 mile refreshening in 5 years.

But if a fully functioning, programmable option were available soon . . . I'm already tired of hard starts at 50 degrees and lousy mileage. Unless McMark can work his magic on the carbs

Posted by: 904svo Apr 13 2010, 08:04 PM

I,m running MS1 extra with wasted spark (VW Coil packs), Honda 900CBR throttle body's, 36-1 tooth wheel , added extra map sensor for barometer correction and O2 sensor.Here a picture of my setup.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 09:58 PM

50 degrees? ouch, that is really not very cold at all to be having issues.

As i said earlier my initial idea was just as a d-jet upgrade and converting back from carbs is a bit more work. It is do able for sure though, and if money is not the issue, getting everything you need for well under 1000 bucks using the d-jet intake parts should not be a problem, just more work.

What size Raby motor are you running? What bolt pattern on your heads? My only concern with higher power motors is that i dont have any data as to how much the stock d-jet intakes can flow, or if it would choke the power of your motor. It is something i would like to find out though. Perhaps Jake has done testing along these lines? I am planning a 2056 at the moment for testing but that is going to be a little ways off.

Another issue you might come across with a Raby motor is the likely hood of Jake supporting this setup being rather low. I may be wrong, but i believe he had a bad experience in the past. I would love to work with him on it to get his support as i see a lot of potential for this type of setup but as he already has an FI setup that he endorses I am not sure what he interest in that would be, again i am guessing probably low.


I would definitely be down to figure something out for you though.

Posted by: rsrguy3 Apr 13 2010, 10:10 PM

I can speak to what james has elluded to as I had to scrounge all the vintage injection parts, a pain but it's great! It works, and uses the origional harness

Posted by: JamesM Apr 13 2010, 10:30 PM

That is a pretty intense looking setup you have there. What do you mean by changed every time you run your engine? is the MS just not holding the data or is your engine wanting different values every time you run it?
Having to change your timing around every time you start the motor is pretty scary. I have not run a 36-1 wheel so i am not familiar with the settings involved with it but i would go over them again very carefully.

Changing the timing is going to affect what fuel the motor wants so the two issues could be related... or not. I have heard of people having a hard time tuning ITB setups using speed density due to the vacuum characteristics, so that could be an issue as well. Where are you pulling your MAP signal from? Where is your IAT sensor located? You have a lot of variables there that makes troubleshooting a bit more complicated. This is one of the reason i try to keep it as simple as possible,

If you could, i would go back to a stock dizzy setup just to make sure you can get it to fuel correctly with the intake setup you have. Hopefully narrow down where your problem is coming from.

Posted by: Thoward914 Apr 13 2010, 10:33 PM

Some thing like this would be right up my alley. I have a stock 2.0L with the stock FI system. I would be looking for a system that needs mininal modifications, other than replacing antiquated hard to find parts.

Posted by: Mark Henry Apr 14 2010, 04:56 AM

You have something wrong there....I have webers on the bus and although they may sneeze a few times they start flawlessly down to 0*F and a bit below that. No chokes, 2 pumps of gas and it fires right up. Hold it a little fast on idle for about 30sec and you're golden.
My mileage isn't great, but it's acceptable and I'm pushing a heavy bus.

Posted by: Racer Chris Apr 14 2010, 05:15 AM

I have more trouble starrting the SDS injected cars in my shop during cold weather than I do my own carbed cars.
They don't have a high idle circuit for initial warmup, the cold start enrichment isn't enough by itself, and the stock type head temp sensor (thermistor) isn't accurate enough at low temps too provide the computer with good information.

Posted by: Mark Henry Apr 14 2010, 05:58 AM

They probably didn't have the $100 fast idle option, I don't either but to me it's never been any worse than starting my weber carbed bus.

Posted by: Jeff Bowlsby Apr 14 2010, 08:49 AM

Let me get this straight. I know you have the most noble intentions and I respect you for that. So on the original 35+ year old harness you plan to zip tie a couple extra wires - outside of the protective casing - here and there to provided extra needed circuitry?

You are genuinely proposing to build and take to market and expect people to pay good money for a standardized PnP FI system (that is supposed to last for how long?), based on an experimental ECU with no warranty, that is not suitable for an engine bay open to the weather, mounting it in the open engine bay (in a gutted D-Jet case) using a kluged-up original harness with brittle wires, broken casing and corroded connections, and it is supposed to work on multiple variants of used engines with 0-1,000,000 miles?

SDS is not experimental and even it has its issues.

You should also look for posts by Jeff Keyzer/McMark on their MS project, Dave up in Oregon on why he had to rebuild his Jake motor a couple times at huge expense and inconenience to not only himself but aslo to Jake and Len, all ultimately attributed to MS issues, and know that Jake does not allow MS on his engines to get a better feel for the cautions of MS.

With all due respect, all I can say is to be sure you transfer all your assets to into your wifes name and may god have mercy on your soul before you jump into this.


Attached image(s)

Posted by: JamesM Apr 14 2010, 10:15 AM

Not plan to, I have already done it. All i can really say to that is I have been running mine for over 3 years, winning my autox class with it despite not being that great a driver, and have yet to replace my engine despite my best efforts to destroy it. Maybe i am just lucky?
I understand that some people have attempted to use megasquirt and failed, sometimes horribly, but then there are hundreds and hundreds of people that it worked just fine for. My goal is to simplify the process. whether i do that by pre building kits for people, or by just documenting step by step EXACTLY what they need to do to get it to work right is still up in the air. The fact of the matter is these cars are getting old, new parts are NLA and i dont think there is a single one of us that wants to give up driving them. As far as i am concerned carbs were never an option for me, a 4K aftermarket system that still comes with its own issues will most likely never be an option for me as well. MS was affordable, it retained a stock appearance for me, and it has already lasted through three autox seasons as well. Even if it died on me tomorrow for what it cost, i would say i have already got my moneys worth out of it...but its still running. The most likely failure i foresee is a burned out injector driver, and even that is a $5-$10 fix. I could replace my entire system if I had to 10X over and still be coming out ahead cost wise.

Yes, 30 year old harnesses could be an issue, but no more of an issue then they would be on a d-jet car. That is one of the reasons i stopped running a 30 year old harness even when I was running d-jet, and i am assuming the reason you build new harnesses. Lets look at what the MS is doing with the harness vs the d-jet setup. MS uses 2 temp sensors, in my setup these are the stock d-jet IAT and CHT sensors, these are just resistance measurements over a single line, same as d-jet, though MS in my experience is a lot less tempermental with these sensors. The other thing MS does is pass current to control the injectors, same as d-jet, i am even using the existing resistors in the d-jet ecu, the only difference is the ground wires are brought back to the ecu rather then the engine case. 2 sensors, 2 injectors banks, 3 more wires if you want to use a TPS and thats it. I am not seeing where there is an increased potential for problems over d-jet on the same harness. If anything i would say MS is a simpler system with less potential for problems over the same harness, d-jet has a lot more going on that depends on a good harness.

Your concern is duly noted though, and i would rather not get into a liability situation. However i would like to give people an option to keep their cars fuel injected for less then a 4k solution. Suppose i should look into a legal waiver of some sort if i decide to go through with this.

Posted by: underthetire Apr 14 2010, 10:46 AM

I found with the MS,the stock sensor was actually better at low temps then high temps. My MS fires right up at any temp i've tried it. I do have to keep my foot in it a little for the first 30 seconds or so before it will idle on its own. I have the idle controlled throttle body for it, just haven't put it on yet. First tunning, cold start was a little PIA, but once it's figured out it works very well. Cold start timing advance will help a little if your running ignition off the MS, but i am not right now.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 14 2010, 11:04 AM

I use the stock d-jet aux air valve on mine with ms doing the enrichment, looks stock, works great, though my valve gets a little sticky at times. Again its the same thing you would see with d-jet being as it is a 30 year old d-jet part. I considered going with idle control but my car idles fine without it so i use the idle circuit for my ignition output.

Posted by: rsrguy3 Apr 14 2010, 02:20 PM

Jeff, Your tone is a bit acrid, and unapreciated, please tame it down. Were supposed to be friends here. James is doing market reserch, that is all, and I might add, he is doing so with class, and restraint. You're experiences are valid, and, needed in order to come up with a widely accepted solution. James has had posititive experiences with MS, and only wants to share. The worst case scenario here for you is that you sell more product, not so bad for you is it? Why don't you jump on the band wagon here, there is no reason this could'nt be a huge benifit for the whole comunity.

Posted by: charliew Apr 14 2010, 02:45 PM

I work on everything I drive, from a ramjet blazer, 91 tb 350 suburban, 86 and 88 v6 fieros and vw and subaru projects. I will eventually learn ms because of the necessity of needing a common ecu that I will know how to customize for the different applications I have. My son programs his sti subaru and I have bought the stuff to reprogram my ramjet.

I say go for it. I will be wanting to try ms in the future just for my own knowledge base to see if it is viable for my more simple projects. I will have a good running 75 with all it's fi stuff still working to play with and this sounds interesting.

Posted by: pbanders Apr 14 2010, 04:55 PM

IMO, Jeff's tone is just fine, he didn't insult anyone and he brought up many legitimate systems engineering issues.

Posted by: jhadler Apr 14 2010, 05:35 PM

Maybe I missed something in the descriptions in this thread. How would a MS system be implemented as a PnP? Unless the system is going to mimic CIS, you need something to signal the ECU where the crank position is. Are you intending on having this system still rely on the FI points? That would be sad, after getting away from the rest of the antiquated old hardware. A crank trigger is the way to go, but adding a crank trigger is anything but PnP.

-Josh2

Posted by: charliew Apr 14 2010, 06:10 PM

I think the end user could decide what engine harness he wants to use. I am very capable of making my own. Only if I determine someone can build a better one for within 100.00 bucks of what it will cost me in connectors would I want to get it done by someone else. I'm sure there are guys that will always want a pnp setup but I kinda like doing as much as I can on my on. I'm retired and my job description is planning supervisor and thats what I do most every day. A crank trigger has always been in the plan for me as thats the most efficient way I know about. I am very familiar with the suby sensors and the gm stuff that I have but if a better solution comes thats simplier to use, thats ok to.

Posted by: roadster fan Apr 14 2010, 06:46 PM

I think Jeff brings up some valid points. I think using the term plug n play is probably a stretch, but for the advanced DIY'er it could feel like PnP. I think marketing the system with a base fuel map for 1.7 and 2.0 cars would sell a few kits as that would get the beginner MS user close to a working setup.

In fact you would probably be better off in my opinion selling your expertise in the base setups for stock engine configs and leave the hardware to the end user. Make recommendations, or show what worked for you hardware wise, then sell the mini-MS boards and base setup. I would be more inclined to go MS if I had a good basis to start from to reduce the risk of destroying my motor but like the idea of tinkering with programmable EFI.

I would think anyone using an original harness would be foolish to attempt to adapt it to MS. Jeff has seen more harnesses than most of us, and the few I have seen were thrashed. In fact I am amazed my 1.7 harness still works, gonna have to address that this year

I think the discussion is productive as a solution for djet cars is inevitable in my humble opinion as parts continue to become scarce and pricey.

Just my .02

Jim

Posted by: BiG bOgGs Apr 14 2010, 07:22 PM

How about this. James sets up one system that he thinks represents the basic system he is thinking of selling to the basic 914 diy'er, along with the proper harness. Sends it to one of us who presently has a running D-jet. We install and run it for a day or so, log any data for him and report how our seat of the pants dyno liked the performance of the system, and then send it on to the next guy on the list to do the same thing with. No need to remove our system, just unplug what needs to be, and plug in his harness. Then when we are done with the trial unplug his system and plug our systems back in. We could get a lot of info for him to refine his setup, and we could get a lot of input from 914er's interested in these systems.

Posted by: charliew Apr 14 2010, 07:31 PM

A base map is just that. It won't be as good as it should be. It may not run as good as stock. It might run better but probably not in my opinion but I'll let James speak to that.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 14 2010, 09:58 PM

Perhaps "Bolt-on" would be a better term to use then plug n play. As with any aftermarket part it most likely will require tuning to get it at its best, but the same goes for carbs or any other FI setup. Nothing is perfect out of the box. The goal is to have it running and driving decently out of the box with minimal install effort and no fabrication.

Im not sure how i would feel about selling my expertise. I am fine with selling my time, but i have always been a big believer in free information so anything i know on the subject i will gladly share with the community, provided it does not eat up to much of time.

My initial idea behind this was not one of turning it into a business, but more of providing what i saw as a useful solution and covering the cost of the parts and my time involved in doing it. I had spare boards from a personal project that i did not want to go to waste. Interest in this has been way more then i expected though, my supply of "extra" boards wouldn't even cover half of the people that have already spoke up, and this poll has only been up for 2 days. That being said I might have to look at a more serious production/business venture. Though various liability and support issues have been brought up that warrant strong consideration. Either way though I plan on it being an open project with information shared freely.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 14 2010, 10:02 PM

the ECU gets its signal from the coil in most fuel only setups

Posted by: JamesM Apr 14 2010, 10:14 PM

I was thinking along similar lines of selecting one or more people to be involved with testing at some point. I think there would have to be some sort of deposit involved or possibly selling the system at discount in order to ensure that my hardware does not decide to disappear on me. That would be a bit off in the future though due to that fact that i want to thoroughly test this new board design before i hand it off to anyone else. Where as my standard MS 2.2 board has been kicking butt for over 3 years now, this is not a standard 2.2 board and i am not ready to sign off on it just yet.

I would like to hear from people interested in working with me on testing though.

Posted by: JamesM Apr 14 2010, 11:00 PM

Well, I can tell you that the map I have on my car runs better then the d-jet did for sure. My d-jet was not perfect though and the map that is on my car was made for my car so hardly qualifies as base in that case.
I did however use it as a base when we installed a system in rsrguy's car. Despite the fact that neither one of our motors was exactly stock and in completely different ways, once the wiring was sorted (the PO really jacked this car up wiring wise) it fired right up, drove around the block, and was running a lot better then the progressive carb we pulled off of it.

To put it in a little better perspective, my motor is a 2.0 with hydro lifters, stock 2.0 intake, and euro race headers. His motor is a 2.0 with unknown internals, stock 2.0 exhaust, and for the intake we hacked up a 2.0 bus FI manifold to fit his heads, and used 1.7 injectors. The ONLY thing i changed map wise was to scale the reqFule value for the smaller injectors. Totally drivable from the second it fired. It was running a little rich though i attribute that to either the flow difference caused by the different intake/exhaust, or me not scaling the injector flow rates perfectly. Either way, it led me to be pretty confident that a map from one stock 2L would be perfectly drivable on another stock 2L because that case would be even closer then what i had already done.

...and yes, i do have both a stock 2.0 and 1.7. I will use those rather then my autox car for building the base maps.

Posted by: JamesM May 3 2010, 03:54 PM

Thought I would through in a quick update on the MS/d-jet project. Due to the fact that I work 70 hour weeks and the added issue of all the random snow/sleet/hail/rain storms we have had here lately, I have not been able to test with the car as much as I would like. The latest board setup I made is working though, the install was pretty simple (MUCH cleaner then my install using the standard MS/Relay) and it fired right up with no fuss. The weather seems to be clearing up now so hopefully I will get some time with it out on the road. I have an autox in a couple weeks so that should be the first real world test of the new board. I have a temp probe setup to monitor the environment inside the ECU casing so I can get some idea where we are at temperature wise with the ECU mounted in the engine compartment.

With the idea of producing these things for other people now in my head I have been focusing my thoughts a lot more on simplifying the build process for both myself and anyone who might be installing it. One of the issues I was looking at is the time and effort required for me to build one of these. While I do prefer the install using the minims board rather then the standard megasquirt board, there are still some tedious assembly steps that I would like to simplify, the biggest one being soldering all the jumper wires directly to the ECU connector. This is an annoying task to say the least, and while I have been happy with the result of my work thus far, I would be a lot happier knowing the connector was soldered directly to a PCB rather then jumper wires. This line of thought has led me down the path of designing a simple PCB to mount the connector to and then jumpering from one board to the other in order to facilitate a cleaner/stronger install. For the moment this is going to increase my time and money involved in this project however in a production environment I think something along these lines is the way to go. My other thought along these lines involve integrating the d-jet connector into the actual PCB for the ECU and enlarging the PCB at the same time in order to mount the same way as the d-jet PCB did. This would greatly increase the speed of the build as I would basically be just swapping one PBC for another without a bunch of custom wiring. This however takes me out of the realm of just getting rid of my spare boards and more into a full production situation, so even though I would like to do it I am pushing it to the back burner for now. Plus I have not found any PCB design software that I like enough to take the time to do this yet.

Another exciting (at least I think it is) development. I have the sort of brain that does not like to shut down at night, so 3am comes around, lying in bed, and all of a sudden it hits me to see if I can modify a megasquirt board to send switched power to the injectors similar to the way that d-jet does rather then switched ground which is how MS normally works, thereby eliminating the need to add the return wires to the ECU with the wiring harness. The hardest part of the install right now from an end user point of view is determining which 2 of the 3 ground connections are the ones you need to use, this should eliminate that, as well as the extra wires all together. I may have just been delirious from it being 3am but I went and looked at one of the boards and I think it will be a pretty easy mod. I am not sure why I, or anyone else, never thought to do this before.

I am going to build another board tomorrow with that and a couple other mods I have thought up and see if it works out.



As much fun as this is I wish my brain would shut off once in a while; maybe I could get some sleep at night.

Posted by: JamesM May 3 2010, 04:17 PM

A couple other smaller issues i need to investigate , that maybe someone has some input on.

1. With the new board setup i am pulling all the power for the megasquirt through the stock harness, while this does make everything look nice an clean it has had the strange side effect of keeping power to the MS system for about 5 seconds after the key is shut off. not a deal breaker at this point but it is high on my priority list to sort out as it is annoying. I am not sure if this is due to a sticky main relay on the stock relay board, or perhaps something else. I have not had time to investigate this yet but maybe someone out there has some ideas?

2. The throttle position sensor setup. I have been thinking a lot about this as it is probably the biggest area I would like to find a development of some sort. Right now the options are
A. Eliminate it all together, which would allow a stock look but i do not like mainly due to losing the flood clear feature but also due to losing throttle position in datalogs.
B. Chop up a d-jet TPS to make an adaptor. While this enables everything to work the way it is supposed to i am not to happy with it because it involves sourcing a d-jet TPS, destroying a d-jet TPS, and on 2L motors does not look stock due to the fact that i have not found a decent TPS that fits completely inside the old one. Not really an issue on 1.7s as it is hidden under the throttle body. Also it is another PITA tedious thing to construct. It works fine, but i have a feeling a better soultion is out there. Looking for input here as well.

Posted by: JamesM May 3 2010, 04:49 PM

A few pics up for fun....


This is the box currently in my test car. The extra wires are to run things like my wideband 02 and ignition control. When stuffed behind the battery it looks stock. I have not got around to blasting and painting the exterior yet.




3/32 jack used for programing. I wired it up to use the cable from the LC-1 wideband, its a nice, small, hidden connector. next to that is the MAP port, and then all the wires to run the "extra" stuff i have on my car.



compairson of the MS2.2 system i pulled out to my new system that went in. I never intended the origianl system to say in as long as it did as it was pretty much hacked together for testing purposes. Still works great though.

Posted by: BiG bOgGs May 3 2010, 08:50 PM

I have nothing of importance to add to help your problem solving. I just wanted to add my encouragement.

I am ready to start negotiations with "she who must be obeyed" as soon as you have something ready to go.

Posted by: ThinAir May 3 2010, 10:04 PM

I'm late to this thread, but finding it very interesting. My vote in the poll was "I'm interested" and "price is no object" because it wouldn't let me skip the price question.

I'm running a stock 2.0L engine with stock FI. Although upgrading to a Jeff Bowlsby harness has given me a system that is very reliable, it's really only a matter of time before there some component that goes out which cannot be obtained or replaced for any price. So yes I'm interested in a system made of modern components that I could install by simply unplugging what I'm got, then plug in the new system and have a running car that was ready to be optimized. I don't care if that's call "bolt-on" or "PnP".

I don't care if it reuses my existing harness (although it would be nice). What I care about is that gives me a way to easily remove what I consider to be the 914's Achilles heal - an aging FI system. So everyone involved in contributing ideas gets my support!

Posted by: Markl May 4 2010, 07:47 AM

Looks great, James. I'm putting a MS3 system together right now - I'd stop and put one of yours together instead. I haven't found a TPS yet, so no help on that. I'd be willing to modify the existing one - it's not going to last forever anyway.

Posted by: JamesM May 4 2010, 09:43 AM

Bosch 0 280 122 001 might work for you.

Its used on a whole bunch of different cars. It has the correct shaft shape and can be mounted on the plate from the stock TPS at about a 45 deg angle if you space it out about half an inch.

Thats what i have been using for the last 3 years anyways. I would like to find a cleaner looking soultion though.

Posted by: type47 May 4 2010, 12:47 PM

I have a schedule to have an engine running within 3 months and would love a modern digital FI system. Would one of yours be ready for me? I'm willing to be a Guinea Pig for your R & D ... at my expense.

Posted by: the head May 4 2010, 02:40 PM

if the price comes in at that $250 or so range I am definitely interested as it makes swapping nuked junkyard type 4s into my new lemons rig a breeze, and I have enough in my budget at this time to snap this up ahhh the joys of cheap cars with expensive parts inside would this eliminate the MPS as well?

Posted by: JamesM May 4 2010, 10:00 PM

It eliminates the MPS and all the other expensive NLA d-jet stuff.

Posted by: JamesM May 4 2010, 10:31 PM

Technically i could have one ready in a couple days. Idealy though I would really like to give it a serious stress test myself before i ship one out to anyone else. I am also still making changes to the system, the more i mess with it the more i find ways to improve it and until i have finalized all the changes i would like to keep it in house. I just built another board today with some modifications i wanted to test out however i feel that if all the modifications work as expected it will be pretty close to final. 3 months might be doable for guinea pig testing but i will have to see. I was considering some pretty specific criteria for anyone who wants to be involved in initial testing in order to simplify things for me, however that is still up in the air as well.

Give me the details on your car and motor so i can at least have it in my head to think about. For initial testing i was planning more on cars that are close to stock in order to eliminate variables however i am willing to consider anything.

Posted by: gothspeed May 5 2010, 09:59 AM

Let me get up to speed on this awesome project. This is programmable EFI with ignition control together, correct?

I am interested in it. I will be building a 2056, ported heads, big cam/valves and custom exhaust.

There is still decision being made between ITBs or a custom single TB plenum intake (basically a four banger version of the Carrera 3.2 intake manifold).

Maybe the injection system will help make that decision.

Posted by: mk114 May 5 2010, 11:44 AM

Well James,

You know you have my 1.7 to test on If it wil save me fromt he nightmare of tunning this headache, and keep me from going to carbs. I'm In.

Plus being Local to SLC is always a bonus for testing.

Posted by: JamesM May 5 2010, 05:47 PM

The basic idea behind what i am doing is to simpliy the replacement of d-jet with megasquirt while remaining as close to stock apearance as possible. It is digital and fully programable so you will not be tied down to stock cams and displacement. Basically a good cheater system. My idea is to supply it in a fuel only configuration in order to keep the install as simple as possible for stock system replacement however being as that it is Megasquirt based and running the MSnS Extra code someone could add ignition control or a ton of other features if they were so inclined. I am running my autox car with ignotion control and a wideband O2 sensor with target AFR tables. Once you start geting into all the extra features though things can start getting complicated so i would rather just be supplying the base to build from and anying else people want to add is up to them. check out the MSnSe feature list, its pretty exciting.

As the part of my goal is retaining an appearance as close to stock as possible you might be more intrested in just doing your own megasquirt build. Things are a lot less complicated when you are not tied to the stock wiring harness and stuffing everything in the stock ecu. Yes, what i am building could be made to work with what you are planning, but if you are not concerned about looking stock with the ITB's or custom manifold I think it might be better to go with a custom wiring harness as well and not mess around with the d-jet one.

Posted by: JamesM May 5 2010, 06:03 PM

Your car looks so original i am almost afriad to touch it! That being said i still say it would be a crime to put carbs on it, so if the options are carbs or a stealth MS setup I am all for the MS setup. The Ms setup will probably be the easier swap too. Plus it will be a good test for fixing d-jet cars that are acting up.

I do want to take a good look at your car first though and see if we can sort out the d-jet, it was running so well...

Posted by: gothspeed May 5 2010, 06:15 PM

Thanks for the response . As you said I am not tied to the stock 'look'. I was thinking yours was a 'new' EFI system.

So I will continue looking into the programmable EFIs out there. Choices are Electromotive, Haltech, MegaSquirt, SDS or even Motec depending on support structure, 'local' technician availability and first hand experience of 914 worlders.

Posted by: type47 May 6 2010, 06:33 AM

Stock stroke and have options of 94 or 96mm pistons. CR in the range of stock... 8ish:1. Plan to use stock 2.0 intake system, injectors, ... SS heat exchangers w/ supertrapp ... "muffler"...

Posted by: eric914 May 7 2010, 09:57 AM

With all due respect, all I can say is to be sure you transfer all your assets to into your wifes name and may god have mercy on your soul before you jump into this.
[/quote]


A possible solution to your concerns about liability would be to use the same warranty that Jake gives on his engine kits.

"All sales are final, no refunds, exchanges or returns are allowed." pretty simple.

Posted by: charliew May 7 2010, 06:35 PM

I am not up to speed on ms yet but I was reading the ms info on the version 3 board and it mentioned a run on condition in the fuel pump flyback clamp circuit and changing it to a zener diode to correct it if I remember correctly. This may or may not help.

Also I found this tps on ebay and it looks pretty adaptable. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=370327639601&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT
Charlie

Posted by: r_towle May 7 2010, 07:45 PM

James,

What parts would need to be replaced in your bolt on kit?
I would assume it would all be in the box for me to bolt on.
Base map to get it running.

From there I can tune it.

I am ready now and I have a 1.7 I am about to pull out of my car for a 2.0 liter....
I will be happy to play with modified motors and your system
I will learn it on the 1.7 and then modify it.

When can I have one...no warranty needed...I suck at soldering.

Rich

Posted by: JamesM May 10 2010, 08:47 PM

I have been sort on time since my last post, but what i have found so far is that when you first turn the key off while the engine is running the circuit that energizes the stock 914 main relay still has about 4.5 volts on it until the engine spins down(alternator feedback i believe). This 4.5 volts is enough to keep the relay on and keep feeding 12V to the MS. As i am also currently running ignition control and using that signial for my switched +12V on my spark box as well, the engine does not shut down as both my fuel and ignition systems are getting power. My quick fix at the moment is just to pull the MS switched power from somewhere other then the main 914 relay.

I am not sure if the problem would present itself on a car running a stock ignition setup as i have not had time to investigate that yet. If ignition is cut with key off in a stock setup then this should not be a problem as far as keeping it a stealth install. I have a busy week comming up so i probably wont be able to get to it anytime soon, but i plan on investigating the stock d-jet/ignition setup closely to see how everything is handled.

Posted by: JamesM May 10 2010, 09:11 PM

Right now if you already have a d-jet system, its simply a matter of swapping the ECU and TPS though i am currently looking at ways to eliminate having to swap the TPS for stealth installs. If you dont mind doing the tuning you could even put which ever d-jet parts you like on any engine, ie. use 1.7 injection parts with drilled intake runners on a 2.0. We even did my buddys using the 2L bus intake due to the larger runners/plenum. If you are not worried about a stock look there are really a lot of options you could play around with.

As far as a time table goes right now its hard to tell as i have been pretty tight on free time. I sit in front of a computer for my day job, so i have plenty of time to solder boards, i just dont have much time to test the modifications i am working on in my cars. next week i should be able to test my latest changes and then i could proabably give you a better estimate on time.


As far as soldering goes, having a good adjustable temp soldering station and the right tip on the iron helps a lot.

Posted by: jcb29 May 10 2010, 09:13 PM

The PO of my '75 2.0 removed all the components of the FI and replaced it with a Holly "Bug Spray" of all things. I would like to take it back to being a FI but am concerned about finding a complete 35 year old D-Jet system and getting it installed and running, to say nothing of the cost!! I would be very interested in more information/development of your system and possible use of my car as a test mule.

Posted by: Tom May 10 2010, 10:47 PM

James,
I'm following this thread with interest as D-jet parts are really getting costly. Trigger points over $200.00 and they are one of the more simple items.
Keep up the good work you are doing. Also sending a PM.
Tom

Posted by: rsrguy3 May 23 2010, 05:59 PM

If I remember correctly, we rounded up all the parts of my system for 1000$ or slightly less(including wide band), imo quite the coup. The sweet thing is, it ran like a top till I found the PO's hidden wiring issues, multiple melt spots in the harness, NOT FUN! James has none of these issues. I'm currently working a couple of other projects for $$$ flips, in order to get back to my beloved teener. So, If any of you guys want's to by my MS brain your welcomed to it 300$ for the brain and relay board, The 2l maps are all in it. Follow James instructions and you'll be a happy 14 camper.

Posted by: underthetire Jun 17 2010, 03:37 PM

I still can't vote. There is no Already have megasquirt and love it.

Posted by: draganc Aug 24 2010, 08:27 AM

James,

I like your project a lot and believe the MS system is the right approach for 914. Why? Because most of us “like” to work on 914 and we are all facing a return-of-invest issue/challenge with the 914. I have been screening the aftermarket FI ECU for about a year. There are great products (Electromotive, AEM, MSD, ect) out there for a great price. MS offers a very flexible inexpensive package for the DIYer. Maybe it’s not perfect (I don’t see any show stopper yet) but it’s within reach.

I believe MS – even in a PNP setup – will always require some minor tuning. But that goes for all aftermarket FI ECU. A true PNP system will be to go to one of the 914 experts and have them install a ECU system and let them do all the work.

As of the MS warranty terms, they had to use that statement because it IS a DYI experimental system and every 2nd guys modifies the system to his specification – that is the purpose of a open platform! Even SDS’ webpage states that read their manual first and then buy the product if you believe you can do it.

To conclude, I believe that most of the available aftermarket ECUs are very well design systems and all have some pros/cons. It’s up to you/us to pick the system of your choice. My suggestion is to read a few ECO books (i.e Bosch FI & Engine Management, Design and tuning high-performance FI systems, ect) before you make up your mind.

I have made my choice, it is Megasquirt.

Keep up the great work!!

Dragan

PS: How did you install the trigger wheel? Std. GM or MS 36-1 trigger wheel at the crank?

Posted by: velum Sep 24 2010, 11:38 PM

Hi James!

Anything new about your PnP MegaSquirt solution? I have a '73 914-4 2.0L and I would be interested. Also, are you thinking of providing a solution that would allow to get rid of the distributor? I heard all this can be done electronically. And what about injectors, do you use stock injection valves, or do you recommend swapping them for modern ones?

Cheers!

JF

Posted by: JamesM Sep 25 2010, 07:12 PM

I am not using a trigger wheel in my setup at the moment. The installation of one is a bit more then what most people would consider plug and play.

Posted by: draganc Sep 25 2010, 08:43 PM

What are you using to trigger the MS then? Just the signal from the dizzy?

Posted by: JamesM Sep 25 2010, 09:18 PM

It has been slow going as my schedule has not permited me to get much work done latley. I did however make a major decision on the direction i was going in and have started working on something new, but i will get to that later... As for getting rid of the distributor that should not be to hard with megasquirt, you just need a crank trigger, or some other trigger setup and you could go with a wasted spark arangement or maybe a coil on plug setup. I have yet to see data showing any advantage of those systems on our motors though and i am not sure if they justify the extra cost/complexity for most people. I like to lean towards a keep it simple design philosophy whenever possible. As for injectors i use the sock ones because they fit so nicely into the stock intake runners. You could run just about any injector you like as long as it is sized correctly for the application but I feel if it aint broke, dont fix it if you have the stock ones and they work then stick with them.

Back to the subject of my current work, originally i had posted this topic to find a use for some extra Mini-MS boards that i had left over from my own project. Most of the cost in PCB production is the initial setup, after that it does not cost much more for 20 boards then it does for one, so even though I only needed a couple for my own cars i had a bunch of extras made up. I initially thought of just building in the same way i had done with my own car for anyone that was intrested in them however intrest was greater then i had expected and various issues were raised that started me in a different direction. Adapting the mini-ms board inside the d-jet case in order to make a plug and play type solution is somewhat labor intensive, and while i would not have minded doing it for a few people here and there, on a larger scale it is not something i think i would want to undertake or deal with supporting. There is to much custom work getting the board mounted in the d-jet case and soldering of custom wiring to get it to work the way i want it to and in addition to being tedious i see every extra wire joint as another source of potential failture. It is a fine solution for the DIY'er but if i am looking at a small scale production for other people I would like to deliver something that is less of a hack.
SO...
For any DIY'er intrested in duplicating what i have already done I still have extra Mini-MS PCB's that i am willing to get rid of for cheap and i am always willing to share any informaton on my setup.
BUT...
For people looking for more complete PNP solution what i have decided to do is just design my own PCB that addresses the issues i see when building a plug n play solution from an existing megasquirt board. This new board i am working on is of the proper dimensions to act as a drop in replacement for for the PCB in the stock D-jet ECU. All the signlas will be brought to their proper locations on the d-jet connector and the injector circuit will be modified on the board to allow it to work with the stock d-jet harness with no modification. It will mount using the same screws/holes that the stock board does and solder directly to the stock ECU connector so there will be no rigging up of custom mountings or jumper wires in the ECU. Basically, I am taking everything I have learned with MS this far and all my personal modifications and building them into a PCB that will fit properly in the stock case.

I finally took the plunge and made time in my schedule to start on this last week. So far i have made a custom part in Eagle for the d-jet connector, finished most of the board schematic and have just started working on the component layout and routing. I decided to pause at this point as i am trying decied what, if any, other features to add to the board itself. Being that this is a totally new board i am in a unique situation of being able to add any of the other megasquirt modifications out there directly to the main board itself I decided that i should give serious thought to some of the features that are out there before i settle on a final design. While most of these features can be attached later I would like to have the ones most likely to be used built into the board iteslf. The one that is getting the most consideration right now is a 2nd MAP sensor for constant Baro correction as i feel this might be usefull. I still need to test this on my current setup though. I will be posting another thread looking to get peoples input on features.

Posted by: 76-914 Sep 25 2010, 09:27 PM

Posted by: JamesM Sep 25 2010, 09:36 PM

One car I have setup as fuel only, it pulls the tach signal from the coil. My autox car gets its signal from a pertronix unit set up with a pullup resistor in a dizzy with locked advanced mech, the MS then controls the advance and triggers a CD box. Its a pretty easy setup to do on a stock car keeps it looking pretty stock and for me at least was an improvement over the stock dizzy that was in there. A crank trigger would probably be a better choice overall but this is an easier way to go.

Posted by: JamesM Sep 25 2010, 10:02 PM

because people like pictures...

Still have a long way to go, but you get the idea. I am new to Eagle and finding it to be a bit quirky at times.

The outline is the full dimensions of the d-jet board, the extra vertical line is my current target for fitting all the components in, hopefully when i am done it will be even smaller then that.



in case anyone is wondering.... from a windows box remoted into my linux server running a windows app an emulated environment. A little strange but it allows me to squeeze in work on it in my free time during the day.

Posted by: velum Sep 26 2010, 01:01 AM

Hi James!

Thanks for that update about where you're at with the project. I am seriously thinking of converting my car to MS within the next year. The solution does not have to be totally PnP, but I don't wan't it to be complicated either. I am not racing with my car, so I just want a solution for normal driving that will replace my d-jet. Of course, with modern technology, I am expecting the performances to improve a bit.

Would it be possible for you to give me a list of items I will need to convert my '73 914-4 2.0L to MS with a ballpark price for these items? If you can send me that, please also identify the items you can provide me with. Just list items for a fairly standard setup. I just installed a new FI wire harness in my car, so I would like to reuse it if possible.

Cheers!

JF

Posted by: charliew Sep 26 2010, 07:37 AM

My machinist friend used to dragrace a t3. He modified a few hei chevy distributors for the t1. Won't the t1 dist fit a t4? Those hei were pretty easy to cut down to fit the t1 and had the coil and all in the cap. He just used everyother plug wire in the cap. They are big though and may not fit the t4 tin. The t4 dist modded like you describe may be a cleaner setup except for the cd box though but the hei stuff is regularly available. If the overall size of the hei is a problem maybe a 4 cylinder later model electronic distributor could be found and made to fit in the t4. The base of the dist is pretty simple. I probally am making this more complicated than it really is though. In the early 70's I bought some electronic conversions for the t1 from montgomery wards that worked good till the potting epoxy melted out of them. They were just the wheel and pickup that went in the dist and a small box about 2.5x3.5x1.25.and the short wiring harness between the dist and the box with the power and ground lead. Course you still needed the mechanical and vaccum advance. I like the ms for making your own advance curve much better. Stock looking isn't important to me. Easy to do maintenance and easy to find parts and reliability are my main concerns.

Posted by: JamesM Sep 26 2010, 12:10 PM

I believe type I and IV distributors are interchangeable as i have seen the same part used on both motors before. I am intrested in gettting more information on some of the wasted spark setups i have seen sold for type I's and how they trigger. What i am most intrested in checking out at the moment though are some of the late model vanagon parts. Its been a long time since i sold my vanagon but from what i remember the distributor looked similar to the ones used in type I's and 4's but had some sort of a trigger wheel in them. Also the late 2.1 vanagon throttle body with the 50mm bore looks as though it could be made to bolt on a 1.8 plenum.

Posted by: JamesM Sep 26 2010, 12:24 PM

Wanting to use a replacement harness I had my car was on of my primary motivating factors in doing the conversion in the way that i did, the downside though is you will have to destroy a stock ECU to source the connector. Other then that, if you already have d-jet on your car you dont need to purchase a whole lot as you can use the stock sensors and injectors. The only d-jet part that wont carry over is the TPS so you will either have to source one that is compatable with MS or use a resistor on the TPS signal line to fix it and then use MAPDOT Accel.

Really all you will need is a stock ECU to source the connector from, the MS itself, a MS relay board if you want to make things a little easier, resistors for the injectors, and wire to hook it all up.

Posted by: velum Sep 26 2010, 05:35 PM

Hi James!

I have 2 spare ECUs and one is not working properly already (fuel pump won't work with it), so I don't mind trashing this one. I believe there are various types of Megasquirts (I, II, III) though... From what I understand, you are using MS-2. Would MS-3 be good too? Also, won't I need a wideband 02 sensor? I don't see this in your list of parts needed.

Are you still selling mini-MS parts? Are these printed circuits only, or assembled boards with all the components? Price? From what I read in this thread, you made it so it can be inserted in the original ECU case. However, I have read documentation about MS telling that it should not be located under the hood because of extreme conditions (heat).

I had a look at www.diyautotune.com, but what parts I would need to order exactly is still an enigma for me after looking at the site. Is there a list somewhere on the web with exact part numbers of what is needed?

Sorry for all those questions... all this is quite new to me, and I am still in the process of absorbing all this information.

Cheers!

JF

P.S. I don't mind doing a bit a soldering, but I don't think I have enough experience to do a good job at soldering all the components on a bare printed circuit board.

Posted by: karlo Sep 26 2010, 06:14 PM

You may find that Bosch 0 280 120 402 fits better. I have used it on other MegaSquirt retrofits on D-Jetronic cars, albeit not the 914. Given that the 914 setup is the same, it will bolt straight on with correct angle, depth and all. You'll find them in BMW e34 M20 automatic cars. Be sure to get the unusual connector as well. They are expensive new, so look for a used one.

- Karl

Posted by: JamesM Sep 26 2010, 11:04 PM

I have actually always used the old and cheap MS1 with the 2.2 board layout on my own cars. Originally with the genuine B&G 2.2 board and then later with the mini-ms board which is based on the 2.2 schematic. I did do one install on a friends 914 with a MS1 on the 3.0 board as well but really did not see any advantage when doing a fuel only install. I could see some usefullness in running the MS2 chip given its larger memory, higher clock speed and greater resolution but so far MS1 with the Hi-res variant of the MSnS Extra code has done everything i needed it to(as well as a lot of extra stuff i dont even need)

Technially you dont "need" a wideband sensor to run MS but you dont want to try and tune it yourself without one. Its always the first part i buy when doing a conversion as it is a usefull thing to have on any old car.

As far as mounting in the engine compartment goes, the MS manual does state not to do it for environmental concerns. The standard MS case is not weather proof and underhood temps could exceed the specs of some of the MS onboard components. My original install with a 2.2 board I followed these instructions and used the MS relay board mounted to the stock ECU location and ran a relay cable to the MS in the passenger compartment. I ran it like this for years but was never happy with the extra wires and runnning the realy cable into the passenger compartment. On most cars I would not think of running the MS under the hood because under the hood usually means right next to the exhaust and fully insulated trapping a bunch of heat in. 914's are a little different with the exhaust below the engine shelf and cooling tin and you have a constant airflow comming through the engine bay to cool the motor. Part of my testing right now is involving mounting a temp probe at various locations in the engine compartment and inside the ECU on various components to see just how hot everything is getting. So far though it has gone through one autox season in its current configuration in the engine bay with no problems. As for moisture, most people with 914's try and avoid water like the plague, living in utah though i always seem to get hit with a random downpour when i least expect it. If you can fit your board into the stock ECU case it can be sealed up pretty well. Of all the stock ECUs I have opened up only 1 showed any signs of water damage inside it and I believe it was only because it had been treated pretty badly, run without the proper seal on the wiring harnes and hit with so much battery acid it had almost correded through. You can also coat your board to protect it from moisture in the air. Properly installed i dont think it will be seeing any more mosture then it would mounted in the passenger compartment, maybe less depending on what shape your targa seals are in. I had an autox at Alta ski resort that got rained out and wound up driving 26 miles, decending 4000ft on mountain roads, in hard rain with zero issues. This is all with the board mounted in the engine compartment. I still want to put it through more long term testing before saying 100% its an ok thing to do, but so far i have been beating the crap out of it with no problems. My current thoughts are that if you are using a relay board then mount the ECU in the most environmentally friendly place possible, if not and you are mounting in the stock location then just make sure you are sealed properly from the elements. If i suffer a failure running this way i will be sure to let everyone know.


The parts you need to get from DIYautotune really depend on what system you want to run and how you want to do your install. Pieceing together your own fuel injection system is something that should be done with a lot of forethought and research. I think at this point every MS install that has been done in a 914 has at least in some way been slightly different from one another. There is not set way to do it so the best thing to do if you are going it on your own is to read as much you possibly can, familarize yourself with the system and components and deciede which way you want to go with it. Read through the megasquirt manual as well as the info on the MSnS extra code, i recomend reading it all more then once. Read up on other peoples installs in 914's as well as other d-jet cars and just suck up as much information as possible. Reading up on how d-jet works is helpfull as well when adapting the systems. I can tell you the exact specifics of what i have used in the past, but as you are going to be doing all the wiring yourself these are all subjects that you want to be familar with.

The basics you will need are:
#1 an ECU - Lots of options here with different board versions processors. I have used the MS1 v2.2 which is the most basic one available so really any of them should be able to work just fine, even the microsquirt should be able to be made to work. It just comes down to how much money you want to spend and what sort of features you want.

Really the ECU is all you need if you already have a d-jet system running however there are some other things you might want to get in order to make the process easier as well as items that are related to how you are setting up your system.

#2 MS relay board - Good to have if you dont want to mount the ECU in the engine compartment, makes the wiring a lot easier. Simplifies things a lot if this is your first install.

#2b Relay cable - needed if running a relay board - dont use a homemade one with soldercup connectors or you are just asking for problems.

#3 wideband 02 sensor setup

#4 Temp Sensors - MS is setup by default to use stock GM temp sensors- some people use these and adapt them to the 914, other people flash the MS ECU to read the stock d-jet sensors.

#5 Throttle position sensor - if you are going to use one

#6 Resistors for the injectors - if you are going to use them

I could probably type on this subject all night but your best bet is just to read what is out there first. Start here is a to give you a basic idea of what you are getting into. Its a lighter read then diving right into the megamanual and has some usefull d-jet/MS information.
http://www.1800philes.com/tuning_article.html




As for the Mini-MS boards i have no idea what the current licenseing situation of these boards is so i am reluctant at this pont to sell any assembled units. I do have some extra PCB's though if anyone wants to assemble them themselves, i just dont want to get involved in higher $$$ transactions when licenseing issue are in question. I will let them go with the understanding that these are experimental and unsupported for $20 basically to cover production and shipping costs. I have about 10 of these that i will get rid of at which point i will not getting any more made. Instead i will be focusing on my own boards designed specifically for d-jet replacement which after they are completed and tested i will work with B&G to get a proper licence to sell them.

Posted by: Markl Sep 27 2010, 08:42 AM

I'll tke a shot at one of your boards - sending PM

Posted by: velum Sep 27 2010, 07:30 PM

Hi James!

Thank you so much for all that information! I is much appreciated. I showed this to a guy who has a dyno and who installs MegaSquirts close by where I live. I think what I'd like is a wasted spark setup with a dented wheel attached to the engine for timing. I am not sure yet where that wheel should be attached. I would prefer to do both fuel and ignition and to get rid of the distributor.

Where did you put your O2 sensor? In the muffler? I am asking because my heat exchangers have separated pipes, so the exhaust gas only mixes once in the muffler.

Cheers!

JF

Posted by: JamesM Sep 27 2010, 10:15 PM

On my autox car i have the sensor installed just after the 4-1 collector on the header, on my street car i run a bursch and have it installed after the Y's but before the muffler. I have not installed an o2 sensor in a stock muffler before and dont know of a good way to do it. Perhaps someone that has cut one open before might have a sugestion. I have a 1.7 wiht a stock muffler that i am going to convert as well but i picked up a bursch specifically for this purpose.

Technically the O2 sensor is optional, and while it is really nice to have it is not manditory if you already have your fuel maps dialed in. If you have access to one you could tune the system on a dyno without a permanently installed o2 sensor. I dont have access to a dyno so i need the wideband in the exhaust when tuning.

If i was going to go distributor-less i would probably go with something like McMarks setup. I have not used it personally but it looks like a good setup that tucks away nice.

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php?showtopic=97550&hl=trigger+wheel

Posted by: velum Sep 28 2010, 09:00 AM

This is very interesting!

Thanks for the link!

JF

Posted by: JamesM Sep 29 2010, 06:21 PM

I work 60+ hours a week take a 1/2 load in school... my wife just saw this and told me i still have to much time on my hands

I have a layout done and fully routed. This is really rough, still a ways off before i send it off to get printed. I am still playing around with it, there are a couple symbols that i want to create custom librarys for, and a few other things then i need to double check everything again. Final layout my look nothing like this. But in the mean time for everyones viewing enjoyment...

Posted by: Jeff Bowlsby Sep 29 2010, 07:36 PM

James...Wow...this is intriguing. I have not followed the whole thread, but what I surmise is that you are developing a MS ECU board, for fuel-only control, that could be mounted into the D-Jet ECU case?

This would utilize the existing 914 FI harness, relay board, fuel injectors TS1 and TS2?

You would eliminate the standard D-Jet MPS and trigger points?

If so, a couple of thoughts/observations you may have considered. Not critical, trying to help your progress, just to be sure:

1. Your efforts are commendable and if it all works out, this could be a windfall for 914 owners. Plug N Play would be the goal.

2. The offering could include standard 1.7, 1.8, 2.0L fuel maps for standard set-ups (reprogrammable of course for those so-inclined), so its a bolt on for most owners.

3. Reusing the existing FI harness would mean the MPS, trigger point branches could simply be cut off. The 3 ground branches would remain - 2 for the injectors and the third for the ECU/TPS ground...is this acceptable? Would a supplemental engine-chassis ground cable be advised? This assumes the FI harness is still viable and functioning after all these years which may be a stretch for some harnesses. New FI harnesses could be fabricated without uneeded circuits or with modifications as you specify.

4. Wasn't it true that for 2.0L injectors/systems, the MS does not have sufficient pulse width resolution, pulses were too rich - has MS changed or is this resolved? Dave Hunt burned up motors because of this and switched to SDS. Would injector changes or PWM be needed?

5. EMI has been a huge issue for several of the 914world members who have tried this conversion, these low volt PEFI systems are notorious for this...does the existing harness accommodate this or is internal shielding needed on certain circuits?

6. D-Jet injectors require power resistors...are these on the new board?

7. Your circuitry suggests that the existing AAR and CSV are used correct? Is the CSV turn-off after the starter quits, ECU controlled?

8. Maybe the four MPS wires, now not needed, could be preassigned on the new board to accommodate an O2 sensor for closed loop? A connector could be mounted to these wires and a supplemental harness run back to the O2 sensor.

Rock-on

Posted by: JamesM Sep 29 2010, 11:53 PM

Yes plug and play, or at least as close to it as possible is the goal. This board however is just basically the next step in what i have been working on all along.

While i had originally played with the idea of building some extra Mini-MS boards into a plug and play solution for anyone who wanted them, the response i got was greater then I had expected. I had thought originally that the people most intrested in this would be the experimenters but the idea seemed to have a more widespread apeal, and while i would not have minded delivering what i was running in my own car to a small number of people for various i did not want to do it on a large scale. As there seemed to be a desire/need for a product of this sort though I set my sights on solving the problems i saw with delivering on a larger scale the greatest one being the complexity and time involved with the build followed closely by questions of durability specifically of the soldered connections to the main ECU connector.

The problem i see with adapting existing systems into a plug and play solution on a larger scale is all the custom work that needs to go into it. Every extra wire i have to cut and solder just adds that much more time. Having to figure out which wire jumpers which 2 pins really slows you down, especally when you have to do it 10-20 different times per build. I also saw every custom wire as a pontential source of failure and was not happy with that. This board is my solution to that, it takes the custom setup i have been running with and integrates it all into one board that solders directly to the d-jet ecu connector.

As for the details and your comments...

Yes, it does use the existing 914 FI harness, relay board, injectors and temp sensors. I have done away with the relays on the MS board itself and use all the stock ones. Controling the stock fuel pump relay is important because the stock AAR is also powerd by it.

Yes, the stock MPS and trigger points are eliminated but both may remain in place for appearance purposes. Also, i have been thinking about adding jumpers to the board to allow an easier way to take the MAP sensor off the main board and relocate it using the stock MPS wiring in case someone wants to be really sneaky and put it inside a gutted MPS.

2. My idea with fuel maps is to get as many as possible for common engine configurations, and possibly if this thing takes off, start a library of maps for common mods and cam setups. I have both a stock d-jet 2.0 and 1.7 here so those will definatly be first to be done. The 1.8 being a non d-jet motor complicates things a little bit as it was not a stock d-jet car so a decision needs to be made as to which intake parts to use when building the maps. Hopefully i will be able to build maps for a 1911 and some of Jakes setups as well. I spoke with him about Megasquirt a couple weeks ago and will probably be sending him some hardware when it is ready, so if we are lucky we may even get base maps that he tuned himself.

3. Yes, these wires are going to be left unused and can be removed however i do plan on adding extra jumpers in the ECU should anyone come up with their own uses for them such as relocating the MAP sensor or perhaps a custom triggering solution in the base of the dizzy. I would only recomend this with a new or rebuilt harness though due to the issues with the age of the harnesses that you mentioned. A custom harness could be very usefull in running these pins out to other locations in the engine bay as well. Depending on if you are going to run a TPS or not there are 11 wires from the ECU that are unused as well as 2 more unused locations where wires could be added, these could all be setup for custom purposes. So far the stock gorunds have proved to be addiquate however if you dont mind modifying the stock apearance there is always room for improvement. The only time so far i my system as failed was duing an autocross when i managed to lose my ground wires during a hard righthander. Funny that the only failure i have been able to produce so far is one that was a result of the stock systems design.

4. Very true - The 2.0 injectors are HUGE for the motor they came in. With an MS1 chip and standard code variants you will never get a good idle as the pulse width resolution is only .1ms. There are however hi-res code variants for the MS1 that give a resolution of .035ms at the cost of losing the pulse width modulation feature. This is a win-win as far as i am concerned as PWM seems to be where a lot of peoples problems with MS come from in the first place. The MS2 also has increased injector resolution as well increased resolution for everywhere else.

5. EMI - This is one area where i would like to get more testing done. I have yet to encounter it on any of the cars i have converted so i have not been able to personally investigate it. I did originally run a shielded wire for my tach signal but i have since removed the shielding and have still not encountered any problems. As of right now i am not sure if what people have seen is a result of the way they installed the system or possibly another varaible in their car, possibly a bad or nonstock alternator, regulator, coil or any number of things. Also i am not sure if what they saw was even EMI and not some other quirk. There was an older code version that had a bug that produced tach spikes that apeared to be very much like EMI. I encountered this during my first megasquirt install many years ago and tore my hair out trying to find the source of what i thought was EMI.

6.Resistors, yes these are needed in the circuit. These will be in the ECU but as to weither or not they will be on the actual board or mounted to the case is still in debate. For ease of installation i would like to be able to mount them on the board but it depends on how much heat the resistors i am using generate. I have not gotten that far in my testing yet and at this point just have them mounted to a heatsink plate in the case.

7. AAR is used, it is triggered by the stock fuel pump relay which is switched by the ECU. CSV is not used as i prefer to use the megasquirt cold start options and eliminate 2 more d-jet components. Again these can be left in place to appear stock if desired.

8. Yup! I like the way you think. This is why i am putting in jumper pads to the unused pins on the harness. I currently run closed loop on my own car however this is via an extra wire i run out of the ECU. With a custom harness all it would take is a single jumper wire in the ECU and you could have a very clean setup. I think having a custom harness that adds all the extra features like crank trigger and O2 sensor but still hooks into an ECU that apears stock would be really cool. Sort of a stock only better sort of look to it.


Lots of great ideas here and probably a lot more to come. My favorite thing about megasquirt is how it unlocks potential. No longer are we stuck with stock cams and displacement(perfect cheater system). No more injection system with zero feedback when troubleshooting issues. Tons of options.

This post is already insanely long but i will touch on a couple more points here that we have not mentioned yet.

TPS-I am setting up a location for an optional jumper or fixed resistor in order to elimanate the TPS. Stock TPS will not work and its really hard to get any aftermarket TPS to look stock. This will enable leaving the stock TPS in place for appearance but resorting to MAPDOT accell enrichment in the ECU.

Injectors- We will now be able to swap injectors to whatever we can make fit. 1.7 or 2.0 injectors could be run on either engine (1.7 prefered obviously due to the 2.0s being huge) OR even better, 1.8 injectors which have the better connector on them and are still available NEW! I think all the injectors used on flat 4 VW's are pretty much a direct fit physically so anything up through the late vanagons should probably work. Which brings be to another point... the late 2.1 vangons used a throttle body that looks as though it would be easily adapted to the 1.7 or 1.8 style intake, i mention it because of its 50mm stock bore. I am thinking a 2056 with 1.8 plenum and runners and 50mm throttle body might be fun to try. Not being limited by injectors or intake configuration we are free to mix and match as we like.

Posted by: karlo Sep 30 2010, 05:45 AM

It would be very appealing to make a PCB that completely replaces the D-Jet PCB in the enclosure; meaning that it includes the connector end as well, so you won't have to chop the connector end off the D-Jet PCB and do a lot of soldering. Is this what you are planning?
I have completely abandoned the MS1 CPUs. MS2 extra has better resolution and I find it to be easier to tune. I'm testing the MS3 CPU now, and it appears to be even better in this aspect, if not a bit more expensive.
I've not had problems with EMI in my installs. The primary issue with EMI is incorrect power and grounds, more of an issue if you have to fashion the entire harness yourself. I've put my MS in the D-Jet enclosure and hooked it up to the stock wiring harness, and that seems to work just fine.

- Karl

Posted by: charliew Sep 30 2010, 09:36 AM

EMI, this isn't car related. I worked for ncr, ibm and eastman kodak on electro mechanical and electronic equipment for a long time. Usually emi was the result of a low amperage signal wire being placed next to a higher amperage wire that operated a solenoid or large coil whether it's a relay or solenoid of some type. The coil energizing and dropping out will cause the magnetic field around the coil wire to rise and fall and would be induced into the signal wire. Heat changes the way things happen in electronics a lot, the higher the heat the more the resistance. In my case if emi was suspected I would look back at the history card and see what had recently been repaired or messed with and that would be a good starting place. Sometimes it would just be a loose connector that had not been fully seated or the pins had gotten loose.

Most of my recent experience has been with suby stuff and they do use shielding.

I'm just reading along though and the guys with experience are good teachers. I wouldn't worry about emi if a long time experienced ms user hasn't found it to be a problem. EMI has probably been blamed on many problems that are really just poor wiring or cheap connectors.

Posted by: JamesM Sep 30 2010, 11:24 AM

Yup, pretty muchwhat i am planning. As you know megasquirt can be put inside the stock ECU case however it is very labor intensive. It will still require the connector be removed from the d-jet board as i have not found a source for them however the connector will then be directly soldered to the new board rather then a bunch of jumper wires, which will make the process a lot easier.

The one advantage i see to the MS1 is cost, it is the most affordable option and with the hi-res code it works just fine, especally when you are doing a fuel only install. The MS2 resolution is nice though and sure does make the datalogs look pretty. The MS3 seems like overkill to me for our cars as the MS1-extra already has more features then most of us will ever wind up using. The MS3 is insane, i like the idea but most of the features seem to be geared more towards the hardcore modder.

EMI - I think most people have not had a problem with this when installing MS in 914's. I have not seen it in my installes or know personally of anyone that has. I would just like to see a case where it has occured though so i could investigate it further. So far i feel fine about the way i have been doing things, i would just like to be extra sure. I have used both the stock wiring, and the stock wiring with suplemental power and grounds and never had an issue.

Posted by: JamesM Sep 30 2010, 11:32 AM

I have used MS since very eary on and never had a problem with EMI so it does not really worry me a whole lot. I would just like to investigte it more in order to put other peoples fears to rest.

This is good information to have in case i ever do run into it. If anyone out there has personally had an issue with EMI and megasquirt on their 914 i would like to hear about it.

Posted by: Jeff Bowlsby Sep 30 2010, 01:10 PM

Hopefully McMark, Jeff Keyzer (mightyohm) or maybe Dave Hunt will chime in with their personal MS experiences, they all had what they described as significant EMI issues. You could also search for their posts here on this board.

Posted by: BIGKAT_83 Oct 8 2010, 06:56 AM

I have just finished a megasquirt DIYPNP install on my subaru conversion. I used all of the stock sensors and this worked great with only a few problems with mistakes that I made myself.
You just need to use good wiring practices on your signal wiring making sure the shield grds. are used .
The guys at Diyautotune have just written a book on aftermarket fuel injection. Anyone doing a install should read this. Best $10 I spent on the car.

Bob

Posted by: ThinAir Jan 30 2011, 11:27 PM

Can you provide a link to that book? The only book link I can find goes to Amazon and the book doesn't sound like it matches your description.

Posted by: BIGKAT_83 Jan 31 2011, 04:35 AM

Try http://www.amazon.com/Performance-Fuel-Injection-Systems-HP1557/dp/1557885575/ref=pd_sim_b_14
Bob

Posted by: draganc Jan 31 2011, 08:11 AM

I have the book and it's a great read if you are entering the EFI area. In addtion, for the std. setup I would highly recommend:

http://www.amazon.com/Bosch-Fuel-Injection-Engine-Management/dp/0837603005/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1296482960&sr=1-1

dragan

Posted by: rick 918-S Aug 30 2011, 07:24 PM

This is an awesome thread. What ever became of this product development?

Posted by: Ductech Aug 30 2011, 07:48 PM

I'm not really sure that i would apply for needing one as i need a v3 based board with a squirt 2 processor to run my subie but dear god that is a sweet setup, It makes me wish i had a concourse car to put that in and try and pull a fast one on some concourse judges.

Well done!

Posted by: kg6dxn Aug 31 2011, 07:18 PM

I think a hopped up stock looking engine would be cool! make a CW car with a bad ass stealth engine.

Posted by: Gint Sep 1 2011, 08:09 AM

I was wondering that myself. James?

Posted by: 914_teener Sep 4 2011, 09:20 AM

Bueler?

Posted by: JamesM Feb 7 2012, 12:15 AM

Saw the new MS thread and thought I would go looking for this one, sorry for being late on the response guys, I missed your posts back in September.

This is not dead, just on hold for life at the moment. I have been working 7 days a week for the last 3 years now, Last year involved me changing jobs twice as better opportunities presented themselves, though I am still working 7 days a week. In addition to that my daughter was born in Feb of last year which has kept me pretty busy as well.

To top it off (and this is the worst part) I had a power supply blow up in my file server and burned out the boards on all 4 hard drives (in RAID arrays) attached to it. They literally started smoking when I hooked them up to a good system afterwards. This happened to be where I had all my PCB designs and most of my notes stored. Ironic that I was working for the cloud backup division of Seagate at the time AND NOT BACKING UP MY DATA....stupid.

Took me a couple months but I was able to get the burned out controller boards cloned and the RAID online and recover about 1TB worth of data which included my MS work, and more importantly all the pics I had taken of my daughter since the day she was born.

Life is settling down a bit now and I gotten into a the flow of the new job I took back in September so I am looking to start working on this again. Just got an environment setup for running the Eagle PCB software and all my old data imported this weekend so I am just about good to go. Still very busy though as I have lots of other projects so all I can say is progress will be made when it is made. Been building a lilac 72 1.7 over the winter that I will use to test stock 1.7 fuel maps when it is done. My bone stock 2.0 D-Jet car that I was going to use for testing I need to pull the heads on as found a PO had jacked up one of the exhaust stud bosses.

Lots to keep me busy...

Posted by: 76-914 Feb 7 2012, 02:49 PM

Glad your back. Now get off your butt and give us what we need.

Posted by: PeeGreen 914 Feb 7 2012, 04:19 PM

Congrats on the daughter and welcome back

Posted by: ConeDodger Feb 13 2012, 09:40 AM

Mine does... On the advice of Dave Hunt, McMark incorporated an AAR we sourced from Mark Heard. It appeared to be new old stock but proved to be a bit stiff when installed. Mark tells me (the car is still at his shop for flares) that it has loosened up and gives perfect high idle till warm...

Voila! Integrated AAR goodness... Thanks to Dave Hunt.


Attached image(s)

Posted by: Gint Feb 13 2012, 07:17 PM

That looks pretty nice. Who built that vacuum manifold? Mark?

Posted by: kwlane Feb 13 2012, 10:50 PM

I have a aftermarket FI I purchased with a 1.7 engine to replace the carbs on my current setup. This consists of 48mm trottle bodies with I believe are Ford injectors, with most of the wiring, and a controller of unkown origin. Think it is a old CB Performance set up. I was considering MS but don't know anything about FI, so on a learning curve (as with eveything else). So good support would be really key. CB sell an upgrade with O2 sensor and self tune, but whatever I get would operates in day to day driving, which is what I am looking for. So I am interested if it can be pretty much plug and play.

Posted by: ConeDodger Feb 13 2012, 11:27 PM

The bare bones of the vacuum manifold is commercially available from the company with the logo on the plenum. Mark assembled and plumbed everything. We put the logo backward because of the "cheese factor"


Attached image(s)

Posted by: Dasnowman Jan 3 2013, 01:01 AM

This is a real interesting thread so I'm bumping it up to see anything going on with this still?

Car came with a 1.7 that was said to be running 20 years ago before putting away in storage. But missing EFI system was thinking about doing carbs and cam but will want to swap in a 2L in the next year or two.. So I want something i can change or motify at a later date to fit my needs.

Posted by: JamesM Jan 3 2013, 12:14 PM

This has been on hold for a long time due to a series of life events and me making this a lower priority. It started with a power supply blowing up and literally burning up 2 hard drives in a raid array I had all the data for this project stored on, smoke and all. 3 months, multiple attempts at cloning the HDD controller boards and a bit of work getting the RAID running on 1 drive and I was able to recover the data, but at that point I had lost a bit of the momentum. That was followed by changing jobs twice that resulted in no longer having 40 hours a week of downtime in front of a computer where I can work on this. Add to all that a new baby and a wife that requires a lot of maintenance and bottom line is I just have had not had the time.

The other half of the time issue on this would be one of supporting the product. This is the reason I have made it lower priority. Even if I did produce the boards I would not want to widely distribute them without being able to support it, which again, I just don't have the time for at the moment. I have considered the idea of finishing the design and handing it over to someone for production/support just so it's available, I have a couple people in mind but have not started any discussions with them yet to see if they would be interested.

As it stands right now I have 2 running prototypes that could be swapped into any d-jet injected car, so I know it can be done. These are built on MiniMS boards that I applied my hacks to. I have the circuits laid out for the custom boards in my board design software, I just need to finish component arangement and get them printed. Thats pretty much where it has been sitting for the last 2 years. One of the boards I modified even further to do full ignition control and have been running that one at autocross for a few years now with no failures yet.


So to summarize, no time, low priority for me, support issues to work out. that being said, this is still something that I want to make happen even if just to run on my own cars. Once it does happen if I don't have the time to support it I would probably still hand over some boards unsupported to qualified people.

Posted by: llich Oct 31 2015, 07:35 PM

What about this?
where i can buy a PCB or get a gerber/excellon file for build it?
I have a blog, where i translate and regroup information about this PCB

Thanks for all guys

Posted by: Beebo Kanelle Nov 11 2015, 07:39 PM

what would it take to capitalize this project? I think this really fills a necessary niche.

Posted by: JamesM Nov 11 2015, 10:14 PM

It would take someone with the time to get it done. Unfortunately I took a job with a startup a few years ago and the abundance of free time I had completely disappeared.

Technically, its not that hard to accomplish, I have had a couple prototypes running for the last 10 or so years, the challenge is more the time investment needed for production and support. I had played with the idea of a fully custom PCB, but with the time required to hand solder a single unit being 6-8 hours it was just not feasible. I have a couple other ideas that would reduce the amount of labor for production but all of them result in higher cost. I have toyed with the idea of finding an EE student who wants a project to do some of the heavylifting here, but again have not had the time to pursue it. Another idea might be to approach one of the larger players (thinking DIYautotune) and see if they would take up production and support, but there would need to be a large enough market and I am not sure there is.

A while back someone (cant remember if it was a VW guy or a Volvo guy) started producing d-jet adapter boards while not fully plug and play it would simplify the process for someone looking to go down this road.

Posted by: JamesM Nov 11 2015, 10:39 PM

On second thought....

You just got me looking at the DIYautotune site again as I have not even thought about this project in some time. It looks like there is an available product now that didn't exist when I started down this road, but would most likely simplify this project quite a bit, as well as address some of the legal grey areas of using a custom board.


http://www.diyautotune.com/catalog/microsquirt-module-v22-p-381.html


Pre assembled, single board solution, but more importantly, unlike every other MS product out there it looks like the injector drivers on this new board are logic level which would greatly simplify the process of using this with a stock D-Jet harness.

Basically all you would need at this point is an adapter board to the d-jet main harness connector that includes the high current injector circuit and MAP sensor which would be a pretty simple board to design and produce. It would increase cost over a custom single board solution, guessing someone would probably need to price an assembled PnP solution in the $600 range, but this is way more feasible than it has been previously.


Damn, I may need to cough up the ~$350 in core components needed and work on a new prototype now that you got me thinking about this again.

Posted by: veekry9 Nov 11 2015, 10:54 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qztuEucrNBc
Yes you can.
The other guy.
http://rusefi.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
Progress.

Posted by: BeemerSteve Nov 12 2015, 01:56 PM

The DubShop for all your MS needs.
I'm enjoying mine!!

Posted by: aircooledtechguy Nov 12 2015, 02:41 PM

Mario at thedubshop.net is not sitting on his laurels and just putting together great kits that are custom for your application. He's not even satisfied manufacturing most of the ancillary components associated with his kits. He's designed his own licensed MS ECU that incorporates most of the features everyone wants. It even has an on-board O2 sensor controller!! Here's a couple shots of the new ECU that's about to begin testing. . .





"So I've been working on a new MS module based ECU to use with my EFI packages. My focus was on our 4 cylinder engines and I really wanted something that was ready to run sequential out of the box including boost control, launch control + constant baro as the standard setup. The ignition drivers are capable of running smart or dumb coils for COP/CNP or wasted spark applications. Of course you can run larger engines with it as well, just not sequential. On top of all that it has an incorporated wideband controller for a Bosch LSU 4.9 sensor or a jumper to use your currently installed 02 system. All this will be cased in a compact cast aluminum enclosure with an OEM type slide lock connector."

Here is the feature list running in sequential mode:

4 Cyl Seq Fuel / Spark
- High impedance Injector drivers
- Passive Ignition drivers for smart and dumb coils (COP / CNP)

Crank and Cam Inputs
- VR or Hall

Dedicated Tacho Output

Idle Control
- 2 or 3 wire PWM

Launch Control
Boost Control
Table Switching

Onboard Realtime Baro
- 1 ADC input with onboard baro enabled
- 2 ADC inputs with onboard baro disabled

Onboard LSU4.9 Wideband Controller
- with 0-5volt output for dash gauge
- Can be bypasses for use with out board controllers

Interchangeable map sensor modules
- 1bar
- 2.5bar
- 4bar

It's soon going to be going to a whole new level for those that want to run a real tuneable modern EFI system in our old cars!!

Posted by: GregAmy Nov 12 2015, 04:07 PM

Sounds trite but..."subscribing!"

Posted by: BeemerSteve Nov 12 2015, 08:11 PM

So Nate, is he going to have a beta program available too? Count me in for testing!

Posted by: porsche913b_sp Nov 12 2015, 09:45 PM

subscribed

Posted by: aircooledtechguy Nov 12 2015, 10:16 PM

I'm going to see him at his open house for his new shop this Sunday. I'll get a chance to actually see it in person then and we'll see what he says about a time-frame for testing and other particulars.

If you are free Sunday, he's having an open house this Sunday from 12-4:30. Come on down!!

Posted by: JamesM Nov 13 2015, 12:51 AM

I love Marios stuff, he is the guy I refer people to when they need any part MS related these days. What he produces currently doesn't match the original intent of this thread though (and this thread is so damn old at this point i think it predates knowledge of his existence). The intent was to have a stock appearing, plug in ECU replacement for existing DJET cars that retains (in appearance anyways) the stock djet components. In my opinion Mario is THE guy to go to for a turnkey MS solution, and in fact maybe should be the guy to go to in order to continue this project as it is his business.

From a functional standpoint it is much better to ditch the stock d-jet harness, but for people who lean towards being more purist, or the sleeper crowd a plug in solution is not yet produced. It can and has been done, just not offered by any vendor currently and taking the jump from hobbyist to vendor is not something I would be able to maintain at the moment.

I believe Mario has posted on this board before but i doubt he is active. If anyone is going to be speaking with him though point him at this thread and see if he wants to pick up the torch. It would not be a far departure from the board he is currently working on (technically not an ECU by itself but appears to leverage Micorsquirt Module as is core) With what is currently available this honestly would not take to much work.

Posted by: aircooledtechguy Nov 13 2015, 10:13 AM

I agree that this is a departure from a true PnP ECU however I would seriously doubt that anyone at this point will be willing to produce a true PnP ECU that looks stock, uses the same harness and components. It's the harnesses that cause a lot of the grief with D-jet and it's the D-jet components (mainly the MPS) that go bad routinely. Why on earth would anyone want to keep the very things that make these systems not work?? Even is someone did, how many would they sell?? 10 maybe 15 units??. . . No one wanting to stay in business will do this. Only an enthusiast that does it in their spare time could afford to take the time needed for such low production numbers.

If someone wants to have a true PnP hidden MS system, they will have to be hand made one at a time using obsolete connectors and would be ridiculously expensive. This would only appeal to a very small number of people. Besides, after about 2.1L, your 2.0L plenum limits your output anyway. . .

IMHO, if you are thinking of going MS or another aftermarket ECU/system, then looking absolutely stock is not your #1 focus. Drive-ability and performance is. The factory D-jet components are just not up to the job. Especially for reliability.

Just my .02 FWIW. . .

Posted by: GregAmy Nov 13 2015, 10:30 AM

I'm perfectly fine with a system that uses a bespoke wiring harness and connectors, and is reasonably PnP for the home DIY'r. I see no pressing need to stick with factory stuff (except for maybe injectors, to make the install a tad easier.)

Posted by: JamesM Nov 13 2015, 11:04 AM

The idea is to start with a working d-jet system and then swap the ECU to have a stock looking, but fully programmable solution. Completely agree about the harness issues, the d-jet connectors were defective in their design even when new. On the plus side Megasquirt does make it a lot easier to diagnose which sensor circuit has a problem (also greatly reduces the number of active circuits in the harness) Bowlsby does re-produce/repair d-jet harnesses for people who want/need them and despite the short comings of the d-jet connectors there are people that still want them.

There is no "one size fits all" solution when it comes to fueling, hell there are still people that swear by carbs. If you want the most reliable, fully modernized system you will need an updated harness/ECU connector,different injectors and sensors, that cannot be argued. Some people want to retain a stock appearance though, and a complete system replacement/update wont do that.

To add some perspective, I have been running my stock d-jet harnessed Megasquirt powered car for over 10 years now and have had ZERO harness related issues. In theory it is not ideal, but it does work.

Posted by: JamesM Nov 13 2015, 11:14 AM

If you are changing everything else, late model Vanagon injectors fit the 914 intake, have updated connectors, and are more appropriately sized for EFI than the stock 2L injectors. Not to mention are way cheaper and still available new.

Thats a win/win, win, win, win.

Posted by: GregAmy Nov 13 2015, 11:32 AM

Concur. It would be an even better win when I can buy it...

Posted by: Mueller Nov 13 2015, 01:59 PM

Only 2 reasons I can think of to have a hidden/undetectable MS install....

You show your car at concours show and will be heavily dinged for a non-stock FI...

or you are in a race series that requires stock components and you don't mind cheating

I like the plug and play or at least near pnp since many people don't want to deal with too much wiring or tuning.

Posted by: DBCooper Nov 13 2015, 02:13 PM

If it's an either-or choice I imagine the plug-n-play system with a modern harness designed for drivability would be chosen by a heck of a lot more people than a disguised concours installation. Maybe by a factor of 50 to 1? No, probably more.

Posted by: JamesM Nov 13 2015, 03:02 PM

If the threads original pole is still accurate more like 10:1. Labor of love perhaps. might be better offered as an assembled board for people who are truly committed to that route.

Posted by: JamesM Nov 13 2015, 03:03 PM

You can, talk to Mario