ProEFI-tuned Turbo M3

[Apex Speed Technology]

Where you and I dislike what the factory did... you have to (to a point) appreciate why they did it.

I've worked in OEM calibration and what the factory does is first biased toward emissions and second towards fuel consumption. When you modify these cars, you need more power to make changes. I just worked on a high-compression/big cam S54 last week - the 3rd car in 3 weeks that we replaced a stock re-flash on with a Pectel kit. The differences are astounding.

I think there's room in the world for piggybacks like Pro-EFI, but there's a limit to what you and do with them.

-Neel

[Sticky]

I just worked on a high-compression/big cam S54 last week - the 3rd car in 3 weeks that we replaced a stock re-flash on with a Pectel kit.

Any further details on this? Would love to see what that NA motor put down and more details.

[Apex Speed Technology]

We just did a bone-stock NA motor for Schumacher racing last week. It was their second S54 project with us and put down 325hp at the wheels on DC Performance's Dynapak. To give you some perspective we did a Dodge 6.1L Hemi, running all open exhaust and intake and it put out 330 on the same dyno.

Here's the car we did in Toronto later in the week, its Mark Marquis's E36/S54 with a high compression motor and aftermarket cams. I'm not sure what else has been done yet, and we just got it running and prepped for the dyno. The car was built by Raven Performance, who we're also doing an S65/E92 race car with.

Both cars features Pectel SQ6 ECUs with integrated ABS/Traction Control, knock control, pit lane speed limiters, driver-selectable multiple throttle maps and our custom plug & play harnesses.

[GG///M3]

e36 with a s54. light weight and rape.

[Jason S.]

I've worked in OEM calibration and what the factory does is first biased toward emissions and second towards fuel consumption. When you modify these cars, you need more power to make changes. I just worked on a high-compression/big cam S54 last week - the 3rd car in 3 weeks that we replaced a stock re-flash on with a Pectel kit. The differences are astounding.

I think there's room in the world for piggybacks like Pro-EFI, but there's a limit to what you and do with them.

-Neel

Show me. Post up the dyno comparisons.

[Sorena]

that's a serious looking race car.

[Apex Speed Technology]

Show me. Post up the dyno comparisons.

If you're evaluating your builds on dyno charts you're missing the point entirely. Cars don't make any more power on the dyno with Pectel as they would with Pro-EFI, reflashed stock ECUs or any other capable ECU for that matter. We have gone the direction we did because in the real world our solution operates better than any other we've seen.

The difference is that with a fully programmable ECU, one has FULL CONTROL of all compensations, failsafes, throttle curves and VANOS operation. Initially, this leads to more consistent and safer operation, but with modified engines (especially high-compression, big cam or forced induction) the benefits are much greater, as you can tailor your VANOS, drive-by-wire & knock control to take advantage of these modifications. You also have a lot more functional integration - your boost control, water injection, knock control, traction control functions all interact. On top of all that, you have very powerful data acquisition of specific functions that is race-car appropriate - not just things like TPS and RPM, but items you need to diagnose problems like VANOS solenoid duty cycles & drive by wire PID terms. To the average customer this may not sound like much but when you can diagnose an issue with a race car in 30 seconds it can save a weekend.

Jason, I have nothing against the Mototron ECUs that you use with Pro-EFI - as I've said my old research group used them extensively, and I have colleagues at Argonne National Labs & the US Department of Energy that still do. But its a piggyback, the MotoHawk software development can be a lot of work. It doesn't have the kind of integration capabilities of a true standalone. It was designed to be used as an OEM development ECU, and what you see as virtues with that I've found to be vices.

That said, I think the product you sell is perfectly appropriate for people who feel the level of control you provide is all they need, and they're comfortable dealing with the stock ECU for the rest of the engine's operation.

-Neel

[Apex Speed Technology]

Let me add one more point - for relatively sedate street cars, I think that piggybacks like Pro-EFI are a good solution. My comments apply to swap cars, high-boost builds and track-only cars, where the demands are much higher and flexibility is a necessary asset.

-neel

[Bmxpert86]

I have been patiently waiting to see how this works out with the HPF guys. It's the only reason I have not bought a kit already. I wonder if adding a turbo setup would speed up the VANOS bolt issues that are prone to failure on the s54.

[Jason S.]

If you're evaluating your builds on dyno charts you're missing the point entirely. Cars don't make any more power on the dyno with Pectel as they would with Pro-EFI, reflashed stock ECUs or any other capable ECU for that matter. We have gone the direction we did because in the real world our solution operates better than any other we've seen.

The difference is that with a fully programmable ECU, one has FULL CONTROL of all compensations, failsafes, throttle curves and VANOS operation. Initially, this leads to more consistent and safer operation, but with modified engines (especially high-compression, big cam or forced induction) the benefits are much greater, as you can tailor your VANOS, drive-by-wire & knock control to take advantage of these modifications. You also have a lot more functional integration - your boost control, water injection, knock control, traction control functions all interact. On top of all that, you have very powerful data acquisition of specific functions that is race-car appropriate - not just things like TPS and RPM, but items you need to diagnose problems like VANOS solenoid duty cycles & drive by wire PID terms. To the average customer this may not sound like much but when you can diagnose an issue with a race car in 30 seconds it can save a weekend.

Jason, I have nothing against the Mototron ECUs that you use with Pro-EFI - as I've said my old research group used them extensively, and I have colleagues at Argonne National Labs & the US Department of Energy that still do. But its a piggyback, the MotoHawk software development can be a lot of work. It doesn't have the kind of integration capabilities of a true standalone. It was designed to be used as an OEM development ECU, and what you see as virtues with that I've found to be vices.

That said, I think the product you sell is perfectly appropriate for people who feel the level of control you provide is all they need, and they're comfortable dealing with the stock ECU for the rest of the engine's operation.

-Neel

First, it's not a 'mototron' ecu, mototron has been out of business for over 2 years, it's a Continental Motorola ecu. Second, you are assuming a lot, and you REALLY do not know what you are talking about. You don't know what we are and are not cabable of through motohawk. Nothing has ever been done like what we have done with motohawk or these ecu's. So please don't speak about things in which you don't have first hand experience. As for drivability, you are talking about perception. It's easy to say that your are 'picking up a lot' by taking control of the dbw, and vcam (we can do that too, and have done it on these engines as well). The fact of the matter is, that is YOUR perception, and at the end of the day, If I want more power, the accelerator goes closer to the floor. Throttle response and drivability are VERY closely related, and yes, you can have to much throttle response. So if you can't quantify your results, it is clearly perception. The ProEFI is NOT a piggy back controller, a piggy back controller 'tricks' the stock ecu in to doing certain things, we don't do that. It has 100% control over the fuel, timing, boost, traction control, limiters, etc... We leave the stock ecu in control over the cams, and the throttle in plug and play kit form, because there is no need to take control over it, even if you say there is.

[Commanderwiggin]

Jason, just curious if you've tried grabbing cam control while tuning any of the HPF equipped cars and if it actually yielded any gains or losses? I've seen what the differences are on your tune and HPF's tune but I'd like to know why HPF thinks controlling the vanos yields better gains and you don't? My apologies if this has already been covered but I would like to see if you can gain any power by controlling the cams.

[Sticky]

The ProEFI is NOT a piggy back controller, a piggy back controller 'tricks' the stock ecu in to doing certain things, we don't do that. It has 100% control over the fuel, timing, boost, traction control, limiters, etc... We leave the stock ecu in control over the cams, and the throttle in plug and play kit form, because there is no need to take control over it, even if you say there is.

Or it is because you can't take control of those things? As long as you are still using the stock ECU to control functions in lieu of doing it yourself, it is piggy backing, period.

[Apex Speed Technology]

First, it's not a 'mototron' ecu, mototron has been out of business for over 2 years, it's a Continental Motorola ecu. Second, you are assuming a lot, and you REALLY do not know what you are talking about. You don't know what we are and are not cabable of through motohawk. Nothing has ever been done like what we have done with motohawk or these ecu's. So please don't speak about things in which you don't have first hand experience.

Jason, you should be a bit more be careful about accusing people that they don't know what they're talking about. I'm not going to spend my time here discussing my history with Woodward/Mototron products, nor have I made any assumptions. Perhaps I clarify my comment by saying that, in your application, you don't have true integration capabilities as you aren't directly controlling either the H-bridges or PWM outputs driving the VANOS.

We are seeing improvements in the performance of vehicles using DBW and BMW VANOS, and if your ECU can do it I think you should offer those as options since many customers do take advantage of them. I also agree that throttle response is a matter of perception. When I am talking about throttle response, I am not talking about "more or less." I am talking about the ability to tailor an engine's torque output as a function of driver input. The ability to change the "curve" of pedal position versus engine torque does result in a perceptively better performing car - so much so that this is a focus of development for a lot of our professional customers in Grand AM, ALMS and AMA Superbike.

If a stock ECU is required to be in place for an engine to run, I consider it a piggyback - and that's okay. If you don't feel a need to control cams and throttles in your plug and play kit, that's fine too. I understand that for your target market, this may be acceptable. I prefer fully integrated standalones on our race cars because our experience has taught us its a liability to leave control in any other hands.

We would be happy to try one of your kits and see how it works - it may fit in very well in our product offerings, especially among those customers who have less demanding applications. I find your defensiveness odd because I have been supporting your use of Pro EFI on the kinds of street cars you run. I believe that there are applications where more control is desired. Have you completed a standalone that allows us to have that?

-Neel

[Jason S.]

Jason, just curious if you've tried grabbing cam control while tuning any of the HPF equipped cars and if it actually yielded any gains or losses? I've seen what the differences are on your tune and HPF's tune but I'd like to know why HPF thinks controlling the vanos yields better gains and you don't? My apologies if this has already been covered but I would like to see if you can gain any power by controlling the cams.

This has been covered several times. They think that because when they first started trying to let the stock computer do it with their computer on the car, the stock ecu went in to fail and zeroed the cams. The dyno charts we show proved they didn't gain anything, and in fact lost a bit.

[Jason S.]

Or it is because you can't take control of those things? As long as you are still using the stock ECU to control functions in lieu of doing it yourself, it is piggy backing, period.

We already have controlled both the cams and the throttle...that's not an issue.

[Jason S.]

Jason, you should be a bit more be careful about accusing people that they don't know what they're talking about. I'm not going to spend my time here discussing my history with Woodward/Mototron products, nor have I made any assumptions. Perhaps I clarify my comment by saying that, in your application, you don't have true integration capabilities as you aren't directly controlling either the H-bridges or PWM outputs driving the VANOS.

We are seeing improvements in the performance of vehicles using DBW and BMW VANOS, and if your ECU can do it I think you should offer those as options since many customers do take advantage of them. I also agree that throttle response is a matter of perception. When I am talking about throttle response, I am not talking about "more or less." I am talking about the ability to tailor an engine's torque output as a function of driver input. The ability to change the "curve" of pedal position versus engine torque does result in a perceptively better performing car - so much so that this is a focus of development for a lot of our professional customers in Grand AM, ALMS and AMA Superbike.

If a stock ECU is required to be in place for an engine to run, I consider it a piggyback - and that's okay. If you don't feel a need to control cams and throttles in your plug and play kit, that's fine too. I understand that for your target market, this may be acceptable. I prefer fully integrated standalones on our race cars because our experience has taught us its a liability to leave control in any other hands.

We would be happy to try one of your kits and see how it works - it may fit in very well in our product offerings, especially among those customers who have less demanding applications. I find your defensiveness odd because I have been supporting your use of Pro EFI on the kinds of street cars you run. I believe that there are applications where more control is desired. Have you completed a standalone that allows us to have that?

-Neel

Neel, just because you know who Woodward/Mototron is and was, doesn't mean you have ANY idea on how our coding works. The relationship between Woodward and ProEFI ends at the ECU, Woodward/Mototron didn't write our control strategies, I did! So you don't know what we are doing, you are only assuming. How am I being 'defensive'? If I started making assumptions on how your business works, would you not correct me? I'm not being defensive at all, I am just speaking the facts. Driver perception and drivability are two completely different things. You jump in a Chevy Cobalt and the thing feels like a big 6 cylinder off throttle because they ramp the throttle in so quickly...doesn't mean the torque output of the engine is ANY different (no different than putting the M3 in Sport mode). The engine is doing the same thing...the throttle is just moving faster. Either way, this IS a perception, and to say you get vast improvements is rediculous at best. That is like saying 'I repainted my car to 'Snow white instead of Pearl white, and it looks much better', that is an opinion....period.

The ECU is a stand alone ECU, you should be aware of that since you know Woodward/Mototron!

We don't need the stock computer to run the engine...so I guess this isn't a piggy back!

[Apex Speed Technology]

The ECU is a stand alone ECU, you should be aware of that since you know Woodward/Mototron!

We don't need the stock computer to run the engine...so I guess this isn't a piggy back!

Jason, sorry if I made you feel like I was attacking your business. I know all about coding the Woodword ECUs and am quite aware that you have to develop the software yourself. Its an impressive task and has the potential to provide an amazing product. I thought about this years ago but just the cost of a proper matlab/simulink seat and the Greenhills compiler, plus all the development time was too much. I could have backdoored licenses through the DOE projects I guess, but since we have a pretty strong business I didn't think that was prudent. Anyway, we've gone a different direction now and I'm really glad to hear you've taken on the project of developing that platform for the aftermarket crowd!

So let me know how to get a standalone unit for an S54 from you?. At its price-point, with the features available it would be a great addition to our product line. I don't need a harness since we do that ourselves, so get in touch with me and let me know how to proceed.

Thanks,

Neel

[Sticky]

We already have controlled both the cams and the throttle...that's not an issue.

You have done these things without the factory DME in place on the S54 with a turbo?

[Sticky]

We don't need the stock computer to run the engine...so I guess this isn't a piggy back!

I understand you are saying you don't need the stock computer, but you are using it, therefore you are piggy backing in current applications. I really like your product so don't get me wrong (as you can tell by the coverage you get as well as limited posting ability without being a vendor) but as long as you are using the factory DME to control functions it is functioning as a piggy back. The correct way to phrase it would be that it could be capable of not piggy backing.

[5mall5nail5]

I just realized ProEFI is showing the MegaSquirt log viewer on their website

LOL what's the deal with that? Sounds like someone liked my idea.

[Ciprian]

Any updates? Pictures of the engine bay?
Do you have any movies on the drag strip? or street pulls?
I want to build similar set-up on my M3, but using the HPF Tuner Kit + intercooler, keeping the stock air box.

[Sticky]

Any updates? Pictures of the engine bay?
Do you have any movies on the drag strip? or street pulls?
I want to build similar set-up on my M3, but using the HPF Tuner Kit + intercooler, keeping the stock air box.

He doesn't have any drag strip times.