MS vs all others

[BDKR]

In another thread Morley said....

If cost is a minor matter, get a "real" EMS instead. If you're aiming for goals above the limits of the Motronic, you'll be thankful for the extra options an EMS like for example Haltech and Autronic will give.

I figured I'd start another thread to avoid the jack and just in case this got ugly. LOL! I don't want it to get ugly. I just think this is a worthy conversation topic.

Anyway, Morleys comment sounds like the same talk the Pro MS guys used to have for the various open source tools and programs floating about. Now those hobbyist operating systems and databases are disruptive technologies that have dramatically altered the business model in the IT world.

I got a feeling that MS will do the same thing in the world of EMS.

And BTW, I'm not attacking Morley. I just thought this would be an interesting conversation.

[JohnLane]

Many choices. MoTec is fancy and expensive. Electromotive works well for my toy.
MS is a common choice amongst T-Bricksters.....in large part due to low initial cost.

Done right most systems will make good power.

Fancier systems will allow Anti-lag and numerous user defined outputs to do whatever you like. IE: turn on the fan relay.... Turn on purge for the charcoal canister.... Run a drive-by-wire Ect.

If you know what you are doing or hire someone who does you may really enjoy a fancy programmable system.

JL

[kyle242gt]

Well, if you want sequential, or multiple PWM outputs (VVT f'rinstance), or COP on more than 4cyl, or better/more stable software, then MS may not be your best bet.

Otherwise, multiple spark outputs, knock retard, boost control, etc etc etc all in an open-source, friendly environment... hard to beat that. Especially with a cost difference measured in the thousands of dollars. :omg:

FWIW, I agree with what Morley and JL said in that other thread - Motronic 4.3 (?) is awesome. But I have a suspicion that those dudes are just griping because they jumped the gun and missed out on MS goodness. :badboy: (doing my part to turn this thread ugly :rofl: )

[BDKR]

What I'm really trying to get at here is whether or not any of you think MS will ever begin to really challenge the more well know options such as Motec, Haltech, etc..... If no, why? I the Open Source IT world is any indication, I think it will.

[frpe82]

In a few years time (maybe months), the MSII or UltraMegaSquirt + a further developed MSnS-E firmware and Megatune will definetly kick some serious a**!

This is a really potent system and if everybody does their thing and add their thoughts and knowledge into the MS project, it will beat most of the aftermarket EMS out there soon.

The open source thing is great in that aspect...

[Dave562]

Many choices. MoTec is fancy and expensive. Electromotive works well for my toy.

What are you running on the Electromotive? Did you go with the TEC3?

[JohnLane]

TecII is what is in my car. I purchased Electromotive for it back in '99.
Each and every programmable system has made big improvements in the last several years.
MoTec is world class stuff and you will pay for it.
Electromotive is easy to tune and has made big power for me.
Smog tests? As long as you are not having to pass an OBDII test you can easily make most any car without excessive valve overlap pass.
Motronic is a good system that can also be tuned. I would prefer to go the route of laptop programmable rather then tune Motronic.

Is someone wanting to break front drive drivetrain parts? Yum!!

John Lane

[Morley]

In a few years time (maybe months), the MSII or UltraMegaSquirt + a further developed MSnS-E firmware and Megatune will definetly kick some serious a**!

This is a really potent system and if everybody does their thing and add their thoughts and knowledge into the MS project, it will beat most of the aftermarket EMS out there soon.

The open source thing is great in that aspect...

+1

But as it is now, I find at least the software to be even worse to navigate than a Unix kernel.

It's at the moment a niche product, but it will become more and more mainstream. The day most dyno-tuners will touch it, will be a big day. That will also force the established EMS producers to rethink their strategies and lower the prices.

YAY! for MS, and for the record, I didn't say that. ;-)


As for my original statement quoted by BDKR, I don't wholeheartedly agree with myself. The old T-5 engines don't have a ****load of devices the MS can't control. One of those e-throttled, vtakked newer engines is a different story though.

[BDKR]

But as it is now, I find at least the software to be even worse to navigate than a Unix kernel.


LOL! That's because the UI is developed by programmers. More correct, by programmers that haven't yet made the leap that most users aren't programmers.


It's at the moment a niche product, but it will become more and more mainstream. The day most dyno-tuners will touch it, will be a big day. That will also force the established EMS producers to rethink their strategies and lower the prices.


No doubt! I'm positive the cost of those things can go way down and those companies still turn profits. I think Cisco is a perfect example here. The included processing power of a good percentage of their line was/is way out of whack in comparison to their asking prices.

[martyagt4]

If you think the MegaSquirt software is difficult to navigate, you should see the Bosch Motorsport software for 4.3. Some of the most unintuitive and scatter-brained software I've ever used. Fantastic in what you can do with it, but it takes 10 steps to get there, and a few midnight sacrifices :).

[linuxman51]

In a few years time (maybe months), the MSII or UltraMegaSquirt + a further developed MSnS-E firmware and Megatune will definetly kick some serious a**!

This is a really potent system and if everybody does their thing and add their thoughts and knowledge into the MS project, it will beat most of the aftermarket EMS out there soon.

The open source thing is great in that aspect...

Further developed (well debuged) MSnS-e with better documentation for the myriad of functions it already supports would go a very long way.
Megatune isn't bad at all, its just not what some of yall are used to. try to use the software for AEM ems if you think megatune is rough, or hondata for that matter.. talk about a million functions. They dont do you any good if you dont know how to use them.

msII will be nice, i could care less about UMS, the precision offered by msII is on the same level as all the big players (big maps doth not a great system make :-P ), they just need to move the focus.. and thats part of the msII chasm right now, not enough people have made the jump because not enough people with MSI need to. I'll eventually get there, probably with the new engine (getting bigass injectors, gonna need something to rein em in), but no rush here.

[JohnLane]

I'm fond of the idea of a system having the ability to learn on the fly when asked to and having it suggest changes in the map...... I've yet to see this.

JL

[the poi]

I'm fond of the idea of a system having the ability to learn on the fly when asked to and having it suggest changes in the map...... I've yet to see this.

JL
you can do that with MS and vexme right now. theres also an experimental autotune feature in the latest msns-e codes

[blkaplan]

i had poor results with autotune but i know others have had success so i think its just the settings i was using.

[Morley]

I'm fond of the idea of a system having the ability to learn on the fly when asked to and having it suggest changes in the map...... I've yet to see this.

JL

Autronic has Autotune, fiddles with the fuel maps. AFAIK it works pretty well for cruise conditon mapping and coarse tuning.

[kyle242gt]

you can do that with MS and vexme right now. theres also an experimental autotune feature in the latest msns-e codes
Vexme = :)
Autotune = :grrr:

[benflynn]

ms is the sh1t.if there was a ms stock i would buy as much as i could. ms can only get better, can only gain market share...it has features that i have yet had time to set up

[82DMC-12]

i'm a beginner in the MS world but i'll say it was not that hard to assemble or get the car running. i have 60-2 wheel and 780cc injectors and it runs like a champ! both are said to be harder to get working on MS. i've used haltech and other EMS's and have to say MS is running up FAST.

[volvogeek]

Anyway, Morleys comment sounds like the same talk the Pro MS guys used to have for the various open source tools and programs floating about. Now those hobbyist operating systems and databases are disruptive technologies that have dramatically altered the business model in the IT world.

I got a feeling that MS will do the same thing in the world of EMS.
Though I know what he meant, using one acronym for two different products in the same though process here is a bit confusing. 'Pro MS guys' meaning MicroSoft, and 'MS...EMS' for MegaSquirt.

That said, I think he's right on the money. People like Kenny making plug n play harnesses for MegaSquirt as well as the boxes themselves, others updating the software and hardware...the correlations between Microsoft (OEM Engine Managment) vs Linux (DIY Engine Management) are many. It's only a matter of time before the MegaSquirt featureset has everything that a DIY tuner would ever want or need. However, like Linux, the UI has got some growing up to do. It's hard to get a good base tune without a lot of fiddling or grabbing one from a friend. A laptop is absolutely essential - it's almost like needing another computer to get your computer working. Actually, that's exactly what it is...and you really shouldn't need that to get your car simply WORKING.

According to this (http://www.grmotorsports.com/news/102005/megacapable-beating-the-man-with-diy-fuel-injection-from-megasquirt.php) GRM article, MegaSquirt development started around 1993 ("12 years ago", from Oct '05). Which, coincidentally, was about the same time Linus Torvalds decided to write Linux. However, Linux has hundreds of thousands of developers working on different parts of Linux, commercial enterprises (Redhat) paying people to do the same, and a LARGE user base. The DIY Engine Management development team and user base are quite a bit smaller. So...it's taken a bit longer for MegaSquirt to get up to speed, but where it seems to be headed looks to be a good direction.

I for one, am excited to see where it takes us.

[BDKR]

Though I know what he meant, using one acronym for two different products in the same though process here is a bit confusing. 'Pro MS guys' meaning MicroSoft, and 'MS...EMS' for MegaSquirt.


Sorry about the confusion.


That said, I think he's right on the money. People like Kenny making plug n play harnesses for MegaSquirt as well as the boxes themselves, others updating the software and hardware...the correlations between Microsoft (OEM Engine Managment) vs Linux (DIY Engine Management) are many. It's only a matter of time before the MegaSquirt featureset has everything that a DIY tuner would ever want or need. However, like Linux, the UI has got some growing up to do. It's hard to get a good base tune without a lot of fiddling or grabbing one from a friend. A laptop is absolutely essential - it's almost like needing another computer to get your computer working. Actually, that's exactly what it is...and you really shouldn't need that to get your car simply WORKING.

According to this (http://www.grmotorsports.com/news/102005/megacapable-beating-the-man-with-diy-fuel-injection-from-megasquirt.php) GRM article, MegaSquirt development started around 1993 ("12 years ago", from Oct '05). Which, coincidentally, was about the same time Linus Torvalds decided to write Linux. However, Linux has hundreds of thousands of developers working on different parts of Linux, commercial enterprises (Redhat) paying people to do the same, and a LARGE user base. The DIY Engine Management development team and user base are quite a bit smaller. So...it's taken a bit longer for MegaSquirt to get up to speed, but where it seems to be headed looks to be a good direction.

I for one, am excited to see where it takes us.

[Rant on]
For those of you that are more familiar with the whole Open Source Software thing, I'll give another example that could compare to MS and it's march into greater acceptance. When I was working for a small startup in in the 3rd world, money was allways an issue. One of the things we needed in a big way was a database. My boss who knew nothing about OSS at the time, wanted to use Oracle or MSSQL. Well, one was $48K per processor and the other was around $25K. That meant we were looking at spending at least $100K in database software alone! Worse yet, our investors weren't about to kick down that kind of cash. Wer were screwed!

Enter MySQL. When I explained to my boss that it provided (at the time) 80% of what the others provided, ran on a Unix like OS, and was free, he flipped out with suprise. After that, I built the systems and we were in business.

Well, as it turns out, this kind of thing is a common occurrence down there ane more and more up here as well. With software that's free, all these companies are paying for is hardware, which is a lot cheaper anyways.

So do we see how this compares? I'm sure that it must allready be happening now. Someone stumbles across someone that says, "Try MS. It's free!" Then the mook with the question mark over his head starts thinking about how he now has a bunch of extra dosh for that extra crank, or block, or turbo, or whatever, thanks to the low cost of entry provided by MS.

And then there is the inevitable big time success of teams using MS that will really push it into the limelight.

OK. [Rant off] :-P

[Matt Dupuis]

MS is getting a bad rap because of a few reasons:

MS's forum is loaded with "I'm having troubles, help me" or "WTF how do I do this" or "bug found in code 026x" or whatever. Gives people the impression that it's full of bugs or really tough to use.

MS's forum is loaded with people who know how to do a few things but don't know anything REALLY well. The main code, for example, works... but is incomplete in my opinion. To that end, there are too many people doing too many things to it at the same time, and it's getting fragmented. You've really got to visit the forum every day to know what's going on.

MS doesn't cost alot, so many people automatically think it's garbage. It's not - it's a regular EMS with all the profit stripped away, and without professional input. If you can deal with that, it's okay, but some people think that a name brand EMS won't leave you stranded, or will make more power, or whatever.

MS doesn't cost alot, so many people slap them on their cars because "what the hell?". They don't have to have alot of money invested in the EMS or the install, so they don't reserve a large enough budget for tuning. Personally, I installed it to get away from K-jet, and I think it's a fine trade. I'd never 'squirt an 850, though.

MS was designed to be simple, and people are making it more complicated than it needs to be. As Kenny mentioned, the docs were written by people who have trouble communicating thru print. They're fantastic instructions by some internet standards (Techedge's instructions, for example), but compared to someone trained in communications, they're barely useful.

---------------------

MSII is opening the door to some modules that will bring UMS capability to multiple boxes. UMS will (might?) be MSII plus the GPIO plus the router, all in one container. When all three modules are brought together, anything will be possible. Two complete banks of sequential injection and a channel for COP ignition, plus infinite inputs & outputs, all programmable for whatever condition is desired. Provided the base programming is properly done, the possibilities are endless.

---------------------

Changes I'd like to see in MSII? Well, I think multiple maps could be implemented for any field. By that I mean, for example, a complete 12x12 map for "cold" temps and a complete 12x12 map for "hot" temps, and having MS interpolate between them dependant on the temp targets assigned to each. That would allow the tuner to develop an ideal tune for hot and for cold, without the narrow multiplication factors we're forced to deal with now. Same could be said for ignition, and the dependant variable could be either IAT or CLT, depending on what the tuner wants. However, this all means that more sophisticated means of tuning will be required, and this takes it back out of the hands of the shade tree mechanics and grease monkeys.

Also some professional assistance in logic controls would be GREATLY appreciated - both for boost control and for idle control valves. It's not enough to tell it to search for the proper value, because it's always chasing it's tail. Both boost and idle can be nailed down, but vary too far away from the conditions the system was tuned in and you're lucky to see favourable results.

---------------------

My car ran GREAT on MSI, with a single 8x8 table for fuel and no ignition control. With every addition to the code, my car has gotten further and further from leaving me satisfied, because it's getting harder to spend enough time getting everything right. I'm sure if I had professional assistance, with a strong knowledge of the background and limitation to the system, it would be far closer to OEM quality, but for now I'm just constantly bothered by every little thing, and am more and more amazed at how good my wife's car runs.

---------------------

Will Megasquirt ever challenge the professional systems? Well, there's no reason it can't, except that it's mainly in the hands of the users right now. If the user wants more sophistication, due to the open source nature of the code, it's up to them to design something better. MSnS-E was NOT a sanctioned code evolution by Bruce and Al - Phil and James developed it because they wanted something better, and it caught on. MSII will be the same way, and if the users want to fully exploit the available memory and power the system has, it'll happen. If it happens, all the other systems still have two things that MS does not have - a professional team of developers, and a focused development plan. Because of that, I think that it'll be incredibly lucky to have MS anywhere NEAR the quality of the expensive systems.

If y'all have actually read this whole post, thanks for sticking with me.

[BDKR]

If y'all have actually read this whole post, thanks for sticking with me.


Believe it or not, I did read it. And I'm glad I did too.

Anyway, I'm going to sit on my butt, play guitar and watch TV for a short spell before commenting.

[linuxman51]

User friendliness seems to be something thats getting tossed around with respect to megatune.. A complex program is rarely ever "user friendly". Look at microsoft office for instance, its for windows and from MS, it must be stupid easy to use... (and it is, for basic stuff).. So if its so user friendly why do people have to take classes to use it?


Clearly then, it must not be user friendly. And so it is with engine management systems.
The easiest (well, we wont say easy anymore, thats misleading.. lets use "Intuitive" instead) interface i've encountered was for a honda hack called turbo edit. it was easy because it had two maps and about 10 buttons. not a whole lot there. And you didnt really get a whole lot in return, as most of the honda hacks choose to ignore the air temp sensor (go look it up, I was shocked to see that), including the previous versions of hondata (the new s300 does).

AEM, which is touted in the tunerz mags as the one true path to riteousness, has nothing near an intuitive interface. a simple click of the mouse to tune the fuel map gets you a window with a 3d map, a 2d numerical map, status bits off to the left, and a whole slew of options and tweaks. I spent more time trying to figure out the basics than i've ever had to spend figuring out how to do something in megatune.

I suspect haltech and the rest are similar in their methodology as well, there just isnt a "easy" way to present that kind of information. If all it took was a 5 minute crash course to tune any engine management system, you'd have a whole lot more "professional tuners" floating around (thats just to use the systems to their potential, we're not even talking tuning ability).

Basically how it boils down: if you can't get your car started in about 20 minutes (first time here), then you've more than likely got a physical problem. It took me start to running loudly, about 30 minutes to get a stock 5.0 cranked up last night, the tps wasn't working correctly and had ms in flood clear mode, and to further compound problems, the coolant temp sensor wasnt working either, so I had to map around those two things. once cranked, the car ran pretty close to the best its ever run, with a fuel and timing map for a 5.7L chevy (which is, or used to be the default map that comes with ms firmware).

that same map worked fine the first time i cranked up my 90', car cranked up idled great and went through warmup before the distributor ****ted out on me (it was richer than ****, but it ran fine).

Whats the relevance? You generally have to do the same thing with the other big names as well, so for the sake of comparision, we can drop that from the list of grievances.

Fyi, in most cases a trigger angle of around 55 degrees will crank almost every ms&s'd car.