home register FAQ memberlist calendar

Go Back   Turbobricks Forums > Mechanical > performance & modifications

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-30-2017, 03:09 PM   #51
Lord_Athlon
Just damn
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Real world
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BDKR View Post
I write code too but I'm kind of curious what you mean by "the open source attitude".
The open source evangelists, who think anything closed source is evil and should be purged from the earth.

That said, back in the day, there were tons of counterfeit and ripoff megasquirt solutions, that ranged from an actual improvement, to downright garbage.
__________________
84 242 turbo msII
My build https://forums.tbforums.com/showthread.php?t=8675309
Lord_Athlon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2017, 03:59 PM   #52
BDKR
Section 9
 
BDKR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Horizons Cave
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxman51 View Post
TL;DR: they only dispatch C&Ds when folks try to rip their stuff off (normally the software, as they have no exclusivity claim on the hardware they're using lol)
Makes perfect sense as far as I'm concerned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord_Athlon View Post
The open source evangelists, who think anything closed source is evil and should be purged from the earth.
I'm down with Open Source but closed source has it's place.

In some places however (operating systems, database servers, languages, browsers), it's the best thing to ever happen.

But a purge? That's a bit much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord_Athlon View Post
That said, back in the day, there were tons of counterfeit and ripoff megasquirt solutions, that ranged from an actual improvement, to downright garbage.
Sounds like there still are.
__________________
Quote:
For all you Dijkstra fanboys:

Knuth also cites a letter sent to him by Dijkstra, in which the latter adds some nuance to this earlier statements: "Please don't fall into the trap of believing that I am terribly dogmatical about [the go to statement]. I have the uncomfortable feeling that others are making a religion out of it, as if the conceptual problems of programming could be solved by a single trick, by a simple form of coding discipline!"
BDKR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2017, 05:03 PM   #53
CoconutColin
Board Member
 
CoconutColin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Default

After seeing whats going on with the RusEfi. I think I am going to try and print the gebers at:

http://dirtypcbs.com/store/pcbs

and try and find all the electrical components from mouser or something. But I need the gerbers and I need the BOMS!
__________________
1986 245 - Daily Driver
1982 245 - 302 CI V8 Air Ride Lowder
1958 PV444 - Student Project
1991 Volvo 244 - 18'' RIP
1981 Volvo 244- 18'' RIP
1982 Volvo 244 - First car. Benz lights, various bumpers, spoilers, porche rivera blue. RIP
CoconutColin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2017, 05:04 PM   #54
Lord_Athlon
Just damn
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Real world
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BDKR View Post
Makes perfect sense as far as I'm concerned.



I'm down with Open Source but closed source has it's place.

In some places however (operating systems, database servers, languages, browsers), it's the best thing to ever happen.

But a purge? That's a bit much.



Sounds like there still are.
I <3 open source.
Lord_Athlon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2017, 08:36 PM   #55
Dirty Rick
Board Member
 
Dirty Rick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Cornholio, OR
Default

I don't think there is anything stopping you from "improving the hardware".

Until you try to sell it......

Im pretty dang sure you can do anything you want with your own stuff.

The minute you go to market with it you are berkleying wrong. As it should be.
Dirty Rick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2017, 09:21 PM   #56
andrey
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Rick View Post
I don't think there is anything stopping you from "improving the hardware".

Until you try to sell it...
I was told by people I trust this is not how it works. I have not got any communication from B&G personally and I'd rather not share more details - just say that words "patent infringement" were there. Which brings us to

http://www.google.com/patents/US7313474
http://www.google.com/patents/US7369933
http://www.google.com/patents/US7421329


"The present invention provides an engine controller that is: more cost effective because of its low parts count due to integrated technology; simpler to install because of its generic design and flexible software, allowing it to be used with all models and makes of engines from motorcycles to trucks, even or odd number of cylinders, and regardless of the experience of the end user. The design is also more reliable because of several software algorithms that will be described."

I am definitely not qualified to understand this, but there is an opinion that this is a very vague troll patent.
andrey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-2017, 09:51 PM   #57
linuxman51
BRANDSCHUTZVORSCHRIFTEN!
 
linuxman51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: mont, AL
Default

there are opinions on a number of things. if you read all the way, there are a number of other prior arts referenced in the patent(s).

suffice to say, they do not want a bunch of little "sort of different" clones running around with their software on it causing even more problems for the community at large than it brings upon itself by the very nature of what it is. It doesn't really matter what the opinions about it are, without any patent at all, they have no control whatsoever on their stuff... Hate it if you don't like it. the rules are pretty lax, you just don't get to rip it off for free.
__________________
"They bum rushed them in their own crib, they drank all their beer, they partied with their ladies and they left with the trophy"

Now with in-house Dyno tuning!

Megasquirt Tuning!
Plug and play LH 2.4 Megasquirt, now with stealth mode!
linuxman51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2017, 02:01 AM   #58
kb1gtt
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Default

Hello. This is my first post on this forum, and I'll probably disappear shortly. However I wanted to comment as it will likely answer the stuff above.

The fellow who was looking for gerbers, and BOM, for Frankenso look here.
https://sourceforge.net/p/rusefi/cod...enso_rev00.40/

Please note that R0.5 is still in development, and R0.4 is currently the most used version. Development has been slowing as the changes from R0.4 to R0.5 are fairly minor. Also please note that the assembled boards have been much more successful projects. We have had very few people assemble there own boards successfully. Neither of the primary developers at rusEFI have hand built these boards. If you hand assemble please document the effort and update the wiki. We would be happy to see this better documented, but we do not have the pictures, and such to do it ourselves.

I wanted to chime in as I have been personally threatened by Bruce. I do not participate in any kind of clone, either software or hardware. I know others have had similar issues to what I had. In my case, the threats were not C+D, but it was vague claims of patent infringement, even though I do not MFG hardware. It sounded like a C+D was coming, so I stopped e-mailing and the problem seems to have gone away. That was many years ago, and I do not have negative feelings over it. I understand the desire to protect the product. I see Bruce's reactions as normal, and expected for a closed project.

I'm one of the primary developers at rusEFI. I'm a big fan of open source, and do not have any biffs with people who try to make money with closed projects. I have learned allot from open source projects which allows me to learn low level details, and I want to give back to the community which has given me so much. I'm all for people getting stuff out there, and MS has gotten functional systems in the hands of many people, which is great. However just like a mac isn't for everyone, a closed systems is also not for everyone.

In my case I want to do some science experiments, and if these crazy crack pot ideas work, they could have some very important impacts. I don't want the risks of entanglements caused by the MS licencing. So I look for an open system, which will not have those issues.

This thread was about Speeduino, which is also a great effort, and I'm glad to see he's doing some cool stuff. I have offered him advice on how to make things more robust. I hope he does well with his efforts. However I generally feel that for low cost hobby ECU's, that rusEFI has hit the major features that people are looking for in hobby projects.

Also note the rusEFI hardware design intent is posted here, feel free to comment if these specs are missing something. Also if you know how to verify if the intent was upheld, feel free to let me know. I'd really like to see if I was successful in hitting these goals.
http://rusefi.com/wiki/index.php?title=Manual:Hardware

Also the history of the board / dirty laundry is here. Feel free to tell me it sucks, and give me specifics. I once got a complaint that the original regulator would not up hold load dumps per ISO blah blah blah. So I made a bunch of changes and I believe it now upholds that ISO specification.
https://sourceforge.net/p/rusefi/cod...own_issues.txt

Can anyone tell me when MS changed the IAT resistor from 2.2k to 2.7k? Also can you tell me why it changed? I feel it's important to post this kind of history such that existing hardware can be corrected and verified. This is why I post the known_issues.txt log. It lets people know what is changing, and they can verify if these changes happened to their boards.

I know that davebmw once had some issues with MS. He was not able to post that in MS forums, so he posted his suggestions here.
http://forum.diyefi.org/viewtopic.ph...t=285&start=12

Any how that's enough for a first post. Keep doing cool things.
kb1gtt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2017, 03:20 PM   #59
CoconutColin
Board Member
 
CoconutColin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kb1gtt View Post
Hello. This is my first post on this forum, and I'll probably disappear shortly. However I wanted to comment as it will likely answer the stuff above.

The fellow who was looking for gerbers, and BOM, for Frankenso look here.
https://sourceforge.net/p/rusefi/cod...enso_rev00.40/

Please note that R0.5 is still in development, and R0.4 is currently the most used version. Development has been slowing as the changes from R0.4 to R0.5 are fairly minor. Also please note that the assembled boards have been much more successful projects. We have had very few people assemble there own boards successfully. Neither of the primary developers at rusEFI have hand built these boards. If you hand assemble please document the effort and update the wiki. We would be happy to see this better documented, but we do not have the pictures, and such to do it ourselves.

I wanted to chime in as I have been personally threatened by Bruce. I do not participate in any kind of clone, either software or hardware. I know others have had similar issues to what I had. In my case, the threats were not C+D, but it was vague claims of patent infringement, even though I do not MFG hardware. It sounded like a C+D was coming, so I stopped e-mailing and the problem seems to have gone away. That was many years ago, and I do not have negative feelings over it. I understand the desire to protect the product. I see Bruce's reactions as normal, and expected for a closed project.

I'm one of the primary developers at rusEFI. I'm a big fan of open source, and do not have any biffs with people who try to make money with closed projects. I have learned allot from open source projects which allows me to learn low level details, and I want to give back to the community which has given me so much. I'm all for people getting stuff out there, and MS has gotten functional systems in the hands of many people, which is great. However just like a mac isn't for everyone, a closed systems is also not for everyone.

In my case I want to do some science experiments, and if these crazy crack pot ideas work, they could have some very important impacts. I don't want the risks of entanglements caused by the MS licencing. So I look for an open system, which will not have those issues.

This thread was about Speeduino, which is also a great effort, and I'm glad to see he's doing some cool stuff. I have offered him advice on how to make things more robust. I hope he does well with his efforts. However I generally feel that for low cost hobby ECU's, that rusEFI has hit the major features that people are looking for in hobby projects.

Also note the rusEFI hardware design intent is posted here, feel free to comment if these specs are missing something. Also if you know how to verify if the intent was upheld, feel free to let me know. I'd really like to see if I was successful in hitting these goals.
http://rusefi.com/wiki/index.php?title=Manual:Hardware

Also the history of the board / dirty laundry is here. Feel free to tell me it sucks, and give me specifics. I once got a complaint that the original regulator would not up hold load dumps per ISO blah blah blah. So I made a bunch of changes and I believe it now upholds that ISO specification.
https://sourceforge.net/p/rusefi/cod...own_issues.txt

Can anyone tell me when MS changed the IAT resistor from 2.2k to 2.7k? Also can you tell me why it changed? I feel it's important to post this kind of history such that existing hardware can be corrected and verified. This is why I post the known_issues.txt log. It lets people know what is changing, and they can verify if these changes happened to their boards.

I know that davebmw once had some issues with MS. He was not able to post that in MS forums, so he posted his suggestions here.
http://forum.diyefi.org/viewtopic.ph...t=285&start=12

Any how that's enough for a first post. Keep doing cool things.
This is cool, after reading everything about ruseefi. I think I want to put together a speeduino. and then when i run into limitations then upgrade to a rusefi. The idea is to show my students about electronics and engines. In a sort of scientific way. I first need to look and compare the costs and difficultt of putting the boards together.

Thanks for the BOM and the Gerbers for the frankenso. I looked at it. I wouldnt be able to put it together.

I think someone should go to every forum on the web come up with a list of group buys or start a kickstarter and have some chinese company print and assemble these complex boards for a really low price.

Does that exist? I havent been able to find a RusEfi for less than 400 dollars which is more than the ms....

I may be wrong or didnt look hard enough.

Let me know if there is better assembled frankedenso boards out there
CoconutColin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2017, 11:07 PM   #60
bobxyz
Board Member
 
bobxyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CoconutColin View Post
The idea is to show my students about electronics and engines. In a sort of scientific way.
Tell me more about your students and the available teaching time. MS is a well proven and refined product, especially for the most basic "squirt and spark" setups. There's a huge amount of teaching opportunities here. For instance, demonstrate and log the results of varying any of the different terms in the Fueling Equation - http://www.megamanual.com/v22manual/mfuel.htm#equation

I'm worried that while speeduino (fka kartduino) is built off of the more familiar Arduino environment, that the actual ECU development is a few years behind what MS-1 offers.

[Do speeduino or rusefi have standard logging capabilities? MS and FreeEMS certainly do. This would be essential for teaching in a classroom.]

If you'd like to start with a simple setup, but keep the options open for future features, start with an assemble-it-yourself MS II 3.0 PCB, but a cheaper MS 1 CPU chip. Use your existing distributor, coil, and ignition module. You can run either the B&G firmware or the MSextra1 firmware and learn all the basics. In the future, you can upgrade to a MS 2 CPU board to get more features.

[For the rusefi folks - it's great that you're using a lightweight RTOS, especially for open source development with vastly different talent levels. But I gotta say that one of my pet peeves is schematics that use flying/hidden connections -- please take the time to draw every wire, and even list the connecting pages -- everyone, other than the original designer, will thank you for your efforts.]
__________________
'85 245glt aw71 k-jet -> lh2.4 -> ms
bobxyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2017, 11:18 PM   #61
andrey
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Default

Teaching students you say, looking at the logs you say... Well, rusEfi shows the formulas online via it's "rusefi console" tuning tool. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsKoD4tMfOU

As for logging, SD card on the board is there obviously to write the logs. Since rusEfi is compatible with with TunerStudio, you can also write logs with tunerstudio. Or you can write logs with rusEfi console - so three options to write the same .msl/.csv log file.

update: better quality video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKbtZKQFg4I


Last edited by andrey; 02-04-2017 at 09:04 AM..
andrey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2017, 11:49 PM   #62
kb1gtt
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Default

I agree that my schematics are not easiest to read. I generally design semi backwards from what most people are looking for. You may notice my schematics have lots of similarities with the layout. This is because I generally layout the chips, paying very close attention to the current loops, and how current flows on the PCB. I start paying attention to this with the schematic layout.

As well in a 4 layer board design you generally have GND and power as your internal planes, then you punch via's through to these planes at every GND and every +V point. So I do the same in the schematic. Then I layout the wires with minimal antennas, crossed over wires and minimal current loops.

I agree this works well for me, but is not as clear to most of the world. I hope I make it easier than starting a project from scratch, but at the same time I agree it could be better. I was happier with the general arrangement in the below link, but am still not happy with it.

https://sourceforge.net/p/daecu/code...pdf?format=raw

I really want something that includes the system, not just the PCB parts of the schematic. However I do not know of any good system schematic tools.

One of my biff's with tags, is that I don't have a list which tells me where all the other tags are located. I have to do a crtl-F to find them. I have those zone markers on the border, I would really like to get a list of tags which are noted with page and zone. But I have never seen that in any software.

I wish I knew a way to make the schematics more easy to understand. On a good note, a second schematic could be made such that we have an design schematic and a diagnostic schematic. Both could give you the netlist and links to the locations on the PCB. AKA if you click a pin on the schematic, it high-lights the pin in the PCB window.

I'd like to find better solutions. Are there any suggestions on how it could be made better? Keep in mind that a board with 4 layers can become a big pile of spaghetti when drawn on a 2D medium. Spaghetti schematics are not easy to follow either.
kb1gtt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 12:12 AM   #63
bobxyz
Board Member
 
bobxyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Default

Sorry, I didn't mean to derail the Volvo speeduino thread. kb1gtt - let me setup an account at rusefi and we can continue the schematic vs. layout vs. open source talent level discussion there.
bobxyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 12:07 PM   #64
kb1gtt
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Default

I'll look for you over there. I agree, this thread has gotten off topic. I don't know much about speeduino. I did a review some time ago and relayed my comments and suggestions to them about how I thought they could make it more robust. As well I pointed them to my list of suggested hardware design requirements, like ambient temperature, load dumps, survivable voltage surging, PCB layout, etc. Because I don't have much more to offer in terms of Speeduino, I'll stop commenting in this thread. Here's hoping it goes well for you.
kb1gtt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2017, 11:41 AM   #65
RickyTerzis
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Default

Hi...I think these projects seem to loose momentum after they get a few running and realise the flaws require a complete rewrite and or more expensive hardware to fix said flaws.Far too many buy a MicroSquirt and them try to make it do the things a MS2 can do and have a less than stellar experience.

assembly circuit

Last edited by RickyTerzis; 07-07-2017 at 06:03 PM..
RickyTerzis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2017, 05:36 PM   #66
gross polluter
They see me trollin'
 
gross polluter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Cold Lake, AB
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickyTerzis View Post
Far too many buy a MicroSquirt and them try to make it do the things a MS2 can do and have a less than stellar experience.
Except that Microsquirt (V3) literally is MS2. You're basically talking about the lack of aptitude of the end user, not the hardware itself. The majority of MS users are pretty much clueless, which leads to a lot of people not admitting their own shortcomings when they get in over their head and pass it off as a hardware issue. That seems to be what you're describing here.
__________________
'88 245 - 2JZGTE VVTi | MS3X ECU, MS2 TCU | GT3582R-HTA | Staged simultaneous dual fuel | 590whp 580ftlbs

1968 Furd Rustang fastberk | 2JZGTE VVTi | MS3X ECU | PT6776S | 4L80e Microsquirt TCU Sloppy Transbrake | 3.73 8.8" rear end

1981 Piper Cherokee Archer II | All stock
gross polluter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2017, 08:56 PM   #67
Big_White
Newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Default

interested in speeduino...

what a aditional sensors i will need to assemble and run it on my 940 B230 turbo?
Big_White is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2017, 10:10 AM   #68
CAPT_BLOTTO
#Crush It
 
CAPT_BLOTTO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Kansas City
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_White View Post
interested in speeduino...

what a aditional sensors i will need to assemble and run it on my 940 B230 turbo?
Did you read?
__________________
Hello My Glorious!

Junkyard Parts request thread!
Mesquite FB page! Constant updates!

Da Yellow Sold | $800 245 | 77 244
CAPT_BLOTTO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2018, 07:08 AM   #69
FreeEMSFred
Board Member
 
FreeEMSFred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kiwiland
Default

A bit late to the party here! And I see it's gotten out of hand and noise control has been called. That's often how such things go. Que sera sera :-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Rick View Post
Is Free EMS the Russians? Haven't heard from them in a while...

EDit - Nope not the russian = rusEfi

Free EMS seems to be active, but stalled awaiting development of more permanent hardware layout?
No new boards have been made in 1.5 years. (jaguar 0.7?) (waiting on hardware changes?)
Difficult to tell what is going on, the forum seems like a diary/scratch pad for Fred.
No, definitely not Russian, a quality design Originally Kiwi in the UK, but gradually a global international project. 12 countries, 42 engines. Drive by wire. Paddle shift. etc etc. Depending on skill, hardware, and code variant.

Jaguar 0.7-alpha is solid, however it's a pain to assemble and install and use, and can be fragile depending on how you put it together.

Prior Jaguar releases had various extra flaws, but 0.7-alpha is pretty solid. The only update from that to a potential new version would be revised MAP/AAP sensor footprints due to obsolescence of the package in use on the 0.7-alpha. However Andy only sells blank boards now, so you need reasonable skills to put one together including the SMD parts. I need to step up in this space. Andy has another product "basic ECU v2" that can run an engine, but AFAIK he's not run one with it yet, so consider it still awaiting testing.

There was a decent Russian project on the forum by the name of SECU-3 however they eventually went their own way hosting wise. I originally gave them a forum section because they were using a single thread on some other site and it was unmanageable for Alexey (who is a good honest dude with skill and morals).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Rick View Post
FreeEMS has 40 documented installs, the latest was posted Sept 16.

I'd buy one and give it a twirl but with the last board release 1.5 years ago, I'm in wait and see mode.

I'm actually looking forward to trying one as that will force me to learn a new skillset compiling code.
Apologies for what appears Stagnant. You can blame my Volvos for sucking up all of my time Semi serious excuse. Also been through a few jobs and family issues and a land purchase and so forth. Kids on the horizon now, too. I have a few regrets with the project and they can be summed up by:
  • Tried to put community first and encourage a team effort
  • Didn't do all aspects of project myself in the first place

Though a couple of people in here would probably bitterly argue that I did the opposite of that. You can't help the blind to see :-)

The net effect was I poured many many thousands of hours into helping others to do things I could have done quicker and better myself, and less got done. Oh well, live and learn.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mck1117 View Post
rusEfi is where it's at now.
I don't think so!

Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxman51 View Post
So crying about breaking IP law generally just means that you're a hack who can't or won't code up your own junk.
Quoted for truth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxman51 View Post
easy or not, with *any* kinda management system there's usually a steep up front learning curve.
Quoted for truth, also. This reeks of experience and hands-on knowledge

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord_Athlon View Post
The open source evangelists, who think anything closed source is evil and should be purged from the earth.
Not everything, just anything involving trust. As someone else said, operating systems, browsers, and, when you have 5k in your engine build, ECUs (after careful review of code, bench testing, and someone else with a similar setup trying it first).

MegaSquirt (of any variety) is what it is. A product with a well known set of flaws with well known work arounds that some people have memorised and mastered. 11 years ago when I first ran an engine with MS2 on the very first sequential code I had a flawless experience - not because the product was - rather because I knew all the gotchas before I began. I also built my MS2 from local components for about 200nzd and sold it a 4 or 5 years later for double that. Can't complain. Not looking back, either. I've personally seen FreeEMS running engines in 6 out of the 12 countries it's run them in. Nothing like watching your work come to life and meeting the people that make it happen. Especially when it's a truly original work!

Speaking of which, the topic of this thread is about Speeduino. One of the things I'd criticise about Speeduino is that it uses the M$ style algorithms, and they're flawed. ReqFuel? Oh come on!

And while critiquing work, if you ever looked at the MS2/3 code, you'd be forgiven for crying. It's not open source, but the source is readable, and that's valuable in terms of QC and many-eyes review. It failed all of my tests. My own code fails *some* of my tests, but passes many others. The failure modes of MS firmware are scary in the context of that 5k engine. When you have been coding since before your voice dropped and your balls grew hair, have a formal tertiary education in the topic, and have worked across several continents in various types of software development from one end of the spectrum to the other, you're well qualified to make judgment calls like that. When my forged 16 valve redblock turbo wakes my 740 GLE up, rest assured, only one code base will be running it: FreeEMS. 'nough said.
FreeEMSFred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2018, 11:14 AM   #70
Dirty Rick
Board Member
 
Dirty Rick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Cornholio, OR
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gross polluter View Post
Except that Microsquirt (V3) literally is MS2.
Off topic but I must respond.

A MicroSquirt is literally NOT an MS2, it uses MS2 technology.
A MicroSquirt doesn't use the same firmware as a MS2, it uses a subset of the MS2 code ported over to a smaller processor.
A MicroSquirt does not have the available IO ports that a MS2 has.

I agree with the rest.
MicroSquirts are purchased because they are a cheap preassembled unit.
Folks who can't assemble their own ECU (MS2 v3.0) should not be enabled by a preassembled super basic system that is not expandable.
Just because you can run an LS motor on one, doesn't mean you should.
The MicroSquirt should have been marketed as a MS1.5 or even a 1.9 because it is literally not an MS2, yet it is marketed along side an MS2 this confuses folks. Thus they think it will do everything a MS2 does.
Dirty Rick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2018, 12:35 PM   #71
Dirty Rick
Board Member
 
Dirty Rick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Cornholio, OR
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeEMSFred View Post
MegaSquirt (of any variety) is what it is. A product with a well known set of flaws with well known work arounds that some people have memorised and mastered. 11 years ago when I first ran an engine with MS2 on the very first sequential code I had a flawless experience - not because the product was - rather because I knew all the gotchas before I began. I also built my MS2 from local components for about 200nzd and sold it a 4 or 5 years later for double that. Can't complain.

And while critiquing work, if you ever looked at the MS2/3 code, you'd be forgiven for crying.
I have tried to not complain about MS short comings.
I am not a coder so I can't speak to that end of the deal. I'm a hardware guy.
The engineers who designed the MS boards have made some huge blunders.

They have tried to embrace everything with one product.
They have expended huge amounts of resources to support stuff that probably should not be supported. In doing that they have not improved the product but cluttered it up.
Continuing to advocate/support legacy systems is doing new users a dis-service.
Incorporating/embracing third party systems that add complexity when simple native hardware solutions exist especially when functionality is compromised is not a win.

Their biggest blunder was the MS3, making it plug into a MS2 main board was a huge fail.
Attempting to retain legacy compatibility hurt it bad, a clean slate was certainly called for.
They should have built a backplane for the basics that every system uses including an interconnect for 2 to 4 modules (ign, inj, and add ons), with separate harnesses for injection, ignition, sensors, & addons.

I think that MS2 firmware should have been made modular instead of rolling it all into one and wasting a lot of memory space on the processor. They have painted themselves into a corner and can no longer add to the MS2 without removing something to make space.

Thanks Fred, I am encouraged to try your stuff.
Dirty Rick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2018, 01:09 PM   #72
Broke4speed
Board Member
 
Broke4speed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Marionville, Ontario, Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Rick View Post
I think that MS2 firmware should have been made modular instead of rolling it all into one and wasting a lot of memory space on the processor. They have painted themselves into a corner and can no longer add to the MS2 without removing something to make space.
MS2 development ended a while ago, so I don't really think that's an issue.

I'd like to try FreeEMS, but ultimately I'm not a coder/hardcore DIYer, so not being able to purchase a complete product kinda kills it for me :(. I've run just about every other system out there over the years, and am intrigued by the open-source offerings. EFI is an addiction for me, lol.

Same goes for Speeduino and RusEFI.
__________________
1984 B6304S/AW30-40 w/Poi-Shift.
Broke4speed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2018, 01:36 PM   #73
tryingbe
Boosting along.
 
tryingbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Mesa, AZ
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Rick View Post

MS2 is still under development some MS3 features are even being folded into the MS2 code
I know this is replying an old thread, but

Consider the latest official MS2 3.4.2 release is dated Jul 10, 2015
http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewto...4270bc21ffbc16


And the 3.4.3 beta 3 on May 3, 2017...
http://www.msextra.com/downloads/dev.../3-4-3/beta-3/

And if you would read the all the beta release notes
http://www.msextra.com/downloads/dev/ms2extra/


I expect no more MS2 developments and only bug fixes.
__________________
85 GLH 367whp
00 Insight mpg > yours.

Last edited by tryingbe; 02-08-2018 at 01:43 PM..
tryingbe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2018, 01:40 PM   #74
cosbySweater
Board Member
 
cosbySweater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Monterey/Falun
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Rick View Post
Off topic but I must respond.

A MicroSquirt is literally NOT an MS2, it uses MS2 technology.
A MicroSquirt doesn't use the same firmware as a MS2, it uses a subset of the MS2 code ported over to a smaller processor.
A MicroSquirt does not have the available IO ports that a MS2 has.

I agree with the rest.
MicroSquirts are purchased because they are a cheap preassembled unit.
Folks who can't assemble their own ECU (MS2 v3.0) should not be enabled by a preassembled super basic system that is not expandable.
Just because you can run an LS motor on one, doesn't mean you should.
The MicroSquirt should have been marketed as a MS1.5 or even a 1.9 because it is literally not an MS2, yet it is marketed along side an MS2 this confuses folks. Thus they think it will do everything a MS2 does.
I have 2 turbo ls car one with microsquirt and one with ms3x. I think from a beginner standpoint (like myself) the microsquirt is very fun to mess with and learn with, also its easy to use.
__________________
1979 Volvo 244DL 6.0/4l80e,8.8,Ms3x goldbox ecu and Mircrosquirt tcu, s366 clone, 11.4@123mph 9psi
2005 Honda Civic Hybrid, 5 Speed
1991 Volvo 245, so stock it hurts, and I like it that way
1982 Ford Fairmont Futura, 4.8/th400, 8.8, mircrosquirt, 7875 turbo, 228/230 cam, Project Cheap Thrills

Quote:
Originally Posted by bricktop420 View Post
Thank you very much everybody... i now feel sufficiently retarded and will go cry in the corner...
cosbySweater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2018, 12:17 AM   #75
bobxyz
Board Member
 
bobxyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Rick View Post
Off topic but I must respond.
A MicroSquirt is literally NOT an MS2, it uses MS2 technology.
A MicroSquirt doesn't use the same firmware as a MS2, it uses a subset of the MS2 code ported over to a smaller processor.
A MicroSquirt does not have the available IO ports that a MS2 has.
The MegaSquirt-II CPU daughterboard, the older MicroSquirt module, and the newer MicroSquirt v3 all use the same identical processor -- MC9S12C64CFAE. You can read the part number for the first 2 from the pictures on diyat, and you'll need to trust me that I confirmed the same part number on my MicroSquirt v3:
https://www.diyautotune.com/product/...t-module-v2-2/
https://www.diyautotune.com/product/...daughterboard/

[I know that the published MicroSquirt schematics show a smaller MC9S12C32 part. I'll assume this was wishful thinking by the designers, but it might have been done to annoy anyone trying to build their own based on the schematics.]

Both MegaSquirt-II and MicroSquirt use almost exactly the same software - there are slight differences due to supporting different input/output capabilities. There are compile time flags for the different versions in the Makefile. As far as I can tell, there will be no further development or bug fixes for either version.

As far as IO ports, they're different and one version may be better than the other for your particular setup. A brief comparison is at: http://www.useasydocs.com/index.html
- MicroSquirt does need an external MAP sensor, so that's a minus.
- I wouldn't recommend running low-Z injectors with either version, so that's a wash.
- The MS-II stepper idle control is not usable for redblocks, so removing it doesn't make a difference.
- The MicroSquirt 2x logic level coil signals support wasted spark while MegaSquirt supports direct drive for a single coil. Which is better depends on your engine.
- Both MicroSquirt and the pre-assembled MegaSquirt 3.57pcb support PWM idle control, so another wash.
- MegaSquirt includes 1x opto-isolated crank/cam input and 1x VR input, with manual adjustment. MicroSquirt includes 2x auto-adaptive VR crank/cam inputs. There are issues with all and 60-2 wheels.
- For connectors, the MicroSquirt's AmpSeal is much better electrically than the MegaSquirt DB-37, but the DB-37 may provide a lower-profile installed solution.
bobxyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.