Turbonator SMEC codebase

[Aries_Turbo]

T2 boost control controls the solenoid like a 87 T2 car and would require the solenoid be plumbed like a 87 T2 car.

You would then tune the tables that are shaped like the 87 t2 tables for control.

T1 is more safe. if it fails you get wastegate boost. if T2 fails you get "all of it" boost.

Brian

[Dan H]

So far playing with boost control on SBEC it works well to select TI boost control and plumb it like 92+. I'd try the same with SMEC assuming you're going to be tuning it to your car.

[Fenderbass]

So far playing with boost control on SBEC it works well to select TI boost control and plumb it like 92+. I'd try the same with SMEC assuming you're going to be tuning it to your car.

Thanks Brian, that helps a lot!

Thanks for the input, Dan. Are you talking about vacuum plumbing? What’s the different between pre-92 and 93+ ?

[Dan H]

Thanks for the input, Dan. Are you talking about vacuum plumbing? What’s the different between pre-92 and 93+ ?

Yes, the vacuum plumbing. Pre-92 TI was set up to use the WG solenoid as a controlled bleed of the signal going to the WG actuator. 92+ was set up to use the WG solenoid as an interrupt to the signal going to the WG actuator. Each has the default of sending a full pressure signal to the WG actuator as a failsafe, which gives you the your minimum boost possible. Therefore an increase is WG DC% (wastegate duty cycle) will result in increased boost.

TII boost control was setup to use the WG solenoid as in interrupt but the default was completely blocking the pressure signal to the WG actuator. That would result in "all of it" boost if the WG solenoid failed and the only safety to control it was overboost cutout. If you look at a WGDC table for TII boost control you will see that the DC starts off high (so that the WG solenoid get some signal to keep boost low) then the DC decreases to raise boost.

I've been meaning to make a separate post from the "Computer controlled boost turbonator" thread trying to explain it in the way that made sense to me, but my time went to other things. Most people just give up on computer control and use a manual or electronic boost controller. Myself included for the past 20 or so years. It works well for me so far now that I understand better how it works and started tuning it to the car.

[Aries_Turbo]

once you replace the old solenoid for something like a mac valve and retune the DCWOT table, factory boost control is pretty good.

its nice having a tame part throttle and a ridiculous full throttle boost curve.

at the moment, im using a HDi aftermarket controller (installed it when my LM boost control failed for whatever reason.... either solenoid or the driver on the board died) but since ive swapped to SMEC ill be playing with the factory boost control again, probably in the spring when my reliant comes back out.

that said, having a knob in the dash to twist for boost is really nice.

Brian

[chromguy]

at the moment, im using a HDi aftermarket controller (installed it when my LM boost control failed for whatever reason.... either solenoid or the driver on the board died) but since ive swapped to SMEC ill be playing with the factory boost control again, probably in the spring when my reliant comes back out.

that said, having a knob in the dash to twist for boost is really nice.

Brian

I like my HDI EBC.

[Aries_Turbo]

I like my HDI EBC.

i do too. i just wish it had a TPS input for a lower part throttle boost.

Brian

[Dan H]

i do too. i just wish it had a TPS input for a lower part throttle boost.

Brian

That was one of the biggest reasons I wanted to get back to computer control on my Spirit. There are plenty of times with the 2.2 that I need more throttle input but don't want the little Garrett pushing toward 15psi PT.

Reduction on knock is a good safety. Though I do wonder if it will work fast enough to save from a situation well beyond stock limits. Certainly has more of a chance than no response on knock.

[cordes]

i'm going to post up a new version of the tsmec cals - 19.7. here is what i've changed.

1) added a table and cal mod to allow the speedometer to be adjusted via the tune vs a mechanical change.
2) fixed the labeling for the No2 routines so the config flags point to the proper bits.
3) fix WidebandAFRToO2TransferFunction error.

any other things i need to fix/review? i'll do the tsbec stuff next so send me fixes that need to be made for those also.

Was there ever an update to these cals posted somewhere? I lost the computer I had when I was working up the cal for my white Lancer. I'm going to attempt a flashable SMEC tonight and want to get started on a cal to go in the car. It has big injectors, ported head, etc. so I would like to start from a stock cal and do the bare minimum changes necessary with the most up to date cals posted. Thanks guys.

[wheming]

Brian, I need to discuss with Morris, but there is a cal change I was testing that I'm not sure got updated for the masses. It is however a small change that doesn't really affect things substantially.

With the availability of the MPFlash modules out there in use, I wanted some "gauge" I could log for a designation of which cal I was active at the time.
So in the Setup/Configuration there is a Cal Version that you can use to assign a single digit number to the cal.

There may be other little tweaks I had been testing as well, but they escape my memory right now.



Sent from my KB2005 using Tapatalk

[cordes]

Thanks for that info. I’m going to installation of MPFlash in a SMEC tonight. I hope I can get it all figured out. Worst case scenario, I drive to your house for service after the sale!

[wowzer]

Was there ever an update to these cals posted somewhere? I lost the computer I had when I was working up the cal for my white Lancer. I'm going to attempt a flashable SMEC tonight and want to get started on a cal to go in the car. It has big injectors, ported head, etc. so I would like to start from a stock cal and do the bare minimum changes necessary with the most up to date cals posted. Thanks guys.

no, i did not. it's only been 2 years. why the rush

i need to have wayne email me the test version i gave him way back and see what needs to be added to the 19.7 draft. updating to this new version will REQUIRE all the templates to be downloaded also. otherwise it will break since the code will be looking for tables that don't exist.

[cordes]

no, i did not. it's only been 2 years. why the rush

i need to have wayne email me the test version i gave him way back and see what needs to be added to the 19.7 draft. updating to this new version will REQUIRE all the templates to be downloaded also. otherwise it will break since the code will be looking for tables that don't exist.

I'm certainly cool with that. I'm starting from scratch due to losing everything, so no complaints about a download here.

Thanks for all the work you put into this. I really appreciate it.

[motomick76]

I have recently acquired a '89 T-Van and interested in socketing and MPFlash. I notice the links for BoostButton no longer work. Does anyone here offer 'Plug-n-play" SMEC's? I do not feel comfortable socketing my SMEC, and also building the MPFlash to go on the SMEC. Thanks!

[wheming]

I have recently acquired a '89 T-Van and interested in socketing and MPFlash. I notice the links for BoostButton no longer work. Does anyone here offer 'Plug-n-play" SMEC's? I do not feel comfortable socketing my SMEC, and also building the MPFlash to go on the SMEC. Thanks!

Just to clarify, you don't have to assemble an MPFlash at all, they are available ready to install for the ECU you choose.

If you had a previously socketed SMEC logic board, then installing an MPFlash requires only a few soldered connections, and the zener diode bypassed.

If you would prefer to get a turn-key MPFlash modified SMEC logic board, there are a couple options. PM me and we can discuss how I can help.

Sent from my KB2005 using Tapatalk

[cordes]

It seems like every time I'm tuning something, I have a new computer after the old one died. Hopefully I can get this going and make my Lancer run right. The hot restarts are horrific to impossible. It's also fouling plugs like crazy. I have some new injectors, a new head, etc. etc. on there. I hope to have some testing done soon.

[Aries_Turbo]

yeah, some hot restarts are lean till it sees the wideband.

my LM stuff was never like that.

<shrugs>. i just dont touch the gas and wait the 10 seconds or so till it recovers.

cold start is a touch rich but not too bad.

im a lazy tuner on my own stuff. lol

Brian

[cordes]

yeah, some hot restarts are lean till it sees the wideband.

my LM stuff was never like that.

<shrugs>. i just dont touch the gas and wait the 10 seconds or so till it recovers.

cold start is a touch rich but not too bad.

im a lazy tuner on my own stuff. lol

Brian

I need to burn another chip for this Lancer. I think I have the injector size properly calculated, and hopefully that cures my ills. I'm pretty sure mine is flooding things on hot restarts, as I have to catch it just right with the throttle open, and even then it's blowing black to start. If I don't do it correctly, I'm stranded for 20-30 minutes.

[Aries_Turbo]

yeah mine is definitely lean on hot restarts... and its not all restarts.... its the one where i run to the gas station up the hill from work and shut it off, then its lean.

if i heat it the whole way up and the restart after a store visit, its fine....

there must be some middle point where its a problem. i should log it and then pour through the logs to see what the actual conditions are.

Brian

[cordes]

I have my MPSciLink working in the Lancer, so I should hopefully be able to begin logging now. We'll see how that adventure goes for me.