REVIEW: Ric Shaw Controller - Fitted
 

Hi all,

Here is the latest scoop from the House of Hymee.

This evening we fitted a "Ric Shaw" piggy-back ECU. The special thing about this one is that we fitted it without cutting or splicing any of the wiring loom. We did this with the latest Hymee special - a custom made wiring harness that plugs directly into the factory connectors. The harness is a product of at least 25-30 man hours work by myself and a silent partner.

Don't ask me for any coightometer reports. The dyno will reveal all when we get it on there. (Remember - mine doesn't have "Safe Mode")

Note - the unit was installed with Ric's "base tune". We have the cable and software to be able to tune the unit ourselves. A very experienced rotary engine tuner will be doing a full tune on the unit in the very near future.

Here is what I do have to report:

• Unit looks very good, and professional. Nice black case, much smaller in all dimensions than the factory ECU.
• Comes with a "blank off" plug to allow the unit to be switched on/off without un-installation/re-installation.
• Car started first go with "blank-off" installed.
• Car started first go with unit operational.
• Car drove just fine.
• Real time ODBII data logging (via my scan tool and software) showed the Air/Fuel ratios in a much more desirable range. This shows the fuel control is performing its intended function.
• We fiddled with the Ignition timing in real time (while the engine was running) and noticed the difference. We held it at about 2000 RPM and pulled a bunch of timing out, and the revs dropped off correspondingly. This shows the Ignition control is performing its intended function.

More details to come when we do some proper tests in a controlled environemnt, and do a full tune.

Cheers,
Hymee.

PS - I just awarded myself the Post of the Day! Actually - a tie with EASTMOON. All your base are belong to us, grasshopper!

And the plan is to add these harness's to the Hymee cattledog if a market is shown to exist???

Gomez.

Or maybe sell them to Ric only!!

Hymee,

Great stuff. I wait with much interest to hear the results of your testing. Are you going to look at
1) Stock Car
2) With Rics tune
3) After the unit has been professionally tuned?

Your Hymee wiring harness that plugs the unit directly into the car sounds awesome.

Congratulations on a great job.

Hymee

Any idea of COST , AVAILIBILITY of the Rick shaw , HYMEE and secret agent partner , and rotary tuning mystery guru ??????.

CHEERS

MICHAEL

Hymee

Whats with the House of Hymee label , i sincerely hope you dont end up like the house of the clothing designer (P@#$F).
"Richard De CHAZZAL"

CHEERS
MICHAEL

Sound promising... I think I found the ECU I am dreaming for...

If this works... you will see my hard earn cash coming your way RIC!

I would be interested in seeing the dyno results.

BTW what are the benefits of upgrading the ECU...I am a novice when it comes to upgrades.

Great work -- I reckon you can have post of the week (but, being Tuesday, it's potentially premature) ;)

As I have done in the past, I will post reliable results when we get a chance to measure them. Patience, grasshopper! :)

Are you talking about having the (Powertrain Control Module) PCM flashed with the latest calibration from Mazda, and the effect this would have on the piggy-back?

Or are you talking about the benefits of the unit itself? It is not a replacement for the PCM. It plugs into the PCM and "takes control" of ignition and fuel (in simple terms). All other operations/functions of the car are still in-tact. In fact, after we had been plugging and un-plugging a couple of times, my radio still had all it's station presets, remembered what station is was on, and the A/C still held it's settings. Even the Trip computer rembered I had done about 450km

The cruise control worked flawlessly (well, I didn't check for the random "surge" I usually get on "resume", but that is random anyway, and is a behaviour of the car, not the piggy-back).

Cheers,
Hymee.

How long have you been working with Ric on this Hymee?

How long? Oh - about 1/4 mile. Or 15 Seconds. Hehehe. Only joking. I first spoke to Ric on the... Hang on a bit...

The unit has been purchased outright at (full price) from Ric so we could do our own totally independant evaluation.

The "Hymee Special" Harness was done independantly from Ric, by myself and SP (the Silent Partner).

Cheers,
Hymee.

Hymee,
I am interested in the benefit of the unit that you installed....I guess more power and better fuel efficency would be some of the benefits.

The purpose of the unit is to tune the car to an "optimum level" of efficiency.

Traditionally, factory tunes very in degress between rich and pig rich. The RX-8 is rich. The idea is to lean out the mixture as well as optimise the ignition timing.

Most people would do this mod for more power and better "driveability". But it can also be beneficial to fuel economy. Surely if the mixture is not so rich, then it is better for the environment as well. So potentially winners all round.

Cheers,
Hymee.

I guess it is also dependent on the fuel you use (ie, 98 RON v 95) -- is that right?

When I saw the other (US) thread on Ric's unit, I was somewhat daunted by the amount of calibration one could do. So it will be interesting to see what you achieve.

Do you know whether Ric has any dyno results?

Timbo,

I have spoken to Ric about this issue. He is quite guarded in his response. I suspect that he does not want to make claims that are later shown to be wrong. He was openly sceptical of some of the claims that have been made here about what simply changing the fuel & ignition maps can do for this non forced injection motor. When I pressed him on the type of gains that this modification would get I got the impression that he was talking in the range of 10 to 15kw. That is just the feeling I got from Ric. I am extremely curious to see what results Hymee gets!

He struck me as an honest and open guy that could be trusted.

I think Ric also was bitten pretty bad by the "Safe Mode" bug which I seem to be imune from.

I'm curious as well :)

Cheers,
Hymee.

Two great innovators working on the same project - and in harmony. Hard to beat.

I have knelt at Ric's shrine on Parramatta Rd; now looking forward to meeting my other guru, Hymee la Croix, at Wakefield - and in the mean time reminding him about those boring old catbacks.
I'm anticipating with the same enthusiasm the hardware as well as the software..

Rock On!
jack

Hymee,

After being the first to get one of your grills and as your Hymee cat-back test pilot, please place me at the front of the que for your latest project!

Hats off to Ric Shaw also for producing what sounds like a top-notch TUNE-ABLE mod for the '8.

well done again. your true champs, both of u ric and hymee!

I may be missing something here, and I don't want to knock this device.... BUT:

Why would Mazda or any other respected manufacturer deliberately map settings that are SIMULTANEOUSLY too rich, burn excess fuel, pollute more, develop less power AND compromise driveability? Doesn't make much sense to me, unless they are either totally incompetent, or the ONLY justification they had for the current settings was engine longevity.......

Surely when you chip or reprogram a car you are likely to achieve pluses in some areas and minuses in others, otherwise if it can be done so easily with a "win" on EVERY front why didn't Mazda do it in the first place?

No disrepect to Ric Shaw or you Hymee - but I'm really curious to know how this is supposed to be achieved.

rotary engines blow if they are too lean. They need to run rich in order to keep the seals lubricated. given the market of buyers out there for the cars, i assume that they want to make sure that engine life is retained.

Lean makes them detonate. drop an apex seal etc.. you dont want that.

I can't believe at this advanced stage, I'm still reading posts like the two above this one.:(

NickG and Kas - please read these threads:

Greddy/Trust E-Manage Fuel Computer Install
Combustion and the 13B-MSP

Rotary engines do not blow if they are too lean. You are confusing your issues.
The Mazda tuning situation has been beaten to death.

Thanks Jeff.

Fella's - We are not trying to run the engine "lean". We are trying to run the engine "less rich" than it is (which is too rich).

Nick, no offense taken, and a valid question. There is a safety factor build into all factory tunes. It covers many things including crap fuel and manufacturing tolerances. The idea with what we are doing is to get an optimal tune for each individual car.

If the car makers build things so "good", why is it, for example, that a std 225kW LS1 can be easily and cheaply "tuned up" to 300kW, without compromising longevity? (A 300kW GTS has basically identical internal components in it as a std LS1, except for a different cam and different sized valves, and a bit of head work.).

I'm not saying the Renesis has the same potential % gains as the LS1, but the reasons why are applicable.

The are many, many things on every production car that the engineers might have liked to be better, but have their hand forced (designed compromised) by others where $$ is more important than performance. Fortunatley, the RX-8 does not seem to exhibit many of these compromises, compared with say a Commodore.

All we are trying to do is find where those compromises have been made, and in some sense get our cars performing like the designer intended.

Cheers,
Hymee.

Fair enough Mazda Maniac however your argument appears to be at least partly predicated on the assumption that Australian RX-8's run the same mixture settings as those mandated by your EPA. Considering our substantially different design rules here that may or may not be the case. And please don't always assume that overseas forum participants necessarily search and review the entire forum database before posting replies to other participants in their local forum....

Hmm. I look at all areas of the forum, not just those that affect me regionally.
I didn't realize that users "overseas" were so lazy...:(

I would like to make a couple of points about the prior posts:

1) Mazda Maniac - Jeff has made some immensly interesting contributions to this forum which are worth everyone here reading your knowledge of the RX8 will be increased by doing this.

2) Nick - G There are many people here that wish to improve their car. Mazda have different aims that we as enthusiasts have.

They want to sell cars.
We want our cars to be the best they can be.

These are different motivations.

I understand your feeling that if it can be made better why didn't Mazda do it. Read the above. We have different aims for the car.
BTW I agree that if we modify the motor to make it work harder we are probably taking some life from it. Life is full of compromises. We all make choices. Hopefully reading this Forum makes us all better informed when we make those choices.

Well said, rx8 - smooth!

Thanks Hymee for your comments. I am but a babe in the woods when it comes to engine tuning, and yes I can see the logic in your argument.....

For most owners’ everyday driving needs our Aussie cars are well balanced and tuned, perform extremely well in daily driving conditions, and don’t urgently need improving on. But what we’re dealing with here is the endless quest for MORE that drives the dedicated Owner/Tuner car nut. We are the types who drive the car home and then immediately get out the tool-kit and start unscrewing things to see how they work and how we might change them around… just that little bit….. and then just that little bit more…. and then…

Claims that we can get better performance, better economy, better environmental outcomes etc all at the same time may sound a little over-optimistic. But, as others have said, any mass production engine can be improved with a certain amount of polishing, tweaking, tuning and general alteration etc. If the goal was to improve everything across the board with no compromises then it can still be done, although it would generally need some additional mechanical work on the engine to complement the tuning, and the gains would often be relatively modest.

But let’s be honest. The number of RX8 owners who are going to buy performance modifying equipment specifically so that they can improve their emissions (for instance) can be counted on the fingers of one ear…

Most people will be looking for more power and will be prepared to make some sacrifices in other areas, on the assumption that in stock form there are reasonably conservative margins for error that can be sliced a little thinner without causing any great problems.

But these are early days. Much of what you read on forums like this is often hot air. In amongst the good stuff is a mixture of educated guesswork and half-truths spiced up with a good sprinkling of enthusiastic bullshitting from most of us. :) But the good information does slowly emerge, and it’s an enjoyable process (for the enthusiasts anyway). For most of us it’s the journey that’s fun, not arriving at any particular point of gain (which we’d immediately change when we got there anyway). :p

So don’t expect too many huge increases, major breakthroughs or 100% accurate information, especially in the first few months after release of a new engine. But do expect that the keen and knowledgeable few, such as Ric Shaw, will discover ways to make the car perform better in all sorts of ways and that gradually the useful information will filter through. Also expect that Mazda engineers are also working on improving the engine and that what they are doing and what the enthusiast are doing will have some areas of overlap.

Nicely put BVD:cool:

Totally agreed. A very well balanced post.

Post of the day, BVD!

Cheers,
Hymee.

Yep, good stuff.

Even us dim Yanks can appeciate it! ;)

Thanks Hymee – I’m honoured. :)

It was nearly my last post too…. I set out for a mountain bike ride today through some dramatically rough and hilly bushland and promptly got lost. Doh!

What was supposed to be a 12k ride turned into a 35k slog. Amazing countryside, and worth the effort though. A combination of some poor trail markers, followed later by a stupendously dumb directional decision on my part. Fortunately, two very kind young ladies (the only other riders I saw on the trip) re-directed me and led me back to a recognisable road. Good riders too.

Obviously I need a Global Positioning navigation aid on the bike, never mind the RX….

Actually, a reconditioned brain might do the trick - must check the Yellow Pages.....
;)

To get this thread back on track, I was wondering if there is an optimum air/fuel mixture of the Renesis and, given the discussion above concerning perhaps a richer mix for a rotary, how this might compare with, say, an LS1?

Wait a minute Timbo...

BVD... what do you mean GPS??

You had two ladies lead you out on their bikes... sounds like a good day to me!

;)

14.7:1 is optimum for consuming all of the fuel present.
13.2:1 generates maximum power.
9:1 is about the richest ratio that will still support combustion.

These are general guidelines.

The Renesis can be run as lean as 17:1 in parts of the RPM range and at some loads.
It will start to loose power almost across the board below 12.5:1 and very obviously so below 11.9:1 which is where the original PCM calibrations were.

Thanks Jeff, that's really helpful.

Do you have any comparable data on other engine types?

Tim

The first half of my last post pretty much applies to all internal combustion engines.

Timbo,

I sort of have this funny feeling inside me that says the air/fuel mixture doesn't really care what sort of mechanical cycle it has gone through, as the ignition is basically a chemical reaction.

Like Jeff said, maxiumum power is generally slightly richer than ideal, pretty much for all internal combustion engines.

What I mean is the "ideal" or Stoichometric AFR is something that is dependant on the fuel. Around 14:1 for gasoline, but varies with each "type" of fuel. The O2 sensor in the car actual measure what is called "lambda" which is a number that represents if all the oxygen has been consumed in the combustion process. A Lambda of 1.0 means "stoich", and if the value is > 1.0 then this means lean (extra oxygen still available), conversely values < 1.0 are rich.

It is a neat measurement, as it is not dependant on the fuel used. The actual AFR can be computed by multiplying the lambda value by the stoich value for the fuel. So if we used 14, and we had a Lambda reading of .889, then our AFR would be 12.446:1 (12.446 parts air and 1 part fuel, which is richer than 14:1)

There are all sorts of reasons why the computer changes the mixture at different load points / RPM's.

http://www.hymee.com/smilies/sm_teach.gif

Cheers,
Hymeehttp://www.hymee.com/smilies/sm_karate.gif

That's very informative

I propose MazdaManiac and Hymee be jointly awarded 'Post of the Day'

Motion seconded - it’s great information isn’t it. :)

Here's some more general waffle from me that might help explain some of the issues to some readers.

As most of you probably know, there’s a lot more to modern tuning than just adjusting a mixture figure and seeing if the car goes faster.

It’s a bit like the old days of rock and roll when you all you had was just a volume knob on your amp, compared with a modern sound mixing board that can shape and balance every aspect of a performance as it’s happening. You can do a lot more, and a good mixer can improve a performance, but a bad one can screw it up. :eek:

I bought my first car 45 years ago (at age 12) and it had a lever on the steering column that allowed you to manually advance and retard the ignition timing to suit conditions. On the fuel/air front you had a choke knob that pulled a cable that closed a ‘butterfly’ in the carburettor, reducing the airflow and richening up the mixture to start the car. Apart from the accelerator, that was about the extent of the variables. On later cars both functions were automated, but still in a pretty basic and linear sort of fashion.

I’m a bit rusty on the modern theory (it’s 35 years since I qualified as a Motor Engineer and I worked directly in the industry for less than 10 years). So please jump in and correct me where I’m wrong, but, if I understand it correctly these are some of the factors affecting tune and performance. Some you can change as the car is going along, others you can only change in the workshop.

Ignition timing:

This changes the point at which you fire the spark and start the mixture burning. The process is a burn and not an instantaneous explosion, so the point at which you fire the spark is important if you are to get the most power and the cleanest and most complete burn. The amount of time that you have to complete the entire process of intake, compression, burn and exhaust will obvious vary hugely between an idling engine and one revving at 9,000 rpm, so varying when you begin the process is an issue. The amount and composition quality of the mixture will also vary depending on factors such as the speed and pressure of the airflow at the time, etc.

Old engines advanced and retarded the spark using a system of springs and weights that moved a plate using the principle of centrifugal force to change the timing for different engine speeds. Modern electronic ignition (which I know nothing about) can presumably vary the choices it makes in a less linear and mechanical fashion, and also more precisely.

Fuel/air mixture

Trying to overcome the difficulties inherent in trying to keep a constant mix ratio between two different elements (a gas and a liquid – air and fuel) supplied through two separate and dissimilar delivery systems, under a wide variety of conditions has never been easy. Depending on such things as engine load, throttle setting, available air-flow, temperature, etc the mix can vary in ways you don’t want.

Many things affect the equation, including length and design of the air intake (what is optimum for one engine condition will not be for another, so it’s always a compromise), the amount of back-pressure from the exhaust system, the temperature and quality of the fuel and the air, the points at which the intake and exhaust valves or ports open and close, etc etc. Many things can only be changed in the workshop, so air/fuel mixes and ignition timing would seem to be the main interest of engine management systems.

Roughly speaking, they are trying to a) keep the mix ratios in the desired range – between too lean and too rich – and b) to balance differing requirements such as providing the best power when and where it’s needed, delivering the best economy both overall and particularly at those times that maximum power is not the main game, and to do all of this as cleanly as possible, etc. Tuning such a system is a complex and subtle art, and it involves more than just a richening or leaning across the board.

If I understand it correctly, what Canzoomer, Ric Shaw, Hymee and the other more knowledgeable guys are trying to do is:

A: Firstly figure out where Mazda have set all these variables as stock (particularly fuel/air mixes and ignition timings in all their range of combinations), and then try and get a feel for what their objectives were in setting the values they did. Presumably there’s also a bunch of stuff to figure out regarding the operation of the sensors that can contribute to or over-ride the settings.

B: Decide how and where to apply the variations in tune, depending on what the clients want – i.e what aspect of the car’s performance do you want to try and change, by how much, under what circumstances (i..e in what part of the rev range, or for what kind of driving) and at what amount of cost and risk to other elements of the car. I.e. different fuel maps for different parts of the rev range and varying engine conditions, altered timing, etc.

These are not simple issues and will be debated, experimented with and tested for a long time. The full effects of the changes you make are not always immediately apparent or easily measured. This could be a very long-lived discussion…

Good luck guys.
:)

BVD

You have become very tecknically informative of late , are you going to challenge the various rotary gurus for number 1 rotary posts???? .

Great work well written , Hymee is being mentally challenged .ha ha ha .

cheers
michael

BVD thats a piece of art mate.

Before you know it, the RX-9 will ultimately be deisigned by you.

Good Stuff;)

So Hymee,

Any more news?....................................

(Hears sounds of fingers impatiently drumming on desk in the background!)

So Hymee,

Any more news......................on your cat-back?

(hear sound of pins being methodically inserted into bananas.)

Rics Controller has been running fine on my car for a week know. It feels crisper to drive. Have not been on a proper dyno yet. When we do, it will be re-tuned.

I did some tests with the MR Dyno the other night, and found it was consistantly a little bit quicker in my 40-105km/h test. I would rather wait till we put it on the dyno and tune it up before I sprout off any figures.

Exhaust. We are having a "session" tomorrow night, and I should (hopefully) be able to start shipping the first couple on Friday, and the rest early next week. I have had the custom shipping boxes made. I have to get them from the factory 2 at a time.

Thanks for your patience, and my apologies for the delays.

Cheers,
Hymee.

No chance mate. :D

I'm way behind the gurus, as it's years since I rebuilt an engine or did anything other than superficial tuning.

Just supporting Hymee's cries of "Patience Grasshopper" by trying to explain why these things take as long as they do to fully explore and sort out. (Oh, and I guess we all like to show off what little knowledge we have... or think we have... :p )

However, I'm as impatient as the next guy to hear what they're finding about Mazda's settings, and where they think they can be best tweaked.

I guess we're all a bit like kids in the back seat calling "Are we there yet Uncle Hymee, are we there yet???" :)

Does Ric Shaw have a web site with details about his controller, cost, specs, etc?

BVD, I did a search on Ric last week and only found a bunch of racing results.....no website......

Gomez.

Yes, me too Gomez. :confused:

Maybe it's only avaliable by phone or in person. Geez, one gets to rely on the net all too easily.

Perhaps Thing could do some web-crawling and unearth some price and spec info for us ....