My understanding of the timing operation is this:
The PCM operates with set tables for ignition timing. If a knock is detected, it retards the timing. It only does so for that instant in time. It does not learn or adjust the ignition tables based on the detected knock. Its also not searching for the most advance it can get away without knock. There is no ignition equivalent to LTFT.
I'm still letting the PCM do all the ignition. MM has rigged-up the ignition harness for the emanage with the necessary diodes and has adjusted the ignition using the emanage ignition maps.

 

if it takes away i would think it adds back a lttle at a time aslong as it doesnt detect more knock, up to the total timing its mapped for.

interestingly enough i just yesterday re-read this article that i found some time ago on tuning a turbo on a 2005 mustang http://www.modulardepot.com/?show=articlesdet&aid=58

where they mention locking down the knock timing. good article

 

I know what you're thinking Zoom44. It COULD be possible, but the RX-8's ECU is older than the "Spanish Oak" ECU used in the V8 2005/6 Mustang. The one in the Mustang is really advanced. Remember what I posted from Kenne Bell in either the INterceptor-X or ECu flasher thread... the Mustang's ECU is tuned for Premium Unleaded gas, but the car is sold as regular unleaded gas. The ECU system is advanced enough to compensate for whatever fuel you put in it. The knock control system runs on its own processor and regularly checks to ensure the system is working properly. So the engine is always trying to run the most aggessive timing the fuel will allow it to.

In the case of the RX-8... who knows. Maybe that's why Mazda specifies it's best to run premium unleaded...

 

The RX-8 has two timing MAPs - one for normal operation and one for the misfire/CEL situation.
It also has a timing curve that is dependant on temperature.
In all of my data logs, the timing remined static, regardless of knock events. It just backed it off for a sec and then put it back.
The PCM has no way of knowing that timing is being affected by the E-Manage, so it doesn't react to it.
BTW, the advance can be as much a 40° BTDC in some spots!

 

the mustangs PCm i salso running 2 knock sensors!

40 jeff? i think i heard someone else, or you even, say that before but it still sounds crazy!

 

I've only seen about 30 under WOT. But, I've gotten some erratic readings near 40 after lifting off the throttle.

 

Do you have any fuel pressure readings? or maybe Jeff does? I dont remember if the scanalyser can pull fuel pressure or not- i dont think it does. I havent used it in awhile.

 

I don't think that's available on the CAN bus - at least the CANScan doesn't read it.

 

with all the advances that you guys have done with the emanage, would it be worth it for a n/a application?

 

And on the seventh day the LORD made the WEBER DCOE and a distributor!!!
I am to damn old for this other ****.

 

Oh come on man get with the program,I'm 61 years and its great(I'm so old I used to ride a Vincent Black Shadow as daily transportation.)

 

Very interesting question!

Given that the P2's are coming on where the system goes open-loop and very rich, I'd say that driving the P2's independently of the PCM would give you the oportunity to lean things out. It would be similar in performance to the CZ, but with a little more control of things. The LTFT would be less of an issue than it was with a CZ.

 

That's the exact setup we're removing from my best friend's RX-7 and replacing with a Megasquirt. You are an old bastard!

 

i gues teh Fuel Pressure is not available from the CAN

there is no mention of usign the wds to read it. in fact here is a pic pic from fuel pressure testing in the manual

 

It's called tounge in cheek guys.
Just think about this though. Anybody can build an electronic FI. Think of the real intelect it takes to design a carbarettor. (British spelling?)
They have to bend a fuel curve with tiny amounts of airflow deltas in tiny tubes and passages. You guys can change things with a key, can you design an emulsion tube? Do you know what one is?

I know, my skills make me as employable as an enciclapedia salesman. Or a Fuller brush man. Or a covered wagon wheel builder. Or a bodyman who works only with lead. A vacuum tube designer, Mechanical slot machine designer, ............

 

My choice for you would be a proofreader in charge of spelling!

 

which begs the question if a cz could be easily wired up to do this...

 

Everyone on the board knows I can't spell but they let me slide on it because I have long hair down to the small of my back a tiny waist and big ****.

 

It's OK, we all know that Zoom can't type the word "teh" if his life depended on it

 

Crazy isn't it? And people want to bash Ford for lack of innovation/use of high tech! Mustang's intake manifold is variable like the RX-8's and the engine has variable valve timing as well.

And people wonder why I "preach" that the best solution is an ECU flasher (which is what everyone uses on the Mustangs).

More on topic... these new results with the emanage looks good. Definitely a better cost/performance solution than the Interceptor-X until/if an ECu flash tool ever becomes available.

BTW... any news about the emanage ultimate, Jeff?

 

hey hey HEY!!! its teh friggin keyboard i swear there is something wrong with it...

 

Still no update from Greddy. Right now mine is a paperweight.

 

I wish:

1) Jeff would hurry up and get back to Phoenix to play with his 8.

2) someone else would work up the cahones to do this mod.

 

So just to be clear Jeff, your able to adjust the ignition timing through the emanage without the car fighting your changes either buy altering the timing over the emanage or trying to adjust the A/F?

 

Yes. The PCM has no idea that the timing has changed.
It is likely that moving the timing changes the effective A/F such that the PCM compensates, but that would be minimal and probably optimal anyway.