Engine and Transmission Tech

I am in the process of converting my Rover 3.5 L to FI. I have build a megasquirt ECU V2.2 system a few years ago. I am not sure how to start with the installation. Should I first try the 14CUX original Rover system to see it the engine runs fine or immediately run with the Megasquirt system ?
Anybody experienced with the megasquirt set-up ? need some help.
Werner

Hi Werner,

There are so many geniuses here when it comes to this but when they schooled me, I learned that the 14CUX system is self-adapting and runs all on its own. The MS system allows you to fine tune your Fuel Injection and the newer MS systems will run sequential injection and ignition management for a more advanced ignition system. You can rid of the antique distributor.

Cheers,
NCtim

Hi Werner,
If the ultimate goal is to run the megasquirt then I would start with it.
The time spent setting up the Rover injection and then replacing it,
Would be better spent tuning the megasquirt.
If you are really concerned about your engine build, fire it up on a carb first to break it in and then mount the fuel injection.
Once you get comfortable with the megasquirt you will wonder why you were worried about it at all.
Down load a couple of the tuning programs and play around with them offline.
One I use is "Tuner Studio", which is one of the easier programs to use. And it offers a self tuning option that is really usefull
But I find that I use "Mega Tune" more often as it makes more sense to the old school me.
Cheers
Fred

Hi Fred,

I've been reading all the MS and Mega Tune manuals and I have a headache now. I truly know now that you guys are geniuses if this is simple stuff to accomplish for you all.

Cheers,
NCtim

Fred,
The only reason I am worried about the engine rebuild is the proload on the rockers. The deck is shaved by 0.030 but ran well with the carb.before the rebuild. Now I want to make sure that the preload is right. I need some info on this so I'll start a new tread or find the "How to" in older forums.
I think I start with the older version of MS V2.2 with distributor and switch over to MS 3 later so I can get rid of the dizzy and have 8 individual coils or 2 banks of 4.
Werner

Werner, this might be the preload thread you're looking for: [forum.britishv8.org]

Please post lots of photos and notes as you come along with your EFI installation! I hope to follow in your footsteps soon. My scheme is to use the Rover intake manifold, but custom fab a plenum top that will aim a throttle body straight back toward my existing cowl-mounted air filter... and since there's no room to package a hot-wire sensor in that space, I'm planning on using Megasquirt. If I had room to package a hot wire sensor, I'd just stick with the Rover control system. I'm not convinced Megasquirt is necessarily better in the end, and I'm not looking forward to the tuning phase of Megasquirt installation development.

Curtis,
I'll give you all the info with pictures I have so far.
I do not look forward to upload and fine tune the megasquirt files either but maybe with some help from friends that have done it before it might not be all that bad. I am planning on starting with the MS1 version first and when the engine runs fine I will upgrade to MS3 so I can get rid of the dizzy. Glad to see that there is lots of interest for the MS system.
BTW, how do you like my powder coating . It has the color and texture from the Ferrari valve covers. Not easy to do but for our first time it looked pretty good.
We are working on a banner.
Need to find some help with the replacement of the door sills. Hope to find it in the forums.
Werner

Nice valve covers, Werner!



If our Megasquirt enthusiasts will indulge me, I have a couple quick questions:

1) am I correct to assume that Megasquirt is equally happy with just about any OEM throttle position sensor? (If not, what should one look for in a throttle position sensor?)

2) given that the 14CUX-generation Rover throttle butterflies measured 65mm in diameter and were sized for the 3.9L engines, if you were considering using an entirely different throttle body assembly on a 3.5L Buick/Rover V8 what diameter throttle body would you look for?


Rover integrated plenum cover and throttle body assembly:




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/23/2012 02:47PM by Moderator.

The megasquirt will work with just about any TPS. But it must be a linear type sensor for best results. Some TPS are sloped, and while usable, they make tuning harder.
Sensors for some vehicles such as BMW, Volvo,VW etc won't work as they are actually idle and WOT switches and not a true position sensor.
Port type EFI really doesn't care what size the throttle body is. Technically you can't go too big. The consideration is more about throttle control and charge tuning. An oversized opening causes the throttle to be very hard to modulate. Many manufacturers use a progressive opening linkage just to allow a larger throttle body to be driven smoothly. Such as the later Land Rover v8's. That's why the first 1/2 of the throttle feels so dead. Interestingly most OEMs with electronic throttle control exaggerate the throttle control to make a small motor feel bigger.
You also lose any tuning advantage that a well sized throttle body would have given you towards a ram air effect.
For a mildy built 3.5 the 65mm throttle valve should be more than enough.
An easy way to find out would be to measure manifold vacuum at WOT and maximum torque.
Cheers
Fred

Hiya

Hope this isn't classed as me spamming - although I do run a small company specialising in Megasquirt and Rover V8s in particular, the linky below will help you a lot - irrespective of if you buy anytghing from me !

I would suggest EDIS vs Direct Coil Drivers, MS1 and also that you use a Hotwire Injector system vs the Flapper one.

Look at www.megasquirt-v8.co.uk

If I can help just ask, but as others have said it will transform the engine, I run twin MSQs (Programs" 1 x for max power (and fuel !) and another as a "Economy" Map for just driving about, you can swap between them either via loading via a laptop or build the ecu right and have a dashboard switch :O)

MS1 will do all you need and then some, use latest version MS1 V3.57, MS3 is frankly for what you engine is far too OTT and expensive, you'll gain 1/32 of F all :O). Use MS1 get it running then spend the saving on a rolling road session with someone who knows not just about tunning but who is also familair with tunuing MS. You can do the fuel side yourself, the spark is the trickier one to sort. If you get stuck let me know and I can send you a suitable spark table

Never forget the engine you have there is basically a 50s Buick engine, simple and MS3 is just not going to give you any gains over a well set up MS1

Hope this helps

Nige



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/24/2012 03:31AM by NigelB.

I have a question maybe you could answer. I have a FAST efi throttle body. It's basically a 4 bbl carb body with 4 injectors in it if you're not familiar with it. It's going to go on a ford cologne V6. I have a dual plane manifold. With the carb when cruising, the primaries feed only the longer intake runners but under more throttle the secondaries open up and the short runners get fed at the same time. With MS2, should I try to set it up like a progressive carb, with only the 1st bank of injectors working, then under more throttle have the secondaries open and the second bank of injectors kick in? Or should I set it up like up double pumper and have all 4 opening with all 4 injectors working. I would also like 2 maps, one for performance, 1 for economy.

You'll need an IAC valve, MS-I might have some limitations there, and that is something to be very particular about. Just a solenoid valve can work, but basically if you want to run EDIS you can't do IAC.

The simpler MS systems are good, and inexpensive, so they make a lot of sense. But it's really all in what you want out of the system. The engine may be 50s technology but that is not so far removed from today. It's still pistons running up and down, and everything else is peripheral and can be updated. You've seen the build details on my Buick 340 for instance. It's a '67 engine but is fitted with neoprene seals, crank trigger, port injectors, etc. Ultimately individual egt's and COP, and then there is the transmission control. MS-1 is hopelessly inadequate for that task, but MS-3 is not. There is however a new board on the scene, called the Qorivva:

[blogs.freescale.com]
I know very little about it at this point but it seems interesting. One thing I like very much is the sealed case and connector.

On the throttle body, you get some progressive action by the way you connect the linkage. On mine I'll be using a bellcrank to double that action for smooth off idle performance. A small car with a big engine does not need much throttle most of the time.

On the dual injectors, most of those are set up with some overlap so that the secondaries begin to come in before the primaries saturate.

Jim

I am thinking that what you call IAC is what I know as "Extra Air Valve" or of the Rover V8s the "Stepper Motor" in which case you are correct in that MS1 will not control the 4 wire RR Stepper motor. However, MS1 will control the simpler and more relaible Bosch 2 wire Air Valve, and offer the ability to program it in terms of the "Autochoke" as to how much to lift the RPM to on cold start ups, and then lower the rpm bit by bit down to "Off" at another set RPM at a set temperature when reached. It will also control the tickover and give a rock solid one via closed loop settings

I actually don't like the RR stepper motor, they are reknowned for sticking, and being a PITA !

Control of a gearbox linking to the Engine ECU then yes MS3, but for engine control MS1 is more than enough, I have customers using highly tuned and rather exotic Rover V8s, dyno'd and set up spot on, a MS2 or MS3 would stuggle to give "More" BHP & Torque.

Too many people think that £s more = must be better, and to some degree that is true, but MS1 is a whole load easier to get to grips with and set up and get good than MS2 and 3 which are a huge step up in complexity. A spot on MS1 will and does often beat MS2s, I have lost count on how many poor MS2 set ups I have seen over the years !.

Ms2 basically gives a Bigger tune table than a MS1, will run a Steeper Motor, and allows the owner to rewrite and tweak the code it is written in, other than that MS1 will do everything MS2 does.

I have a lot of customers who have started with MS1 with the intention of going MS2 and never have, also people who have tried starting on MS3 and given up with a non runner. MS3 is superbly designed but you do have to know what you are doing to build and tune up the unit, more so than with say MS1.

Viva L Difference !

One thing is for sure, MS in any config set up properly knocks spots of "Lucas Prince of Darkness"

I even ended up selling these for those who wnated a coffe table talking point :



:O)

Nige




Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/24/2012 10:43AM by NigelB.

Here is a link to a handy dandy chart that shows the different features of the various versions of Mega-Squirt.
[ms3efi.com]
I'm a big believer in using MS3! Its faster, smarter and you can do more with it. Even if you don't use all of the features of MS3, the fuel tuning down to one tenth of a percent can make a big difference when tuning low load drivability conditions ie.city driving.
When I was running MS2 there were times when 1% of fuel trim was either to rich or lean. With 1/10 % of adjustment, it makes it easier to tune for both fuel mileage and power!
1/10% fuel adjustment also makes auto-tune work much better as well! There much less "hunting/surging" during the auto-tune phase of setting up your VE table, due to the faster processor and finer adjustments. This is important for first time users.
Even though it is more complex then MS1/MS2, MS3 combined with Tuner Studio is actually easier to use for a "car guy" like myself.
I like to compare the various versions of Mega-Squirt to a PC computer. You can have a PC that was designed a couple of years ago, or you can have one that was designed 10 years ago! Both will work, but which one would you rather have?!!

Bill

Mac?

That business about the air valve... how are you going to get different steps and different flow volumes from a solenoid air valve? Isn't it going to be either open or shut? If you could step it down... well, wasn't that what the stepper motor was designed to do?

I actually prefer the Ford IAC which is PWM controlled and needs only 2 wires. I like the configuration and mounting better too.

Jim

In all the commotion, we almost forgot to welcome a new member to the forum.

Glad to have you here, Nigel!

Re: Megasquirt vs 14CUX

Posted by: Moderator
Date: April 24, 2012 04:09PM


Mac?


Sure! :-)

I have been using Tuner Studio on my mac some, but using Parallels and running it through windows. It will run on the Mac, but i have not worked out the connections there yet..

Yes,

Welcome Nigel! I suspect that I'll have loads of questions for you. Also, thanks for the link. On the MS version 1, I didn't think this system could control sequential spark, only wasted spark technology. Am I incorrect?

Cheers,
NCtim