fi and openflash tune

[mwjcyber]

I see tuners on here that don't get it.

I want to tune my car now for NA, and for FI in a year.

Why would I spend $600 now for Ecutek cable & license, + cost of tune and dyno time; and then repeat that every time I add something to my car? Might be great for tuners, but no way in hell I'm paying additional $500 every time I want a tune (including local dyno for remote tune). Plus if I ever get tired of the car I could sell the OFT, not a option with Ecutek.

With OFT, I can load up a generic tune, and if I want it customized, I'll send a tuner my data logs. The ft86 community now has a viable affordable tuning platform, and if you want our business, you best get on board with OFT in the future.

As OP started, when I buy my turbo, OFT support will be a top requirement.
.

[AVOturboworld]

Hardware doesn't support software. Software supports the hardware.

OFT doesn't support the FI hardware at this time. If you want OFT support of hardware, you need to be asking OFT to support it. If you want tuners to tune FI cars with OFT, OFT needs to have the features necessary to tune and support FI properly. If it doesn't, then then the tuners won't use it.

Lets use Accessport as an example, an example of something that actually happened to us. Accessport used to support the 2.5i naturally aspirated 2008+ Impreza. So we designed a turbo kit around the idea of the Accessport being used to program the 2.5i. When we finished up the turbo kit, we were informed by COBB they were no longer going to produce the accessport for the 2.5i. And when we got our hands on the Accessport for those models that were on the market, we found out that it didn't have any support for the maps that were necessary for tuning the 2.5i for a turbo kit. So now we use opensource/romraider/ecuedit to support those cars using those kits.

See, it's not a matter of wanting to lock our product to any particular tuning software, it's a matter of using whatever is available that works.

[Circuit Motorsports]

Originally Posted by Dephective

I'm purchasing a turbo kit here soon and I too want OFT to hurry up and offer FI support. I won't be doing much tuning on my own, so naturally I would want tuners to hop on board with this as well. I just hope that they offer the support by the time I get around to dropping on a kit, in which case I will make my purchase of ECUtek model and eventually switch when the support is satisfactory with OFT.

With the exception of 1 person localy (unfortunately not an ECUtek tuner), I wouldn't trust anyone absolutely with my $5k investment, especially when it can turn into a $10k headache. Anyone who says "trust me" makes me weary, regardless of reputation. While I can't do the majority of tuning on my own just yet, I am competent enough to catch something if it seems off to me, which is extremely beneficial for longevity and safety. Datalogging doesn't show you what the tables values are, only current running conditions. I want to see what my tuner did and, more importantly, WHY.

Another benefit is being able to adjust the stupid little things like fuel trims. With the changing of weather, these things can certainly make a big difference in how well and how safe your car runs. It's stupid to have to be limited on your tuner's time to adjust something so simple its infuriating. That's if you're lucky enough to get someone who offers free updates, which would more than likely make your wait times even greater.

So as a tuner, you're not willing to tune using a program that has less features but costs you nothing to use, especially when it's not reinventing the wheel, tuning principles apply regardless of the program you are using. You are about to have people throwing money at you and you're just going to say no? Guess the fewer that capitalize on this, will just profit all the more.

Not to mention, the ridiculous price variances you find on ECUtek cables and licenses through different vendors. Standardize your shit guys.

Originally Posted by mwjcyber

I see tuners on here that don't get it.

I want to tune my car now for NA, and for FI in a year.

Why would I spend $600 now for Ecutek cable & license, + cost of tune and dyno time; and then repeat that every time I add something to my car? Might be great for tuners, but no way in hell I'm paying additional $500 every time I want a tune (including local dyno for remote tune). Plus if I ever get tired of the car I could sell the OFT, not a option with Ecutek.

With OFT, I can load up a generic tune, and if I want it customized, I'll send a tuner my data logs. The ft86 community now has a viable affordable tuning platform, and if you want our business, you best get on board with OFT in the future.

As OP started, when I buy my turbo, OFT support will be a top requirement.
.

The pricing here is way off for what most tuners would charge for those services secondary services....

I could go on and list differences and correct some things but it would just turn another thread into a Ecutek > Opensource debate...which I doubt people want to see.

If either of you wants to discuss tuning/prices/differences in software we'd be happy to, but probably best done via PM.

[Dephective]

Originally Posted by Circuit Motorsports

I could go on and list differences and correct some things but it would just turn another thread into a Ecutek > Opensource debate...which I doubt people want to see.

If either of you wants to discuss tuning/prices/differences in software we'd be happy to, but probably best done via PM.

I know the current pros and cons of each. I understand the lack of support for FI with the OFT.. for now.


Like I said, if it's not available when I'm ready, there will be no choice for me but to go the ECUtek route, hoping that shortly after FI will be supported by OFT. My comments where just my thoughts on WHY I want OFT vs ECUtek, and I think that there are a lot of people with my same concerns. This thread was specifically about FI and OFT, not "hey ECUtek already supports this, and OFT doesn't!" We already know this, and we know the major vendors on here that support it. What we are addressing are those tuners who have plans for OFT when the support becomes available for FI.

My other comments weren't toward any specific vendor here, I was merely addressing the overall attitude of vendors toward OFT who currently use ECUtek.

[jamesm]

what exactly does OFT not support that is necessary for FI? it's a map flashing device, you don't even edit roms with it. it seems like a contrived argument that's easier to say than 'we have an exclusivity agreement with ecutek and can't do it'.

oft can't possibly 'not have the features for fi' when all it does is flash a damn map.

[King Tut]

Originally Posted by jamesm

what exactly does OFT not support that is necessary for FI? it's a map flashing device, you don't even edit roms with it. it seems like a contrived argument that's easier to say than 'we have an exclusivity agreement with ecutek and can't do it'.

oft can't possibly 'not have the features for fi' when all it does is flash a damn map.

I agree. I think people have forgotten that it is basically a $500 map flasher. The editing of the table in the ROMs can be done with multiple software programs and the editing of those tables to run forced induction on a non forced induction ROM is up to the tuner.

[endrswrd]

I would probably also note that new logic doesnt necessarily need to be introduced to the stock rom to support FI. I think the stock rom can be rescaled to be used as a FI rom. If I had a car to test with I would find out exactly what needed to be done, but sadly, there arent enough twins here in ohio for me to play with. Ive helped people do it with the older 2.5i's so it shouldnt be too difficult. I think the issue right now is just that OFT is still very new and needs time to reach new people. The OS nature of it will benefit the community it just takes time for people to adopt it and use it.


That and were still waiting for logging *cough cough =)

[Td-d]

Originally Posted by endrswrd

I would probably also note that new logic doesnt necessarily need to be introduced to the stock rom to support FI. I think the stock rom can be rescaled to be used as a FI rom. If I had a car to test with I would find out exactly what needed to be done, but sadly, there arent enough twins here in ohio for me to play with. Ive helped people do it with the older 2.5i's so it shouldnt be too difficult. I think the issue right now is just that OFT is still very new and needs time to reach new people. The OS nature of it will benefit the community it just takes time for people to adopt it and use it.


That and were still waiting for logging *cough cough =)

Hey endrswrd, I figured you'd land up in this thread eventually

Patience, Kimosabi.

[Xero-Limit]

Originally Posted by endrswrd

I would probably also note that new logic doesnt necessarily need to be introduced to the stock rom to support FI. I think the stock rom can be rescaled to be used as a FI rom. If I had a car to test with I would find out exactly what needed to be done, but sadly, there arent enough twins here in ohio for me to play with. Ive helped people do it with the older 2.5i's so it shouldnt be too difficult. I think the issue right now is just that OFT is still very new and needs time to reach new people. The OS nature of it will benefit the community it just takes time for people to adopt it and use it.


That and were still waiting for logging *cough cough =)

Yes and no. While you can scale stock stuff, with the EcuTek RaceROM custom mapping we can bypass the stock logic. This is huge. All of the FI programming we do on the BRZ involves this so we can base it off of MAP or do boost based fueling/timing. With this you can up the boost, put in boost failsafe, change fueling relative to boost, and make ECU based boost control. Load based is great for NA, but sucks with big boost (or even low boost on high compression) since you're so close to the edge.

[endrswrd]

Originally Posted by Td-d

Hey endrswrd, I figured you'd land up in this thread eventually

Patience, Kimosabi.

I am very excited Td-d, and I have some local guys who cant wait either!

One thing I do need to do if I can get my hands on a car is work with merp to add some boost control stuff. The only major thing I really need to make these maps better for FI is getting an EBCS(and all the associated TD and boost cut) to work with the stock ecu. Gotta look for a sensor we can hijack!

Should be really easy considering the ecu is in the engine bay lol.

Originally Posted by moto-mike

Yes and no. While you can scale stock stuff, with the EcuTek RaceROM custom mapping we can bypass the stock logic. This is huge. All of the FI programming we do on the BRZ involves this so we can base it off of MAP or do boost based fueling/timing. With this you can up the boost, put in boost failsafe, change fueling relative to boost, and make ECU based boost control. Load based is great for NA, but sucks with big boost (or even low boost on high compression) since you're so close to the edge.

Same thing can be done in OS, it just is going to take some time. I am a software developer by day, and actually get to do some DoD based RE work for my company as well. I am well aware the stock rom isnt the best setup, but adding boost logic from other subarus will be straightforward once I have a car to work with. I know for sure merp would help as I am sure alot of guys would love to go completely OS for their BRZ tuning needs. Realistically, the boost cut is easy, its adding in an EBCS that will be more difficult. But there are cars who wont need this either (sc guys), and would just need emergency boost cut (doubtful for a SC but its nice to have).

[regal]

Originally Posted by moto-mike

Yes and no. While you can scale stock stuff, with the EcuTek RaceROM custom mapping we can bypass the stock logic. This is huge. All of the FI programming we do on the BRZ involves this so we can base it off of MAP or do boost based fueling/timing. With this you can up the boost, put in boost failsafe, change fueling relative to boost, and make ECU based boost control. Load based is great for NA, but sucks with big boost (or even low boost on high compression) since you're so close to the edge.

But for someone who just wants a moderate kit like base innovate, avo, or greddy, ~ 225whp, the license/cable/tune end up adding 25% to the cost.

If these cars are so complicated to tune that a 225 whp kit requires bypassing stock logic and EcuTeck then it cuts off a lot of potential customers.

Maybe I'm wrong but those who buy an Innovate kit with their carb 210hp base-map are paying for more than they need with the Ecutek.

I totally get the need for a $900 tune+ tuning equipment on those pushing 270+hp, but at some point someone is going to sell a ~225 hp kit with a free base map. Probably for $3500 done deal. Its a business model and market segment that this platform needs. Like Flying Miata's $3k kit?

[King Tut]

Originally Posted by endrswrd

Should be really easy considering the ecu is in the engine bay lol.

The direct injector controller is in the engine bay mounted to the intake manifold on the passenger side, but the ECU is inside under the dash on the passenger side. By the way EcuTek is using the fuel vapor vent sensor input to control an EBCS. It is mounted under the intake manifold on the driver side.

[endrswrd]

Originally Posted by King Tut

The direct injector controller is in the engine bay mounted to the intake manifold on the passenger side, but the ECU is inside under the dash on the passenger side. By the way EcuTek is using the fuel vapor vent sensor input to control an EBCS. It is mounted under the intake manifold on the driver side.

Oh so thats just the intermediate controller. Damn. I was thinking it was the Entire ECU like they are doing on some newer cars.

Thanks for the tip! Ill have to look into that sensor. So eliminating it has no ill effects?

[King Tut]

Originally Posted by endrswrd

Oh so thats just the intermediate controller. Damn. I was thinking it was the Entire ECU like they are doing on some newer cars.

Thanks for the tip! Ill have to look into that sensor. So eliminating it has no ill effects?

Nobody has reported any thus far but there aren't many that are using that form of boost control.