Haltech E6GM

[Mike Buckham]

>----------
>From: 	bearbvd at sni.net[SMTP:bearbvd at sni.net]
>Reply To: 	diy_efi at efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu
>Sent: 	16 January 1999 01:13
>To: 	diy_efi at efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu
>Subject: 	Re: Haltech E6GM
>
>>I did a little reading through the archives and came across a post
>>which mentioned that one drawback to the E6GM was that the RPM
>>increments were 1000RPM as opposed to 500RPM in another system.
>>
>>Can someone explain the difference in operation and the effect on
>>programming as well as driveablity?
>>
>>TIA,
>>
>>Charles Brooks
>
>Your fuel and timing maps are basically a matrix of (engine) load vs.
>speed, with fuel/advance values at each point on the chart. Either MAF or
>MAP is used as the load indicator, RPM as the speed indicator. Having
>mapped points every 500 RPM (with respect to speed) results in twice as
>many points on each chart as having them every 1000 RPM would. This leads
>to more accurate tuning. On the best systems, RPM increments and load
>increments are user selectable, and do not necessarily have to be evenly
>spaced (for instance, you could choose to lay your RPM increments out so
>that each higher one was an equal percentage greater than the one below!!)
>
>Take a look at the web sites for MoTeC and/or Autronics if you want to get
>a good idea of what programming options are available on higher end units.

http:\\www.motec.com
http:\\www.autronics.com
>
>Also, there was a thread a few weeks ago talking about the effect of the
>minimum increment in injector pulse width of which a given ecu is capable
>of incrementing, and the effect of that factor on a tuner's ability to get
>an engine to idle in a civilized manner--particularly if using a big cam
>and/or injectors. IMHO, a unit with a minimum pw increment of more than 16
>us --preferably 8 or 10 us (us, not ms) is not worth a #$@% for a
>STREETABLE hypo application. Check this out carefully before you buy!!
>
>Regards, Greg
>
>
>