Nissan VQ30DE

[greenamex2]

Hi all

I am a current disillusioned Cosworth user looking for a replacement for my current ECU.

I have now got a CDL3 dash which I am really happy with (prefer it to my older Cosworth Omega, and i2 seems every bit as good as Toolbox) and am looking at the M84 for my street/trackday/race Nissan VQ30DE.

This is a fairly light spec, just with ITB, dry sump, mild reground cams and a mildly ported head....fed up with small capacity highly strung race engines costing me a fortune. It is fitted to a 800Kg mid engined kit car via an ex BTCC Hewland sequential touring car box.

The questions are -

Is this ECU OK for the engine?
Anybody got a base map I can play with?

Thanks in advance.

[sardengineering]

Denis,

Do you have any specifics you would like to share? I don't have the VQ30 engine local to me, however I am almost positive that the OEM cylinder sync and cylinder reference signals are supported. From there you will have to assess you inputs and outputs you are using. The M600 might be the best suited fit if you were to consider long term based revisions.

Here are a few concerns you can review,

Are you using Inductive discharge or Capacitive discharge ignition solution, and will you be using a wasted spark or sequential based coil strategy?

Will you be running a staged injection fuel system or will you be using a single injector per cylinder solution. What injectors will you be using? Do you have injector characterization data available?

Will the data logging strategy be very specific and detailed or will it be simple and basic? That is to say will you be monitoring many systems like the lubrication system (temperature and pressure), independent wheel speed data and as such.

Something else to consider would be implementation of CAN, I don't remember you making mention of any needs in this respect.

In short, the M84 will be more than okay to support a VQ30 with respect to an engine management solution. However, should any specifics or curiosities come to mind please feel free to respond accordingly.

My apologies for the delayed response to your post, cheers!

[David Ferguson]

Isn't that a dual DBW engine? I believe we needed to use a DBW4 with an M600 to support that. I do not believe an M84 will support Drive By Wire.

[greenamex2]

Hi all, and thanks for helping

Still arguing with myself about M600 versus M84....I know that the M600 is more expandable but will also cost over £1000 more for things I might not end up needing.

That aside -

Inductive coils used sequentially (standard VQ30 so TTL). Err, mostly for spark plug lige because replacing three of the plugs will probably need the engine partially removing unless I get lucky and create an access panel.

Single injector per cylinder, sequentially. Just planning to use the standard injectors unless they run out of flow. The engine is pretty lowly tuned so we might get away with it running at 4 bar. The standard injectors are around 260cc at 3 bar, high impedance.

From a CAN point of view, I am only currently planning to have my CDL-3, SLM-C, ECU and eventually PDM and VCS on the bus.

As for drive by wire, as I am on independent throttle bodies I can either go "cable" OR "drive by wire". Drive by wire would be nice...but yet more money!

For triggering I am currently think of using the standard cam trigger with the crank trigger on an aftermarket disk on the crank pulley. Particularly as the gearbox requires a non standard flywheel anyway.

Any thoughts welcome.

Thanks in advance.

[sardengineering]

Denis,

From what you have described the M84 will be able to take care of your engine management need on your VQ30. I must apologize for assuming that you were not going to implement a DBW solution, I saw your comment on the ITB throttle arrangement and went from there. Please keep in mind that the engine in question isn't available locally for me to review so I will be advising based on your remarks/descriptions.

David is very much correct as the M84 doesn't offer DBW support, but you have to keep in mind that this was offered as an entry level solution so there aren't the usual bells and whistles native to your hundred series ECU. If you can be mindful of this in an immediate and long term perspective then I believe you will you can make a definitive decisison.

A couple other things to note would be that there's no integrated knock support by way of the usual SKM (an independant solution can be used here), you wont be able to use the 2 spare injector outputs for anything, data analysis by way of i2 Pro isn't available but i2 standard is there, and variable valve timing support isn't present. These are the more important points I thought to be of prime interest to your application.

These are all noted on the MoTeC website - http://www.motec.com/aboutecu/ecucomparison/

On the upside, you will be able to run support sequential operation for both fuel and ignition. The injector drivers will support both high impedance and low impedance. The lambda support is unlocked (free) for a single sensor setup, however, there are provisions to use a dual lambda sensor solution with the M84. Which is great since you have a V configuration engine. Another useful provision is 512k data logging which is also unlocked (free), and the maximum logging rate is at a very decent 100Hz. Once again this information is available on the web page the link above navigates to.

I will agree that the M600 solution will do a much more comprehensive job of addressing both your short term and long term needs, but this is something you should review at length. Where the M600 really shines out is long term when your engine management needs may grow, the M600 will be able to adapt without drastic revisions. That is to say, the downsides or missing functionality of the M84 isn't present in the M600 plus there. The link posted above reflects a contast for you.

Also, you should feel free to speak with a vendor, dealer or authorized support personnel should you wish to go deeper into specific details you have. Or, if you feel more at ease communicating here on the forum this is okay as well. Please be sure to address your posts in a direct manner to avoid misunderstandings.

Thank you kindly for your interest in the MoTeC brand and I look forward to the success of your project, cheers!

[greenamex2]

Thanks for all the advice.

I think the best way forward is probably to go for the M600 and cut back elsewhere. In the long run it makes more sense.

Once I make some progress I'll provide an update. It's an interesting project.....building a genuine road going race car that can beat "super tourers" on the track, low running costs and still drive to work/the shops.

The complete opposite to my previous race car...An AE86 with a tuned to oblivion engine, solid suspension, massive running costs and totally undriveable below race speed.

[sardengineering]

As strange as it may sound, more is better for some instances, well as far as engine management solutions for anyway. In most cases the planning stages of any engine management solution may very well be time consuming, however, if done correctly ahead of time it really allows things to flow smoothly. Well, maybe not completely smooth but at least trouble free from the usual suspects anyway.

Both automotive projects you have described are rather interesting in their own respects, and they both sound like they make for some rather pleasant driving experiences. I hope that things progress in a productive manner, also, I trust that your MoTeC product experience continues to be a pleasant one.

Please feel free to sharing any further updates on the forum as you see fit, cheers!