Computer upgrade clarification proposal - any thoughts?

[mossaidis]

Current ST rules for computers states:

Section X.5.B "In cars using computers, aftermarket chips may be substituted. Ignition coil may be upgraded. Any ignition may be
used as long as the stock spark trigger (distributor) is used."

My proposed change:

Section X.5.B "In cars using computers, reprogrammed ECU and/or aftermarket chips may be substituted/installed. These allowances also apply to forced induction cars, except that no direct changes to standard boost level, intercoolers, or boost controllers are permitted. Ignition coil may be upgraded. Any ignition may be used as long as the stock spark trigger (distributor) is used."

Comments: Clarifiction of current rules to allow ECU mods in ST that are meant to allow new rev limits, better fuel curves and ignition timing changes, but not boost for turbo/sc cars.

[mossaidis]

After my ranting this morning... I can think one alternate to not allowing boost increases. That is, if you allow boost increases in non-NA ST cars, then you would have to reclass cars in ST according to potential HP levels when boost increases.

Another way of thinking about it is: ST turbo/sc would get bumped if they adjusted the boost levels.

[mdaniels]

This rule always confused me a little bit. For example, I think the rule is meant to disallow complete swaps of the ECU, but it is a little unclear.

I actually wouldn't mind seeing this rule changed to allow for open ECUs (i.e. complete replacements with a third party ECU).

Matt

[mossaidis]

Current rule: "Section X.5.C. Underdrive pulleys are permitted."

Proposed change: "Section X.5.C. Underdrive pulleys are permitted. Supercharged cars may not change the effective diameter of any pulley which drives the supercharger."

Comments: Prohibits increase in supercharger boost levels via mechanical means.

[mossaidis]

This rule always confused me a little bit. For example, I think the rule is meant to disallow complete swaps of the ECU, but it is a little unclear.

I actually wouldn't mind seeing this rule changed to allow for open ECUs (i.e. complete replacements with a third party ECU).

Matt

Do you mean the whole ECU board or just the main chip?

[rajito]

Clear enough :thumbleft:

Raj

[mdaniels]

Do you mean the whole ECU board or just the main chip?

The entire ECU.

[WillM]

Comments: Clarifiction of current rules to allow ECU mods in ST that are meant to allow new rev limits, better fuel curves and ignition timing changes, but not boost for turbo/sc cars.

Where is it stated that the current rules are meant to allow those specific changes, but expressly NOT boost control? From past discussions, it seems that sometimes an interpretation of the rule is thought of as the intent of the rule.

With that in mind, how about adding what the intent of the rule is within the wording of the rule itself? Would this improve clarity in the rules, thus helping competitors and stewards identify what is and what is not in compliance with a rule?

For example, if the intent of the rule above is to allow modifications which enable the adjustment of rev limits, timing, and fuel maps, but not boost settings, then would it be helpful to state exactly that in the rule?

Section X.5.B "In cars using computers, software or hardware replacement or changes of the factory ECU is permitted. Electronic or mechanical adjustment to boost levels is prohibited. Ignition coil may be upgraded. Any ignition may be used as long as the stock spark trigger (distributor) is used. The intent of this rule is to provide a means to alter rev limits, timing, and fueling perimeters."

Likewise, if the rule was to be written to allow boost level changes:

Section X.5.B "In cars using computers, software or hardware replacement or changes of the factory ECU is permitted. Ignition coil may be upgraded. Any ignition may be used as long as the stock spark trigger (distributor) is used. The intent of this rule is to provide a means to alter rev limits, timing, fueling, and other engine performance perimeters, including boost levels."

Thoughts?

[Stynger]

IMO having the intent of the rule would help clarify many gray areas during a rules dispute.

X.5. A. Any air cleaner may be used. Original carburetor or fuel injection throttle body (or OEM equivalents with same flow rate) must be used. In all cases, intake manifold must remain stock as delivered.
The intent of this rule is to allow optional air cleaners, filters and means of attaching such items, It doesn't allow for the change or deletion of any electronic devices (sensors) installed in the stock system or the addition of any power enhancing devices.

[rajito]

Will, I agree about stating the intent. Especially with ECUs and programming, it might be useful to state the intent of the rule, and list out what is not allowed. Listing what parameter changes are allowed in ECUs will produce one hell of a list.

The boost control is just a thorny issue for those who don't have turbos

Raj

[HerbD]

Since boost control effectively makes a turbo engine make as
much horsepower as the driver is willing to risk in his engine,
I make the following suggestion:

- Allow aftermarket chips, ECU swaps, and ECU flashes in ST.

- Allow manual boost controllers.

- If any turbo car is fitted with a manual boost controller or ECU which
raises the boost level above stock, that car shall be classified in STGT,
regardless of where it came from in SS.

Due to the very significant power/weight ratio increases that can
be achieved from a simple ECU swap in a turbo car, I think this is
the only way to be fair to NA cars.

And yes, I drive a turbo car and have seen the types of power
increases possible with just an ECU swap.

[cfossum]

And yes, I drive a turbo car and have seen the types of power
increases possible with just an ECU swap.
_________________
-Herb DaSilva
2004 SRT-4, Blue #62, ST1


Herb,
Don't you mean
2004 SRT-4, Blue, #62, STGT ???

[HerbD]

And yes, I drive a turbo car and have seen the types of power
increases possible with just an ECU swap.
_________________
-Herb DaSilva
2004 SRT-4, Blue #62, ST1


Herb,
Don't you mean
2004 SRT-4, Blue, #62, STGT ???

Not yet!! Just wheels and swaybars at this point.

But a friend has a Silver 2004 SRT-4 with an aftermarket ECU,
and that car is QUITE a bit quicker than mine.

If this rule goes through, I'll take my medicine and see
you other boost boys in STGT!!

[rajito]

If this rule goes through, I'll take my medicine and see
you other boost boys in STGT!!

See you there, Herb. I'll probably be there with no engine/exhaust mods

Raj

[KC]

Since boost control effectively makes a turbo engine make as
much horsepower as the driver is willing to risk in his engine,
I make the following suggestion:

- Allow aftermarket chips, ECU swaps, and ECU flashes in ST.

- Allow manual boost controllers.

- If any turbo car is fitted with a manual boost controller or ECU which
raises the boost level above stock, that car shall be classified in STGT,
regardless of where it came from in SS.

Due to the very significant power/weight ratio increases that can
be achieved from a simple ECU swap in a turbo car, I think this is
the only way to be fair to NA cars.

And yes, I drive a turbo car and have seen the types of power
increases possible with just an ECU swap.

Another club is dealing with this same issue in on a national level. It is almost impossible to detect changes to boosted in cars that have ECUs flashed as they can be 'made' in such a way that a simple boost gauge may not even detect, or better yet... switchable through a combination of buttons on the dash, or through plugging something in on the OBD port, before someone is able to look at it/test. A dealership wouldn't even have the tools to see it either.

So keeping that in mind...

If any turbo car is fitted with a manual boost controller or ECU which raises the boost level above stock, that car shall be classified in STGT, regardless of where it came from in SS.

Would that part of the rule fix or help prevent someone running a WRX from upping their boost and not saying anything? You'll have no way of telling if the ST WRX does or does not have boost changes... honesty is all you have to go on (to most that is enough as I saw this weekend.. which I think is fantastic).

One or two other clubs have addressed this with classing the car to it's potential as if it had all the mods on the car (upped boost being one of them) and best driver. Ie: one or two classes harder for all cars that have boost... as if it was assumed that all cars had upped boost. It removes the potential for cheating by addressing the issue, it removes the speculation by competitors/bystanders/losers that the driver may NOT be that good and is cheating ("but we have no way to tell"), and the car is classed appropriately with this new-found power.

--kC