MAP ECU3 question

I'm just starting to wire mine into a 1GR truck (a Toyota Fortuner). I'm wondering why didn't you consider the UCON, since with the cam gears and thermostat the overall cost will be close to the UCON kit?

I also always wondered why do we need to advance the timing, since the Toyota ECU automatically advances itself to the maximum until it feels knock and then dials it back a bit.

I had a problem with the UCON syncing with my ECU, apparently the first such case, which is why I changed to the MAP-ECU3 instead.

I gather you're not using the built-in MAP sensor, since you are not using the MAF-elimination mode? Once you go F/I, you really should use the MAF-elimination mode, because MAP is far more accurate in tuning F/I than MAF.

I'll be watching this thread.

 

His '09 ecu has plugs which aren't currently compatible with the UCON.

 

It's still a couple hundred cheaper, but like Tor said, its not currently compatible with my ECU. In terms of timing, I don't believe it automatically advances itself until knock. I know it will retard if it senses knock, but I have my doubts about the first part. But maybe you're right. It just seems weird that they would have the ecu make the engine (in my truck) intentionally knock just to figure out where the threshold is. What if the sensor goes bad, or happens to miss the knock events? My guess is that Toyota engineers went through several engines during development doing just this: advancing until knock and then backing off a few degrees. They do this with enough engines, then they can establish a statistical model of where the knock threshold will be and then program the ECU so that it performs spark timing on the safe limits established by the statistical model+some sort of safety factor. Either way, there's still room to advance timing between it's current setting and knock threshold. According to Gadget @ URD, 3 degrees at higher RPM's is a good number for timing advance. I'm sure you could go even further if you really wanted to push the limits, but I'm just going to take his word for it as a safe number based on the amount of experience he has. Really all I'm doing with timing advance is eating up the safety factor set by the factory. Anyways power gains are very noticeable with timing advance. If the timing advance is creating knock like you infer it would, it would be the opposite, and power would be eaten up.

I do have the MAP sensor hooked up, just for data logging purposes at the moment, but may play around with the MAF elimination mode at some point. MAF intercept mode is pretty easy to work with and I will stick with that for now as I continue to learn. I like the fact that I can simply alter the stock tune vs creating an entire new one, which would be the case with MAF elimination.

 

Anyways, let me know if you run into any issues, since I just very recently went through the install. I actually had to dremel out the hole in the aluminum casing for the 16 pin connector a little be since the internal plug didn't quite line up with the cutout in the casing.

 

Oh yes, I forgot about that. What a shame! They didn't change the ECU in the Fortuner until today.

I will definitely use your experience and knowledge. Planning to plug mine in this weekend. Which MAF intercept you're using, MAP Y axis or MAF Y axis?

You are able to advance the timing I guess because of the advantage of the exhaust cam gears you've got installed. That will help a lot with the knock, I think.

I am guessing the Toyota does advance automatically, but only up to a certain limit, and doesn't go beyond that. So to go beyond that you need to advance manually. I'm guessing the four degrees advance that the exhaust cam gear gives you cannot be achieved with the ECU AI alone. Just a hunch.

 

You're right, the exhaust cam timing cannot be advanced electronically, hence the offset timing gear. All its doing is effectively reducing combustion chamber temps by allowing more exhaust gases to leave. This allows for safer spark timing advance since the combustion chamber will be slightly cooler.

I'm running MAF Y-axis.

 

I've been playing around with my AFR adjust and definitely pleased with the power gains at the low end. For example, while driving around in the rain, normal acceleration will spin the tires on wet pavement, whereas before, I had to kick er down to break em loose. Its much easier getting up to speed quickly without having to rev out at all. Its kind of tricky figuring out the fuel trims tho. I'm having this problem where the MAF adjustment needed to get fuel trims at zero with 12.5:1 afr in closed loop is different than the adjustment in open loop. Therefore, at the transition point, I'm either running lean closed loop, or rich open loop. Tough to explain it all at the moment, but will give an update once I get it figured out.

 

Man that's exactly the problem I had with a previous piggyback system! I don't know why you're facing this while you're still NA with stock injectors, I faced this with larger injectors and a Supercharger.

 

Correction: im using TPS for y-axis

 

Well that's definitely not going to work with FI.

At least you should use MAF y axis. Better would be using MAP Y axis, and better yet but most difficult is MAF elimination.

 

Little late to the party. I've been tackling suspension. I have a MAPECU3 to tune slightly larger injectors over stock and also dealing with a turbo. I've done all the tuning on mine from scratch. I'm using MAF intercept with MapY axis. I highly recommend this setup even for NA. Just run an 1/8"( think that is the correct size) tube from the manifold up to the Piggyback. You can still be lazy with this setup by not having to fill out an entire fuel table.


I'm on o2 adjust instead of afr adjust so I'm not sure if I'm much help here. I just kept adjusting my afr richer(add in a negative value) until that transition felt smooth. AFR do jump around kinda weird in that area but I try to hold 13.1 afr at my transition. It is still better than 14.7 from the factory ecu. I still get a little mini lean out kick between.

 

I see you have the old model Tacoma, is that the 5VZ engine? I'm not sure if that engine has a current-based AFR sensor or a voltage based O2 sensor in the front, but I assume it has the AFR sensor. If it does, it will do you no good modifying only the rear sensors. That will cause you problems. You have to use the MAP-ECU3 AFR calibrator.

 

2rz or 3rz I think. Either way, same era.

 

I'm 2rz 99. Mine is a narrow band o2. different than the afr sensor. I just do a voltage output shift to swing my afr around in closed loop. You guys do current shift for afr sensor? I know the afr sensors are more difficult to work with from what I've heard. Haven't seen an afr table yet.

 

PM sent
justrynarip

 

thanks for the thread revival... sub'd af.... also @Ohiobenz there is a group buy for these units that gets em down to about $500 going on, gonna order this weekend if you want in
https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/mapecu3-feeler-possible-group-buy-af.458556/

 

I'm not ready to jump in on a GB just yet until I know more about the capabilities.
Are the files shareable like Megasquirt?

I have e-check, how will this affect me passing?
Will this eliminate the PO420/430 codes since the header and freeflow CAT install?
Does the GB include the exhaust cam gear (s)?

 

for the cat codes an o2 simulator is what most are using I believe, and the GB is just the unit, and a few of us are also getting the afr module's but not saving anything but shipping on those. I'm not sure on shareability... I have almost exhausted my knowledge on the product now

 

I would think that leaning the fuel out a bit would eliminate the errors because with hot CATs they don't occur.
For now I'm just going to sit back & learn.

 

-You can share files.
-Won't eliminate cel codes
-Doesn't need to read off your crank sensor.