Pectel T6
22-02-2007, 10:16 AM
#41
Originally Posted by Deano
Does the better the ECU say Pectel T6 make a car easier or harder to map Stu or is it pretty much the same regardless of ECU choice ?
Just wondered if there was a specific ECU you preffered mapping
Just wondered if there was a specific ECU you preffered mapping
I love mapping T6, however, please be aware that if you want ALL teh maps doing, and i advise that you do use its extensive features, it would literally take a LONG TIME, so it would be expensive to map.
Anyone ever seen how many maps it actually has?
22-02-2007, 10:18 AM
#42
Professional Waffler
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
Originally Posted by Deano
Does the better the ECU say Pectel T6 make a car easier or harder to map Stu or is it pretty much the same regardless of ECU choice ?
Just wondered if there was a specific ECU you preffered mapping
Just wondered if there was a specific ECU you preffered mapping
I love mapping T6, however, please be aware that if you want ALL the maps doing, and i advise that you do use its extensive features, it would literally take a LONG TIME, so it would be expensive to map.
Anyone ever seen how many maps it actually has?
Ive seen all the correct maps
i still look at them nearly everytime i drive my car
22-02-2007, 10:19 AM
#43
Resolution, to my mind is an issue on teh spark front, but for this reason.
If we only have, say, 8 speed sites for our spark map, we would likely label them 1000 - 8000rpm yes?
So on a YB we have a resonance issue around 5500 that can cause det, and we often have to pull timing out there... what do we do?
We would have to pull out of 5 and 6 thousand together as its interpolating these 2 sites. This would lose torque from 4 - 5K and 6-7k too, again due to speed site interpolation.
The same can be said for load really.
We are rarely going to lose peak power, but area under the graph wil, normally, be better on a "Properly" mapped ecu with higher load and spee sites than one with very very few that requires intense interpolation.
Hope that makes sense, as im a tad rushed today, sorry.
If we only have, say, 8 speed sites for our spark map, we would likely label them 1000 - 8000rpm yes?
So on a YB we have a resonance issue around 5500 that can cause det, and we often have to pull timing out there... what do we do?
We would have to pull out of 5 and 6 thousand together as its interpolating these 2 sites. This would lose torque from 4 - 5K and 6-7k too, again due to speed site interpolation.
The same can be said for load really.
We are rarely going to lose peak power, but area under the graph wil, normally, be better on a "Properly" mapped ecu with higher load and spee sites than one with very very few that requires intense interpolation.
Hope that makes sense, as im a tad rushed today, sorry.
22-02-2007, 10:28 AM
#47
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
Resolution, to my mind is an issue on the spark front, but for this reason.
If we only have, say, 8 speed sites for our spark map, we would likely label them 1000 - 8000rpm yes?
So on a YB we have a resonance issue around 5500 that can cause det, and we often have to pull timing out there... what do we do?
We would have to pull out of 5 and 6 thousand together as its interpolating these 2 sites. This would lose torque from 4 - 5K and 6-7k too, again due to speed site interpolation.
The same can be said for load really.
We are rarely going to lose peak power, but area under the graph wil, normally, be better on a "Properly" mapped ecu with higher load and spee sites than one with very very few that requires intense interpolation.
Hope that makes sense, as im a tad rushed today, sorry.
If we only have, say, 8 speed sites for our spark map, we would likely label them 1000 - 8000rpm yes?
So on a YB we have a resonance issue around 5500 that can cause det, and we often have to pull timing out there... what do we do?
We would have to pull out of 5 and 6 thousand together as its interpolating these 2 sites. This would lose torque from 4 - 5K and 6-7k too, again due to speed site interpolation.
The same can be said for load really.
We are rarely going to lose peak power, but area under the graph wil, normally, be better on a "Properly" mapped ecu with higher load and spee sites than one with very very few that requires intense interpolation.
Hope that makes sense, as im a tad rushed today, sorry.
.
22-02-2007, 10:28 AM
#48
Originally Posted by SECS
Stu @ M Developments
You have got resolution and mapping sites confused I think with regards
to my comments.
You have got resolution and mapping sites confused I think with regards
to my comments.
22-02-2007, 10:31 AM
#51
BANNED
BANNED
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 12,483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pectel Descpro.... Dont care how good it performs , looks bloody awfull IMO
Especially when you compare it to Autronics user interface
(All just my friendly opinion of course )
Especially when you compare it to Autronics user interface
(All just my friendly opinion of course )
22-02-2007, 10:33 AM
#52
Professional Waffler
Originally Posted by SECS
Pectel Descpro.... Dont care how good it performs , looks bloody awfull IMO
Especially when you compare Autronics user interface
Especially when you compare Autronics user interface
and stu,,,, ummmm,, i havent time
and just checked i havent got descpro on this computer 
22-02-2007, 10:55 AM
#53
BANNED
BANNED
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 12,483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Stu @ M Developments
Originally Posted by SECS
Stu @ M Developments
You have got resolution and mapping sites confused I think with regards
to my comments.
You have got resolution and mapping sites confused I think with regards
to my comments.
Stu,
Dont ever feel embarrassed, your input is always welcomed/wanted
(especially when you back me up LOL
)I am thinking about doing a write up on how an ecu works internally
including hardware/software/mathmatics etc...
Most people would be surprised how "inaccurate" things actually are
in the real world as an ecu would cease to function without averaging
which reduces accuracy in a dynamically changing device such as an
engine.
22-02-2007, 11:14 AM
#58
10K+ Poster!!
I noticed yesterday at Nicholson Mclaren that they use T6 a lot on their engines. The Nissan engine I put a picture up of ran T6, Considering no one was about I could of made off with it but I'm too paranoid of stealing penny sweets let alone 2k worth of management
I really should of got some pics of the dyno rooms as they were superb.
Yum- I probably know someone with T6 for sale if your decide to go for it
I really should of got some pics of the dyno rooms as they were superb.
Yum- I probably know someone with T6 for sale if your decide to go for it
22-02-2007, 11:24 AM
#59
BANNED
BANNED
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Surrey BUT IF UR A FIT WOMEN
Posts: 4,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jsut ring AHMED dave he will tell you all and leave you to deside
i would ahve done T2 if i knew the problems i would have had and save Ł1500 !!!
i would ahve done T2 if i knew the problems i would have had and save Ł1500 !!!
22-02-2007, 11:46 AM
#60
BANNED
BANNED
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 12,483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T6 is used widely in motorsport because it is so flexible in it operation and
has many standard features that 99% of road users would never need.
Also, the T6 is rugedised to the motorsport enviroment of vibration
and high ambient temperatures.
It just happens to have a high resolution that you would expect of any
modern ecu designed and sold in the last 10 years.
has many standard features that 99% of road users would never need.
Also, the T6 is rugedised to the motorsport enviroment of vibration
and high ambient temperatures.
It just happens to have a high resolution that you would expect of any
modern ecu designed and sold in the last 10 years.
22-02-2007, 12:36 PM
#62
Busy today so I havent read the thread, so apologies if I repeat anything.
T6 is a proper motorsport ecu, multiple dimension tables etc, there is utterly nothing you would ever want to do with your car that it cant do Dave, very capable of running ITB's and a turbo together etc.
Proper bit of kit by any standards.
That said though, im sure SM4 would also do what you need from your car, so I dont see any need to spend more money just for the sake of it to change, especially given you already have it mapped and ready to go and would be back to square one in that regard, but thats up to you of course!
T6 is a proper motorsport ecu, multiple dimension tables etc, there is utterly nothing you would ever want to do with your car that it cant do Dave, very capable of running ITB's and a turbo together etc.
Proper bit of kit by any standards.
That said though, im sure SM4 would also do what you need from your car, so I dont see any need to spend more money just for the sake of it to change, especially given you already have it mapped and ready to go and would be back to square one in that regard, but thats up to you of course!
22-02-2007, 12:43 PM
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Chip-3Door
Busy today so I havent read the thread, so apologies if I repeat anything.
T6 is a proper motorsport ecu, multiple dimension tables etc, there is utterly nothing you would ever want to do with your car that it cant do Dave, very capable of running ITB's and a turbo together etc.
Proper bit of kit by any standards.
That said though, im sure SM4 would also do what you need from your car, so I dont see any need to spend more money just for the sake of it to change, especially given you already have it mapped and ready to go and would be back to square one in that regard, but thats up to you of course!
T6 is a proper motorsport ecu, multiple dimension tables etc, there is utterly nothing you would ever want to do with your car that it cant do Dave, very capable of running ITB's and a turbo together etc.
Proper bit of kit by any standards.
That said though, im sure SM4 would also do what you need from your car, so I dont see any need to spend more money just for the sake of it to change, especially given you already have it mapped and ready to go and would be back to square one in that regard, but thats up to you of course!
SM4 Came with Ranj's Engine, only been dyoed mapped and has not been live mapped yet, cars not back on the road at this moment in time.,
Just wanted to know what cost and who thats all..
22-02-2007, 01:09 PM
#65
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 7,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MAD YUM
SM4 Came with Ranj's Engine, only been dyoed mapped and has not been live mapped yet, cars not back on the road at this moment in time.,
Just wanted to know what cost and who thats all..
Just wanted to know what cost and who thats all..
A TRUE Madette would choose Autronic SM-4
A TRUE Motorsport person would choose Pectel T6.
22-02-2007, 01:14 PM
#66
Originally Posted by Doug Stirling
Originally Posted by MAD YUM
SM4 Came with Ranj's Engine, only been dyoed mapped and has not been live mapped yet, cars not back on the road at this moment in time.,
Just wanted to know what cost and who thats all..
Just wanted to know what cost and who thats all..
A TRUE Madette would choose Autronic SM-4
A TRUE Motorsport person would choose Pectel T6.
.
22-02-2007, 01:18 PM
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
I only posted this to see what the crack was...
This means NOTHING!!!!!
At the end of the day l just want to know some more info on T6 and who thats all.....
This does not mean that im moving away fom SM4 OR Mark Or YUM
Just at this moment have lossed the go that l had when l 1st started this!
People that have PM me over this topic you have replys.
Cheers
Dave
This means NOTHING!!!!!
At the end of the day l just want to know some more info on T6 and who thats all.....
This does not mean that im moving away fom SM4 OR Mark Or YUM
Just at this moment have lossed the go that l had when l 1st started this!
People that have PM me over this topic you have replys.
Cheers
Dave
22-02-2007, 01:18 PM
#69
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 7,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SECS
PMSL @ Doug, we really need a can of worms smilie
Originally Posted by MAD YUM
I only posted this to see what the crack was...
This means NOTHING!!!!!
At the end of the day l just want to know some more info on T6 and who thats all.....
This does not mean that im moving away fom SM4 OR Mark Or YUM
Just at this moment have lossed the go that l had when l 1st started this!
People that have PM me over this topic you have replys.
Cheers.............Dave
This means NOTHING!!!!!
At the end of the day l just want to know some more info on T6 and who thats all.....
This does not mean that im moving away fom SM4 OR Mark Or YUM
Just at this moment have lossed the go that l had when l 1st started this!
People that have PM me over this topic you have replys.
Cheers.............Dave
Me thinks he doth protest too much!
22-02-2007, 02:35 PM
#71
K155MYRS
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: NYC @ work NJ @ home
Posts: 4,371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I think it's all down to the mapper and their choice or expertise in ECU.
You can have 2k pound ECU and if the tuner can't map it, it's worthless.
I don't see how Autronics is bad in any way. Look at all the cars using them.
I myself have an Electromotive TEC 3 but might be switching over to Autronic. I don't have the need for a Pectal or the need to say I have one just to say it. My car will never use it to it's full potential.
Motec is another popluar and expensive ECU.
You can have 2k pound ECU and if the tuner can't map it, it's worthless.
I don't see how Autronics is bad in any way. Look at all the cars using them.
I myself have an Electromotive TEC 3 but might be switching over to Autronic. I don't have the need for a Pectal or the need to say I have one just to say it. My car will never use it to it's full potential.
Motec is another popluar and expensive ECU.
22-02-2007, 02:47 PM
#72
Happily retired
Originally Posted by Doug Stirling
A TRUE Madette would choose Autronic SM-4
A TRUE Motorsport person would choose Pectel T6.
A TRUE Motorsport person would choose Pectel T6.
Does that mean Dingy is the only one using T6
.If mine went round corners I would obviously have to go T6 but as it dont im OK with SM4.
22-02-2007, 02:59 PM
#73
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by ThePH
Originally Posted by Doug Stirling
A TRUE Madette would choose Autronic SM-4
A TRUE Motorsport person would choose Pectel T6.
A TRUE Motorsport person would choose Pectel T6.
Does that mean Dingy is the only one using T6
.If mine went round corners I would obviously have to go T6 but as it dont im OK with SM4.
See thats my point l might need to go round corners hence this topic
22-02-2007, 03:08 PM
#74
20K+ Super Poster.
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 23,377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely you'd only ever let Mark map your car.
Bearing in mind he obviously much prefers mapping Autronic, and is vastly experienced with it, and considering it's a "money no object" build, you're obviously going Autronic.
Strange post.
Bearing in mind he obviously much prefers mapping Autronic, and is vastly experienced with it, and considering it's a "money no object" build, you're obviously going Autronic.
Strange post.
22-02-2007, 03:13 PM
#75
DEYTUKURJERBS
Originally Posted by RichardPON
Surely you'd only ever let Mark map your car.
Bearing in mind he obviously much prefers mapping Autronic, and is vastly experienced with it, and considering it's a "money no object" build, you're obviously going Autronic.
Strange post.
Bearing in mind he obviously much prefers mapping Autronic, and is vastly experienced with it, and considering it's a "money no object" build, you're obviously going Autronic.
Strange post.
Even tho T6 does a lot more in reality.
So it kinda went wrong.
But maybe it wasnt.
22-02-2007, 03:14 PM
#76
20K+ Super Poster.
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Essex... and Birmingham!
Posts: 21,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RichardPON
Surely you'd only ever let Mark map your car.
Bearing in mind he obviously much prefers mapping Autronic, and is vastly experienced with it, and considering it's a "money no object" build, you're obviously going Autronic.
Strange post.
Bearing in mind he obviously much prefers mapping Autronic, and is vastly experienced with it, and considering it's a "money no object" build, you're obviously going Autronic.
Strange post.
BUT to be fair there has been some GREAT and very interesting info on this thread
22-02-2007, 03:16 PM
#77
20K+ Super Poster.
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Essex... and Birmingham!
Posts: 21,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Stavros
But maybe it wasnt.
Dave is VERY clued up... and yet he is now saying 'maybe I need to go around corners' and thats why he is asking about Pectel.
Well Kev Atkins seems to go around corners ok on Autronic as he well fooking knows...
22-02-2007, 03:17 PM
#78
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Dave,
The second article I did for Fast Ford (Issue 249) detailed everything that the T6 can do. However, for your information - look here:
http://www.pectel.co.uk/sub_page.cfm...ucts/editID/14 The PDF file you can down-load on this page also goes into a bit more detail.
I also explained in layman's terms why I NEEDED T6 for my new engine, so if you have an email address you would like me to send it to, I can send you the article I wrote if you haven't got access to the relevant FF issue?
I don't know enough about Autronic to know how it compares. However, why do YOU think you need T6 over your current ECU?
The second article I did for Fast Ford (Issue 249) detailed everything that the T6 can do. However, for your information - look here:
http://www.pectel.co.uk/sub_page.cfm...ucts/editID/14 The PDF file you can down-load on this page also goes into a bit more detail.
I also explained in layman's terms why I NEEDED T6 for my new engine, so if you have an email address you would like me to send it to, I can send you the article I wrote if you haven't got access to the relevant FF issue?
I don't know enough about Autronic to know how it compares. However, why do YOU think you need T6 over your current ECU?
.
22-02-2007, 03:19 PM
#79
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Originally Posted by Mike Rainbird
Dave,
The second article I did for Fast Ford (Issue 249) detailed everything that the T6 can do. However, for your information - look here:
http://www.pectel.co.uk/sub_page.cfm...ucts/editID/14 The PDF file you can down-load on this page also goes into a bit more detail.
I also explained in layman's terms why I NEEDED T6 for my new engine, so if you have an email address you would like me to send it to, I can send you the article I wrote if you haven't got access to the relevant FF issue?
I don't know enough about Autronic to know how it compares. However, why do YOU think you need T6 over your current ECU?
The second article I did for Fast Ford (Issue 249) detailed everything that the T6 can do. However, for your information - look here:
http://www.pectel.co.uk/sub_page.cfm...ucts/editID/14 The PDF file you can down-load on this page also goes into a bit more detail.
I also explained in layman's terms why I NEEDED T6 for my new engine, so if you have an email address you would like me to send it to, I can send you the article I wrote if you haven't got access to the relevant FF issue?
I don't know enough about Autronic to know how it compares. However, why do YOU think you need T6 over your current ECU?
.