Factory Five Racing Forum banner

Another AEM Infinity ECU Install on a Coyote

80K views 443 replies 18 participants last post by  TMScrogins 
#1 · (Edited)
Another AEM Infinity ECU Install on a Coyote and...

Well, I got my roadster back on the road after the dyno disaster late last year. Took the opportunity to replace the destroyed stock coyote motor with an Aluminator XS (this proved to add some unintended consequences, I'll describe in a moment). Here's a link to that saga for those interested... http://www.ffcars.com/forums/45-for...ter-builds/469954-cold-air-intake-coyote.html

After having a new tune built for the Aluminator XS and logging dyno time I began driving the heck out the car over the spring and early summer months. The tune just wasn't quite right down at low RPM, especially at tip-in and tip-out conditions at no load. Clearly more power with this engine but the driveability characteristics just weren't as gentlemanly as my stock coyote motor. So back to the tuner I went for some more tweaks. We were able to improve it but still not quite right. I then pondered going back again to try and get more tuning done but began to think maybe it's time to start tuning this thing myself as the inconvenience to take it to someone continues to mount. I began looking into SCT's Advantage III Pro Racer tuning software since I was setup with the SCT tuner and tune already.

Enter David Borden... David says he's thinking of considering ditching the stock PCM in favor of AEM's Infinity ECU. Not knowing much about their product, I began my research and ultimately decided to ditch the SCT route and Ford PCM and go full hog. Fast forward and we are both sitting in tuning class down at AEM's headquarters (safety in numbers right?). After the whirlwind 2-day tuning training class and product purchases made, on to the install of the new ECU.

What sold me on the Infinity setup was the fact the hardware and software was manufactured and supported by one company. No locked tables, no mystery areas of the ECU, no reverse engineering. Everything is above board. Coupled with a one stop shop to help the likes of a sorry wannabe tuner like me. Couple this with some of the product features that I was really interested in, like Traction Control, and the user-friendly approach of their tuning software interface with the use of wizards, and I was hooked.

The physical install itself, while involved, went without a hitch. I took the opportunity to install tone rings on the rear IRS axles along with wheel speed sensors front and back. I also had to convert the VSS Analog VR signal from the Tremec TKO to a digital signal for the Vehicle Speed input to the ECU (Thank you Dakota Digital), wired in inputs for a 12-position traction control switch as well as some other inputs for engine protection strategies and some other features. Wired in the fuel pump to be controlled by the Infinity ECU. Done with that and it was time to start tuning.

What is really cool about the Infinity ECU is that AEM provides a base tune file for the stock Coyote motor. You basically start with a conservatively safe tune that will run your engine and can then tweak it from there. My problem was that the Aluminator XS uses larger heads and cams along with larger throttle body and fuel injectors. This would need to be compensated for in the tune. The great guys at AEM took my throttle body (Ford Racing Corbrajet Twin 65mm) and one of my fuel injectors (47 lb.) and characterized them for me on their equipment. This gave me the data I needed to build out the modifications to the base tune file.

It was time to start the engine. At this point David Borden was about 1 week ahead of where I was on mine. He had already successfully started, idled and test drove his without much of any issues. The engine started right up with not a lick of problems. However, there were immediate idling issues. Idle would range from over 2,000 RPM down to 400 RPM. The engine would just begin to oscillate as the idle feeback would work overtime to correct the oscillations. Until I could get the idle tuned properly there would be no driving it. With hours and hours of tuning on just the idle with lot's of phone and email support from AEM (those guys have been absolutely fantastic), I still have yet to get the idle working properly. All the issues have been focused on the drive-by-wire tuning. Particularly, we determined that there was some stiction in the throttle body down at just off idle at around 1-2% throttle position. Ultimately, I changed out the throttle body and went to the Super Cobrajet Monoblade TB. Still unsuccessful although through tuning the PIDs and the DBW Bias tables I was able to get the idle within a range of 600 RPM to 1300 RPM using idle feedback to control the idle. Still not acceptable though.

Both of these throttle bodies flow about 1600 CFM (twin) and 1800 CFM (mono). The stock Coyote TB flows about 900 CFM. Since upgrading to the Aluminator XS with the Cobrajet Intake and TB, I've never had nearly as good of idle characteristics as the Boss IM and Accufab 84.5 mm throttle body (1200 CFM). So my current theory is that the Throttle Body is just too large for the N/A application to reasonably expect low-end driveability. The slightest movement of the throttle plate causes a large run up or run down in engine speed as it takes in or restricts such a mass volume of air.

To test this theory I have ditched the CobraJet intake and throttle body for now in favor of the Boss intake with Accufab throttle body. Just finishing up the install now and should be back to tuning it this weekend. Assuming this fixes the problem I'll hit the road for some data logs and begin working the tuning out for the VE map, ignition, cam timing, and decel. Hopefully be back on the road soon.

Fingers crossed.

Trevor
 

Attachments

See less See more
5
#40 ·
Finally, Traction Control is up and running!

Last weekend was met with another milestone on my quest to further tune the new Infinity ECU. With the wheel speed sensors calibrated and working flawlessly, I enabled the traction control and set the tables for torque reduction trims in the area of DBW/Throttle, Fuel and Ignition. I chose not to use the spark table to reduce torque. Anyhow, during a quiet traffic time of day while getting on a freeway onramp I mashed the skinny pedal to floor while in 1st gear and held on for dear life ready to let up on the accelerator if the hind end started coming around to greet me. Didn't need to. As the wheels began to spin the traction control engaged and began reducing torque until the tires regained traction and then started to slip and then regained traction just teetering on breaking loose. Kept the pedal mashed through the run and the car remained straight as an arrow.

I am throughly pleased and impressed with the traction control. I will tune some more on it to refine the behavior and try to eliminate some of the minor oscillation and keep the measured slip a little tighter to the target slip by tuning more on the PID gains.

Trevor
 
#41 ·
#42 · (Edited)
Dale,

This is very interesting. I wonder how this device works? I'm guessing it either remaps the throttle curve or somehow remaps the fueling. Hmmm.

I know I sure don't need it on my application. Ever since I changed out the PCM to the Infinity, I noticed a much improved throttle response. In fact the response is so quick that I had to tune out and deaden some of it just off idle on the throttle curve. See attached pic and notice in the lower left corner how it dips. Much better. Knowing how these two ECUs compare I think there actually might be a noticeable difference in throttle response with this Pedalmax product providing it works.
 

Attachments

#43 ·
Don't know how it works, but I've been thinking about calling JMS and having a chat. My Lokar Drive-by-Wire pedal module seems to have dead spot when I'm drifting at low speed; real twitchy. Not a big deal, but annoying. I recall awhile back someone with the Lokar mentioning a similar issue and Lokar sent him a newer version which satisfied him. Maybe I will do the same.
 
#45 ·
Ah, then I'll go ahead and speak with JMS & Lokar and compare costs for what I'm promised. $359 Lokar, $279 JMS. Easy winter job.
 
#50 · (Edited)
If your coyote is tuned, just ask your tuner for a more responsive throttle. Off the top of my head it's pedal pos start in the electronic throttle controls. WOT fueling comes on at 65 percent in the control pack as compared to 90 percent in factory 5.0 mustang calibrations, so it's a little more aggressive already. I'm assuming the pedal max plays with the throttle voltage somehow. I thought I might as well suggest this for those that have tuners and can get free revisions. I prefer a stock style throttle though so I likely won't be messing with this, especially in a car with a crazy power to weight ratio like this one.

But anyways, back to the infinity discussion...
 
#51 ·
Yes, Russ makes them. I was told the gap is .027" - .030"; works on my 3 channel '94-'96 unit.
 
#53 ·
I ordered mine online from RacingSolutions.com. All about the same price everywhere I looked. Came very quickly from time I placed the order. They are out of Texas.

Also, keep in mind that you'll need to order the 12-pin Deutsch plug and wedgelock. (The Motec converter doesn't come with the mating plug)
 
#56 ·
I was wondering how he does it...

:huh:

Funny!

:laugh:
 
#57 · (Edited)
Infinity enclosure

Hello fellow infinity gurus.

Well, I have been busy working on setting up my Infinity computer/wiring and I can honestly say that I have made some progress! but first I have to admit that for the first time during this build I decided to get some outside help and contacted a local tuner that really knows his way around these systems.

His name is Nick Hunter of 5523 Motorsports and apparently he and his wife Jen are the team that helped wire Mark Gearharts coyote powered challenger "street" car build. They came to my house a couple of days ago to check out my project and figure out what final wiring I need to get me up and running for my first start... Way cool couple :punk:

5523 Motorsports » Interview with a Zombie Vampire

I'm really looking forward to my first start but with work and Christmas, it may be early in January.

Saul
 

Attachments

#58 · (Edited)
Saul,

Looks like you are making great progress. Sounds like you have found gold with Nick Hunter. Always good to get networked with solid people that are in your area. The pictures are great.

Question, it looks like you built an enclosure for the ECU. Is that what I'm seeing where the coil drivers are mounted?

Trevor
 
#60 ·
Thanks Trevor,

Yes, I stuffed the ECU and the entire adapter harness, connectors and wiring that as you know is substantial into the enclosure, the only thing that did not go inside are the coil drivers because they need to be mounted on a flat metallic surface with thermal grease (Much like a heat sink in a PC) to transfer heat, mounting them on the back of the enclosure next to the vents should work.

My theme has been to minimize the visibility of any wiring as much as possible while still providing access for future maintenance/upgrades. Right now I'm waiting for Nick to assemble a harness to tie all of the engine management functions together, also according to Nick this will save me a bunch of time that is better spent doing the actual tuning, I agree. :white:

Saul
 
#61 · (Edited)
A couple of comments. 1) The enclosure will help to shield from ambient heat. But it may also trap ECU generated heat in which would not be good. The ECU has cooling fins and airflow across them would be helpful. Probably not a problem since these ECUs can really take some heat but I would closely monitor that. David Borden posed the heat question to AEM a while back regarding tight or enclosed spaces with the ECU around a heat source (engine bay) AEM responded with what I'll paraphrase below...

"When temps increase the DBW area of the circuit board is most vulnerable. DBW draws a lot of current and constantly. There has been an instance in an endurance race where this was the problem. However, no permanent damage was induced, but DBW started acting up when it was hot. They let it cool down and all was good again. You're not likely to permanently cook anything on the board with high temps, components are likely just going to start clamping current which can increase temps more and cause some control systems to start acting up."

Good news here is that you are very unlikely to fry anything. And even with the enclosure you may be shielding more heat then what the ECU is generating. So maybe no issues at all. If you encounter intermittent problems as described then remember this post and check out the heat issue.

And 2) I would make sure you can access the Molex connectors on the ECU once your body is mounted. This is important. On three different occasions I locked up my communications between my ECU and my laptop. I did everything including killing the power. The only thing that worked was to unplug the Molex connectors and plug them back in. It would suck if you couldn't get to those plugs after your build is complete.

Just things to watch out for. Can't wait to start hearing updates on your actual tuning.

Trevor
 
#62 ·
Hello Trevor,

As usual thanks for the informative reply, I did have the very same concern regarding heat in the airtight enclosure and ambient heat coming from the headers and came to the conclusion, go heavy on the insulation and use high quality heat shielding materials and allow for good air flow/ventilation.

In the end I believe that it will be shielding more heat than what the ECU will be generating but just to be sure I'm going to place a thermostat inside the enclosure to monitor heat levels.

Like I said in my earlier post that even with the body on I designed the enclosure for easy access, the panel on the engine compartment side is secured by 6 easily accessible machine screws that permit the removal of the entire front panel and allow for easy access to the ECU the wiring and all connectors.

I'm really looking forward to getting this beast running and ready for some...
TUNING! :eclipsee_steering:

Saul
 
#64 ·
Cold Start Issue

I have encountered a new tuning opportunity/issue. It has been quite chilly in the mornings around my place (high 20s - OK, OK I know that's not chilly for many parts of the country but for California, it is.). This last month has been the first time we have seen cold temperatures since installing the Infinity ECU. When the ambient temperature is below around 40 degrees F and the engine is cold, I have starting issues. A turn of the key and the engine starts like it always does, then about 1 second in the engine stalls. I start it a second time and the engine stalls again. Then on the 3rd start the engine will stay running and then begin to warm up with no further problems.

Tuning this has been a little elusive because once the engine begins to warm up then any tuning opportunities are done with until the next cold engine cold morning start. So I have to wait until the following day to try out any changes to the tune and this assumes that the following day is below 40 degrees.

Anyhow, the startup data log suggests that this behavior is a byproduct of the engine going lean (thinking fuel is puddling up on intake runner/port walls due to cold temps and not getting into the cylinders quick enough).

With what I believe the problem is, I have a tuning solution for it and will implement the changes and report back. If it works, I will post the details to hopefully help any other Infinity users troubleshoot similar issues if encountered.
 
#65 ·
Geez, by the time I get mine running there may not be any new undiscovered issues left to fix!

:lol:

Saul
 
#66 ·
Have no worries! With your blower I think you will be forging ahead in new areas not yet discovered by some of us. I'm sure you'll find a hiccup or two on the boost control side of the equation that you'll have to solve and then can school the rest of us.

Cheers to leading the rest of us in the mysteries of managing the boost control side.

Trevor
 
#67 ·
Cold Start Issue

In my last post I commented on the problems surrounding cold starts. The cold weather (sub 40 degrees) continues to hang on giving me a chance to make tuning changes and try them out each morning. Based on my initial cold start data log it was very apparent that Lambda was spiking north of 1.80 (going extremely lean). This was evident in the first 10 seconds of start. Each time it would go lean, it would starve the engine out and the motor would die. After the third start attempt, it would stay running.

Soooo, I needed to temporarily add more fuel for about 15 to 20 seconds following first start based on coolant temperatures (more fuel at colder temperatures). In the "Start" tab there is a table for a fuel adder called FuelTrim_Coolant and a table to alter the target lambda value from the base lambda table at start called LambdaAfterStartTrim. Both of these tables are correlated between time and coolant temperature. FuelTrim_Coolant is a percentage value (i.e. 0.10 will add 10% fuel). LambdaAfterStartTrim represents actual lambda trim negative value (i.e. -0.10 would subtract .1 lambda from the lambda target). So if the base lambda target is 1.00 then the new temporary lambda target would be .90 richening up the fuel/air mixture).

The first pic represents the tables before I did any tuning. You'll notice that for the first 10 seconds the fuel adder is between 3 and 5% with about a -.08 temporary decrease in target lambda.

The second pic represents adjustments made to the table where I moved the fuel adder up to 23% in the first 5 seconds and then declining to about 14% after 10 seconds in with Target Lambda being initially adjusted down by -.15.

Word of caution. I've circled a section of the right most column in the normal operating temperature zone. These cell values should always be set to zero otherwise the trim values loaded in these cells would be be considered permanent during normal driving conditions potentially causing extra rich conditions.

And now the result... It starts and stays running on the 1st try. The engine no longer dies. It does have a rough idle in the first 7 seconds and further analysis shows that there is still a lean condition with Lambda peaking at 1.2. It quickly settles in and begins idling very smooth after that. I think there is some room for improvement for the first 7 seconds following start and I will go back and add a little more fuel to finalize the tune in this area.

One more problem resolved...

Trevor
 

Attachments

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top