AEM FIC finally out
Former Moderator
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 3,677
Likes: 1
From: Mesa
Originally Posted by Tyraid2K,May 29 2007, 08:09 PM
much cheeper than the 1052U,
the link for me was bad, but I'm interested in some comparison to e-manage ultimate
the link for me was bad, but I'm interested in some comparison to e-manage ultimate
Given Greddy's past performance regarding support, documentation, etc... I will likely go with the AEM.
I also like:
AEM does 21x17 mapping where the ULT only does 16x16
AEM uses both cam sensors for timing management where ULT only uses one
I do like that the ULT will do A/F target tuning - not sure if the AEM does. I also think that the ULT does slightly better logging and with a flash update will be able to monitor the knock sensor with a pending firmware update (again - not sure if the AEM will be capable of it).
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,160
Likes: 35
From: Decatur, GA
This is more a comment on piggybacks in general than on the AEM FIC.
I would run a piggyback only if
1. My mods were not major
2. Transmission control was an issue
3. Control of advanced in car electronics
4. The piggyback can modify stock timing signals in any way I wish
5. The piggyback can perform fuel modification, or can completely replace the stock fueling with it's own maps.
6. The system allows real time tuning.
7. The piggyback allows a wideband O2 input.
8. The piggyback logs everything it possibly can.
9. The piggyback has a built in boost controller.
I have run piggybacks before. Some of them were very expensive. Getting the piggyback and the stock ECU to not fight one another can be a challenge without logging the stock ECU, the piggyback, and a wideband O2. Some piggybacks that merely modify the stock sensor input signals are heavily limited as to their usefulness on a turbocharged car. The other issue is that by the time you add up a piggyback, boost controller, WBO2, and all of the other controllers needed to properly run the car, many times you have surpassed the cost and complexity of a standalone and the car runs worse and was harder to tune. Much of this applies to stock PCM tuning programs as well.
I'm not saying that all piggybacks are bad or that they don't have their place, but I think you must be very careful before modifying your engine management strategy to ensure that your $$ is well spent.
Tim
I would run a piggyback only if
1. My mods were not major
2. Transmission control was an issue
3. Control of advanced in car electronics
4. The piggyback can modify stock timing signals in any way I wish
5. The piggyback can perform fuel modification, or can completely replace the stock fueling with it's own maps.
6. The system allows real time tuning.
7. The piggyback allows a wideband O2 input.
8. The piggyback logs everything it possibly can.
9. The piggyback has a built in boost controller.
I have run piggybacks before. Some of them were very expensive. Getting the piggyback and the stock ECU to not fight one another can be a challenge without logging the stock ECU, the piggyback, and a wideband O2. Some piggybacks that merely modify the stock sensor input signals are heavily limited as to their usefulness on a turbocharged car. The other issue is that by the time you add up a piggyback, boost controller, WBO2, and all of the other controllers needed to properly run the car, many times you have surpassed the cost and complexity of a standalone and the car runs worse and was harder to tune. Much of this applies to stock PCM tuning programs as well.
I'm not saying that all piggybacks are bad or that they don't have their place, but I think you must be very careful before modifying your engine management strategy to ensure that your $$ is well spent.
Tim
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
From: Calgary
Originally Posted by shivers,May 29 2007, 02:53 PM
anyone know this unit allows timing advance? the posts specifically mention being able to retard timing, but nothing about advancing it. I would guess this is due to the unit being specifically designed for factory n/a vehicles with add-on f/i.
I am looking at it for the exact same thing
Registered User
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: AEM Electronics R&D
Hello everybody, I just found this thread and since I work at AEM Electronics I will attempt to answer questions about the FIC. Also, rather than attempt to make a wall of text answering all the questions in one post (and likely missing some), I will respond to each post seperately.
Registered User
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: AEM Electronics R&D
Originally Posted by SPECIAL-OPS-S2K,May 29 2007, 01:32 PM
so this would be essentially as good as the AEM EMS 1052 but in a piggyback form? in what areas would this fall short of the EMS?
The EMS has over 1,400 user settable options, the FIC has about 10
The EMS has over 500 user viewable/logable parameters, the FIC has about 13
The EMS has over 45 3D Maps, the FIC has 3
Now, with that said, I am not saying that the FIC is not powerful, it is VERY powerful, but it is not very configurable. It was built to solve the problems that arise when you attempt to boost a modern (OBD2+) N/A car. It was designed assuming that is what it is going to be used for so the setup is much, much simpler. It allows you to change to bigger injectors and retard the timing and it does so without setting codes.
- It allows you to offset (by percent) the fuel map so bigger injectors can be used.
- It allows you to remap or clamp the MAP sensor so it does not show boost to the factory ECU.
- It does NOT trick the ECU by diddling with IAT and such. It directly intercepts the to change the pulsewidth.
- It allows you to retard the timing by intercepting and retarding the cam/crank/TDC position signals to the ECU. This method allows all the OBD-2 missfire detection systems to function as Honda designed them to because the Honda ECU is directly controlling the coils!
- All the OBD2 diagnostics will work as originally intended. BUT, the FIC is NOT smog legal and should only be used in offroad applications (trackdays etc...)
- It does not have boost control, knock control, AFR feedback, idle control, traction control, etc..... It allows the factory ECU to control the engine.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
From: Calgary
Originally Posted by DelSolid,May 30 2007, 11:23 AM
The FIC is fundamentally different than the EMS. It is almost imposible to compare them, kind of like comparing a paper airplane to a fighter.
The EMS has over 1,400 user settable options, the FIC has about 10
The EMS has over 500 user viewable/logable parameters, the FIC has about 13
The EMS has over 45 3D Maps, the FIC has 3
Now, with that said, I am not saying that the FIC is not powerful, it is VERY powerful, but it is not very configurable. It was built to solve the problems that arise when you attempt to boost a modern (OBD2+) N/A car. It was designed assuming that is what it is going to be used for so the setup is much, much simpler. It allows you to change to bigger injectors and retard the timing and it does so without setting codes.
It allows you to offset (by percent) the fuel map so bigger injectors can be used.
It allows you to remap or clamp the MAP sensor so it does not show boost to the factory ECU.
It does NOT trick the ECU by diddling with IAT and such. It directly intercepts the to change the pulsewidth.
It allows you to retard the timing by intercepting and retarding the cam/crank/TDC position signals to the ECU. This method allows all the OBD-2 missfire detection systems to function as Honda designed them to because the Honda ECU is directly controlling the coils!
All the OBD2 diagnostics will work as originally intended. BUT, the FIC is NOT smog legal and should only be used in offroad applications (trackdays etc...)
It does not have boost control, knock control, AFR feedback, idle control, traction control, etc..... It allows the factory ECU to control the engine.
The EMS has over 1,400 user settable options, the FIC has about 10
The EMS has over 500 user viewable/logable parameters, the FIC has about 13
The EMS has over 45 3D Maps, the FIC has 3
Now, with that said, I am not saying that the FIC is not powerful, it is VERY powerful, but it is not very configurable. It was built to solve the problems that arise when you attempt to boost a modern (OBD2+) N/A car. It was designed assuming that is what it is going to be used for so the setup is much, much simpler. It allows you to change to bigger injectors and retard the timing and it does so without setting codes.
It allows you to offset (by percent) the fuel map so bigger injectors can be used.
It allows you to remap or clamp the MAP sensor so it does not show boost to the factory ECU.
It does NOT trick the ECU by diddling with IAT and such. It directly intercepts the to change the pulsewidth.
It allows you to retard the timing by intercepting and retarding the cam/crank/TDC position signals to the ECU. This method allows all the OBD-2 missfire detection systems to function as Honda designed them to because the Honda ECU is directly controlling the coils!
All the OBD2 diagnostics will work as originally intended. BUT, the FIC is NOT smog legal and should only be used in offroad applications (trackdays etc...)
It does not have boost control, knock control, AFR feedback, idle control, traction control, etc..... It allows the factory ECU to control the engine.
