Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

So I'm looking at going to fly by wire on my RB26/30 to take advantage of a few things that Link and many other ECUs are updating software for, like idle control (my car has none of the AAC valve etc) cruise control, launch control, traction control (although this one really isn't needed with FBW)

I still want to keep the 6 throttle body of the RB26, there is a guy on the UK that runs a BMW M3/M5 FBW throttle motor with a R35 pedal.

Has anybody here used anything else? Link has used the pedal and throttle off a Falcon and an LS1/LS2, and although the pedal is fine, they run single throttle bodies.

Your thoughts?

Edited by Sub Boy32

Are you happy to fabricate the linkage that you'll need? I ask because you may not have realised that you will not be able to install the FBW motor the way you (probably) think you can.

Typically the FBW motor is direct on the shaft that runs through the throttle plate. Being a single throttle and all. But the multi-throttles will obviously have to have the FBW motor hanging out in the breeze somewhere, running a shaft that will then have to connect via linkages to the 3 separate throttle shafts. The likelihood that the FBW motor will fit where the RB26 bellcrank normally sits is unknown, but not 100%. Hence the high likelihood of having to build it.

This is something I have thought about as my ECU was origanally design to run the R35 ( or at least with the R35 in mind ) and has twin 20a H bridge outputs to run twin FBW throttles, but room to fit 6 FBW TBs is near impossible, what I have thought about is twin motors linked to the stock TBs and drive them that way

My reason was to utilise the down shift "blip" function for the sequential

This is something I have thought about as my ECU was origanally design to run the R35 ( or at least with the R35 in mind ) and has twin 20a H bridge outputs to run twin FBW throttles, but room to fit 6 FBW TBs is near impossible, what I have thought about is twin motors linked to the stock TBs and drive them that way

My reason was to utilise the down shift "blip" function for the sequential

damn that would be cool. Idle air valve delete too.

cruise would be nice too.

I could see some major headaches in getting that all working

I have been thinking about this for a while too, although I only have a single throttle body to worry about. I would love to hear from anybody who has done this successfully in conjunction with a Link G4 ECU.

For the RB26 and ITB's, using the M3 part would be a good idea. They are fairly easy to come by as the M3 uses two of them and they tend to fail quite regularly, so it is a pretty commonly stocked item.

We machine an ls2 dbw motor down with a jig I have made and machine a billet shaft support and weld a lever arm on shaft, it will drive a stock gtr ITB setup, a holley carby or anything else you chose. Have never used a link but Motec can drive it no issue like a factory dbw ecu . The P.I.D values are required to be configured to eliminate over and under shoot of target throttle opening . Ideally you check the total return spring values only requires 2.8 amps or less motor current to hold at 100 percent throttle. Large gains in wasted throttle mapping are dbw traction control is quite refined. We use VE commodore pedal due to simplicity of mounting and ability to space forward and back to set heal and toe hieght if your not running auto blip. You will require two tps switches on the same shaft. Cheers brad

Justin:

Phil at NZEFI runs an LS2 throttle and pedal IIRC on his S14 Silvia RB32 track car with a ViPec (Link G4+) and it works great, I would do the same if I was only using a single throttle......but I want to keep the 6TB.

Don't know if I'm keen on the the M3 part if it fails regularly...... :(

Brad:

That sounds interesting! Do you have any pictures of it mounted on an RB26 6TB? And what do you use for the second TPS?

How much would you charge to make one up to suit?

Edited by Sub Boy32

The ls2 unit has two internal tps tracks , the buetiful part about that is they never get out of sync which eliminate throttle drop out (ecu dropping throttle plate to limp setting ) . I need to speak to someone at vipec about P.I.D settings, some of the ecu manufactures use the same settings for all DBW units ( would explain why some don't work as well and are either to slow to get to target or overshoot) . Pm me your phone number I'll send you picture cheers brad

The ls2 unit has two internal tps tracks , the buetiful part about that is they never get out of sync which eliminate throttle drop out (ecu dropping throttle plate to limp setting ) . I need to speak to someone at vipec about P.I.D settings, some of the ecu manufactures use the same settings for all DBW units ( would explain why some don't work as well and are either to slow to get to target or overshoot) . Pm me your phone number I'll send you picture cheers brad

Hi Brad, any chance of those photos?

Cheers, Chris

  • 3 years later...

doesn't seem to work in this case as its a video. tried to ressurect it.

 

did some testing with a spanner  and digital fish scale and the holding torque of a stock RB26 ITB throttle assembly (3 throttle springs and main shaft spring) is about 800Nmm at 100% throttle and 400Nmm at ~1% throttle

lighter springs will be required on the throttles, removing the three throttle springs would bring this down to nothing, and would be easy to do on a fitted engine, but i think having very light springs on each is good for safety of the engine, although I'm yet to see a linkage break on an RB26. throttle cable sure, but threaded link.. nah.

 

specified max holding current for most DBW motors seems to be around 2 amps.

Edited by burn4005

Galvsport in Perth have done the conversion using a BMW DBW motor, not that you could tell by looking at it now(a heap of modifications have been done to it). If you look them up or Gav rb28 you should be able to see the set up

 

  • 1 year later...

Hey Guys 

If you haven't seen the video yet on our RB26 ITB DBW kit, check it out in the YouTube link below.

In the next months we will be online with DBW kits! No pricing yet sorry but follow Innovative Engines & Engineering NZ on Facebook or instagram to keep up to date with whats happening and videos of the running system coming soon. 

The whole kit contains over 50 components, The past 11 months we have perfected it. so stay tuned! 

Any questions feel free to email me on [email protected]

https://youtu.be/MGUupCYQCfE

 

D9BA1573-D7DD-4A44-8A6D-41C5837D48F1.jpeg

IMG_0122.jpeg

  • Like 1

Stumbled over it a few weeks ago. It looks brilliant but I’m afraid it will price most people out of it. I could be wrong but I see it priced in the thousands which could turn most people off. 
Brilliant engineering though, you’ve done a great job! I pray that it is affordable and I’d probably be all over it!

Hey man.

Im getting very close to having official prices ready, the kit price will be very fair in comparison to doing a billet single TB intake manifold conversion and what you get. 

Kind Regards

Stefan

Sounds good! I really hope it works out for you. People like you that invest in making these beasts even better by bringing them into the modern era deserve to be rewarded for it. I hope it works out well for you. 

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...