Installing the FAST EZ-EFI 2.0 Multi-Port Retro Kit in a 1987 Pontiac Fiero V6 (Page 2/8)
Trinten FEB 21, 02:12 PM

quote
Originally posted by lou_dias:
... We actually race our cars on tracks.





I know text doesn't carry tone very well, if your post didn't mean to come off as condescending as the last part of it made it sound, I apologize. Just because someone doesn't want to use what others have used, and may never need the full capability of what they're installing, is no reason for anyone to get on their soapbox about it. Just appreciate what they guy is trying to do and be supportive.

And if you want to define "race cars on tracks", there's plenty of people here that have had their car on the quarter mile track.

[This message has been edited by Trinten (edited 02-21-2023).]

zkhennings FEB 21, 03:35 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:

A lot of people told me to do Megasquirt. I wanted to, I seriously considered it. It wasn't cost, it just seemed like there would be a LOT of effort, and tuning, and configuration. I didn't want to hack together parts. I wanted an entirely new engine harness, which I effectively get with this... and it uses all the existing GM connectors, which is fantastic. Effectively, I can make it look 99% stock, which was part of my goal, while running reliably.




I am using all brand new GM connectors with my Microsquirt harness, and new pins in the C500 and C203 connector. My entire engine harness will be 100% brand new besides the plastic housings for C203 and C500 connectors. Like I said, what you are going for is great also, and probably less work, but you can accomplish the same end goal with much less money but a little more effort with MS, and the tuning software is excellent. Your goal was to make it simple and I think you will accomplish that.
Raydar FEB 21, 05:03 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:

Making use of your stock gauges... how? Can these be powered by the existing feeds from the VSS and tach filter? Are there leads from the EZ-EFI?

I purchased the H272 over 10 years ago, and before I put it in storage, I slathered it with gear grease so it wouldn't rust. It's in the original box, so I'll have to see. I also have a Cloyes timing set on my engine now, but I assume it's installed to default specifications. What is the DAWG intake mod? Thanks!!!

Hah, yes... I just don't want old stuff in the car. I want the system to run as modern as possible, and ideally, I'd like to even get rid of the EGR and cold-start injector if I can.



I can't speak to the EZ-EFI, but since the existing setup routes the VSS signal to the speedo, first, and then to the ECM, I don't see why it wouldn't work.
The tach just runs off of pulses. It should work, too. The only confusion might be if you convert to coil packs, but they generally still have a tach feed.

Good show on the 272. I think you'll like it, especially through an Ocelot. (Since the 3.1 is a bit smaller than the 3.4, the 272 will have even more of a "thump" than it did in my 3.4.)

The "dawg" mod? Is well documented here. Basically it removes the floor of the intake neck between the EGR fitting and the plenum, and replaces it with a semi-round section of pipe. Increases the cross-section by a huge amount.
It's probably not necessary for a nearly stock engine. Probably beneficial for a cammed 3.1. Absolutely required for a 3.4.

EGR and cold start injector? Easy. I did away with my cold start injector on my 3.4, and didn't even do anything else. Of course it tended to run a bit on the rich side, since I had 19# injectors, but it worked well.
Just block off the EGR and don't add the spark advance and lean fueling to the tune, since you're starting from square one.
lou_dias FEB 21, 05:13 PM
@Trinten,
The quarter mile is a useless race in my opinion. Perhaps you should do some searching before you bring the attitude...




Text does not carry tone.
I guess if you followed my and La Fiera's builds you'd understand what I was talking about with regards to our engines and mods.

A 7730 conversion is probably less complicated then the EZ 2.0 or Megasquirt and keeps your original sensors and dash. It can handle boost. It basically costs $30 and a de-pinning tool. It does everything the stock ECM does, and more (DIS, knock sensor, etc...)...and better. The '7730 is tunable with free software as well (Tuner Pro).

From what I've seen of the EZ, it's more of a "hey - if you have a carb'd vehicle and want fuel injection here's a kit..." than 'if you already have fuel injection this will be substantially better!' I think one video I saw of someone who already had fuel injection on a 600 hp car gained maybe 6hp. So the juice is not worth the squeeze.

I believe there is a code for the '7730 that does autotuning as well when you supply it with a heated O2 sensor (nA1$T or something like that) which I intend to try out before resorting to a Megasquirt....

[This message has been edited by lou_dias (edited 02-21-2023).]

Trinten FEB 21, 07:58 PM
I'm sorry you felt like I brought attitude. I'm sorry to see that you can't see (or won't acknowledge) where I thought you were bringing attitude. I am glad to see that your opinion on quarter mile racing matches my opinion on the kind of racing you do. I have followed La Fiera's build. He and I have hung out on a number of occasions, and at times he tells me what he's up to before he posts it.

Apologies to the OP for causing a disruption in your thread! I won't engage Lou anymore on this topic.
82-T/A [At Work] FEB 21, 08:49 PM

quote
Originally posted by Raydar:

I can't speak to the EZ-EFI, but since the existing setup routes the VSS signal to the speedo, first, and then to the ECM, I don't see why it wouldn't work.
The tach just runs off of pulses. It should work, too. The only confusion might be if you convert to coil packs, but they generally still have a tach feed.

Good show on the 272. I think you'll like it, especially through an Ocelot. (Since the 3.1 is a bit smaller than the 3.4, the 272 will have even more of a "thump" than it did in my 3.4.)

The "dawg" mod? Is well documented here. Basically it removes the floor of the intake neck between the EGR fitting and the plenum, and replaces it with a semi-round section of pipe. Increases the cross-section by a huge amount.
It's probably not necessary for a nearly stock engine. Probably beneficial for a cammed 3.1. Absolutely required for a 3.4.

EGR and cold start injector? Easy. I did away with my cold start injector on my 3.4, and didn't even do anything else. Of course it tended to run a bit on the rich side, since I had 19# injectors, but it worked well. Just block off the EGR and don't add the spark advance and lean fueling to the tune, since you're starting from square one.




I realized after what the DAWG mod is... I kind of suspected that's what we were all talking about, I just never remember it being called that. Yeah, I'm definitely going to have to do that.

My 3.1 is every so slightly hotter than what a stock 3.1 would be. I have .040 overbore pistons, and also decked the heads and intake so the compression is a little higher as well. I believe I'm getting around 9.2:1 compression (if I remember correctly). I don't suppose that makes too much of a difference, but I'm using 17# Accel (pintle-style) injectors. So I think the 17# are probably decent for what I'm doing, especially if I get rid of EGR and cold start injector.

I'm going to have to ask you about the springs when the time comes for that. Also, a problem I have is that I can't / shouldn't even start that engine with the EZ-EFI since if I remember correctly, to properly break in the cam I'll need to bring it to 2,000 rpms for a couple of minutes (it's been a long time since I looked at how all of that works.



quote
Originally posted by lou_dias:

@Trinten,
The quarter mile is a useless race in my opinion. Perhaps you should do some searching before you bring the attitude...

Text does not carry tone.
I guess if you followed my and La Fiera's builds you'd understand what I was talking about with regards to our engines and mods.

A 7730 conversion is probably less complicated then the EZ 2.0 or Megasquirt and keeps your original sensors and dash. It can handle boost. It basically costs $30 and a de-pinning tool. It does everything the stock ECM does, and more (DIS, knock sensor, etc...)...and better. The '7730 is tunable with free software as well (Tuner Pro).

From what I've seen of the EZ, it's more of a "hey - if you have a carb'd vehicle and want fuel injection here's a kit..." than 'if you already have fuel injection this will be substantially better!' I think one video I saw of someone who already had fuel injection on a 600 hp car gained maybe 6hp. So the juice is not worth the squeeze.

I believe there is a code for the '7730 that does autotuning as well when you supply it with a heated O2 sensor (nA1$T or something like that) which I intend to try out before resorting to a Megasquirt....





Lou, I remember that video. I appreciate the input, but with me, I was not interested in having to go through all of that work with the Megasquirt. Over the years, I would go back to the site and kept coming away with... ugh... I'm going to have to tune it, and then I also have to build a wiring harness. I think you may be misunderstanding some of the EZ-EFI 2.0. They do have a lot of kits that simply allow you to upgrade an existing carbureted V8. This system works really well... and, should this not work out how I want it, I've got a 1969 Oldsmobile 455 Big Block (punched out to a 468) that I can put it on.




The specific version of the kit that I got though, is intentionally designed to be used to upgrade GM cars that already have multi-port fuel injection systems, like a TPI, LT1, or something like that. The harness is built by default to support General Motors sensors, and while it does come with all new sensors, they are all GM sensors and use the exact same connectors as the Pontiac Fiero has for its MPFI system. Based on a little more reading too, it does not replace my guages. I do get a hand-held for additional tuning changes and other features, but my existing gauges will continue to work.

When I go through my Fiero next month, I will be removing the entire factory harness and will not be cutting anything. I have another 87 Fiero that I bought at auction many years ago (it was a wreck, and didn't have a title). I used that car to pull most of the 5-Speed parts off of for when I did the 5-Speed conversion on my car. I saved all the harnesses from that car, so any engine compartment wire splicing I need to do, I'll be using that. For the most part though, everything in the engine bay will be completely new. I'm going to get rid of the fusible links (as I said, I'll simply remove them uncut), and put all new wiring.

Generally, with most of the reviews I've seen, the biggest benefit is an engine that runs more smoothly throughout the entire powerband, optimizing the performance throughout. And that's what I'm looking for.



quote
Originally posted by Trinten:

Apologies to the OP for causing a disruption in your thread! I won't engage Lou anymore on this topic.




No problem, I appreciate it. I'm excited to see how this works out.
pmbrunelle FEB 21, 10:01 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
Generally, with most of the reviews I've seen, the biggest benefit is an engine that runs more smoothly throughout the entire powerband, optimizing the performance throughout. And that's what I'm looking for.



I think that running smoothly isn't so much about the ECU; it's about the tune that in it.

I quickly looked through the instruction manual for this ECU. The second half of the manual documents the different tuning settings that the user has to adjust.

The only part that self-tunes (kind of like other computers) is that the fuel table self-adjusts to hit the AFR targets... targets which are determined by the user.
82-T/A [At Work] FEB 22, 07:11 AM

quote
Originally posted by pmbrunelle:


I think that running smoothly isn't so much about the ECU; it's about the tune that in it.

I quickly looked through the instruction manual for this ECU. The second half of the manual documents the different tuning settings that the user has to adjust.

The only part that self-tunes (kind of like other computers) is that the fuel table self-adjusts to hit the AFR targets... targets which are determined by the user.




Are you talking about the EZ-EFI 2.0? Because that is not at all what it does. You set the displacement, number of cyls, the type of timing controller (internal, or external), and that's literally all that's required. It has some basic fuel maps which are determined by cyls/displacement and then it self-learns and builds it's own fuel tables off of that. You can adjust the additional settings if you want, but it's unnecessary unless you want something specific.

I'm not sure why you guys are so adamant about me buying a Megasquirt. I'm happy to buy one and throw it on the shelf if that'll pacify the "I could have saved $500 bucks" argument? The money isn't important to me, reliability and simplicity is. My time is extremely valuable. I spent the first half of my adult life as a programmer, and don't want to have to sit there with a laptop fiddling with the settings of some old-ass GM controller... going back and forth, up and down the street, trying to dial in my fuel maps.

A truly intuitive system should not require that ... that's old technology. The EZ-EFI system continuously learns, essentially using machine learning to continually build those fuel tables, not a decision-tree algorithm. That's what I want.
La fiera FEB 22, 09:58 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
Are you talking about the EZ-EFI 2.0? Because that is not at all what it does. You set the displacement, number of cyls, the type of timing controller (internal, or external), and that's literally all that's required. It has some basic fuel maps which are determined by cyls/displacement and then it self-learns and builds it's own fuel tables off of that. You can adjust the additional settings if you want, but it's unnecessary unless you want something specific.

I'm not sure why you guys are so adamant about me buying a Megasquirt. I'm happy to buy one and throw it on the shelf if that'll pacify the "I could have saved $500 bucks" argument? The money isn't important to me, reliability and simplicity is. My time is extremely valuable. I spent the first half of my adult life as a programmer, and don't want to have to sit there with a laptop fiddling with the settings of some old-ass GM controller... going back and forth, up and down the street, trying to dial in my fuel maps.

A truly intuitive system should not require that ... that's old technology. The EZ-EFI system continuously learns, essentially using machine learning to continually build those fuel tables, not a decision-tree algorithm. That's what I want.



You are free to do whatever you want but I can sense you just want A.I. to tune your car, we can see that clearly and I personally respect that. There are lots of tuning strategies that gets programmed by a good tuner that A.I. can't duplicate because A.I. is not human and is missing that human touch. Things you learn over experience and feeling like engine sound note at a specific RPM with specific parameters, things a computer even with the best programming can't sense. Remember, these "intelligent" systems are as intelligent as their programmers, lazy people who rely on math to do everything for them and don't even want to take the time to learn about a simple air pump because they themselves think they know better because the graduated from MIT. Tuning is not like you can program a computer to play chess. Proof is in the pudding, lets see what your A.I. can do!

82-T/A [At Work] FEB 23, 08:40 AM

quote
Originally posted by La fiera:

You are free to do whatever you want but I can sense you just want A.I. to tune your car, we can see that clearly and I personally respect that. There are lots of tuning strategies that gets programmed by a good tuner that A.I. can't duplicate because A.I. is not human and is missing that human touch. Things you learn over experience and feeling like engine sound note at a specific RPM with specific parameters, things a computer even with the best programming can't sense. Remember, these "intelligent" systems are as intelligent as their programmers, lazy people who rely on math to do everything for them and don't even want to take the time to learn about a simple air pump because they themselves think they know better because the graduated from MIT. Tuning is not like you can program a computer to play chess. Proof is in the pudding, lets see what your A.I. can do!



Hahah... perhaps. Incidentally, that's what I do for a living. I literally run a team of AI researchers. As the chief scientist of the company I work for says, "AI cannot reason," which is what I think you mean. But I think it's important to understand what AI can and cannot do well. Number crunching, and normalization is something that AI actually does really, really well. To be honest though, the EZ-EFI 2.0 isn't new. It's been around for almost a decade if I'm not mistaken. I think it came out in 2013, and there have been a couple of updates. It uses rudimentary machine learning, so not exactly the sophistication of a GAN or an NLP... but to be fair, the type of processing that's required in a fuel injection system is extremely simple.

If we're using AI terms... both systems use some form of machine learning logic. The difference is whether or not the learning model is done through supervised (what you're doing) or unsupervised (what I'm doing) learning. The inputs are the same... TPS, MAP, IAC, O2, etc. You go through a lot of effort to "dial in" these specifics (supervised learning)... but you're also merely using the input from these sensors to make a decision. This is something that machine learning can easily do on it's own.

Truth be told, I'd be willing to bet that all of these systems that are out there are so old that they're using very basic math algorithms. If someone put in even the slightest bit of effort into redesigning one of these... that "issue" would be solved tomorrow. But there aren't a lot of car guys who are also mathematicians, who are also computer programmers, who are also AI engineers. Never the less, it's not a hard problem... and there's no reason to go through the effort of repeatedly dynoing and "dialing in" a car's computer, when it simply should be able to optimize the efficiency on its own through basic math.

My kit comes in the mail today... so I'll post pictures when I get it. But I still need to tow my Fiero from the storage unit first.


BIG question I have though... if I'm going to be installing a new cam in my engine... I want to run it with the existing computer that's in there, right? I need to be able to run the car at 2,000 RPMs from the get-go (or whatever the break-in procedure is for a flat-tappet cam). It's been like a decade since I've really turned a wrench, so I've forgotten almost everything. If I put the FAST system on immediately, I'm concerned I may wipe out my cam.


EDIT: You encouraged me to reach out to Edelbrock and Holley to see if I can get some of the guys on my team to work with either of them on a new, more advanced system. I just asked to be able to buy the unit at cost when it comes out. I'll let you know what comes of it.

[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 02-23-2023).]