Supra Forums banner
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey all, I've owned my supra since I was 18 (now 37 :cry:) and it's gone through a lot lol. Unfortunately life happened and I had it sitting for the last 8 years. Before it went to hibernate, I had upgraded my turbo and manifold, switched to FFIM, started relocating my battery and etc.. I had purchased an AEM v2 from Driftmotion back then but ended up selling it. Fast forward to now, I'm starting to get it back up and running. I've been away from the community for awhile. What's standalone is everyone using? Is the AEM v2 still good? I've also read good things about the ECUmaster black.

Here's a filthy engine bay pic lol. I have a lot of stuff to take off and clean. Thanks in advance! So happy this forum is still somewhat active. I've learned a lot of the years of owning it. Vehicle Car Hood Motor vehicle Automotive design
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,862 Posts
MoTeC to rule them all.
M130...

AEMv2 is old tech. All the newer standalone run Volumetric Efficiency models instead of the old pulse width models.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,418 Posts
I just switched from pulse width based ecu to ve based ecu and wow what a difference!
 
  • Like
Reactions: awsom-0

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,393 Posts
Welcome back to the party! My Supras have been sitting a long time as well, I know them feels, dude.

The big lessons learned in the past ~5-10 years with 7M-GTE's is that the stock cam position sensor is not a great way to run the whole show for engine position, regardless of ECU used. So budget for a good crank position sensor kit or build one yourself using a trigger wheel and a hall effect or VR sensor, and there's a few upgrade/rebuild options to improve the factory CPS for better CPS accuracy with aftermarket ECU's. Driftmotion is still a big player and they offer a ton of good parts including CPS upgrades. Upgrading the CPS and adding a crank trigger has allowed for much more accurate and consistent ignition timing control which in turn has helped 7M-GTE builds get reliable and stay reliable with 700+whp builds. There's at least 6 or 7 built 7M-GTE cars I know of that are 900+whp capable, or will be soon, and a modern approach to sensors has been a big part of making that happen.

The ECU Master Black has been great on a lot of 7M-GTE builds of late. But I'd strongly encourage you to buy the very best ECU you can afford, and don't skimp on sensor packages to make sure the ECU 'sees' everything as best it can. The progresses in engine management and injectors have really made a huge change in how efficient, driveable, and reliable these kinds of builds can be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Welcome back to the party! My Supras have been sitting a long time as well, I know them feels, dude.

The big lessons learned in the past ~5-10 years with 7M-GTE's is that the stock cam position sensor is not a great way to run the whole show for engine position, regardless of ECU used. So budget for a good crank position sensor kit or build one yourself using a trigger wheel and a hall effect or VR sensor, and there's a few upgrade/rebuild options to improve the factory CPS for better CPS accuracy with aftermarket ECU's. Driftmotion is still a big player and they offer a ton of good parts including CPS upgrades. Upgrading the CPS and adding a crank trigger has allowed for much more accurate and consistent ignition timing control which in turn has helped 7M-GTE builds get reliable and stay reliable with 700+whp builds. There's at least 6 or 7 built 7M-GTE cars I know of that are 900+whp capable, or will be soon, and a modern approach to sensors has been a big part of making that happen.

The ECU Master Black has been great on a lot of 7M-GTE builds of late. But I'd strongly encourage you to buy the very best ECU you can afford, and don't skimp on sensor packages to make sure the ECU 'sees' everything as best it can. The progresses in engine management and injectors have really made a huge change in how efficient, driveable, and reliable these kinds of builds can be.
Thanks man! I was on one of the facebook groups and saw Fornari Racing has a CPS delete kit for the 7M. Would that be a better route than going with the Driftmotion CPS upgrade? So glad to have people making parts to bring the car up to date lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,378 Posts
Thanks man! I was on one of the facebook groups and saw Fornari Racing has a CPS delete kit for the 7M. Would that be a better route than going with the Driftmotion CPS upgrade? So glad to have people making parts to bring the car up to date lol.
Great to see another 7M back from the dead. :D

Others here would definitely know more than me but there has been debate over whether the cam driven CPS is accurate enough due to belt deflection. Personally I would consider it an option vs a CPS upgrade not a 'must have' but I still haven't broken 300hp myself. As for Fornari himself he's a great guy. His shop is 5 miles north of me off the same main road. He just installed a set of his solid subframe bushings and replaced my turbo oil gasket for me last week.

As far as an ECU it really depends on what your tuner is comfortable with. Any modern option will be a huge leap. My plans include an EMU Black but I'll be tuning it myself at least until I rebuild my 7M and slap a bigger turbo and injectors on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
79 Posts
I'm partial to thinking that while belt stretch is real and accounts for a large amount of timing drift, I think that can also be built into the timing tables, as it is (near enough) a function of RPM and is repeatable. Of course with higher lift cams and stronger valve springs things will start getting a bit funnier, and at that point you'd already have long ditched the CPS I'd imagine.

Of course I have no evidence to back this up or way to test it besides from setting up an actual crank trigger and booking some dyno sessions, but it makes sense in my head.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
55 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Great to see another 7M back from the dead. :D

Others here would definitely know more than me but there has been debate over whether the cam driven CPS is accurate enough due to belt deflection. Personally I would consider it an option vs a CPS upgrade not a 'must have' but I still haven't broken 300hp myself. As for Fornari himself he's a great guy. His shop is 5 miles north of me off the same main road. He just installed a set of his solid subframe bushings and replaced my turbo oil gasket for me last week.

As far as an ECU it really depends on what your tuner is comfortable with. Any modern option will be a huge leap. My plans include an EMU Black but I'll be tuning it myself at least until I rebuild my 7M and slap a bigger turbo and injectors on it.
Thanks! Glad to be back! I spoke to Dominic a few days ago to ask him some questions. He was really a nice guy to talk with. I ran a ct26 60-1 from Albert back then and I was able to make about 300hp on a mainline dyno. I decided to go big and upgrade, although with my goals back then, I might have gone overkill lol
 

·
I don't want an MK4!
Joined
·
1,759 Posts
MoTeC to rule them all.
M130...

AEMv2 is old tech. All the newer standalone run Volumetric Efficiency models instead of the old pulse width models.
Not seeing the MK3 listed on the website!

Is just selecting a generic M130?

Thanks

Dan
 

·
I don't want an MK4!
Joined
·
1,759 Posts
Welcome back to the party! My Supras have been sitting a long time as well, I know them feels, dude.

The big lessons learned in the past ~5-10 years with 7M-GTE's is that the stock cam position sensor is not a great way to run the whole show for engine position, regardless of ECU used. So budget for a good crank position sensor kit or build one yourself using a trigger wheel and a hall effect or VR sensor, and there's a few upgrade/rebuild options to improve the factory CPS for better CPS accuracy with aftermarket ECU's. Driftmotion is still a big player and they offer a ton of good parts including CPS upgrades. Upgrading the CPS and adding a crank trigger has allowed for much more accurate and consistent ignition timing control which in turn has helped 7M-GTE builds get reliable and stay reliable with 700+whp builds. There's at least 6 or 7 built 7M-GTE cars I know of that are 900+whp capable, or will be soon, and a modern approach to sensors has been a big part of making that happen.

The ECU Master Black has been great on a lot of 7M-GTE builds of late. But I'd strongly encourage you to buy the very best ECU you can afford, and don't skimp on sensor packages to make sure the ECU 'sees' everything as best it can. The progresses in engine management and injectors have really made a huge change in how efficient, driveable, and reliable these kinds of builds can be.
So what is the best option for an upgrade to the CPS if using the stock ECU? DM, SP, getting the ATI damper, the pirate dude on here?

Or just using the stocker on an 87 with 68K?

My 87 is also ready to come alive!

Thanks

Dan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,862 Posts
Not seeing the MK3 listed on the website!

Is just selecting a generic M130?

Thanks

Dan
Correct.

All standalones are generic in nature and depending on outputs.
They can run anything from a 2 cylinder chainsaw all the way to a v12 lambo. I am sure someone adventurous enough could probably run a standalone on a single cylinder rc engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,862 Posts
I'm partial to thinking that while belt stretch is real and accounts for a large amount of timing drift, I think that can also be built into the timing tables, as it is (near enough) a function of RPM and is repeatable. Of course with higher lift cams and stronger valve springs things will start getting a bit funnier, and at that point you'd already have long ditched the CPS I'd imagine.

Of course I have no evidence to back this up or way to test it besides from setting up an actual crank trigger and booking some dyno sessions, but it makes sense in my head.
it cannot. The only debate isdo people want the motor to survive at MBT or not. If the answer is no, thendo the following;

on a CPS/CAS system, the only "bandaid" is to remove that amount of timing from the table at all times which leads to reduce power output which we are talking a 5 degree ignition timing drop across the board.

This has been discussed ad nauseum and is why the RB26 folks no longer grenade engines yet the 7M folks are like stubborn old men and just don't listen. lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,141 Posts
I'm partial to thinking that while belt stretch is real and accounts for a large amount of timing drift, I think that can also be built into the timing tables, as it is (near enough) a function of RPM and is repeatable. Of course with higher lift cams and stronger valve springs things will start getting a bit funnier, and at that point you'd already have long ditched the CPS I'd imagine.

Of course I have no evidence to back this up or way to test it besides from setting up an actual crank trigger and booking some dyno sessions, but it makes sense in my head.
My dyno time with the stock CPS housing converted to use digital hall sensors and a crank trigger setup running parallel with digital hall sensors showed a spread of roughly 6° +/- crank timing. This is with cams and heavy valve springs.
So what is the best option for an upgrade to the CPS if using the stock ECU? DM, SP, getting the ATI damper, the pirate dude on here?

Or just using the stocker on an 87 with 68K?

My 87 is also ready to come alive!

Thanks

Dan
Stock ECU? Send it to Piratetip for a rebuild. The stock ECU can't read a square wave output by a hall sensor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
Can I get a whack at the dead horse?? lol What would be the most advantageous crank trigger set up? What I mean by that is; is it better to do it off the timing sprocket or add a trigger wheel to the existing harmonic? I'll be heading to the dyno soon and want to setup a crank sensor before hand. DIY autotune and summit sell some universal triggers, can I simply mount one to the harmonic via the already existing threaded holes on the harmonic?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,141 Posts
DIY autotune and summit sell some universal triggers, can I simply mount one to the harmonic via the already existing threaded holes on the harmonic?
I have one of the universal 36-1 DIY Autotune wheels bolted to the front of my ATI damper. You can do the same to the stock harmonic damper if you still have that. (You shouldn't on a built motor, but that's another subject)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
79 Posts
it cannot. The only debate isdo people want the motor to survive at MBT or not. If the answer is no, thendo the following;

on a CPS/CAS system, the only "bandaid" is to remove that amount of timing from the table at all times which leads to reduce power output which we are talking a 5 degree ignition timing drop across the board.

This has been discussed ad nauseum and is why the RB26 folks no longer grenade engines yet the 7M folks are like stubborn old men and just don't listen. lol
It might have been discussed ad nauseum, but I wasn't around and none of the information I've so far come across gives nothing particularly explanatory, most are just parroted 'the belt stretches so timing changes' and they leave it at that.

Which is absolutely true, it changes. On acceleration the cams retard, on deceleration they advance vs. what they were doing while accelerating. The higher the engine speed and/or change in engine speed over time, the bigger the deviation. That is still absolutely true, and gets worse with higher loading valvetrains compared to stock.

Now, my reasoning from that is...

Writing it like that makes sense why it can't be properly be baked into the spark maps, at least not completely. You could make it run the correct timing when accelerating, but as the rate of change gets smaller you'd be overshooting it, comparing say a third gear or a fifth gear pull. Either you lose power on the third gear pull to get it right on the fifth gear one, or you get it right for third gear and overshoot timing in fifth.

Any chance you could elaborate? I'm pretty certain I'm oversimplifying it, or outright getting it wrong. Again, I've no means of testing this other than in my head.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,862 Posts
Any chance you could elaborate? I'm pretty certain I'm oversimplifying it, or outright getting it wrong. Again, I've no means of testing this other than in my head.
It is called jitter. Put a timing light on the oem 7m tccs and watch it dance with the diag shorted.

On a standalone, when i lock 10 degrees it ahould always be 10 degrees without any idle compensation. If it dances when locked, it is jitter which happens lots on the 7m with OEM CPS.

As you well know, nothing that is produced by a human is perfect. As a matter of fact most manufactures have an acceptable range of plus/minus 5% tolerance range.

In nissans rb case, they only have belt stretch/slap to contend with.

In the 7mgte case, we have the afore mentioned belt stretch/slap plus an additional gear lash (cps to exhaust came interface) to contend with. For the helical gear to work properly, it must have some play. Think a differential.

And to close this

 
  • Like
Reactions: MZ024

·
Registered
Joined
·
79 Posts
Oh yeah, CPS lash, missed that one entirely, cheers.

I do have some jitter as well, haven't checked at higher RPM but it is within a degree whilst idling. Not ideal.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,393 Posts
It might have been discussed ad nauseum, but I wasn't around and none of the information I've so far come across gives nothing particularly explanatory, most are just parroted 'the belt stretches so timing changes' and they leave it at that.

Which is absolutely true, it changes. On acceleration the cams retard, on deceleration they advance vs. what they were doing while accelerating. The higher the engine speed and/or change in engine speed over time, the bigger the deviation. That is still absolutely true, and gets worse with higher loading valvetrains compared to stock.

Now, my reasoning from that is...

Writing it like that makes sense why it can't be properly be baked into the spark maps, at least not completely. You could make it run the correct timing when accelerating, but as the rate of change gets smaller you'd be overshooting it, comparing say a third gear or a fifth gear pull. Either you lose power on the third gear pull to get it right on the fifth gear one, or you get it right for third gear and overshoot timing in fifth.

Any chance you could elaborate? I'm pretty certain I'm oversimplifying it, or outright getting it wrong. Again, I've no means of testing this other than in my head.
It isn't a rotating system with a consistent load like a bicycle chain being constantly pedaled at the same force & rate, where the resistance and 'stretch' would be consistent and easily anticipated. Because of the action of valves opening and valves closing, both camshafts have constantly changing resistance to rotation that can be easily felt and observed when rotating the engine manually with a socket wrench or breaker bar. Same with the compression resistance of pistons as they're moving up and down.
As RPM's increase that change in resistance happens over a much shorter period of time which means the total amount of jitter tends to increase with RPM.
This is why HKS, etc came out with kevlar timing belts because the RB26 suffers from this, and the stiffer/less flexible belt was thought to improve this, and it did, but not enough to solve the problem. Which is why all modern RB26 packages from HKS, Tomei, etc all include a crank sensor to augment the RB's CPS.

The only way to 'build this into the timing tables' is to anticipate the most advanced timing position the belt flex allows, and building the table off of that. Which results in significantly reduced total timing advance almost all the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Asterix and figgie
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top