Jump to content
Click here if you are having website access problems ×

MBE 967 communication help

Smithy77

By Smithy77
in TechTalk

 Share

Recommended Posts

Smithy77

Smithy77

Posted
Posted

I am after a bit of help with my new R4/500 k series. *grumpy* 

It's a long story so I'll keep it as short as possible. The car is a 2002 Superlight which was upgraded with a Caterham supplied R400 engine equipped with an MBE 967 ECU. Last year the previous owner had the engine rebuilt and upgraded by DVA with 1444 cams, bigger valves, full balance etc etc so good for 220+bhp. For whatever reason the owner never got a full remap after this work. On the test drive it seemed to drive OK with just the odd misfire at part throttle. I booked the car in with Track and Road on the day of collection from Ipswich as it was on the way home. Got there and they said sorry mate, can't talk to the ECU, we need to source a break out box from MBE. Bollox! So I carried on the 2 hour journey home.

The problem is, since picking it up the misfire has gradually got SOOOO much worse - at times practically undrivable. It was "fine" when I picked it up, splashed a bit of BP ultimate in and I noticed it got a little bit worse. Not far from Track and Road I filled it up with Tesco 99Ron and it got even worse still. Steve at TnR said the misfire is probably just mapping related with not enough ignition advance following the engine upgrades, and that different fuels may make it worse. By the time I got back to Hampshire in the evening the air was much cooler and that's when the misfire was horrendous (any throttle below 90% throttle it would misfire). The misfire gets significantly worse when the coolant temp drops below 70C.

Obviously I am going back to TnR ASAP once they have the break out box, but I don't have a trailer and I don't want to drive it as it is. I could hire a transporter at £140+fuel, but something is telling me that something other than fuel type is causing this apparent deterioration and increase in misfire, and I suspect it might be the TPS. I want to avoid taking it to TnR only to discover something else is wrong and it ends up being another wasted trip. So far I've checked battery, coils, leads, plugs, new water temp sender. The problem now is that I can't really take it any further as I don't have any means of communicating with the ECU. Revilla has kindly sent me a spare TPS (which I'm yet to try without ECU comms)

So, anyone out there able to help any further with this? Ideally, I just want to identify any sensor issues and make it safe to drive to TnR. It would be amazing if there was someone reasonably local with a similar spec engine or with a means of communicating with my ECU? We can then start to make some progress.....

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
revilla

revilla

Posted
Posted

So I think what Steve was saying was that the wires for ECU communications (possibly CANBUS on this ECU?) were simply missing from the loom. They are planning to get made up what is basically an extension lead for the ECU with a plug on one end and socket on the other and a comms socket spliced into the middle.

Would be brilliant if anyone had such a thing already that Pete could borrow?

Are male & female connectors to match the MBE ECU readily available anywhere?

Having seen all the things Pete has tried so far, I would be inclined to suspect that there's an underlying mapping issue to be resolved but something else that has failed on top, and I think the TPS may well be it, but unlike on a MEMS where you calibrate the ECU to match the TPS with the down-up-5-times trick, on the MBE it appears you calibrate the TPS to match what the ECU expects, I believe 360mV at idle. Which leaves Pete either having to splice into the TPS wiring to attach a multimeter while it's all connected up or to work approximately off resistance measurements with it disconnected as he can't talk to the ECU to see what voltage it is seeing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Simon.Rogers

Simon.Rogers

Posted
Posted

I think as far as I am aware the 967 is serial based.  Which is why its not possible to move a map from the 967 to 992/9A4.  It is possible to go from 992 to the 9A9.

Steve G used to have a slave box/ecu for those of us who did not have a mapping lead pinned into the loom.  But I guess as Steve G is not always at Track n Road the box is no longer always there.

Thats why you are in the pickle.

You can get it approximately by measuring with the loom disconnected.  We all used to do that!!  Until you could plug in with Steve G.

Find out from Track N Road when Steve G is available and it will all be fine.  Take the spare TPS and they will sort it.

If you unplug the temp sensors what happens.  They should go to default and assuming engine is warm be just fine,  However the TPS is the weak point and very tempremental!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnv

johnv

Posted
Posted

Sounds odd, who was there at Track and Road? When they do mine (ex Simon's) they (Steve G) piggybacks another 967 on to it .. mine has just got a standard R400 loom, no breakout box or anything. I ask because it will be going back there soon, but not good if Steve has somehow lost the ability to program 967's!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cookie Monster

Cookie Monster

Posted
Posted

You have my sympathy as I've had similar problems but not as extreme as you.

When I had my car mapped by T&R they used a break out box/comms lead which they had so it's odd they can't access it.

I've had recent problems which were related to TPS & MBE. I spoke to Andy Jupp at PGM who has access to the kit you need and he fixed mine in double quick time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smithy77

Smithy77

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Which Steve is Steve G? The Steve we saw had grey hair and bright red glasses and was accompanied by Jim. When I asked where the "other" Steve was, they said he was off on compassionate leave or something, to do with his dad passing? But yes, they spoke about this break out box a bit like a piggyback module that plugs into the ECU. They said that they would need to speak to MBE about getting it? When we turned up that Monday morning they couldn't get us on the dyno straight away as something wasn't working properly which meant they couldn't load up the engine in the normal way; they assured me though that they could "get around" this another way. Wonder if this break out box, or lack of, had anything to do with this....?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smithy77

Smithy77

Posted
  • Author
Posted

If you unplug the temp sensors what happens.  They should go to default and assuming engine is warm be just fine,  However the TPS is the weak point and very tempremental!

I tried unplugging the water temp sensor for the ECU and it started running worse. It ran the same in fact as when the coolant temp is below 70C, so I assume with it unplugged the ECU defaults to a low temp and runs a richer map.

Not tried the air temp sensor yet, but I think by the sounds of it the TPS is the most likely issue and next on the list to try.

So have I entered into a whole new world of Caterham unreliability by getting an MBE equipped car? Why is the TPS any more temperamental in this set-up over any other engine spec?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
revilla

revilla

Posted
Posted

I don't think the TPS is less reliable.

The MEMS3 system makes life easy for you; you just bolt the TPS on in about the right position, then you teach the ECU what voltage it gives at idle and WOT by performing the calibration reset procedure. When you open and close the throttle five times in a row, you are basically demonstrating to the ECU what idle and WOT look like, and it notes those values in its map and uses them to work out where the throttle is between those voltages.

The MBE appears not to have this learning feature, the mapper tells the ECU what voltage the TPS produces at idle and then you have to adjust until it does produce that voltage.

Once set, I can't imagine either system is more or less reliable.

In your case, setting up the TPS is harder because you can't talk to the ECU. If you could, you would just turn the TPS until the voltage displayed on your laptop's readout from ECU matched the voltage set in the map. However, you can't see what was set in the map and you can't see what voltage the ECU is seeing, so you are forced to rig up a multimeter and method to allow you to connect it without disconnecting the TPS from the ECU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smithy77

Smithy77

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I understand there are different set up procedures, I was just alluding to the comment that the "TPS is the weak point and very temperamental", I assume when used in this engine/ECU configuration? Just putting it out there for someone to agree or disagree or explain! *thumbup*

From what little reading I've done on an R400 K type set up is that MBE/TPS/problems often go hand in hand. Would love to be told otherwise...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paul Deslandes

Paul Deslandes

Posted
Posted

SBD in Surbiton are the motorsport agents for MBE and charge through the nose for support, mainly because they don't really want to get too deeply involved.  Steve Broughton (why is everyone associated with engine tuning named Steve) is extremely knowledgeable and can do 'on-the-road' mapping but this can't really satisfactorily cover ignition mapping, only fueling. 

There is no substitute for a TnR rolling road session, just be aware that you're in for a long and noisy session and remember to take a packet of Hobnobs.

The 967 either needs a breakout box or else a few wires added to the ECU loom connector, terminated in a 9 pin D type connector.  Just the serial data connection needs only three wires but seven are required for a full RR session using the mapping box with trim knobs.  The later 9A4 uses CANBUS but still needs two wires brought out from the connector.

As Andrew says, the MBE requires the TPS to be manually adjusted to the correct voltage at idle, unlike some other ECUs, e.g. DTA, which can do this automatically.  The MBE method does however allow the programmer to setup his preferred TPS voltage/load site curve, which I don't know if the others can.

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rj

rj

Posted
Posted

Another detail about the 967: The software can to my knowledge not run on a Win7 based PC, at least not of it's 64 bit. Haven't tried 32 bit. If you try to you'll get all sorts of communication errors...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smithy77

Smithy77

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Update: I discovered the TPS was incorrectly set at 0.54V. Adjusted to 0.36V and the car drives much better, not far off from when I test drove it. Hopefully a good shake down of the mapping will see it running perfectly.

Big thanks to Paul D for offering to help with splicing in a serial connecter into the loom for future ECU comms, to be carried out this weekend (weather permitting). *thumbup*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...