Dual ECU
Dual ECU
Has anyone done a dual ecu? I was on another site and they were using the 3g ecu and a evo 8 ecu stacked. Wouldnt this give you double the room for tables, so you wouldnt have to take stuff off the ecu to have it go to 400-500 load?
Evolving Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 265
Likes: 1
From: Reading, PA
I think the dual ecu harness, is just for the immobilizer or Auto Trans.
The 3g ecu does the immobilizer and the evo ecu does engine management.
Memory from one ecu could not be accessed by the other.
The 3g ecu does the immobilizer and the evo ecu does engine management.
Memory from one ecu could not be accessed by the other.
You could make it work, but it wouldn't be worth it. Too much custom code on both ECUs to get a marginally larger table size....
Trending Topics
LMAO your a really funny guy who needs to go to clug3g and read up alot.
I wasnt talking bout me but others on here that need 500+ load colums. in theory it would double the power and space capability.
how would that theory apply? youre implying that somehow the 2 ecus will see that theyre connected to one another, rewrite theyre definitions, and do what tephra's spent plenty of time doing increasing map rpm/load resolution among many other things....
automatically ??
in "theory"??
You know it doesnt do that for auto 3g's why whould it be any different for evos?:scratch:
automatically ??
in "theory"??
You know it doesnt do that for auto 3g's why whould it be any different for evos?:scratch:
i didnt say you could just connect them and thats it, they would need to be programmed to work together and reconfigured. Once done though it would be like add ram to your computer to make it faster. I didnt say it would be easy.
No need for everyone to get flame-y, but I think you have a disconnect with how everything comes together. While the effort may not only be difficult for programmers, the real lack of motivation comes from the fact that it would be incredibly difficult for the end user.
If this was an easier solution to any of these problems, I imagine people would just have 2 ECUs that were both fully tapped into the harness and just switch between the two for basic map switching. Not only is this cost/space/complexity prohibitive, but it doesn't really offer any advantages.
The only advantage here is doing something one system can do that the other cannot: EG along the lines of the standalone + keeping stock wired in for emissions.
Adding the second ECU (engine CONTROL unit or engine COMPUTING unit) is not like adding more RAM to your computer, it is like adding another computer to your computer. Now you are talking cloud computing, and a whole infrastructure that is hard enough to employ on systems where we understand everything that is already happening and the language that it is written in, etc etc. There are just too many reason's it can't possibly work without more time, effort, and money than it could ever possibly be worth.
If this was an easier solution to any of these problems, I imagine people would just have 2 ECUs that were both fully tapped into the harness and just switch between the two for basic map switching. Not only is this cost/space/complexity prohibitive, but it doesn't really offer any advantages.
The only advantage here is doing something one system can do that the other cannot: EG along the lines of the standalone + keeping stock wired in for emissions.
Adding the second ECU (engine CONTROL unit or engine COMPUTING unit) is not like adding more RAM to your computer, it is like adding another computer to your computer. Now you are talking cloud computing, and a whole infrastructure that is hard enough to employ on systems where we understand everything that is already happening and the language that it is written in, etc etc. There are just too many reason's it can't possibly work without more time, effort, and money than it could ever possibly be worth.
