More broken parts for the Bad Bish
Evolving Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Hmmm, interesting thread. I got the link emailed to me today and just read the last 11 pages. It's interesting because I not only work for AEM but I am working on the GEN2 EMS as well. There is a ton of misinformation in this thread and I was going to quote a bunch of posts and reply to each but thought better of it. I'll just post it here and you guys can do with it what you want.
1. The V2 EMS firmware is 100% new from the ground up. Nothing has been carried over from the standard EMS. Not a single line.
2. The Hardware for the Gen2 EMS is totally new as well. The Evo8 and Evo9 plug & play units have peak and hold drivers now as well (contrary to what an earlier post in this thread said). They will also have upgraded knock control, a larger internal logging memory, USB comms (6-10x faster), much faster processing capability and a bunch of other things.
3. None of the Mitsubishi V2 units have been released yet. There are many betas in the field undergoing final testing but no production units have been made yet.
4. The cam sensor is an electronic device and is a critical input to the ECU. Mounting a 1,500 degree huge chunk of metal literally inches from it is playing with fire (no pun intended
).
5. When the EMS loses the cam input it loses "sync" when that happens the fuel and ignition events are stopped and the AEM requires a complete cycle (720 degrees) of proper cam/crank signals before it will fire the injector and coils again. Same at startup.
6. AEM is committed to making the best direct plug in ECU we can and bringing it to market at the most competitive price possible. We started making boxes for DSM's in 2002 and the V2 EMS rolls up everything we have learned during the last 7 years into a totally new unit with a new code base and totally new hardware.
.
1. The V2 EMS firmware is 100% new from the ground up. Nothing has been carried over from the standard EMS. Not a single line.
2. The Hardware for the Gen2 EMS is totally new as well. The Evo8 and Evo9 plug & play units have peak and hold drivers now as well (contrary to what an earlier post in this thread said). They will also have upgraded knock control, a larger internal logging memory, USB comms (6-10x faster), much faster processing capability and a bunch of other things.
3. None of the Mitsubishi V2 units have been released yet. There are many betas in the field undergoing final testing but no production units have been made yet.
4. The cam sensor is an electronic device and is a critical input to the ECU. Mounting a 1,500 degree huge chunk of metal literally inches from it is playing with fire (no pun intended
).5. When the EMS loses the cam input it loses "sync" when that happens the fuel and ignition events are stopped and the AEM requires a complete cycle (720 degrees) of proper cam/crank signals before it will fire the injector and coils again. Same at startup.
6. AEM is committed to making the best direct plug in ECU we can and bringing it to market at the most competitive price possible. We started making boxes for DSM's in 2002 and the V2 EMS rolls up everything we have learned during the last 7 years into a totally new unit with a new code base and totally new hardware.
.
No offense, but the "misinformation" wouldn't happen if AEM wasn't so cryptic about everything. If everything about the series II box is new in terms of hardware then why aren't you advertising it as such? Here is what your site says about the new product:
SERIES 2 KEY FEATURES
* Plugs directly into the factory harness. No rewiring necessary.
* Uses all the factory sensors.
* Includes start up calibrations.
* System is fully enabled and unlocked - Never pay for upgrades!
* Context sensitive help eases tuning process.
* Maps can be password protected by the tuner to prevent unauthorized usage or sharing.
* Runs on Windows-compatible software.
* 12 peak and hold injector drivers (Supra only).
* 8 direct-fire coil outputs.
* 16 general-purpose outputs.
* 8 definable switch inputs.
* 4 EGT inputs with fuel control.
* 1MB of internal data logging.
* Electronic boost control.
* Full idle control.
* Programmable traction control.
* Software definable knock control.
* Two step launch control.
* User configurable soft-cut rev limiters.
* Wet or dry nitrous control.
* Tune using new USB communication port or serial port.
* Works with all AEM gauges.
So the EVO ECUs are getting the peak and hold driver box? I interpreted the above as only the Supra boxes? Perhaps the description just means the quantity of 12 for the Supra? Again, pretty vague.
Hearing the processors are different, more powerful, ETC is welcome information. Thanks.
delsolid,
Glad to see you stop by. We have sold a lot of AEM products over the years and I have been a huge promoter of the system. I've had great success using the AEM EMS, BUT there have been a lot of problems with the system, a LOT. I have pointed them out, reported them and most of them have fallen on deaf ears. John Romero has a list half as long as my arm I gave him quite some time ago when I heard a V2 was coming so some of the issues would be addressed. I spoke with Devin last week and he informed he was involved with the development of the new unit and had no idea of the issues, he now has the list from John and I am being told things will get worked on. It's like the **** poor job of setting up the dwell for the EVO's, we beat countless sets of bearings out of engines the first year or two dealing with that mess. It wasn't until we switched to the Apexi Power FC, gained about 85 whp and eliminated starting problems and ignition misfires that it got someone's attention and the problem was fixed. None of us are perfect, I am definetely not but when a customer has a problem with something we build we don't wait for them to switch to the competitors product to finally get on the ball and try to fix the issues.
Right now I can say the AEM idled better, drove better and starts better (NOT quicker than the Haltech) but then again I have not figured it all out yet or tuned the car yet.
The AEM absolutely, 100% has a sync problem, there is nothing to figure out. The car has to see too many revolutions before the cam/crank sensors will sync. Is it a programming issue, I'd guess so but as the end user of a plug and play box that has been complained about for 6 years now it is not my responsibility to figure it out, it is AEM's. I'm assuming from my talk with Devin last week, something might get done.
The cam sensor being close the header we THOUGHT was the issue originally. Most of us with headers now run a shield between the header and sensor, my header is not close to the sensor, has a shield and was never run for any major length of time. I've had two sensors fail, both times frying the cylinder head, both times on the stock crank trigger using AEM's settings. There is a 12 tooth trigger wheel available, it sync's instantly and while using it never experienced a failure of the "sensor".
There are a few issues with what you said happens when the car looses sync from the sensor and has to restart guess what happens? If you have any additional timing set up for the car to start better it adds that time to the base map and you...........yes, torch the engine again. This happened to us, John Romero found it and the suggestion was to eliminate the extra timing at start up incase it happens again. Same thing happens if the EMS shuts off, which the EMS does when it feels like it. Emery from STM was at the shop Thursday, says he has a car at his shop now that the ECU just shuts down on, he has to unplug the harness, plug it back in and then the car starts. I've had this happen atleast 100 times, atleast.
The AEM EMS is the absolute easiest plug and play ECU I have seen for any car, I've put them in Subaru's, Vipers, Mustangs, Supras, DSM's and EVO's. I have no idea how many I have tuned but it is a large amount.
I've spent a lot of energy reporting problems and John Romero is a great guy and genius, has never failed to help me and do it in a very quick and timely manner.
There are problems though and I hope that they are going to be addressed and all fixed this time. It is baffling to me that there are beta boxes out there and I don't have one. I don't want to sound arrogant but I don't know anyone else who can supply more feed back or who has been more loyal to the system than I have. When the EVO9 box was released some podunk shop nobody ever heard of ended up with a box for beta testing. Obviously they had no clue what they were doing because whent he boxes were delivered the internal widebands didn't work nor did the MIVEC, both of which were reported through our shop to AEM and then fixed. Al Friedman was the one that found and fixed the MIVEC actually.
Again, I do hope the long list of problems get addressed and fixed. I was in no hurry to jump ship but unless someone is going to pay for $2500+ repairs each time the AEM decides to not recognize the cam sensor, I have no other choice for my own car.
Glad to see you stop by. We have sold a lot of AEM products over the years and I have been a huge promoter of the system. I've had great success using the AEM EMS, BUT there have been a lot of problems with the system, a LOT. I have pointed them out, reported them and most of them have fallen on deaf ears. John Romero has a list half as long as my arm I gave him quite some time ago when I heard a V2 was coming so some of the issues would be addressed. I spoke with Devin last week and he informed he was involved with the development of the new unit and had no idea of the issues, he now has the list from John and I am being told things will get worked on. It's like the **** poor job of setting up the dwell for the EVO's, we beat countless sets of bearings out of engines the first year or two dealing with that mess. It wasn't until we switched to the Apexi Power FC, gained about 85 whp and eliminated starting problems and ignition misfires that it got someone's attention and the problem was fixed. None of us are perfect, I am definetely not but when a customer has a problem with something we build we don't wait for them to switch to the competitors product to finally get on the ball and try to fix the issues.
Right now I can say the AEM idled better, drove better and starts better (NOT quicker than the Haltech) but then again I have not figured it all out yet or tuned the car yet.
The AEM absolutely, 100% has a sync problem, there is nothing to figure out. The car has to see too many revolutions before the cam/crank sensors will sync. Is it a programming issue, I'd guess so but as the end user of a plug and play box that has been complained about for 6 years now it is not my responsibility to figure it out, it is AEM's. I'm assuming from my talk with Devin last week, something might get done.
The cam sensor being close the header we THOUGHT was the issue originally. Most of us with headers now run a shield between the header and sensor, my header is not close to the sensor, has a shield and was never run for any major length of time. I've had two sensors fail, both times frying the cylinder head, both times on the stock crank trigger using AEM's settings. There is a 12 tooth trigger wheel available, it sync's instantly and while using it never experienced a failure of the "sensor".
There are a few issues with what you said happens when the car looses sync from the sensor and has to restart guess what happens? If you have any additional timing set up for the car to start better it adds that time to the base map and you...........yes, torch the engine again. This happened to us, John Romero found it and the suggestion was to eliminate the extra timing at start up incase it happens again. Same thing happens if the EMS shuts off, which the EMS does when it feels like it. Emery from STM was at the shop Thursday, says he has a car at his shop now that the ECU just shuts down on, he has to unplug the harness, plug it back in and then the car starts. I've had this happen atleast 100 times, atleast.
The AEM EMS is the absolute easiest plug and play ECU I have seen for any car, I've put them in Subaru's, Vipers, Mustangs, Supras, DSM's and EVO's. I have no idea how many I have tuned but it is a large amount.
I've spent a lot of energy reporting problems and John Romero is a great guy and genius, has never failed to help me and do it in a very quick and timely manner.
There are problems though and I hope that they are going to be addressed and all fixed this time. It is baffling to me that there are beta boxes out there and I don't have one. I don't want to sound arrogant but I don't know anyone else who can supply more feed back or who has been more loyal to the system than I have. When the EVO9 box was released some podunk shop nobody ever heard of ended up with a box for beta testing. Obviously they had no clue what they were doing because whent he boxes were delivered the internal widebands didn't work nor did the MIVEC, both of which were reported through our shop to AEM and then fixed. Al Friedman was the one that found and fixed the MIVEC actually.
Again, I do hope the long list of problems get addressed and fixed. I was in no hurry to jump ship but unless someone is going to pay for $2500+ repairs each time the AEM decides to not recognize the cam sensor, I have no other choice for my own car.
david, this is my car that emery spoke to you about if im not mistaken. i always just figured that teh jump to AEM was a part of its becoming a race car and will sometimes shut off if it was so inclined. maybe AEM can reward us loyal folks with a discount if you wanna trade up. that would be cool
As far as I am aware the board is indeed made by GEMS here in the UK, I was just about to get an AEM EMS for my IX GT but having read this I think I'll hold off until its fixed or go elsewhere I suspect 
I know it's not the RIGHT fix, as AEM obviously still has an issue that needs resolved, but why not just stick with the Brooks 12 tooth crank disc?
If it eliminates the main problems of the AEM, and I have yet to hear a downside about it, it would just seem WAY easier to recommend everyone use one of these rather than ditch the AEM for another unit.
If it eliminates the main problems of the AEM, and I have yet to hear a downside about it, it would just seem WAY easier to recommend everyone use one of these rather than ditch the AEM for another unit.
Evolving Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
From: England
delsolid,
Glad to see you stop by. We have sold a lot of AEM products over the years and I have been a huge promoter of the system. I've had great success using the AEM EMS, BUT there have been a lot of problems with the system, a LOT. I have pointed them out, reported them and most of them have fallen on deaf ears. John Romero has a list half as long as my arm I gave him quite some time ago when I heard a V2 was coming so some of the issues would be addressed. I spoke with Devin last week and he informed he was involved with the development of the new unit and had no idea of the issues, he now has the list from John and I am being told things will get worked on. It's like the **** poor job of setting up the dwell for the EVO's, we beat countless sets of bearings out of engines the first year or two dealing with that mess. It wasn't until we switched to the Apexi Power FC, gained about 85 whp and eliminated starting problems and ignition misfires that it got someone's attention and the problem was fixed. None of us are perfect, I am definetely not but when a customer has a problem with something we build we don't wait for them to switch to the competitors product to finally get on the ball and try to fix the issues.
Right now I can say the AEM idled better, drove better and starts better (NOT quicker than the Haltech) but then again I have not figured it all out yet or tuned the car yet.
The AEM absolutely, 100% has a sync problem, there is nothing to figure out. The car has to see too many revolutions before the cam/crank sensors will sync. Is it a programming issue, I'd guess so but as the end user of a plug and play box that has been complained about for 6 years now it is not my responsibility to figure it out, it is AEM's. I'm assuming from my talk with Devin last week, something might get done.
The cam sensor being close the header we THOUGHT was the issue originally. Most of us with headers now run a shield between the header and sensor, my header is not close to the sensor, has a shield and was never run for any major length of time. I've had two sensors fail, both times frying the cylinder head, both times on the stock crank trigger using AEM's settings. There is a 12 tooth trigger wheel available, it sync's instantly and while using it never experienced a failure of the "sensor".
There are a few issues with what you said happens when the car looses sync from the sensor and has to restart guess what happens? If you have any additional timing set up for the car to start better it adds that time to the base map and you...........yes, torch the engine again. This happened to us, John Romero found it and the suggestion was to eliminate the extra timing at start up incase it happens again. Same thing happens if the EMS shuts off, which the EMS does when it feels like it. Emery from STM was at the shop Thursday, says he has a car at his shop now that the ECU just shuts down on, he has to unplug the harness, plug it back in and then the car starts. I've had this happen atleast 100 times, atleast.
The AEM EMS is the absolute easiest plug and play ECU I have seen for any car, I've put them in Subaru's, Vipers, Mustangs, Supras, DSM's and EVO's. I have no idea how many I have tuned but it is a large amount.
I've spent a lot of energy reporting problems and John Romero is a great guy and genius, has never failed to help me and do it in a very quick and timely manner.
There are problems though and I hope that they are going to be addressed and all fixed this time. It is baffling to me that there are beta boxes out there and I don't have one. I don't want to sound arrogant but I don't know anyone else who can supply more feed back or who has been more loyal to the system than I have. When the EVO9 box was released some podunk shop nobody ever heard of ended up with a box for beta testing. Obviously they had no clue what they were doing because whent he boxes were delivered the internal widebands didn't work nor did the MIVEC, both of which were reported through our shop to AEM and then fixed. Al Friedman was the one that found and fixed the MIVEC actually.
Again, I do hope the long list of problems get addressed and fixed. I was in no hurry to jump ship but unless someone is going to pay for $2500+ repairs each time the AEM decides to not recognize the cam sensor, I have no other choice for my own car.
Glad to see you stop by. We have sold a lot of AEM products over the years and I have been a huge promoter of the system. I've had great success using the AEM EMS, BUT there have been a lot of problems with the system, a LOT. I have pointed them out, reported them and most of them have fallen on deaf ears. John Romero has a list half as long as my arm I gave him quite some time ago when I heard a V2 was coming so some of the issues would be addressed. I spoke with Devin last week and he informed he was involved with the development of the new unit and had no idea of the issues, he now has the list from John and I am being told things will get worked on. It's like the **** poor job of setting up the dwell for the EVO's, we beat countless sets of bearings out of engines the first year or two dealing with that mess. It wasn't until we switched to the Apexi Power FC, gained about 85 whp and eliminated starting problems and ignition misfires that it got someone's attention and the problem was fixed. None of us are perfect, I am definetely not but when a customer has a problem with something we build we don't wait for them to switch to the competitors product to finally get on the ball and try to fix the issues.
Right now I can say the AEM idled better, drove better and starts better (NOT quicker than the Haltech) but then again I have not figured it all out yet or tuned the car yet.
The AEM absolutely, 100% has a sync problem, there is nothing to figure out. The car has to see too many revolutions before the cam/crank sensors will sync. Is it a programming issue, I'd guess so but as the end user of a plug and play box that has been complained about for 6 years now it is not my responsibility to figure it out, it is AEM's. I'm assuming from my talk with Devin last week, something might get done.
The cam sensor being close the header we THOUGHT was the issue originally. Most of us with headers now run a shield between the header and sensor, my header is not close to the sensor, has a shield and was never run for any major length of time. I've had two sensors fail, both times frying the cylinder head, both times on the stock crank trigger using AEM's settings. There is a 12 tooth trigger wheel available, it sync's instantly and while using it never experienced a failure of the "sensor".
There are a few issues with what you said happens when the car looses sync from the sensor and has to restart guess what happens? If you have any additional timing set up for the car to start better it adds that time to the base map and you...........yes, torch the engine again. This happened to us, John Romero found it and the suggestion was to eliminate the extra timing at start up incase it happens again. Same thing happens if the EMS shuts off, which the EMS does when it feels like it. Emery from STM was at the shop Thursday, says he has a car at his shop now that the ECU just shuts down on, he has to unplug the harness, plug it back in and then the car starts. I've had this happen atleast 100 times, atleast.
The AEM EMS is the absolute easiest plug and play ECU I have seen for any car, I've put them in Subaru's, Vipers, Mustangs, Supras, DSM's and EVO's. I have no idea how many I have tuned but it is a large amount.
I've spent a lot of energy reporting problems and John Romero is a great guy and genius, has never failed to help me and do it in a very quick and timely manner.
There are problems though and I hope that they are going to be addressed and all fixed this time. It is baffling to me that there are beta boxes out there and I don't have one. I don't want to sound arrogant but I don't know anyone else who can supply more feed back or who has been more loyal to the system than I have. When the EVO9 box was released some podunk shop nobody ever heard of ended up with a box for beta testing. Obviously they had no clue what they were doing because whent he boxes were delivered the internal widebands didn't work nor did the MIVEC, both of which were reported through our shop to AEM and then fixed. Al Friedman was the one that found and fixed the MIVEC actually.
Again, I do hope the long list of problems get addressed and fixed. I was in no hurry to jump ship but unless someone is going to pay for $2500+ repairs each time the AEM decides to not recognize the cam sensor, I have no other choice for my own car.
Dave
One question with all the issuses you have had with aem over the years why have you not jumped ship before now?,
I know I would of and its great when you work with a company give them feed back and they change stuff,
I would have thought you would have a big influance over these things with them but it apears not from what they have said.
Mark
Evolving Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 243
Likes: 1
From: Jamaica W.I.
The AEM has been a very good product overall, that is why I have not jumped ship. I am jumping ship now, maybe not for good, because I've had multiple problems in the last month.
Same thing happens if the EMS shuts off, which the EMS does when it feels like it. Emery from STM was at the shop Thursday, says he has a car at his shop now that the ECU just shuts down on, he has to unplug the harness, plug it back in and then the car starts. I've had this happen atleast 100 times, atleast.
UPDATE: I got my AEM back on Friday and Ed from AEM said the eprom lost all of it's information and they had to "reflash" it. This is why the pumps wouldn't prime, the car wouldn't sync, or start obviously.
I had to pay $20 shipping there, $50 diagnostic charge, 1 hour repair(reflash) for $100, and paid to have it next day aired back.
I'm out $200 because of an issue with thier product losing their programming information.
I paid $2,400 for my AEM and I didn't think I would ever have to pay $200 to get it reflashed. Thats just stupid if you ask me.
Last edited by 2.3 Evo 8; Sep 27, 2009 at 12:25 AM.
The AEM absolutely has a sync problem, it's not limited to the EVO boxes. My '99 GSX running an AEM in the early 2000's (2003-2004) toasted a couple of heads from the same issue. Glen T. from the DFW area has also had similar failures multiple times. These were both 600+whp cars in a time when that was insane power. I think Glen swapped to a Haltech. I just bought a Motec from Tony @ T1 about a month ago. We have a saying around here, friends don't let friends drive AEM.
very good thread & since we're talking about cam sensors, what does it mean when u pull the sensor out & its covered in oil? does that mean my rings are shot? car is on stock turbo/ecu & doesn't appear to be running any differently. do i need to do a leak down test or pull the turbo & look for oil there as well?? searched everywhere & came up with no info on a "wet" evo cam sensor...
BTW my car is an 03 evo 8 with 16,714 actual miles on it (no cluster swaps here folks) with just a 3" turboback, ets filter, mbc, & a racegas tune on Sunoco 110 leaded
BTW my car is an 03 evo 8 with 16,714 actual miles on it (no cluster swaps here folks) with just a 3" turboback, ets filter, mbc, & a racegas tune on Sunoco 110 leaded
Last edited by housedj; Sep 27, 2009 at 02:36 AM.